Thursday 10th December 2015

Post by **refitman** » Thu 10 Dec, 2015 7:09 am

Morning all.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Thu 10 Dec, 2015 8:03 am

Morning.

I wonder who reported Momentum to the Info Commissioner ?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-35058551" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Ross Hawkins, reporting on it on Radio 4, forgot to call the usual suspects 'moderates' and referred to them as right wing Labour people.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Thu 10 Dec, 2015 8:08 am

Peter Jukes ‏@peterjukes 6h6 hours ago
Meanwhile the number of young journalists in prominent positions who are alumi of tiny YBF is quite remarkable. More anon

Who on earth would have guessed our press is stuffed with right wingers ?
Shocked I tell ya.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Thu 10 Dec, 2015 8:34 am

This looks interesting, the start of new left Labour group.
Here's their letter to the Guardian:

''On Thursday we launch Open Labour, a forum bringing together activists to build a Labour left which is committed to a better quality of debate and political culture within Labour, while focusing on the question of how to win power.
Labour’s democratic left has for too long been defined by other currents in the party and has been without any form of organisation.
The elections of Ed Miliband and now Jeremy Corbyn have not changed that.
Now is the time for those who believe in equality, democracy, solidarity and the emancipating power of the left to come together.

Open Labour believes that there must be a place within Labour to debate and shape these values in a respectful way, free from the divisive and intolerant voices that have come to dominate Labour debate, especially on social media.

Cllr Tom Miller Brent
Cllr Alex Sobel Leeds
Cllr Bev Craig Manchester
Jo Rust North-West Norfolk CLP
David Hamblin Cardiff North CLP
Jade Azim City of Durham CLP
Shelly Streeter Alyn and Deeside CLP
Josh Fenton-Glynn Calder Valley CLP
Yue Ting Cheng Hertsmere CLP
Ann Black Labour party national executive committee member
Tom Copley AM Greater London assembly
Kaveh Azarhoosh Bethnal Green and Bow CLP
Rose Grayston Islington North CLP
Abby Tomlinson South Ribble CLP
Tom Williams Manchester Gorton CLP
Lauren Day-Cooper Birmingham Selly Oak CLP
Cllr Sam Tarry Barking and Dagenham
Cllr Lesley Brennan Dundee
Cllr George Lindars-Hammond Sheffield
Cllr Beth Marshall Manchester
Cllr Grace Fletcher-Hackwood Manchester
Cllr David Levene York
Cllr Kevin Rodgers Doncaster
Cllr Alon Or-Bach Barnet
Cllr Rosanne Kirk Lincoln and Lincolnshire
Cllr James Roberts Liverpool
Cllr Neil Walshaw Leeds
Cllr Sam Stopp Brent
Cllr Neil Nerva Brent
Cllr Liam O’Rourke Rochdale
Cllr Guy Lambert Hounslow
Cllr Aidan Smith Greenwich
Cllr Ralph Berry Bradford
Steve Yemm Mansfield CLP
Beccie Ions Dewsbury CLP
Baris Yerli Ilford North CLP
Mo Ahmed Stretford and Urmston
Andrew Achilleos Dagenham and Rainham CLP
Jacky Holyoake Halesowen and Rowley Regis CLP
Thomas Sadler Lewisham Deptford CLP
Linda Williams Charnwood CLP
Richard Bell Bethnal Green and Bow CLP
Arthur Baker Greenwich and Woolwich
Garry Chick-Mckay Leyton and Wanstead CLP
Samuel Marlow-Stevens Bath CLP
Professor Steve Eales Cardiff North CLP
Nick McGowan Manchester Withington CLP
Neil Watkins Hackney North and Stoke Newington CLP
Carl Morris Leeds North-West
Frank Podmore Greenwich and Woolwich CLP
Dave Toulson Coventry South CLP
Matthew Donoghue Wantage CLP
Ben Gregg Bradford South CLP
Thomas Kirkwood Hampstead and Kilburn CLP
John Tibbetts Birmingham Northfield CLP
Dr Simon Raphael Picker Chelsea and Fulham CLP
Cllr Bernard Collier Brent
Peter Kenyon Cities of London and Westminster CLP
Trevor Fisher Stafford CLP''

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... artys-left" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Thu 10 Dec, 2015 9:02 am

If it's Momentum without the baggage, would that be a bad thing ?

But it probably won't be long before 'moderates' will be telling us it is a disaster for Labour and someone claims death threats have been made.

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Thu 10 Dec, 2015 9:11 am

As posted late yesterday by HindleA, the government has brought in new rules for tenants in council properties, ending the right to a secure tenancy for more than 5 years.
The idea, apparently, is to free up homes for people who really need them; anyone who is not dirt poor will have to move out to the private rented sector or try to buy.

If the bedroom tax doesn't get you out, if pay-to-stay doesn't get you out, this will. The government will help you to buy a rabbit-hutch, it will help you to buy a council home, but it will not let you stay where you are.
A secure tenancy is not allowed for anyone who works and is doing their best; if you "do the right thing" for yourself and your family, you will not be allowed to stay and contribute to the community you call home.
Your home will become a transit camp for people who are poorer than you are; you must be punished for being too poor to buy and too rich to be considered worthy of the council home you've lived in for years.

New Labour, Old Labour, Momentum, Progress, Compass, Open Labour, Labour with a hat on, Labour "resistance", Labour whatever......while the media wastes its' time and ours reporting on all this bloody stupidity and speculating on how much better Labour would be without Corbyn and how much more fun PMQs is when the Eagle has landed yadda yadda yadda......the Tories get on with dismantling our society.

I posted yesterday - and many times previously - that while Labour prats about with all these groups and whatnot the Tories are sneaking in all manner of crap under the radar. I am sick of this factionalism. It's as useless as it is divisive.
It's all very well having Owen Smith making a bit of noise, it's all very commendable that a few MPs are "anti austerity", but what I want - and need - to see is a unified and principled opposition to the appalling policies the Tories are implementing on a daily basis.

AAAARRRRRGGGGGHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Thu 10 Dec, 2015 9:19 am

I feel a bit conflicted on that Ephie.

We are talking many years ago, but my uncle & his wife had a lovely council flat in a block in the West End. Big windows, good views etc., the sort of flat that would command a small fortune in today's London market if up for sale.
They were both working, he as a senior manager and she as a secretary to a bod high up the chain in a big company. They bought a flat in Brighton, and used it as a holiday home while continuing to live in the council flat.
They even lent my mum & dad money towards the deposit to buy our family home, and owned what then was a flashy car.

Just one case, I know, but it has always rankled with me.
If you own your own house you have to move, sell up, upsize or downsize or whatever according to your personal finances. Maybe higher earner people in social housing or council lets should make way for others, from conscience if nothing else ?

Just asking. Obviously it should not be a guise for other reasons to force people to move.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Thu 10 Dec, 2015 9:43 am

yahyah wrote:I feel a bit conflicted on that Ephie.

We are talking many years ago, but my uncle & his wife had a lovely council flat in a block in the West End. Big windows, good views etc., the sort of flat that would command a small fortune in today's London market if up for sale.
They were both working, he as a senior manager and she as a secretary to a bod high up the chain in a big company. They bought a flat in Brighton, and used it as a holiday home while continuing to live in the council flat.
They even lent my mum & dad money towards the deposit to buy our family home, and owned what then was a flashy car.

Just one case, I know, but it has always rankled with me.
If you own your own house you have to move, sell up, upsize or downsize or whatever according to your personal finances. Maybe higher earner people in social housing or council lets should make way for others, from conscience if nothing else ?

Just asking. Obviously it should not be a guise for other reasons to force people to move.

I can see that this is more than irritating, but this is surely the same situation that we have with all "benefits". I'm prepared to accept that there will be a few exceptions who "game" the system in order that there is acceptable provision for the rest who don't or can't.

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Thu 10 Dec, 2015 9:45 am

There was a story a while back about a woman living in a council house in Bristol who left a lot of money in her will which raised a lot of these questions. The most salient point for me is that on her death the council got the house back and thus was able to pass it on to someone else. Over the long term, better off tenants don't create a council house shortage, they will vacate them eventually one way or another. A lack of council houses creates a council house shortage. At the end of the day, people who rent have nothing to pass on. Who's to say the Bristol lady wouldn't have had a lot more to leave in her will if she'd bought rather than rented from the council? The real problem, to my mind, is that all the people struggling to buy or pay private rents are being overcharged for the roof over their heads, not that the people renting social homes are paying too little. Yahyah's relatives had a lot of disposable income to spend in the local economy. To my mind, one of the dysfunctions of the UK economy currently, is that such easy spenders are in much shorter supply. Too much money is tied up in property prices, not enough is circulating through goods and services.

Lonewolfie · Post by **Lonewolfie** » Thu 10 Dec, 2015 9:50 am

yahyah wrote:Peter Jukes ‏@peterjukes 6h6 hours ago
Meanwhile the number of young journalists in prominent positions who are alumi of tiny YBF is quite remarkable. More anon

Who on earth would have guessed our press is stuffed with right wingers ?
Shocked I tell ya.

'cough'....British American Project for the Successor Generation anyone...'cough'...

The British-American Project for the Successor Generation, to give it its full title, was founded in 1985 "to perpetuate the close relationship between the United States and Britain" in the words of BAP's slim official history, through "transatlantic friendships and professional contacts". It has a membership of "600 leaders and opinion formers", drawn equally from both countries. It holds an annual conference (the next starts this Friday in Chicago) to which journalists are not invited and at which everything said is, officially at least, not to be repeated to outsiders.

...and...

In the years immediately before the founding of BAP, the early 1980s heyday of Tony Benn and CND, the Labour party was sceptical about America. Now it will seemingly swallow almost anything the US does, and the idea that BAP made the difference has some authoritative backers. The leftwing journalist John Pilger, who has been uncovering American manipulation of other countries' politics for decades, has described BAP as a "casual freemasonry" and "by far the most influential transatlantic network of politicians, journalists and academics".

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2004/n ... .politics1

The "values we share" are celebrated by a shadowy organisation that has just held its annual conference. This is the British-American Project for the Successor Generation (BAP), set up in 1985 with money from a Philadelphia trust with a long history of supporting right-wing causes. Although the BAP does not publicly acknowledge this origin, the source of its inspiration was a call by President Reagan in 1983 for "successor generations" on both sides of the Atlantic to "work together in the future on defence and security matters". He made numerous references to "shared values". Attending this ceremony in the White House Situation Room were the ideologues Rupert Murdoch and the late James Goldsmith.

http://johnpilger.com/articles/how-the- ... ts-values-

Ahhh...but no, of course not - I'm a loonyleftyconspiracytheoristtinfoilhatterdelusionalcorbynista...my betters and superiors must of course, just like the non-existent Bilderberg and Bohemian Grove groups of elite politicians, business-people and bankers, be able to discuss 'shared values and ideas' about future society and 'shaping opinion' without the tiresome requirement to actually tell the general population what they've decided to do to society...there's absolutely no connection whatsoever between the different groups, the founders, early supporters and financiers of such groups (such as KRM - who is different from the KRM involved in British Briefing/Committee for a Free Britain, naturally) and there will most definitely not be any connection whatsoever, nothing at all, between YBF, CF etc, the 'modern' press and the method of delivery of the 'message'. Definitely not. No siree bob, no connection at all....'cos that'd mean having a hermetically sealed group of 'leaders', correctly 'trained' in the administration and reporting of Government - the sort of thing that could be organised by an efficient Director Of Communications...over a 3-4 year period....if said DoC had come from one of the press sources...but that is, of course, too far-fetched to be believable or even possible....

Political journalists have expressed surprise and concern after research by Press Gazette revealed that 20 central Government departments employ more than 1,500 communications staff.
Freedom of Information Act releases and transparency figures show that the Home Office (pictured: Reuters) has 276 full-time equivalent staff with communications responsibilties.
Elsewhere, the Department of Work and Pensions employs 184 and the Cabinet Office employs 205.
In total, some 1,514 FTE staff across the main Government departments are communications professionals or have communications responsibilities.
Daily Mail political sketch writer Quentin Letts described the figure as "ludicrous overstaffing".
"The citizen in me is outraged by the cost," he told Press Gazette. "The journo in me wonders how come, with so many press officers, it can still be impossible to get answers from the Whitehall machine until after deadline."

http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/central-g ... wers-until

...and Trump being lauded and supported by FoxNews wouldn't be another example of 'opinion shaping'...nope, again, most definitely absolutely not...

Personally, I'm more angry about the fact that a supposed Presidential candidate can mock a person experiencing challenges through physical disability and it's somehow seen as not important - http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/vide ... rter-video, than I am about the unworkable, impossible objective of 'stopping Muslims'....and whilst I'm on Trump, apparently he's not bothered about losing his status in Scotland - he changed his mind after someone told him about the Mullah Kintyre

...and with that, I'm off to hide under my hat again....

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Thu 10 Dec, 2015 9:54 am

RobertSnozers wrote:
yahyah wrote:This looks interesting, the start of new left Labour group.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... artys-left" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Or just an attempt to outflank Momentum?

How is it different from Compass?

It certainly looks to be a very English movement at present ... perhaps that's how it's going to be different. Ignore people in Wales and Scotland of a left wing persuasion ...

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Thu 10 Dec, 2015 9:58 am

Apparent Private Eye notes that Dave Laws has a new job...

Warwick Mansell ‏@warwickmansell 21h21 hours ago
New @PrivateEyeNews mentions appointment of David Laws as adviser to @ArkSchools ,following donation from Ark chair: http://schoolsweek.co.uk/academy-big-gu ... -campaign-" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

ARK main sponsor is Paul Marshall - non exec board member at the DfE and co-editor of the Orange Book...with David Laws.

All in it together - one big happy family of like minded people...

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Thu 10 Dec, 2015 10:01 am

Jess Phillips MP ‏@jessphillips 38m38 minutes ago
My nan lived in her council house for 60 years. It was her home. Tories are going to undo one of greatest pillars of our social security

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Thu 10 Dec, 2015 10:05 am

yahyah wrote:If it's Momentum without the baggage, would that be a bad thing ?

But it probably won't be long before 'moderates' will be telling us it is a disaster for Labour and someone claims death threats have been made.

Or indeed Compass without the baggage (a large part of which consists of the godawful Neal Lawson)?

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Thu 10 Dec, 2015 10:11 am

Everything this government does re their housing and social security policies (actually that should be social insecurity) seems designed to tear up community and family structures and cohesion.

The people that have been in their social housing - or private rented housing - for a long time and who may have over that time managed to better their circumstances and be more comfortably off are often very valuable members of a community - the ones who pitch in and help, who organise things, who people come to because they know how stuff works and who is who. They may have family and friends who rely on them in small and larger ways.

Above all - they may stop certain areas and housing sectors becoming just for those who are poorer, transient, unable to give much to a community because their life circumstances don't currently allow them to do that.

Along with the bedroom tax, the benefit cap, the pay to stay, the right to buy and many other policies, some yet to hit, this is yet another undermining of society as we would like it to be.

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Thu 10 Dec, 2015 10:13 am

I understand what you're saying, yahyah - but there are very good reasons why people like your relations SHOULD have a council home.

The whole point of our the massive, nationwide, housebuilding that went on from Lloyd George's "homes fit for heroes" to the New Towns built after WW2 was to provide decent housing for all - irrespective of income or status.
I grew up on a street in a New Town where we lived with office workers, our GP, one of my teachers - a really mixed bag of people who saw nothing odd about renting and were proud of their homes and gardens.

I think it is a very good thing that wealthier people live next door to those who have little - in fact, it should be encouraged, IMHO. It helps to prevent the ghettoisation of council estates, it helps to make mixed communities, and it stops the development of places like the banlieues in Paris, for example.
If our social housing becomes not much more than transit housing, tenants will not look after their homes because there is no personal reason to do so; one of the things private landlords bleat about is that their tenants don't take care of the property - and why would they if they can be chucked out after 6 months?

Since Thatcher brought in Right To Buy, social/council housing has been seen as the worst option in housing terms - the assumption is that people would buy if they could and are only stuck in social/council housing because they can't do better for themselves.
What that mindset doesn't allow for is the fact that some people do not see house purchase as the be-all and end-all of aspiration; some folks are quite happy paying a fair rent, doing their thing, and staying where they are - because their community is more important to them than profit.

If you own your own home, yes, you do have to make decisions based on what you can afford at certain points in your life - and the option to sell up and rent an affordable social home should be as available to an ex-homeowner as it is to someone who cannot afford to buy.
I do not think this is a matter of conscience for wealthier tenants - this is the sort of thinking that the Tories encourage. It smacks to me of the richer people laving the dregs to the poorer ones....and yes, I know that's not what you think!

The more I think about this, the more radical I get. We need mixed communities of people from all walks of life; the last thing we need is transit camps for poor people and privileged areas for the recently-gentrified.
It's bad land and financial management, it's bad people management, it's nasty vicious divisive politics. It's bloody Thatcherism writ large, and at a time when we have a housing bubble ready to explode at any moment, it's evil.

When all these wealthier tenants move out, whether through this stupidity or "pay-to-stay", we'll be left with ghettoes. The bigger homes will have to be sold off if the councils can't tenant them immediately, to be snapped up by BTL landlords who will turn them into HMO's and fill them with people on pisspoor wages who have nowhere else to go but the streets.

If I was PM, I'd insist on banning BTL, I'd impose rent controls, and I'd start a massive housebuilding programme - homes for fair rent, never for sale, open to applications from anyone who lives and works in the area. I'd build communities, not no-go areas.

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Thu 10 Dec, 2015 10:20 am

Morning all.

Agree with all that ephie. Given interest rates and the spare capacity in the building sector it's a no-brainer. That *would* be a LTEP. Unfortunately the bottom line is, what's best for this Government in the short term?

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Thu 10 Dec, 2015 10:36 am

Number of 'fit' patients stuck in hospital hits all-time high

http://gu.com/p/4fx5v" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This Government is so f. incompetent. And the MSM as a rule, collectively shrug their shoulders.

Bedford Falls · Post by **Bedford Falls** » Thu 10 Dec, 2015 10:39 am

ephemerid wrote:I understand what you're saying, yahyah - but there are very good reasons why people like your relations SHOULD have a council home.

The whole point of our the massive, nationwide, housebuilding that went on from Lloyd George's "homes fit for heroes" to the New Towns built after WW2 was to provide decent housing for all - irrespective of income or status.
I grew up on a street in a New Town where we lived with office workers, our GP, one of my teachers - a really mixed bag of people who saw nothing odd about renting and were proud of their homes and gardens.

I think it is a very good thing that wealthier people live next door to those who have little - in fact, it should be encouraged, IMHO. It helps to prevent the ghettoisation of council estates, it helps to make mixed communities, and it stops the development of places like the banlieues in Paris, for example.
If our social housing becomes not much more than transit housing, tenants will not look after their homes because there is no personal reason to do so; one of the things private landlords bleat about is that their tenants don't take care of the property - and why would they if they can be chucked out after 6 months?

Since Thatcher brought in Right To Buy, social/council housing has been seen as the worst option in housing terms - the assumption is that people would buy if they could and are only stuck in social/council housing because they can't do better for themselves.
What that mindset doesn't allow for is the fact that some people do not see house purchase as the be-all and end-all of aspiration; some folks are quite happy paying a fair rent, doing their thing, and staying where they are - because their community is more important to them than profit.

If you own your own home, yes, you do have to make decisions based on what you can afford at certain points in your life - and the option to sell up and rent an affordable social home should be as available to an ex-homeowner as it is to someone who cannot afford to buy.
I do not think this is a matter of conscience for wealthier tenants - this is the sort of thinking that the Tories encourage. It smacks to me of the richer people laving the dregs to the poorer ones....and yes, I know that's not what you think!

The more I think about this, the more radical I get. We need mixed communities of people from all walks of life; the last thing we need is transit camps for poor people and privileged areas for the recently-gentrified.
It's bad land and financial management, it's bad people management, it's nasty vicious divisive politics. It's bloody Thatcherism writ large, and at a time when we have a housing bubble ready to explode at any moment, it's evil.

When all these wealthier tenants move out, whether through this stupidity or "pay-to-stay", we'll be left with ghettoes. The bigger homes will have to be sold off if the councils can't tenant them immediately, to be snapped up by BTL landlords who will turn them into HMO's and fill them with people on pisspoor wages who have nowhere else to go but the streets.

If I was PM, I'd insist on banning BTL, I'd impose rent controls, and I'd start a massive housebuilding programme - homes for fair rent, never for sale, open to applications from anyone who lives and works in the area. I'd build communities, not no-go areas.

I just logged in to say thank you Ephie for your eloquent and passionate defence of council housing as it was conceived (not how it has evolved). I have been a council tenant for 36 years and in that time I have gone from single parent on benefits, to part-time receptionist to a senior position in a not-for-profit. For the last five years I have had a good salary with disposable income and have been able to save. Most of those savings have gone into improving my property, making it a pleasant and comfortable home.

In 2017, when the abhorrent 'pay-to-stay' comes in, I will be faced with some difficult choices. I can either reduce my hours so my salary is below the 'threshhold'. This will have a knock on effect on the amount I am able to save towards my pension; I can leave my home and community and try and find a private rental, which will inevitably be a long way from my workplace, my family and friends; or I can pay the approx £3,000 a month that is the 'market' rent for these parts - this will leave me with no disposable income and again, no more pension contributions.

I agree that the way social housing has been decimated, means that it is now seen as only for 'poor people' but for all the reasons you cite, we should refuse to accept this.

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Thu 10 Dec, 2015 10:40 am

StephenDolan wrote:Number of 'fit' patients stuck in hospital hits all-time high

http://gu.com/p/4fx5v" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This Government is so f. incompetent. And the MSM as a rule, collectively shrug their shoulders.

I wonder how the England figures for bed blocking compare to Wales where social care funding hasn't been slashed quite so much. Anyone know?

gilsey · Post by **gilsey** » Thu 10 Dec, 2015 10:42 am

Good rant ephie.

I saw PMQs yesterday, unusually. Angela Eagle was good but I was surprised that she didn't respond to GO's, entirely predictable, strong economy line, why not come back with the crap manufacturing and construction sector figures?

gilsey · Post by **gilsey** » Thu 10 Dec, 2015 10:45 am

StephenDolan wrote:Number of 'fit' patients stuck in hospital hits all-time high

http://gu.com/p/4fx5v" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This Government is so f. incompetent. And the MSM as a rule, collectively shrug their shoulders.

There's talk on twitter of an A&E crisis in London happening now.

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Thu 10 Dec, 2015 10:52 am

gilsey wrote:
StephenDolan wrote:Number of 'fit' patients stuck in hospital hits all-time high

http://gu.com/p/4fx5v" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This Government is so f. incompetent. And the MSM as a rule, collectively shrug their shoulders.
There's talk on twitter of an A&E crisis in London happening now.

I've yet to see reporting of the latest figures that were due out today, anyone have a link?

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Thu 10 Dec, 2015 10:58 am

Primary league tables out today - and it's worth noting that only 16.8% of primary schools are academies.

The ‘golden 28′ in this year’s primary tables

http://schoolsweek.co.uk/the-golden-28- ... ry-tables/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Government press releases highlighted the importance of national policies implemented by ministers to drive up standards.

But Schools Week decided to highlight the individual schools in which outcomes for disadvantaged pupils were highest.

Just 28 schools – we’ve called them “the golden 28” – out of more than 16,000 met our ambitious standards that included getting every child on free school meals (FSMs) to achieve at least two levels of progress in reading, maths and writing.

So how many academies are in that list?

Overall, 16 per cent of primary schools are academies. However, just one academy, Chattenden, featured in our 28.

Our meeting yesterday was unanimously against turning ourselves into an academy trust - ironically given the government rhetoric - it was because of the fear of the loss of autonomy...

Ours was above national and LA average but didn't quite get the 100% progress between KS1 and KS2 because we had 6 kids with SEN statements in Y6 - an unprecedented number for us.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Thu 10 Dec, 2015 11:27 am

Good morfternoon.

11.01am 11:01

In a written ministerial statement Iain Duncan Smith, the work and pensions secretary, has announced that, as universal credit (UC) gets rolled out over the next five years, some council jobs will go. That is because councils currently administer housing benefit, but under UC they will no longer do so. In the statement Duncan Smith says he is not planning to give these council staff jobs administering UC.

In the statement he does not say how many jobs are at risk. (Politics Live, Guardian)

Things just get worse and worse.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Thu 10 Dec, 2015 11:29 am

Include CA in capping,deem necessary rooms for care spare; both exend work conditionality for carers and reduce in work support for hundreds of thousands of carers(and of course potential carers);extend the waiting period for any housing support for homeowners and make it an interest bearing loan plus charges;make council housing only for those deemed to need it as warehousing facilities,scrutinised and policed.Any delusions of non fascistic intent,surely dispelled.

gilsey · Post by **gilsey** » Thu 10 Dec, 2015 11:34 am

StephenDolan wrote:
gilsey wrote:
StephenDolan wrote:Number of 'fit' patients stuck in hospital hits all-time high

http://gu.com/p/4fx5v" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This Government is so f. incompetent. And the MSM as a rule, collectively shrug their shoulders.
There's talk on twitter of an A&E crisis in London happening now.
I've yet to see reporting of the latest figures that were due out today, anyone have a link?

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015 ... e-high-nhs" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Thu 10 Dec, 2015 11:38 am

gilsey wrote:
StephenDolan wrote:
gilsey wrote: There's talk on twitter of an A&E crisis in London happening now.
I've yet to see reporting of the latest figures that were due out today, anyone have a link?
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015 ... e-high-nhs" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Great thanks, that's been updated with the stats.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Thu 10 Dec, 2015 11:43 am

Storm Desmond: Rain causes further Cumbria flooding(BBC News website)

Another very wet few days, then.

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Thu 10 Dec, 2015 12:03 pm

PorFavor wrote:Good morfternoon.

11.01am 11:01

In a written ministerial statement Iain Duncan Smith, the work and pensions secretary, has announced that, as universal credit (UC) gets rolled out over the next five years, some council jobs will go. That is because councils currently administer housing benefit, but under UC they will no longer do so. In the statement Duncan Smith says he is not planning to give these council staff jobs administering UC.

In the statement he does not say how many jobs are at risk. (Politics Live, Guardian)
Things just get worse and worse.

Isn't it up to the councils where they deploy their staff? The man really does have an over-inflated sense of his own self worth, thankfully not shared by the rest of us.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Thu 10 Dec, 2015 12:22 pm

http://www.theguardian.com/housing-netw ... are_btn_tw" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

How I helped a man with a degenerative spinal disease beat the bedroom tax

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Thu 10 Dec, 2015 12:37 pm

PorFavor wrote:
Storm Desmond: Rain causes further Cumbria flooding(BBC News website)
Another very wet few days, then.

Cumbrian Coast trains disrupted because of it, as I found out this morning

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Thu 10 Dec, 2015 12:49 pm

Not complaining because we are nowhere near Cumbria's situation, but heavy rain last night, after weeks of the stuff is causing problems of pooling round our house.

We'll be having to pick axe out some land drains this afternoon to try and stop the wall render from blowing, as happened when we had a mini-flood from faulty pipe work by the water company a few years back. All character, and muscle building stuff.

Thanks for your views & responses to my post about well off relatives who had a council flat.
Food for thought.

My husband reminded me that he and his parents ended up in a pleasant council house in Halifax when their street was condemned as unfit for habitation because of lack of indoor facilities etc.
A whole street had to be rehoused in that case, and other families were turfed out of their homes to make way for road improvements etc.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Thu 10 Dec, 2015 1:03 pm

When they deem necessary rooms as spare ,subject to penalisation and reduce CT for annexes,regardless of use,I humbly suggest,it isn't the better use of housing,that drives them.

gilsey · Post by **gilsey** » Thu 10 Dec, 2015 1:03 pm

PorFavor wrote:
Storm Desmond: Rain causes further Cumbria flooding(BBC News website)
Another very wet few days, then.

I know Glenridding well, used to be one of our regular haunts, it's headline news on Sky today. I'll be interested to see what's happened on the fells upstream when people can get up there.
For people who don't know it, the affected part is the south side of the beck, about 2/3 of the village is on the north side and higher up.
Very sad to see.
What can you say about those guys with the diggers though, just fantastic.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Thu 10 Dec, 2015 1:11 pm

''What can you say about those guys with the diggers though, just fantastic.''

A job for Gomer Parry, if there ever was one.
(That's for the Phil Rickman readers.)

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Thu 10 Dec, 2015 1:34 pm

Musing.If current/proposed "reforms" in place when our circumstances changed.

1.Loss of home-only housing support available subject to extended qualifying period,interest bearing loan plus charges and rendered unavailable in any case on any earnings,whatsoever.
2.Move to Council property,adaptations,HB
3.If one bedroom as per "needed"-inability to undergo home haemodialysis;if two -discretionary as to chargeability

4.Passing of partner,home rendered not needed,posited as selfish,even though policy rendered that the only possibility "encouragement" of moving.

Transient segreTory warehousing.

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Thu 10 Dec, 2015 1:37 pm

HindleA wrote:When they deem necessary rooms as spare ,subject to penalisation and reduce CT for annexes,regardless of use,I humbly suggest,it isn't the better use of housing,that drives them.

"I humbly suggest....." etc.

You are too kind, too polite, and too generous. I doff my fedora to you. I am unable to muster my customary good manners on this.

What drives these sociopathic cockwombling mendacious venal fuckwits is greed and hatred.
Greed for money, status, and power. Hatred for anyone who is not like them.

They want to run the state so that they can dismantle any part of it that fails to make money for them and their friends.
They want to create an underclass they can demonise and despise in order to prove that they are right.

They are succeeding.

Meanwhile, what passes for the opposition (be it Labour, the SNP, or others) sits on its' collective hands and does nothing of note; we get an occasional clever soundbite and bit of stroppiness now and then, but no real action and no real fight.
As our elected representatives (Tories excepted) engage in trying to prove to the media that they're not Blairites/Corbynistas/whatever and the SNP does whatever it feels like doing on any given day, there is no effective opposition to this crap.

I am furious.

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Thu 10 Dec, 2015 1:37 pm

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015 ... ary-drinks" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

“If you think adding pennies is going to discourage youngsters across this country from buying the occasional can of Coke or the occasional Fanta, I think you are very much mistaken,” Millar said.

Yet another weak argument from a corporate sponsored Tory. If a sugar tax won't stop people buying fizzy drinks, why are fizzy drinks manufacturers and their mates in the Tory party so dead set against it then? I thought the Tories preferred regressive taxes. And it would certainly be regressive, although I'm doubtful the very poorest spend much on fizzy drinks. The reality is that taxing a product, as with alcohol, will associate it firmly with a negative health message. That's how it works and, unlike alcohol, fizzy drinks may not be addictive or fun enough to entice people to drink them regardless. It's got to be worth a try and, unlike taxing energy or tampons, it's not like anyone has to buy sugary drinks, is it?

GetYou · Post by **GetYou** » Thu 10 Dec, 2015 1:44 pm

Ouch.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/12/10 ... behaviour/

Amayas Morse, auditor general at the NAO, said the Public Accounts Committee "very rarely indeed writes reports related to personal behaviour like this. It is a most unusual event to have such extensive comment on behaviour which was distressing to staff and visibly confrontational."

Meg Hillier, PAC chair said the officials' "frankly childish" behaviour had an impact on the implementation of the project.

"I want to give both of you the opportunity to defend this dysfunctional behaviour, then I want to hear from Claire Moriarty [Defra's permanent secretary] what has been done about it and why you are still in posts," she added.

Temulkar · Post by **Temulkar** » Thu 10 Dec, 2015 1:46 pm

I would like energy drinks packed full of sugar and caffeine banned from being sold to kids. I spent an afternoon in hospital a few years ago with one of my Year 7's who had drunk 12 of the buggers one morning. They cause disruptive behaviour and lack of focus cos the kids are so wired.

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Thu 10 Dec, 2015 1:46 pm

Donald J. Trump ‏@realDonaldTrump · 44m44 minutes ago
Thank you to respected columnist Katie Hopkins of Daily http://Mail.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; for her powerful writing on the U.K.'s Muslim problems.

To borrow from Douglas Adams:

Ah, this is obviously some strange usage of the word 'respected' that I wasn't previously aware of.

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Thu 10 Dec, 2015 1:50 pm

Nick Boles. Your actions confirm that you are indeed, a complete and utter Nick Boles.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Thu 10 Dec, 2015 1:52 pm

I am in now way "snobby" about Council housing.I spent twenty years of my life living in them.Do I feel some guilt about receiving support as a homeowner,without regard to deemed necessary rooms,certainly.My ire is really about false economy and the denigration of people doing the morally correct thing,posited as selfish and increasingly penalised for it,regardless of house type.

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Thu 10 Dec, 2015 2:12 pm

http://www.theguardian.com/business/201 ... evelations" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

On Wednesday, an investigation by the Guardian revealed that temporary workers at Sports Direct are receiving effective hourly rates of pay below the minimum wage.

I accidently bought a bike from Sports Direct, online from Muddyfox.com, not knowing Muddyfox isn't an independent company anymore but just a Sports Direct brand name. The bike was ok, but nothing on the website linked it to Sports Direct. We only realised when it was delivered in Sports Direct packaging. I thought that was very sneaky and dishonest and shows how hard it is to use consumer power to influence big companies. We bought a Hotpoint cooker recently out of desperation because Cannon had gone out of business only to discover it wasn't even a Hotpoint because they're now owned by Indecit. My husband wouldn't have bought it if he'd known, because Indecit have a bad reputation, which my new cooker is already living up to. There's very little choice these days, it's all coming from the same Chinese factories and sold by a handful of US corporations under hundreds of separate "brand" names. Even Bosch stuff looks cheaply made these days. It's so depressing.

TR'sGhost · Post by **TR'sGhost** » Thu 10 Dec, 2015 3:30 pm

StephenDolan wrote:Number of 'fit' patients stuck in hospital hits all-time high

http://gu.com/p/4fx5v" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This Government is so f. incompetent. And the MSM as a rule, collectively shrug their shoulders.

No surprise there. My mother (89) was taken into hospital a few weeks ago and it was obvious residential care would be needed.

But before anywhere would accept her she needed to have a leaving hospital/care assessment done. Which is a job done by social services and is a statutory function. So the first thing social services ask is "how much savings/income does she have" and as soon as they realise that for residential care that puts her in the self-funding bracket social services announce they "don't do care assessments for self-funders". Even though the law says they have to.

Hospital then suggested getting mother into respite care because then they'd have to do the assessment. But no free respite beds in private sector, only council (who have almost all the respite beds in the area because leaving beds free in private homes in case they're needed is ridiculously expensive). Council has space but neither respite centre has been accepting new clients since the end of October because both are to be closed (and probably sold on) after Christmas to save money. It doesn't help that the local paper has taken an interest and has without quite saying so invited people to conclude that having 90 full and part-time staff to care for up to 80 or so disabled or severely disabled people with complex 24 hours a day care needs is an example of Public Sector Layabouts coining it from Labour Spendthrift Extravagance.

Anyway, eventually got problem resolved with by twisting the arms of the hospital social work team who did the assessment when worn down by us on one side and the doctors who want the bed back on the other.

Meanwhile, the council has been cut so hard over the last few years, and with more to come for the forseeable future that it's actively considering closing the parks and pretty much anything non-statutory that involves paying wages or might potentially need any financial support at all.

TobyLatimer · Post by **TobyLatimer** » Thu 10 Dec, 2015 4:52 pm

Jesus fucking wept. The DWP know how to out the heebie jeebies up people. I had a dreaded brown envelope this morning from Smiffy's finest, I've been in ESA support group for three years now i'm possibly due to be looked at again. The re-assessments were suspended for a while but are now supposed to be picking up again.

I daren't look at the letter until lunchtime, sheepishly opened it and read the first line ;

"We have looked at your claim again following a recent change,. A change to the ESA rate payable"

Ouch. Like a sock to the back of the head. *Puts letter away without finishing to read* Not ready for this again.

The only change is that I am considerably worse health & mobility wise since I was 'awarded' (lucky bugger) my pittance.

Just plucked up courage to have a peep - it goes on to say

"From April 2015 (yes 2015) your ESA is blah blah blahdy blah a week" (no change i think, unless it's gone up a few pence)

"Your circumstances mean you will qualify for a Christmas Bonus Payment, the amount payable is 10.00 paid into your account the first week in December"

Well whoopie fucking doo. If Maximus don't finish me off then the heart attack inducing random communiques from 'The Department' surely will.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Thu 10 Dec, 2015 4:56 pm

Bloody hell Toby. You nearly gave me a panic attack as well. Very glad it wasn't bad news. But they sure know how to turn an OK message into a nasty experience.

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Thu 10 Dec, 2015 5:00 pm

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... t-benefits" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

all-eu-states-oppose-david-camerons-freeze-migrant-benefits

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Thu 10 Dec, 2015 5:05 pm

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... t-benefits

all-eu-states-oppose-david-camerons-freeze-migrant-benefits

Yes it's going swimmingly it seems.

More curious / unexpected is a strange line in that article suggesting that this negotiation is a front for other deals that are going on behind the scenes about a wholly different kind of EU membership for the UK --- something called British membership. I dread to think what that might comprise.