Friday 22nd January 2016

[AnatolyKasparov]

Six local council byelections this week:

Wealden DC - safe Tory hold with approaching two thirds of the vote, almost unchanged since last May. This was once an area with LibDem strength - they won both this ward's seats in 2003, before the Tories just edged ahead in votes come 2007 (though the seats were shared) but then they did not stand at all in 2011 and the Tories easily beat a sole Labour candidate. On GE day the LibDems reappeared, but their sole candidate was beaten nearly 2 to 1 by the Tories in a straight fight. This time Labour stood and took 11% - well down on their previous showing here five years ago but still enough to reduce the LibDem share considerably further, thus confirming their long term decline here.

St Helens - Labour hold with over 70% of the vote in a very safe ward (only in the 2004 all outs has another party been even vaguely competitive - the LibDems, whose vote had fallen to derisory levels by 2014 and have not stood since) which was a 5% increase on last year. The same other parties stood as then, and in the same order - UKIP maintained the runners up spot they gained in their first contest two years ago, but more distantly than ever before whilst the Tories dropped by 2% compared with GE and the Greens also edged downwards. Though it is maybe worth noting there was still a small movement against Labour since 2012, when the seats up this May were (mostly) last contested.

Hertfordshire CC - another safe Tory hold and another example of a long term fall from grace for the LibDems, though they did manage to come second here having dropped to fourth and last come 2013 having won comfortably in 2005 and only narrowly lost in 2009 (they have suffered a similar collapse in these parts at district - Hertsmere DC - level) None the less, the Tories won very easily with over half the vote (a healthy increase on three years ago) and this looks very safe for them now. This time it was the fate of UKIP to collapse as they suffered a double figure drop with their share more than halved to barely 10%, and dropping from 2nd last time to 4th. Labour remained in third, also slightly down.

South Lanarkshire - SNP hold, though this involved them overtaking Labour into top spot in a division which has split 2Lab/1Nat in both 2012 and 2007. Nonetheless, their share increased only modestly and the Lab-SNP swing was a bit over 5% - compared with the 20% plus changes that were being seen in Scottish contests last summer. On this occasion, it was the Tories who may actually have hurt Labour more as they saw a substantial increase - up 8% to 18% - since the last contest (though a markedly more modest boost since 2007) Greens in 4th with little change, ahead of the LibDems who stood here for the first time since the present voting system was introduced but were rewarded with less than 2%.

Southwark - Labour hold with 60% of the vote, very slightly down on 2014 (this may not be unconnected with substantial housing clearance since then) This ward has always returned three Labour councillors since 2002 - when the LibDems actually ran Labour close, but it has become progressively safer for the red team since then and as in many other cases the LibDem vote fell off a cliff after 2010; they actually finished fifth two years ago. This time round they moved into second with a 9 point increase, but were still beaten by well over 3 to 1. Greens were pushed into third, down on last time - as were the Tories who dropped from 3rd to 4th, though they did narrowly beat UKIP who gained 5% standing here for the first time. Then an Independent, and finally the All Peoples Party - a local offshoot from a couple of expelled Labour councillors - who saw their share fall by two thirds to just 2%, falling from 4th to last.

Thanet DC - Labour gain from UKIP in a ward that had previously been one of their safe bets here, Labour beating the Tories by about 2 to 1 in 2011 and also safely getting two councillors elected in 2007 and 2003, before the "purple wave" washed over here last May - Farage may have failed to win his parliamentary seat, but his efforts led to this council becoming the first majority UKIP authority at "principal" level in the whole country. Splits and defections have already put paid to that, however, and this contest saw their grip weakened further as a 14% drop saw UKIP lose out even though Labour's own share only increased slightly. Tories remained in third, also with a small increase - these were the only three parties to stand on GE day, and though there was increased competition now little came of it; the best of the also rans was the top placed of two Independents who scored 6%, followed by the Greens and the LibDems (both standing here for the first time this century) and lastly the other Indy with just 1%.

Back to just the one contest next week.

[citizenJA]

Fishguard, Cardigan, Aberystwyth is a non starter because we have good and direct A road connections between them. There are bus services. The problem is with getting across Wales as I said earlier. The roads are awful in comparison - takes a very long time - no or few buses.

I think a new road sounds a much better idea than a railway. I don't know what plans there are for that.

Yes, with the guarantee frequent, reliable and affordable bus service is provided on it.

[ephemerid]

A letter for Citizen JA.

----------------------------

Dearest J,

I am frequently astonished by your tolerance and kindness.

However, I find that when it comes to the antics and utterances of certain individuals, my own is in very short supply.

Ms.Phillips should heed your counsel - she would indeed be wise to focus her obviously considerable energies on representing her constituents.

Sadly, I am of the opinion that she is determined to make a name for herself as someone who has a lot to say.
On everything.
Very noisily.

What she possesses in confidence is totally eclipsed by her lack of anything useful or interesting to say.

Yours sincerely,

Ephie.

[HindleA]

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

Britain on the booze - live

[Vordy]

Evening All.

Cruddas, Beckett, Labour & Tory spin – How does Labour win?

Source:

https://politicalsift.wordpress.com/201 ... abour-win/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Whisky and Tea
Mark Crawford's blog. Lefty.

Home
The Writer

Let Macer Gifford Speak!
Posted: November 14, 2015 | Author: Mark | Filed under: Religion, Students, UK Politics | Leave a comment »

Update: Woop! UCLU have rescinded their ban at long bloody last.

In yet further grandstanding of the power unaccountable bureaucracy holds over freedom of speech, a former UCL student has been blocked from delivering a talk on the fight with Daesh in the Middle-East. Originally due to speak at the invitation of the university’s Kurdish Society, Macer Gifford was unilaterally barred by UCLU’s activities and events officer, Asad Khan, on grounds so vague as to be borderline absurd. Defending his actions with the lurid euphemism that ‘one man’s freedom fighter is another man’s terrorist’, Khan continued to write that ‘in every conflict there are two sides, and at UCLU we want to avoid taking sides in conflicts.’ For one, it is deeply disturbing to hear any moral equivalence be drawn between the predatory and barbaric political system under construction by Daesh and its Kurdish national opposition, the YPG; but a pre-emptive ban on an individual with first-hand expertise on a subject whose facts are forever blurred in the mainstream media runs counter to the very spirit of independent thought we should aspire to nurture at a university.

We must not allow undemocratic vetoes to be cloaked in this shady language of political neutrality. UCLU has made repeated political interventions in the past, and will continue to do so in the future with or without the consent of its sabbatical officers; several motions have been moved in recent years against the Israeli occupation of Palestine, for example, a theme which deserves to be revisited again. Moreover, despite Khan’s claims to the contrary, not all of his colleagues were informed of his decision to bar Gifford, and he certainly has no right to legitimate such any pronouncements with reference UCLU’s student body, essentially none of whom were consulted. Khan must be censured, and the ban on Gifford immediately rescinded.

Originally written for the UCL Free Education bulletin.
Share this:

[PrivacyBadger has replaced this FacebookShare button.]
[PrivacyBadger has replaced this LinkedIn button.]
Email

Like this:
Five things the Queen’s salary could pay for
Posted: September 9, 2015 | Author: Mark | Filed under: Culture, UK Politics | Leave a comment »

Balmoral Castle

It is virtually impossible to find an accurate breakdown of the Queen’s wealth. The Sunday Times Rich List puts her net fortune at £340 million; but while a significant portion of the income this produces is clearly wasted on antiques in whom only the most pretentious and over-privileged in our society would ever find value, much of it, like Balmoral Castle, takes the form of great historical treasures – and they would need to be paid for by the public whether or not it went through the monarchy first. This does not of course account for the fact that most of these sites are, at present, closed to the public, or for the lost revenue in tourism that has resulted – but we’ll generously glide over that.

Nevertheless, according to the Independent, the Queen’s burden on the taxpayer during the last financial year amounted to about £40 million direct from the Treasury, or:

1,713 new nurses per year.

It costs about £70,000 for a nurse’s three-year training course on the NHS. Today, following a variety of severe cuts and privatisation efforts, waiting times in hospitals are back a decade; and with finances comparable to the Queen’s budget, the number of new nurses trained per year could be restored to the level it was at before the Tory/Lib Dem Coalition began in 2010.
11,810 grants for students from low-income families per year.

In this year’s budget, Osborne announced he was cutting student grants from the budget – entirely. That means that students coming to university from low-income backgrounds will receive nothing to compensate for the lifestyles enjoyed by those with well-off parental sponsors. The Queen’s annual income could pay for thousands in need of the full £3,387 grant.
A fund for 4,500 severely disabled people to live per year.

The Independent Living Fund – before it was obscenely obliterated this year – provided 18,000 several disabled people with the money required to enjoy a very basic standard of living, perhaps in mobility or care at home: life for disabled people – on average, and not even in the worst case – costs an enormous £550 per month more than it does for non-handicapped people. Even if one callously sets aside the disproportionate number of deaths since 2010 from Ian Duncan-Smith’s decision, essentially, to force disabled people to work, a commitment on the size of the Queen’s salary could allow for about a quarter of the ILF to be restored.
1,600 new teachers per year.

At a time in which there is a 10 percent shortfall in the number of teachers needed in the education system, one is an awe at Osborne’s obsession with pay freezes in those sectors where applicants are most desperately needed. Classes are growing and standards are in decline. Not that this would at all discourage the royal family, whose private tutoring is now being adopted by the upper middle-class in their quest to avoid shortcomings in their children’s schooling. The annual salary for a new teacher is £25,000 – which is often returned to the exchequer through tax, even for trainees.
Settling 1,500 Syrian refugees per year.

Any number less than the tens of thousands who ought to be settled in Britain is an utter disgrace. Still, the immediate cost of settling someone in Britain would probably amount to roughly £25,000 – which is to say nothing of the number, as Germany have somewhat cynically appreciated, who would contribute to the economy in the long-run through bolstered production and tax revenue. I don’t find at all tasteful to think in this way about human refugees – refugees, in this case, from a war that our government has done appalling little to stop. But the size of the Queen’s budget does underlie how utterly ridiculous is the Conservatives’ logic on the matter.

Is any of this in itself enough to justify deposing the monarchy? Not really – it’s pennies, and all of the above changes could be made to the treasury for what would amount to a tiny cost on the national budget. Besides, the entire point of social democracy is so ordinary people will not be dependent on the generous handouts of philanthropists and well-meaning churchgoers. But ask yourself – why do the Tories slice away at the NHS, as though it staff were moldy outgrowths, but make an elderly lady – who has never been held accountable to anyone – untouchable?

There is a reason that Elizabeth of House Windsor is romanticised for the glamour she has never deserved. The reflexive defence of her wealth under some ‘patriotic’ delusion stands for everything vested in this country’s tolerance for extreme fortunes which could never legitimately be earned by anyone, the same country that allows cynical scapegoats to be made of the vulnerable, forever fantasising about welfare abuse while billions of income silently disappears from the tax books. And in the case of Her Majesty, it is one worse: it is the fortunate of an unaccountable, unelected, hereditary snob wrought from a past most nations have long since set aside with the toys of their childhood.

In my dreams, Britain’s longest reigning monarch will be its last.
Share this:


It’s absurd to compare Jeremy Corbyn with Michael Foot

Source:

http://www.whiskyandtea.net/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[citizenJA]

http://www.local.gov.uk/web/guest/media ... 58187/NEWS

?

@RR2

Thank you HindleA.

I don't know if we've got the 'statement' that John Healey refers to but that page has a link to this LGA briefing on the next stage of the Housing Bill to be dealt with by the Lords on 26 January. Makes for worrying reading - seem to have quite a lot of concerns about the impact for communities, and local authorities ability to serve their needs well in future.

http://www.local.gov.uk/documents/10180 ... c2d63049e1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Local Government Association briefing, Housing and Planning Bill...

"It is difficult to understand the full implications of the proposals as much of the detail will be determined in regulations
that have not been published alongside the Bill. Draft regulations should be published as soon as possible to allow for
effective scrutiny."

http://www.local.gov.uk/documents/10180 ... c2d63049e1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Let's pass a bill requiring all private properties currently let now for sale at a deeply discounted price to the current tenants living in them.

[Vordy]

Something weird happened above.I copied and pasted a title on its absurd to compare Jeremy Corbyn with Michael Foot.Please go to link provided to read the intended article.

Of to bed so TTFN.

[citizenJA]

Something weird happened above.I copied and pasted a title on its absurd to compare Jeremy Corbyn with Michael Foot.Please go to link provided to read the intended article.

Of to bed so TTFN.

Goodnight, Vordy

[citizenJA]

My advice to Jess Phillips can be summed up in four letters. S, T, F and U.

Yep.

[citizenJA]

http://www.theguardian.com/society/live ... are_btn_tw

Britain on the booze - live

Live?

[PaulfromYorkshire]

This is a strangely heartening read, especially the comments

http://zelo-street.blogspot.co.uk/2016/ ... ation.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

so-farewell-then-sunnation

[PaulfromYorkshire]

http://www.theguardian.com/society/live ... are_btn_tw

Britain on the booze - live

Live?

Let me guess. They actually ventured out of the westminster Village for this one?

[ohsocynical]

Anybody listening to Any Questions from Pembroke Dock?

The amount of applause for the Tory calling out the Welsh government's policy of closing district general and community hospitals tells me what we are up against (as if I didn't know already).

There is huge anger at loss of locally based health provision and I'm not talking about specialist services.

The fury in this programme is mainly about the maternity / midwifery services being centralised in Carmarthen. Carwyn is getting a lot of loud heckling.

This kind of thing winds me up no end. I was heavily involved in the changes in maternity and paediatrics in West Kent, so I know quite a bit about the issues. (That's me being modest - with due allowances for all that being a few years ago, I'm pretty much an expert). There is a long term, UK-wide shortage of staff-grade (i.e. registrar) doctors in a number of the linked disciplines - obs, gynae and paeds. (I refer to all three as they are inextricably bound, you can't have one without the other two, which means that if you have staff shortages in one area, you have to arrange the other services accordingly). There are shortages in obs, but the worst shortages are in paeds.

The Royal Colleges have done a great deal of work on this and they say that the factors that influence safety are overwhelmingly about staffing numbers and skill/experience. You'll hear a lot of arguments about ambulances having to go further, or poor road networks or tired staff having to deliver too many mothers or whatever - these are not really considerations in terms of safety. It is far better to be travelling longer and get to an excellent, properly staffed unit. If you do not have enough staff to a) provide enough density of cover and b) see enough patients with complex cases to keep their skills/experience up to date, your safety will decline. The only option in this case is to concentrate services at a smaller number of larger units.

This is not about the Welsh NHS (nor is it about the Tory government cuts). It is about safe staffing and an increasing intolerance to maintain local units at the expense of safety.

Of course, when we talk about safety, we're talking about higher risk pregnancies and births with complications, which are a tiny proportion of the overall number. Childbirth is a natural activity, and frankly the extent to which we've medicalised it in this country is barking. When we're talking about low risk - i.e. the majority - of births, there is not only no reason why they should take place in hospital, there are many good reasons for them not to, and it is safer for them not to - lower stress and less chance of infection being main ones. The reason we have medicalised childbirth so much in this country is entirely political. In the 1930s, obstetricians were a minority discipline, involved in very few births. Midwives were the professionals that most people turned to. The obstetricians saw an opportunity to increase their power and prestige and persuaded successive governments to encourage mothers to go to hospital to have their children. There was no scientific or medical reason for it. So when you see stories about 'consultant led' units being 'replaced' by midwife-led units, this is not true - the midwife led service is an additional, new service (that is much better for most mums and babies) and usually the level of consultant led service is the same, it's just been concentrated into fewer sites.

Sorry, that's probably enough now. But people do annoy me over things like this.

In '62 my daughter was born prematurely, so I had to have her in hospital although I'd been booked for a home birth. It was quite normal at that time.

In '66, my son was born at home...

[citizenJA]

A letter for Citizen JA.

----------------------------

Dearest J,

I am frequently astonished by your tolerance and kindness.

However, I find that when it comes to the antics and utterances of certain individuals, my own is in very short supply.

Ms.Phillips should heed your counsel - she would indeed be wise to focus her obviously considerable energies on representing her constituents.

Sadly, I am of the opinion that she is determined to make a name for herself as someone who has a lot to say.
On everything.
Very noisily.

What she possesses in confidence is totally eclipsed by her lack of anything useful or interesting to say.

Yours sincerely,

Ephie.

I love it!
You're a delight, my friend, thank you.

[Tubby Isaacs]

Anybody listening to Any Questions from Pembroke Dock?

The amount of applause for the Tory calling out the Welsh government's policy of closing district general and community hospitals tells me what we are up against (as if I didn't know already).

There is huge anger at loss of locally based health provision and I'm not talking about specialist services.

The fury in this programme is mainly about the maternity / midwifery services being centralised in Carmarthen. Carwyn is getting a lot of loud heckling.

This kind of thing winds me up no end. I was heavily involved in the changes in maternity and paediatrics in West Kent, so I know quite a bit about the issues. (That's me being modest - with due allowances for all that being a few years ago, I'm pretty much an expert). There is a long term, UK-wide shortage of staff-grade (i.e. registrar) doctors in a number of the linked disciplines - obs, gynae and paeds. (I refer to all three as they are inextricably bound, you can't have one without the other two, which means that if you have staff shortages in one area, you have to arrange the other services accordingly). There are shortages in obs, but the worst shortages are in paeds.

The Royal Colleges have done a great deal of work on this and they say that the factors that influence safety are overwhelmingly about staffing numbers and skill/experience. You'll hear a lot of arguments about ambulances having to go further, or poor road networks or tired staff having to deliver too many mothers or whatever - these are not really considerations in terms of safety. It is far better to be travelling longer and get to an excellent, properly staffed unit. If you do not have enough staff to a) provide enough density of cover and b) see enough patients with complex cases to keep their skills/experience up to date, your safety will decline. The only option in this case is to concentrate services at a smaller number of larger units.

This is not about the Welsh NHS (nor is it about the Tory government cuts). It is about safe staffing and an increasing intolerance to maintain local units at the expense of safety.

Sorry, that's probably enough now. But people do annoy me over things like this.

Don't worry.

I don't have your experience and knowledge in this area, but what you say rings very true to me. This is the sort of stuff Lib Dems used to get hold of all the time, that Rennard by-election thing. The Tories, as I recall, went for it before 2010. I think I remember you saying that a local rightwing Tory (Julian Brazier?) was surprisingly fair and sensible over some local NHS rationalization.

The Tories lost a couple of seats in London over hospital downgrades- Enfield North and Ealing Acton and Shepherds Bush. Those are areas with booming populations. If Mr and Mrs Pembroke Dock think the Tories would keep their place open, they're probably mistaken.

[Tubby Isaacs]

Fishguard, Cardigan, Aberystwyth is a non starter because we have good and direct A road connections between them. There are bus services. The problem is with getting across Wales as I said earlier. The roads are awful in comparison - takes a very long time - no or few buses.

I think a new road sounds a much better idea than a railway. I don't know what plans there are for that.

Yes, with the guarantee frequent, reliable and affordable bus service is provided on it.

And one marketed properly as a "rail bus", connecting with trains at Camarthen.

Only proper public transport anoraks seem to know about buses from rail stations. Some of them are very good indeed, much easier than waiting around for an infrequent rail connection. Somebody ought to brand the bus services that meet certain standards of reliability and frequency and value for money, then market them.

[PaulfromYorkshire]

I think a new road sounds a much better idea than a railway. I don't know what plans there are for that.

Yes, with the guarantee frequent, reliable and affordable bus service is provided on it.

And one marketed properly as a "rail bus", connecting with trains at Camarthen.

Only proper public transport anoraks seem to know about buses from rail stations. Some of them are very good indeed, much easier than waiting around for an infrequent rail connection. Somebody ought to brand the bus services that meet certain standards of reliability and frequency and value for money, then market them.

Are folk aware of this website?

http://www.traveline.info" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I find it does come up with sensible journeys in my region. How does it work elsewhere?

[HindleA]

I find it very useful,have been using it for a while.I was alerted to it from a link in our Council website

(East Midlands)

[PaulfromYorkshire]

Love the Mirror's choice of three photos to illustrate its story today on Osborne and borrowing figures

[HindleA]

Deleted.Too many G.Osbornes

[rebeccariots2]

Anybody listening to Any Questions from Pembroke Dock?

The amount of applause for the Tory calling out the Welsh government's policy of closing district general and community hospitals tells me what we are up against (as if I didn't know already).

There is huge anger at loss of locally based health provision and I'm not talking about specialist services.

The fury in this programme is mainly about the maternity / midwifery services being centralised in Carmarthen. Carwyn is getting a lot of loud heckling.

This kind of thing winds me up no end. I was heavily involved in the changes in maternity and paediatrics in West Kent, so I know quite a bit about the issues. (That's me being modest - with due allowances for all that being a few years ago, I'm pretty much an expert). There is a long term, UK-wide shortage of staff-grade (i.e. registrar) doctors in a number of the linked disciplines - obs, gynae and paeds. (I refer to all three as they are inextricably bound, you can't have one without the other two, which means that if you have staff shortages in one area, you have to arrange the other services accordingly). There are shortages in obs, but the worst shortages are in paeds.

The Royal Colleges have done a great deal of work on this and they say that the factors that influence safety are overwhelmingly about staffing numbers and skill/experience. You'll hear a lot of arguments about ambulances having to go further, or poor road networks or tired staff having to deliver too many mothers or whatever - these are not really considerations in terms of safety. It is far better to be travelling longer and get to an excellent, properly staffed unit. If you do not have enough staff to a) provide enough density of cover and b) see enough patients with complex cases to keep their skills/experience up to date, your safety will decline. The only option in this case is to concentrate services at a smaller number of larger units.

This is not about the Welsh NHS (nor is it about the Tory government cuts). It is about safe staffing and an increasing intolerance to maintain local units at the expense of safety.

Sorry, that's probably enough now. But people do annoy me over things like this.

Don't worry.

I don't have your experience and knowledge in this area, but what you say rings very true to me. This is the sort of stuff Lib Dems used to get hold of all the time, that Rennard by-election thing. The Tories, as I recall, went for it before 2010. I think I remember you saying that a local rightwing Tory (Julian Brazier?) was surprisingly fair and sensible over some local NHS rationalization.

The Tories lost a couple of seats in London over hospital downgrades- Enfield North and Ealing Acton and Shepherds Bush. Those are areas with booming populations. If Mr and Mrs Pembroke Dock think the Tories would keep their place open, they're probably mistaken.

I think you'll find that it is Mr and Mrs and Misses all over west Wales who are angry about loss of services. They don't rate the Tories particularly but they will probably be persuaded that Plaid would do things differently (the hospital consultant who stood as an independent in May and had a campaign purely about health services has joined ranks with Plaid for this coming election). It'll be Labour losing votes over it. All the other parties pile in to have a go ... listen back to that Any Questions and you'll get the idea.

[Tubby Isaacs]

That is good.

Found you can get from Canada Water to Cirencester in 2h 45 mins. Not bad seeing Cirencester doesn't have a station.

I imagine lots of people would be put off by the change to a bus at Swindon. But there are 10 of them a day, pretty good, and regular- ie not all packed into rush hour.

[RogerOThornhill]

Evening all. Doing a trawl through Ofsted reports...and this one's not good.

Primary converter academy gone from Outstanding to Inadequate and placed in special measures.

http://reports.ofsted.gov.uk/inspection ... ELS/137268

16 parents taken kids out of school since September.
Year 6 being taught by many different teachers and now by supply.

and this:

The headteacher was not present on the second day of the inspection

Inspection was triggered by a complaint.

[Tubby Isaacs]

This kind of thing winds me up no end. I was heavily involved in the changes in maternity and paediatrics in West Kent, so I know quite a bit about the issues. (That's me being modest - with due allowances for all that being a few years ago, I'm pretty much an expert). There is a long term, UK-wide shortage of staff-grade (i.e. registrar) doctors in a number of the linked disciplines - obs, gynae and paeds. (I refer to all three as they are inextricably bound, you can't have one without the other two, which means that if you have staff shortages in one area, you have to arrange the other services accordingly). There are shortages in obs, but the worst shortages are in paeds.

The Royal Colleges have done a great deal of work on this and they say that the factors that influence safety are overwhelmingly about staffing numbers and skill/experience. You'll hear a lot of arguments about ambulances having to go further, or poor road networks or tired staff having to deliver too many mothers or whatever - these are not really considerations in terms of safety. It is far better to be travelling longer and get to an excellent, properly staffed unit. If you do not have enough staff to a) provide enough density of cover and b) see enough patients with complex cases to keep their skills/experience up to date, your safety will decline. The only option in this case is to concentrate services at a smaller number of larger units.

This is not about the Welsh NHS (nor is it about the Tory government cuts). It is about safe staffing and an increasing intolerance to maintain local units at the expense of safety.

Sorry, that's probably enough now. But people do annoy me over things like this.

Don't worry.

I don't have your experience and knowledge in this area, but what you say rings very true to me. This is the sort of stuff Lib Dems used to get hold of all the time, that Rennard by-election thing. The Tories, as I recall, went for it before 2010. I think I remember you saying that a local rightwing Tory (Julian Brazier?) was surprisingly fair and sensible over some local NHS rationalization.

The Tories lost a couple of seats in London over hospital downgrades- Enfield North and Ealing Acton and Shepherds Bush. Those are areas with booming populations. If Mr and Mrs Pembroke Dock think the Tories would keep their place open, they're probably mistaken.

I think you'll find that it is Mr and Mrs and Misses all over west Wales who are angry about loss of services. They don't rate the Tories particularly but they will probably be persuaded that Plaid would do things differently (the hospital consultant who stood as an independent in May and had a campaign purely about health services has joined ranks with Plaid for this coming election). It'll be Labour losing votes over it. All the other parties pile in to have a go ... listen back to that Any Questions and you'll get the idea.

I think I get the idea from here OK! It's dreadful politics, and a good example of where the devolved authority just takes the blame for the UK government.

It's the sort of thing Plaid could make a lot of in a Coalition (never mind what they cut instead). Perhaps Sturgeon will send some Barnet money over.

[Tubby Isaacs]

I was going to say that surely those 10 buses a day, from by a station (Swindon) to a town without a station (Cirencester), could be branded in some way? "Rail link bus"

[HindleA]

A frustrating thing we found was annoyingly little journeys between bus/train where for us it had to be taxi

[PaulfromYorkshire]

I was going to say that surely those 10 buses a day, from by a station (Swindon) to a town without a station (Cirencester), could be branded in some way? "Rail link bus"

I can see why as a bus owner you might not do that. People just wanting to go from Swindon to Cirencester might think it was not for them.

But yes, a little more integration is sorely needed.

[Tubby Isaacs]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-35381130" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Google has agreed to pay £130m in back taxes after an "open audit" of its accounts by the UK tax authorities.

Good news, I think. Though Margaret Hodge played to the gallery a bit, she did get some pressure on here.

Jolyon Maugham's said that some of the technical moves the Tories have made on tax are quite smart. Maybe these are paying off here.

[PaulfromYorkshire]

A frustrating thing we found was annoyingly little journeys between bus/train where for us it had to be taxi

Indeed. We do really need more integration of bus and rail. That needn't be a publicly owned system (though I'm not against same), but probably does need a certain degree of public commissioning. If you are going to tender for a service, you HAVE to offer certain services, like bus stops at stations for example.

[RogerOThornhill]

Did someone say Cirencester? Stopped off there for a couple of days on the way back from taking my son some more stuff a year or so back.



Station building is still there even if the station isn't (closed in 1964). Allegedly designed by Brunel.

[Tubby Isaacs]

A frustrating thing we found was annoyingly little journeys between bus/train where for us it had to be taxi

Indeed. We do really need more integration of bus and rail. That needn't be a publicly owned system (though I'm not against same), but probably does need a certain degree of public commissioning. If you are going to tender for a service, you HAVE to offer certain services, like bus stops at stations for example.

The London system is pretty good, with TfL specifying lots of detail including the fares for the London Overground and DLR, plus lots of control over buses (and of course the state-owned Underground). The only exception at the moment is the National Rail lines that aren't yet part of London Overground (though some are going to be).

[Tubby Isaacs]

Cirencester is a very pleasant town overall.

[Tubby Isaacs]

I was going to say that surely those 10 buses a day, from by a station (Swindon) to a town without a station (Cirencester), could be branded in some way? "Rail link bus"

I can see why as a bus owner you might not do that. People just wanting to go from Swindon to Cirencester might think it was not for them.

But yes, a little more integration is sorely needed.

That's a good point. Sometimes stations (eg Cheltenham) can be out of town. But Swindon's bus and rail station seem to be near to each other.

[Tubby Isaacs]

Desperate

http://www.mayorwatch.co.uk/tories-clai ... evolution/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Transport Secretary Patrick McLoughlin today weighed into the London mayoral contest, claiming that Labour’s Sadiq Khan “has shown no interest in engaging with ministers on devolving rail services”.

McLoughlin was speaking after he and Mayor Boris Johnson announced plans to hand control of inner suburban routes to Transport for London.

Labour started devolving rail services in 2007. Livingstone in 2012 (and Johnson, to be fair to him) wanted more devolved in the 2012 election. Since then the Shadow Rail Minister (Lilian Greenwood) and the London Assembly have re-emphasized the issue. The arguments have been out there for ages, and Labour's always been in favour of it. No idea why McLoughlin took so long to agree to the arguments.

So what if Khan didn't phone up McLoughlin and say "I want it too!" That's Chloe Smith stuff.

[Tubby Isaacs]

Both men also point out that Mr Khan failed to devolve any rail services during his time as Transport minister

So how many franchises were running out?

What was he supposed to do? Force the franchise holders to give them up.

Eeek, Ralph Miliband Marxist!

[rebeccariots2]

For those - like me - slightly fascinated by the ongoing strange tactics of Lucy Allan MP ... it's worth looking at the Telford Labour twitter feed. They too have had some rather unsatisfactory responses - or non responses - from Allan. Their approach seems to have been pretty restrained in the circumstances.

https://twitter.com/Telfordlabour" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Tubby Isaacs]

Here's one of the franchises with London suburban lines in it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Eastern_franchise" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Franchise started in 2006, for 8 years.

So Sadiq, being minister from 2009-10, was supposed to take the suburban lines out of it and devolve them to TFL?

What other franchises were there with London suburban in?

[Tubby Isaacs]

This franchise has some London suburban in.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_ ... 29#History" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The South Central franchise end date was brought forward to September 2009 upon the integration of the Gatwick Express service, to allow the new operator to be in place during major changes to the timetable in and around South London in December 2009.[15] In the run-up to the bidding process for the franchise, reports emerged suggesting that Transport for London, the operator of the London Overground service, wished to take control of all overground services in South London, including the 'Metro' area of the South Central franchise.[16][17] However, such a transfer never took place and the DfT put out the entire franchise for tender.

In August 2008 the DfT shortlisted Abellio, Govia, National Express, NedRail and Stagecoach for the new South Central franchise.[18][19][20] In June 2009 the DfT announced that Govia had retained the franchise, to start on 20 September 2009.

Sadiq arrived at DfT June 2009. I'm shocked and stunned that he didn't, as Minister of State, chuck out all the tenders and immediately award it to TfL!

Interesting to see that TfL wanted those services then but didn't get them. There might be some good reason for it, to be fair, but looks like a missed opportunity.

[Tubby Isaacs]

Here's Zac again, this time on extending the Tramlink to Sutton.

http://www.yourlocalguardian.co.uk/news ... to_Sutton/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Reading out the script. Devolution blah devolution.

“There are two options; one, we get a cheque from the Chancellor but given the constraints that the Government is facing that is unlikely.

“The alternative is devolution to enable us to benefit from the property uplift, we know that when you grow the transport network the first thing that happens is land value goes up.

“Where land is unlocked directly as a consequence of TfL investments it is not a big stretch that the property tax harvested off the back of that should be kept in London.

“It would enable us to be much more ambitious and bullish when it comes to making plans for transport link expansions.”

Tramlink is already devolved to London! He's muddling that up with raising money for transport projects locally- guess what? That's been done already, this exact same thing of getting businesses who benefit from a project to pay towards it. An obscure project called Crossrail did this.

How much will this Tramlink extension cost?

The cost for both phases is estimated at between £200 and £400 million

In Sutton and Croydon? I don't think you're going to get that from extra local taxes, Zac. Johnson promised to extend Tramlink (to Crystal Palace) before but gave up. Reckon there might not be the easy money you think out there.

To his credit. Sadiq Khan has been a bit more cautious in backing this Tramlink extension.

[citizenJA]

Both men also point out that Mr Khan failed to devolve any rail services during his time as Transport minister

So how many franchises were running out?

What was he supposed to do? Force the franchise holders to give them up.

Eeek, Ralph Miliband Marxist!

I read this disingenuous, gross, lying, frippery from Khan's detractors and know they've lost everything. It's not a mistake, they're not misinformed, they're lying hoping most people don't realise what they're up to. They've lost their integrity and trustworthiness.

[HindleA]

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/ia ... re-7229476" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Iain Duncan Smith's cruel welfare cuts will make finding work harder for disabled people say charities
MacMillan, RNIB and Mind are among 30 groups and peers issuing a letter calling for a halt to the cut to Employment Support Allowance

[citizenJA]

I love you, friends.
Sleep well.
cJA

[Tubby Isaacs]

Both men also point out that Mr Khan failed to devolve any rail services during his time as Transport minister

So how many franchises were running out?

What was he supposed to do? Force the franchise holders to give them up.

Eeek, Ralph Miliband Marxist!

I read this disingenuous, gross, lying, frippery from Khan's detractors and know they've lost everything. It's not a mistake, they're not misinformed, they're lying hoping most people don't realise what they're up to. They've lost their integrity and trustworthiness.

Goldsmith is clueless on any detail by the look of it.

[Tubby Isaacs]

Then again Johnson got elected twice.

[HindleA]

A separate study by Mind also published today reveals that 40,000 people unable to work due to mental health problems were threatened with benefit sanctions last year – three-quarters of them incorrectly.

A spokesman said: “This kind of scare-mongering does nothing to help disabled people, and fails to acknowledge that existing claimants and those with the most severe disabilities will not be affected at all.

It is fluid not static ,stop your lies.

[Tubby Isaacs]

I reckon a fair few of those could be for not attending work related activity.

Example- text message (which doesn't I think count as proper notification) sent out 2 days before mandatory activity. Letter (which does count) sent out 2 days before, arrives 1 day before.

Client is away. Sanction.

I looked at work programme stuff which surely should be the same. Supposed to be letter sent out week in advance.

[PaulfromYorkshire]

Just came to mind with Osborne saying he's going to save the steel industry by building Trident. And in any case, perfect for late on a Friday night. Exquisite.

[youtube]6LNB6M7yTBo[/youtube]

[Tubby Isaacs]

Johnson, not at all lying about extending Tramlink to Crystal Palace here.

[Tubby Isaacs]

Trident? How much steel does that use?! There are only 4 submarines.

You'd think he just said that to draw attention to Corbyn or somthing.

[Tubby Isaacs]

HindleA, does what I said about the ESA sanction sound like it's plausible to you?

I have a bit of a personal interest in this case...

Edit- clocking off now. If you see this, send me a PM!

Cheers.