Wednesday 27th January 2016

Post by **refitman** » Wed 27 Jan, 2016 7:10 am

Morning all.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 27 Jan, 2016 8:35 am

Morning refit and all.

Matt Chorley ‏@MattChorley 9m9 minutes ago
Steve Hilton on Google tax anger: "There is a growing sense of companies that are so big... that they really are above the law" @BBCr4today

I wondered who this very sensible and fair sounding guy on Radio 4 was .... turned out it was Steve Hilton ... jeepers. He was ahem ... calling for more reining in of big companies and better measures of anti competitiveness that include impact on community, producers etc ... and much more scrutiny of the way companies lobby government.

Ed - I'm going to say it again - you were spot on with your call to reign in 'predatory' companies. Ahead of the curve again and much maligned for it. Now look who is following in your footsteps.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 27 Jan, 2016 8:36 am

John McDonnell MP ‏@johnmcdonnellMP 3m3 minutes ago
Top Tories met Google chiefs 25 times in run-up to tax deal. We can't have mates rates when it comes to taxes http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/to ... fs-7251620" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; …

Osborne met them 15 times I believe....

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 27 Jan, 2016 8:39 am

Beth Rigby ‏@BethRigby 8h8 hours ago
Beth Rigby Retweeted The Times of London
Retweeting again cos it's such a good splash. Italy secures 15% tax rate from Google, while HMRC gets 3%

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Wed 27 Jan, 2016 8:39 am

rebeccariots2 wrote:Morning refit and all.

Matt Chorley ‏@MattChorley 9m9 minutes ago
Steve Hilton on Google tax anger: "There is a growing sense of companies that are so big... that they really are above the law" @BBCr4today
I wondered who this very sensible and fair sounding guy on Radio 4 was .... turned out it was Steve Hilton ... jeepers. He was ahem ... calling for more reining in of big companies and better measures of anti competitiveness that include impact on community, producers etc ... and much more scrutiny of the way companies lobby government.

Ed - I'm going to say it again - you were spot on with your call to reign in 'predatory' companies. Ahead of the curve again and much maligned for it. Now look who is following in your footsteps.

To be fair to Hilton he's been saying this for a while - his book that was out last year(?) was partly about this.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 27 Jan, 2016 8:41 am

: Google Sweetheart Deal.jpg (73.25 KiB) Viewed 6964 times

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 27 Jan, 2016 8:44 am

RogerOThornhill wrote:
rebeccariots2 wrote:Morning refit and all.

Matt Chorley ‏@MattChorley 9m9 minutes ago
Steve Hilton on Google tax anger: "There is a growing sense of companies that are so big... that they really are above the law" @BBCr4today
I wondered who this very sensible and fair sounding guy on Radio 4 was .... turned out it was Steve Hilton ... jeepers. He was ahem ... calling for more reining in of big companies and better measures of anti competitiveness that include impact on community, producers etc ... and much more scrutiny of the way companies lobby government.

Ed - I'm going to say it again - you were spot on with your call to reign in 'predatory' companies. Ahead of the curve again and much maligned for it. Now look who is following in your footsteps.
To be fair to Hilton he's been saying this for a while - his book that was out last year(?) was partly about this.

Yes I agree. But I don't recall him chipping in to support Ed from the sidelines when he raised this. I just remember a chorus of Tory derision about being anti business.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 27 Jan, 2016 8:46 am

Barry Sheerman ‏@BarrySheerman 18m18 minutes ago
Steve Hilton brilliant on need for serious new kind of competition policy covering dominant corporates & opening competition @BBCr4today

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 27 Jan, 2016 8:57 am

From todays Waugh Zone email:

TRUSS RATINGS

With many fearing fresh floods from Storm Jonas, Liz Truss’s appearance before the EFRA Select Committee was perfectly timed. The Telegraph has splashed on her backing for a new council tax hike of around £15 per household in flood-hit areas. Labour’s Lord Clark of Windemere (what a lovely title) and the Lib Dems aren’t keen on what they have naturally dubbed a ‘flood tax’, though the Local Government Association says it sounds sensible. An easy hit for Corbyn at PMQs?

Meanwhile, Rory Stewart was on Twitter yesterday appealing for volunteers to help build up flood defences in Shap, Cumbria. Does the Environment Agency really now rely on volunteers to do such work?

This has got less media attention but Truss also got into a real spot of bother at the hearing over the Rural Payments Agency fiasco. Turns out farmers are facing bankruptcy because they are still owed payments due. Isn’t facing floods enough?

That's right - shove the responsibility on to the local authorities again. How are they going to decide where to impose such ad hoc taxes? Will it be two strikes in a five year period and you're paying?

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Wed 27 Jan, 2016 8:58 am

Morning

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2016 ... are_btn_tw" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Changeover to universal credit is driving people into long-term debt

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 27 Jan, 2016 9:07 am

Rutherford ruling this morning. Tenterhooks.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 27 Jan, 2016 9:16 am

HindleA wrote:Morning

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2016 ... are_btn_tw" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Changeover to universal credit is driving people into long-term debt

When the National Federation of Almos (NFA), surveyed its members, who manage more than 500,000 council homes across England, on arrears in October and November last year, the policy director Chloe Fletcher had to doublecheck the figures. They showed that 89% of UC claimants in social housing had fallen into rent arrears, compared with 31% of all social tenants. “In my time researching rent arrears, I’ve never seen figures like that for a cohort of tenants,” says Fletcher. She has worked in housing policy for 19 years.

Stunned by the figures on rent arrears, Fletcher and her team at the NFA are pushing for a policy change that expedites that first UC payment to protect tenants from long-term debt and landlords from a loss of income.

A spokesman for the DWP challenges the research findings and says there is no evidence of systemic delays in payments. “For anyone who is having difficulties, we provide budgeting help and benefit advances, as well as stronger support for vulnerable people,” he says. “And under universal credit, claimants are more likely to move into work and earn more.”

They just never recognise the reality. And that last sentence - bunkum.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 27 Jan, 2016 9:32 am

Ian Dunt ‏@IanDunt 2m2 minutes ago
40% of Brit workers don't earn enough to be allowed to bring a non-European spouse to the UK http://www.migrationobservatory.ox.ac.u ... ent-family" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; …

Ian Dunt ‏@IanDunt 1m1 minute ago
Surprising no-one, women, the young and non-Londoners most affected http://www.migrationobservatory.ox.ac.u ... ent-family" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; …

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Wed 27 Jan, 2016 9:35 am

rebeccariots2 wrote:From todays Waugh Zone email:

TRUSS RATINGS

With many fearing fresh floods from Storm Jonas, Liz Truss’s appearance before the EFRA Select Committee was perfectly timed. The Telegraph has splashed on her backing for a new council tax hike of around £15 per household in flood-hit areas. Labour’s Lord Clark of Windemere (what a lovely title) and the Lib Dems aren’t keen on what they have naturally dubbed a ‘flood tax’, though the Local Government Association says it sounds sensible. An easy hit for Corbyn at PMQs?

Meanwhile, Rory Stewart was on Twitter yesterday appealing for volunteers to help build up flood defences in Shap, Cumbria. Does the Environment Agency really now rely on volunteers to do such work?

This has got less media attention but Truss also got into a real spot of bother at the hearing over the Rural Payments Agency fiasco. Turns out farmers are facing bankruptcy because they are still owed payments due. Isn’t facing floods enough?
That's right - shove the responsibility on to the local authorities again. How are they going to decide where to impose such ad hoc taxes? Will it be two strikes in a five year period and you're paying?

This rather strange bit from yesterday's Guardian article on the floods threw me -

Truss said terminology such as “one in 100-year” floods was not helpful, given the frequency with which such floods are happening, and the government was considering the use of clearer language. (my emphasis)

What consideration does it need as long as the message is understandable and accurate? Will there be a Clearer Language on Flooding Sub-committee?

Edited to rearrange words! Well, that's my ambition to serve on the sub-committee in tatters . . . .

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Wed 27 Jan, 2016 9:36 am

Good morfternoon.

utopiandreams · Post by **utopiandreams** » Wed 27 Jan, 2016 9:44 am

A rather late good morning from me, but just thought I'd copy my AS Blog PMQs' post over here too rather than the other way around as it was last week...

Another week and another round of PMQs. Unfortunately I'd forgotten I'd meant to prepare something for this morning after seeing so many hits last week, so top of the head stuff with no links I'm afraid. However what to choose with all the shortcomings of the fat controller? European negotiations as he likes to call them, his compassion for the greatest European refugee crisis since the war, although has he ever demonstrated compassion? His attack on housing or the very fabric of democracy and party funding? Anyone for tennis or a shoe-shopping trip with the lovely Theresa? Of course I jest, these being above-board examples of filling their party coffers no matter how amusing.

I currently have a bee in my bonnet about the inscrutability of our acting Prime Minister. Indeed it would seem that scrutiny is the last thing he wishes, whether it be secondary legislation, statutory instruments or the inadequacy of governmental reports, studies, impact assessments and the like he now wishes to curtail the power of the Lords. As I recently said, I would never have guessed I'd be a cheerleader for them but it seems they're the only ones offering any brake on this out of control and reckless government. At least it's comforting to know there is one chamber that still believes in serving in the best interests of the nation.

Anyway my question for pork-lover today is about the NHS. Before Lansley's top-down reforms, or bottom-up as Dave prefers, he made four assurances to a gathering of nurses for which he he could be held to account. So please David, with more chaos in our national health service by almost any measure, how exactly do you propose that we should hold you to account?

An afterthought on Lansley's reforms. I saw him recently claiming that the 'no top-down refoms' promise was not made shortly before the 2010 election but some years earlier. 2006 I seem to recall but somehow doubt it because Cameron wasn't party leader back then, was he? My flabber was gasted but then it's difficult to check given the internet purge of Toryspeak of 2010.

frightful_oik · Post by **frightful_oik** » Wed 27 Jan, 2016 10:01 am

March 2010 was when TCC made his 'no more messy top-down re-organisations' speech. What TCC says and what TCC does are two completely different things of course.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Wed 27 Jan, 2016 10:08 am

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-35418488?n ... ws_central" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Government loses

utopiandreams · Post by **utopiandreams** » Wed 27 Jan, 2016 10:09 am

frightful_oik wrote:March 2010 was when TCC made his 'no more messy top-down re-organisations' speech. What TCC says and what TCC does are two completely different things of course.

Thanks, frightful, that was my understanding too. However it was Lansley I saw making that claim recently.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 27 Jan, 2016 10:10 am

HindleA wrote:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-35418488?n ... ws_central

Government loses

BLOODY WONDERFUL.

HindleA - consider yourself kissed and hugged for being the bearer of that brilliant news.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 27 Jan, 2016 10:18 am

From the G politics blog on the bedroom tax victories

This is from the Press Association on the bedroom tax court cases.

A victim of domestic violence and the grandparents of a severely disabled teenager have won the latest round of their challenges against the lawfulness of the so-called “bedroom tax”.

Three judges at the Court of Appeal in London ruled in their favour on Wednesday following a hearing in November.

One case, brought by A - a single mother living in a three-bedroom council house fitted with a secure panic room to protect her from a violent ex-partner - concerns the effect of the policy on women living in Sanctuary Scheme homes.

The other, brought by grandparents Paul and Sue Rutherford, of Clunderwen, Pembrokeshire, involves its impact on seriously disabled children who need overnight care.

In both cases it was argued that the policy, which came into force in April 2013, unlawfully discriminates against women and domestic violence victims and against children in the situation of the Rutherfords’ grandson, Warren.

The Government rejects the term “bedroom tax” and says the regulations remove what is in fact a “spare room subsidy”, with the aim of encouraging people to move to smaller properties and save around 480 million a year from the housing benefit bill.

Lord Chief Justice Lord Thomas, Lord Justice Tomlinson and Lord Justice Vos announced that they were allowing the appeals in both cases on the ground that the “admitted discrimination in each case ... has not been justified by the Secretary of State”.

The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) was given permission to challenge the Court of Appeal’s ruling at the Supreme Court.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/blo ... itics-live" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 27 Jan, 2016 10:24 am

Tom Moseley ‏@moseleytom 1m1 minute ago
David Cameron claims Londoners will be "lab rats" for Jeremy Corbyn's economic experiments if they elect Sadiq Khan http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-35412680" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; …

It's going to get very nasty isn't it.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 27 Jan, 2016 10:29 am

I see some people BTL on the G politics blog have suggested it could be good to have Hilton advise the Labour party ... have to admit that thought entered my head earlier after I heard him speak on Radio 4.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Wed 27 Jan, 2016 10:30 am

Government appealing.decision.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 27 Jan, 2016 10:38 am

Barbara Keeley ‏@KeeleyMP 3m3 minutes ago
Barbara Keeley Retweeted The Guardian
Govt should now announce family Carers should be exempt from #BedroomTax

Yes they should. But more than that ... they should get rid of this vile tax altogether. I don't care if they find some excuse to avoid admitting it is a humiliating climbdown ... just do it.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 27 Jan, 2016 10:38 am

HindleA wrote:Government appealing.decision.

They are the rats.

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Wed 27 Jan, 2016 10:47 am

rebeccariots2 wrote:
Barbara Keeley ‏@KeeleyMP 3m3 minutes ago
Barbara Keeley Retweeted The Guardian
Govt should now announce family Carers should be exempt from #BedroomTax
Yes they should. But more than that ... they should get rid of this vile tax altogether. I don't care if they find some excuse to avoid admitting it is a humiliating climbdown ... just do it.

Now they've got "right to buy", the benefit cap and rent reduction to ensure housing associations will no longer be financially viable and will ultimately collapse as a sector, it does seem petty to continue to make a small group of vulnerable people suffer in such a disproportionate and pointless way.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Wed 27 Jan, 2016 10:48 am

"Government appealing" - if only

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Wed 27 Jan, 2016 10:52 am

HindleA wrote:Government appealing.decision.

Of course.

Having already spent £50,000 on this, they were not going to back down, were they?

They appeal everything - as we know - and having been given leave to appeal to the Supreme Court that's what they'll do.

If there is anyone here who doesn't know the background to the case, have a look at underoccupied.net

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Wed 27 Jan, 2016 11:09 am

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistic ... n-hospital" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Ad hoc statistics on Disability Living Allowance claimants who are (or have been) in hospital and impacted by the hospital suspension

We provided this information to the Social Security Advisory Council to consider as part of an equality analysis in relation to a proposed policy change following the case of Cameron Mathieson v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Wed 27 Jan, 2016 11:15 am

I recall some Blairites claiming post-GE that Labour campaigning against the "bedroom tax" had been wrong. Further comment is pretty superfluous.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Wed 27 Jan, 2016 11:26 am

Court Ruling

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2016/29.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Wed 27 Jan, 2016 11:32 am

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/j ... er-uk-role" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

A United Nations panel investigating the Saudi-led bombing campaign in Yemen has uncovered widespread attacks on civilian targets in violation of international humanitarian law, raising questions over UK arms exports to Saudi Arabia and the role of British military advisers.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Wed 27 Jan, 2016 11:42 am

We also think it important to deal expeditiously with the question of permission to appeal in the light of the forthcoming hearing in the Supreme Court. We understood from the oral submissions that were made to this court on the application for permission to appeal and on the substantive appeal that all parties would wish the Supreme Court to consider these cases alongside MA whatever conclusions we reached. That must be a matter entirely for the Supreme Court and we cannot seek to prejudge that. However, as our decisions may be affected by the outcome of the appeal in MA, we would propose to grant the Secretary of State permission to appeal, and to grant the appellant in A and the Equality and Human Rights Commission permission to appeal to the Supreme Court on the PSED issue, leaving it to the Supreme Court as to whether they wish to hear these appeals at the same time as the appeal in MA or to deal with them in another way. If any party wishes to resist the grant of permission, they may apply to do so, but we do not encourage them.

utopiandreams · Post by **utopiandreams** » Wed 27 Jan, 2016 11:43 am

HindleA wrote:https://www.gov.uk/government/statistic ... n-hospital
Ad hoc statistics on Disability Living Allowance claimants who are (or have been) in hospital and impacted by the hospital suspension

We provided this information to the Social Security Advisory Council to consider as part of an equality analysis in relation to a proposed policy change following the case of Cameron Mathieson v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions

Sorry, A, because I haven't followed your link or know about the case in question but I do know first-hand that at the very time a DLA claimant is stuck in hospital that household and other costs are impacted. For example when my late wife lay in hospital after her brain haemorrhage our normal family expenditure was the exactly the same during her DLA suspension plus the extra travel, eating out and parking charges on top, not to mention any impact on work assuming you have some.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Wed 27 Jan, 2016 11:50 am

https://www.leighday.co.uk/News/2015/Ap ... e-Court-in" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 27 Jan, 2016 11:55 am

I am glad that the G moderators have removed the comment by SaltySeaman from beneath the article on the Rutherford's victory in the Court of Appeal.

That comment was the first I saw when I looked. Utterly disgusting.

Is SaltySeaman an old timer?

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Wed 27 Jan, 2016 12:03 pm

So March 1st.Supreme Court.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 27 Jan, 2016 12:04 pm

Tim Ross ‏@TimRossDT 32s33 seconds ago
David Cameron scraps his planned trip to Sweden and Denmark to go and see Juncker in Brussels on Friday for renegotiation talks.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Wed 27 Jan, 2016 12:05 pm

rebeccariots2 wrote:I am glad that the G moderators have removed the comment by SaltySeaman from beneath the article on the Rutherford's victory in the Court of Appeal.

That comment was the first I saw when I looked. Utterly disgusting.

Is SaltySeaman an old timer?

<cough> OpenSeas <cough>?

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 27 Jan, 2016 12:09 pm

AnatolyKasparov wrote:
rebeccariots2 wrote:I am glad that the G moderators have removed the comment by SaltySeaman from beneath the article on the Rutherford's victory in the Court of Appeal.

That comment was the first I saw when I looked. Utterly disgusting.

Is SaltySeaman an old timer?
<cough> OpenSeas <cough>?

Well I wondered - but it's so bloody obvious. Anyway - it was a vile comment - glad it's gone. The G needs to jump on stuff like that immediately.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 27 Jan, 2016 12:11 pm

Kevin Maguire ‏@Kevin_Maguire 2m2 minutes ago
Con MPs making a mistake backing Google tax deal by heckling Corbyn criticism. Out of touch #PMQs

Luciana Berger ‏@lucianaberger 54s54 seconds ago
Cameron asked twice what he thinks about Google's 3% tax rate, he's not keen on answering the question #pmqs

Laura Kuenssberg ‏@bbclaurak 3m3 minutes ago
Corbyn quotes Boris at PM and asks again if 3% effective tax rate is fair.... More impact this week in repeating Q

Post by **refitman** » Wed 27 Jan, 2016 12:11 pm

rebeccariots2 wrote:I see some people BTL on the G politics blog have suggested it could be good to have Hilton advise the Labour party ... have to admit that thought entered my head earlier after I heard him speak on Radio 4.

It's worth remembering that Hilton's parting shot, when he left as being an advisor to the coalition, was that Osborne wasn't cutting deep enough or fast enough.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Wed 27 Jan, 2016 12:13 pm

I'm watching PMQs. Did David Cameron really just say, "When I came to power . . . . "?

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 27 Jan, 2016 12:13 pm

Isabel Hardman ‏@IsabelHardman 41s42 seconds ago
WE'VE HAD NO ANSWERS ON JEFF

Kevin Maguire ‏@Kevin_Maguire 44s45 seconds ago
Tory-Google tax deal an open goal and Corbyn's put the ball in the back of the net. Cameron can't defend it 1-0 #pmqs

Post by **refitman** » Wed 27 Jan, 2016 12:15 pm

Hilton's wife has some nice connections (from Arsene Knows on t'other place):

ArseneKnows
2h ago
4 5

The Whetstone family are among the lobbyists that should be/ have been under far more scrutiny.

Rachel Whetstone was a trustee of Policy Exchange.
Her mother Linda is / was the Chairman of the International Policy Network (Appointed as Director 8/25/2006), a trustee at the Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA), director of the Atlas Economic Research Foundation (1998-2005)
Her grandfather Anthony Fisher was a member of the Mont Pelerin Society and the founder of the libertarian think tank, the Institute of Economic Affairs

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 27 Jan, 2016 12:16 pm

General view seems to be Cameron over reached himself with this nastiness ...

Chuka Umunna ‏@ChukaUmunna 2m2 minutes ago
The PM refers to "a bunch of migrants" in Calais at the Dispatch box just now. Inflammatory and unbecoming of his office. Shameful #PMQs

Daniel Boffey Retweeted
Laura Kuenssberg ‏@bbclaurak 3m3 minutes ago
Surprised Corbyn didn't pick up on Cameron calling people in Calais a 'bunch of migrants'

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 27 Jan, 2016 12:18 pm

PorFavor wrote:I'm watching PMQs. Did David Cameron really just say, "When I came to power . . . . "?

I'm expecting a snap verdict from you then PF. And don't forget the all important scores.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 27 Jan, 2016 12:21 pm

Rafael Behr ‏@rafaelbehr 6m6 minutes ago
Plenty of Tories know bedroom tax is unfair and a mistake and wish it had been dropped asap after election.

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Wed 27 Jan, 2016 12:24 pm

I see Kuenssberg can even make a criticism of Cameron into an attack on Corbyn.

Anyway, given my inabi!ity to understand what anyone ever finds admirable in Cameron's bluster, I won't venture to call a Corbyn win at PMQs but merely observe that he raised a series of topical concerns about government performance in an extremely clear and precise manner. I don't know if he "won", but he certainly performed his role as leader of the opposition as effectively as anyone could. Google, bedroom tax, Yemen. All covered, none adequately answered by Cameron.