Thursday 10th February 2015

Post by **refitman** » Thu 11 Feb, 2016 7:10 am

Morning all.

howsillyofme1 · Post by **howsillyofme1** » Thu 11 Feb, 2016 7:15 am

Morning to everyone

Hi

Just returning to the last post of yesterday on 'worst PM'

I think the 20th Century saw some PM that made bad decisions and too wrong directions

We can say Eden, Baldwin, Chamberlain and Blair all made big mistakes

The difference I think, and why I think Cameron is the worst, is based upon the fact that he is so shallow and his whole Government is a shambles...everything touched turns to shit and he lacks any ounce of the sense of duty and gravitas that even the worst of those above showed

The role of PM until Labour's arrival was always a job for an Establishment character but I am not sure anyone had the overall senses of arrogance and entitlement that this twat Cameron has

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Thu 11 Feb, 2016 8:21 am

Morning all.

Bernard Hogan Howe kicking Humphrys ass. Great listen.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Thu 11 Feb, 2016 8:58 am

Paul Waugh ‏@paulwaugh 2m2 minutes ago
I'm told Jeremy Hunt to make Commons Statement at 11.15am on junior docs contract. Is this it? Imposition?
Or more brinkmanship?

Morning.

Chris Ham from the Kings Fund told Today there has not been such a breakdown of trust between medics and government since 1976. Way to go Hunt - another memorable occasion engineered by you. Memorable in all the wrong ways.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Thu 11 Feb, 2016 9:01 am

Michael Savage ‏@michaelsavage 1m1 minute ago
More than 100 charities attack Cameron in backlash over curbs on lobbying http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/poli ... 687971.ece" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; …

What happened to the Big Society eh?

Another mass alienation of a work / volunteer force.

Is it too much to hope that as the government assaults have now reached the less likely groups of medics, charities - which include plenty of middle class 'hard working' people - more of the population might wake up to just how bad they are?

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Thu 11 Feb, 2016 9:07 am

Patrick Wintour ‏@patrickwintour 2h2 hours ago
Patrick Wintour Retweeted Bruno Waterfield
Interesting by @BrunoBrussels but would Cameron mind if UK alone gets access to emergency brake on benefits.

Bruno Waterfield
‏@BrunoBrussels
Fightback from federalists, France & Eastern Europe (to make sure emergency brake is UK only) in new #Brexit draft

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Thu 11 Feb, 2016 9:09 am

RobertSnozers wrote:Statement in the Commons from Jeremy Hunt at 11.15. He's going to impose the contract then.

It's about the only thing I can imagine him willingly coming to the Commons for ... such is the character of the man.

If someone wanted to question him urgently he'd be too busy looking for large trunked trees.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Thu 11 Feb, 2016 9:12 am

Good morfternoon.

A PORTSMOUTH councillor has quit months before he was up for re-election after admitting his ‘heart wasn’t in the role’ any more.

Ken Ferrett said he found his motivation to carry on had been ‘diminishing’ ever since he left the Labour Party after Jeremy Corbyn’s appointment as leader.

His brother, Portsmouth Labour group leader John Ferrett, yesterday tweeted: ‘The Labour Party can ill-afford to lose people like Ken – same applies to council.’

The resignation will not trigger a by-election. An election will be held in May.

http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/news/politi ... -1-7208714

I wonder how much this really has to do with Jeremy Corbyn's leadership (although I don't doubt that the Ferrett brothers are anti-Corbyn).

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Thu 11 Feb, 2016 9:13 am

Chris Bryant MP ‏@RhonddaBryant 1h1 hour ago
Even the Tories now think EVEL is badly drafted and a waste of time and effort. Yet another overweening attempt at permanent rule.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Thu 11 Feb, 2016 9:18 am

From today's Waugh Zone email - Waugh suspects a government U turn on their short money cuts could be underway.

CAUGHT SHORT

Is the Government paving the way for a retreat on George Osborne’s Short Money plans as set out in the Autumn Statement? After my story on this yesterday - with smaller parties in particular going public with their anger and revealing the staff redundancies it would cause - it could well be.

I hear that an announcement of a consultation on the proposals for a 19% cut in the cash (and in policy development grants) had been due today and may now come tomorrow. Yes, that’s a ‘consultation’, which suggests this is not a done deal and the 19% could be lowered, if not scrapped totally. If so, it will be a smaller scale version of the Treasury’s MO on tax credits: initial bluster about austerity, followed by a climbdown after a backlash. I’d expect it to come up at Business Questions this morning.

Yesterday, Jeremy Corbyn wore his heart on his lapel, if not his sleeve, backing trade unions. And even if the Short Money pain is reduced, the Trade Union Bill still threatens an £8m loss in Labour’s income. It wasn’t as prominent as the junior docs hashtag, but lots of trade unionists tweeted “you won’t get me i’m part of the union”. Let’s see.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Thu 11 Feb, 2016 9:26 am

Morning all.

The Times is briefing that the government is losing patience with Michael Wilshaw (not a bad thing - means he's independently minded leaving aside any other faults) and want a replacement more in tune with their thinking. Here's the possible replacements.

If they go for De Souza or Moynihan they certainly won't get any criticism of govt policies out of them - and you can put money on academy chains not being inspected in the same way as LAs.

Carter's just got a new role so unlikely to be him. Didn't know much about Collins but the name rang a recent bell - he;'s on the Board of Centre Forum with Paul Marshall and Theo Agnew. That's the thinktank that laws now runs.

http://centreforum.org/board/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Thu 11 Feb, 2016 9:29 am

RobertSnozers wrote:
howsillyofme1 wrote:Morning to everyone

Hi

Just returning to the last post of yesterday on 'worst PM'

I think the 20th Century saw some PM that made bad decisions and too wrong directions

We can say Eden, Baldwin, Chamberlain and Blair all made big mistakes

The difference I think, and why I think Cameron is the worst, is based upon the fact that he is so shallow and his whole Government is a shambles...everything touched turns to shit and he lacks any ounce of the sense of duty and gravitas that even the worst of those above showed

The role of PM until Labour's arrival was always a job for an Establishment character but I am not sure anyone had the overall senses of arrogance and entitlement that this twat Cameron has
I do get what you mean. He has all of the entitlement with none of the noblesse oblige that marked the previous run of establishment Tories. And has often been pointed out, many of the previous Tory PMs had served in the armed forces in one of the World Wars so had direct experience of working with people from different walks of life, which would not have been the case if they had worked in the City, say from leaving Oxford to running for office.

Cameron really does seem to be an empty vessel. Why that's not immediately obvious to all I can't imagine. Maybe they only see him through odd clips on the television and think he's a well spoken young man who sounds in control of things?

Whilst I agree with all the above - yes, he is shallow/arrogant/etc. - there's more, IMHO.

He is lazy.
He leaves policy-making to his henchmen, and does nothing to curb their idiocies - he just has his little crib sheets and briefings on what to say at PMQs or if challenged elsewhere, but has no intention of doing any actual work. Most of the time he has no idea what his ministers are up to, and just regurgitates his statistics and soundbites with a few nasty asides to whoever's in his sights.

He has no insight.
He continually brings up Ivan, and has no understanding of how abhorrent that is in the light of what his government(s) have done and continue to do; he gives every impression of seriously believing that his situation is the same as everyone else who has a disabled child. He has no conception of how silly he looks, poncing about on the world stage like Little Lord Fauntleroy. No self-awareness at all.

He is vicious.
He makes ageist and sexist remarks to fellow MPs; he is known to be extremely bad-mannered and dismissive; he takes any opportunity to use a personal insult rather than engage with a point; and when he doesn't get his own way, he behaves like a toddler in a tantrum, blaming everyone else for his own stupidity (eg. Syria vote). He knows he can get away with it, so does it all the more.

I could go on......

I don't care if he is just a figurehead for big business, a placeman for corporations on a promise of whatever when he's carved up the country for them; the effects of the polices he blithely waves through are the same.
I doubt he's so stupid that he really is a puppet - his vanity wouldn't allow him to accept that. But there's no question in my mind that he toadies to the powerful to entrench his position and his grip on power.
He's a liar, a bully, a manipulator, and a vain shallow preening popinjay who has no place in one of the highest offices in the land.

Thatcher was bad, but at least she actually believed in what she was doing. She didn't really care what people thought of her.
Some of the others named here at least believed what they were doing was right, even if they turned out to be wrong.
Cameron has no such redeeming features - it's all about his image and his self-congratulatory posing. He has no ideas of his own - after all this time I still have no clue as to what he really stands for. He's a prat - and a very dangerous prat.
I think he IS the worst PM we have ever had for all those reasons.

Stock markets are plummeting worldwide. We could be in for trouble, and he will have no idea how to deal with it. Scary,

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Thu 11 Feb, 2016 9:32 am

RobertSnozers wrote:Statement in the Commons from Jeremy Hunt at 11.15. He's going to impose the contract then.

Dr Phil Hammond completely destroyed Hunt's 7 day argument on the BBC news last night. The idea that spreading routine work over 7 days instead of 5 with the same number of doctors will improve care is clearly risible. Hunt keeps saying he needs this contract to achieve his manifesto pledge. The junior doctors say he needs more staff to achieve his aim. It's quite a relief to me that a majority of the public are intelligent enough to work out that the junior doctors have the more coherent argument. It's just a shame they gave the Tories the power to ignore good sense and public opinion last May. Dark times.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Thu 11 Feb, 2016 9:36 am

Tom Blenkinsop ‏@TomBlenkinsop 38s39 seconds ago
Tata Steel works fire: Huge explosion at Port Talbot. Flames shooting 100ft into air.Sincerely hope everyone is safe http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/ta ... ar_twitter" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; …

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Thu 11 Feb, 2016 9:40 am

Here's the media preparation for that Hunt statement:

norman smith ‏@BBCNormanS 6m6 minutes ago
Govt chief negotiator tells Jeremy Hunt "to do whatever is necessary to ..make sure a new contract is in place" #JuniorDoctorsStrike

norman smith ‏@BBCNormanS 5m5 minutes ago
"A negotiated settlement no longer seems possible" - David Dalton letter to Jeremy Hunt #JuniorDoctorsStrike

He's been pushed to do this. Poor man.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Thu 11 Feb, 2016 9:40 am

Morning

Deciphered handwritten addendum on letter rom IDS to Frank Field.

"NB There are some out there in the media and social media who have used raw figures to accuse the Government of outrageous action ! I would hope that the committee would not seek to follow suit. I note that having introduced the ESA and the WCA, the Labour Party now attempts to attack it as though they had nothing to do with it. Surely the committee should seek to recognise the good intent of those engaged in this difficult area.’"

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Thu 11 Feb, 2016 9:41 am

StephenDolan wrote:Morning all.

Bernard Hogan Howe kicking Humphrys ass. Great listen.

Yes, this bit was great (wording might be slightly off)

"We'll get an independent judge to look at it and tell us whether we made mistakes"
"But you're in charge - you know what you did"
"Yes John but if I came back and said we did nothing wrong you'd say 'Well you would say that wouldn't you?'"

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Thu 11 Feb, 2016 9:43 am

More from the Waugh email:

THE FREE BREXITEERS

The BBC has picked up the chatter of a ‘unity reshuffle’ that has been around since last week. The Times’ Sam Coates deserves credit for kicking this off last week, not least with speculation that Hammond and Fallon and Grayling were lined up for exit, May set for Foreign Office and Boris lined up for Home Secretary.

Can you imagine?

I can. First move - 'Right, lets sanction use of those redundant water cannons I bought - blast those bloody trades unionists and doctors off my streets.'

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Thu 11 Feb, 2016 9:45 am

Fire extinguished at Tata Steel plant in Port Talbot

13 minutes ago
From the section South West Wales (BBC News website)

There are no other details at present.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Thu 11 Feb, 2016 9:48 am

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... are_btn_tw" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Now Britain needs clothes banks too. What sort of society are we living in?
Frances Ryan

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Thu 11 Feb, 2016 9:49 am

HindleA wrote:http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... are_btn_tw
Now Britain needs clothes banks too. What sort of society are we living in?
Frances Ryan

A Tory society.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Thu 11 Feb, 2016 9:51 am

norman smith ‏@BBCNormanS 3m3 minutes ago
Govt chief negotiator calls for a review to examine doctors morale and welfare #JuniorDoctorsStrike

A review of government morals might be far more effective.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Thu 11 Feb, 2016 9:56 am

Dr.Phil Hammond
Healthcare is centred on the ethics of informed consent. To impose a contract as an alternative to scientifically testing it is unethical.

gilsey · Post by **gilsey** » Thu 11 Feb, 2016 10:00 am

rebeccariots2 wrote:
norman smith ‏@BBCNormanS 3m3 minutes ago
Govt chief negotiator calls for a review to examine doctors morale and welfare #JuniorDoctorsStrike
A review of government morals might be far more effective.

That wouldn't take long.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Thu 11 Feb, 2016 10:00 am

Dawn Foster on the CLG SC report on Right to Buy

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

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Thu 11 Feb, 2016 10:14 am

HindleA wrote:Dr.Phil Hammond
Healthcare is centred on the ethics of informed consent. To impose a contract as an alternative to scientifically testing it is unethical.

Dr Phil suggested on the news last night that Hunt's proposals for a change of rotas and pay to achieve 7 day routine working should be trialled on a small scale to show how it would work. I wonder if the BBC regret inviting him on as he concentrated on questioning whether Hunt's contract will achieve what he says it will achieve, and as such made it less about junior doctors and more about patients and how best to care for them. He raised some big issues with Hunt's central premise that go well beyond whether junior doctors are getting a good deal or not. I suspect Hunt's sudden rush to impose his contract has been prompted by this change in focus as he knows he has no credible response to these questions. His contract won't achieve what he says it will and the more people who realise this, the bigger trouble he is in. Hunt was meant to smooth the way for Murdoch to take over BSkyB but failed. Now he's been charged with readying the NHS for privatisation. Is it possible his stupid lie about 7 day working is going to lead to another fail for this truly useless patsy? One can only hope.

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Thu 11 Feb, 2016 10:17 am

Looks like Hunt will impose the new contract - things could get interesting.....

If he imposes it now, we know that all new posts from 1st.August - when the teams change over - will be under the new terms and conditions.

Very junior doctors - house officers, usually - rotate through specialties every 6 months in February and August. These are the new posts.

But - SHO's, those in GP training on longer-term rotations, junior registrars, and clinical assistant grades, usually have contracts for longer than 6 months; sometimes, if the doctor is on a specific training progression (eg.GP training), they might have signed up for a few years.

In that scenario, they will have signed up to work/train for X years on the basis of the existing contract. I do not see how Hunt can change that.
If he imposes a new contract on doctors who signed up for the old one, he will be in breach of contract - the doctors would be within their rights to take legal action against him, surely? He can't simply alter their contracts in the middle of their rotations, can he?

Perhaps Robert could clarify this for me.

Even if he doesn't do that, for the house officers and those on 6-month rotations, their next job in August will be under the new contract; and by February 2017 all newly-qualified doctors will be on the new contract.

I think they will vote with their feet. If they can't get a job in Scotland or Wales, they'll go abroad. Some are doing this already.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Thu 11 Feb, 2016 10:41 am

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

What if the computer says no because you are a disabled consumer?

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Thu 11 Feb, 2016 10:43 am

ephemerid wrote:
RobertSnozers wrote:
howsillyofme1 wrote:Morning to everyone

Hi

Just returning to the last post of yesterday on 'worst PM'

I think the 20th Century saw some PM that made bad decisions and too wrong directions

We can say Eden, Baldwin, Chamberlain and Blair all made big mistakes

The difference I think, and why I think Cameron is the worst, is based upon the fact that he is so shallow and his whole Government is a shambles...everything touched turns to shit and he lacks any ounce of the sense of duty and gravitas that even the worst of those above showed

The role of PM until Labour's arrival was always a job for an Establishment character but I am not sure anyone had the overall senses of arrogance and entitlement that this twat Cameron has
I do get what you mean. He has all of the entitlement with none of the noblesse oblige that marked the previous run of establishment Tories. And has often been pointed out, many of the previous Tory PMs had served in the armed forces in one of the World Wars so had direct experience of working with people from different walks of life, which would not have been the case if they had worked in the City, say from leaving Oxford to running for office.

Cameron really does seem to be an empty vessel. Why that's not immediately obvious to all I can't imagine. Maybe they only see him through odd clips on the television and think he's a well spoken young man who sounds in control of things?

Whilst I agree with all the above - yes, he is shallow/arrogant/etc. - there's more, IMHO.

He is lazy.
He leaves policy-making to his henchmen, and does nothing to curb their idiocies - he just has his little crib sheets and briefings on what to say at PMQs or if challenged elsewhere, but has no intention of doing any actual work. Most of the time he has no idea what his ministers are up to, and just regurgitates his statistics and soundbites with a few nasty asides to whoever's in his sights.

He has no insight.
He continually brings up Ivan, and has no understanding of how abhorrent that is in the light of what his government(s) have done and continue to do; he gives every impression of seriously believing that his situation is the same as everyone else who has a disabled child. He has no conception of how silly he looks, poncing about on the world stage like Little Lord Fauntleroy. No self-awareness at all.

He is vicious.
He makes ageist and sexist remarks to fellow MPs; he is known to be extremely bad-mannered and dismissive; he takes any opportunity to use a personal insult rather than engage with a point; and when he doesn't get his own way, he behaves like a toddler in a tantrum, blaming everyone else for his own stupidity (eg. Syria vote). He knows he can get away with it, so does it all the more.

I could go on......

I don't care if he is just a figurehead for big business, a placeman for corporations on a promise of whatever when he's carved up the country for them; the effects of the polices he blithely waves through are the same.
I doubt he's so stupid that he really is a puppet - his vanity wouldn't allow him to accept that. But there's no question in my mind that he toadies to the powerful to entrench his position and his grip on power.
He's a liar, a bully, a manipulator, and a vain shallow preening popinjay who has no place in one of the highest offices in the land.

Thatcher was bad, but at least she actually believed in what she was doing. She didn't really care what people thought of her.
Some of the others named here at least believed what they were doing was right, even if they turned out to be wrong.
Cameron has no such redeeming features - it's all about his image and his self-congratulatory posing. He has no ideas of his own - after all this time I still have no clue as to what he really stands for. He's a prat - and a very dangerous prat.
I think he IS the worst PM we have ever had for all those reasons.

Stock markets are plummeting worldwide. We could be in for trouble, and he will have no idea how to deal with it. Scary,

You nailed him exactly...I think he'll go down in History books as the worst. He's articulate, and never at a loss for something to say even though his brain [such as it is,] isn't connected to his mouth.
They approve of him for exactly the same reason many working class people have always voted Conservative. It's a snob thing. The class system is alive and kicking.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Thu 11 Feb, 2016 10:51 am

Tom Newton Dunn ‏@tnewtondunn 10m10 minutes ago
Govt announces "formal consultation" on Short Money's 19% cuts. Another climb down enforced on George Osborne. Not having a great winter.

Isabel Hardman ‏@IsabelHardman 11m11 minutes ago
FURY in the Commons right now

Isabel Hardman ‏@IsabelHardman 7m7 minutes ago
Labour MPs shouting "how many advisers do you have?" as Penrose tries to defend Short money cuts

Isabel Hardman ‏@IsabelHardman 6m6 minutes ago
Now Bernard Jenkin laying into Short money cut.Suggests "there is an agenda behind this change which is rather more political in its intent"

I think this exemplifies how bad Cameron is in comparison to previous leaders .... even his own MPs are pretty aghast at the blatant manipulation of the constitution and legislation and Commons procedures to benefit one party and disadvantage all others.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Thu 11 Feb, 2016 10:55 am

RobertSnozers wrote: Cameron really does seem to be an empty vessel. Why that's not immediately obvious to all I can't imagine. Maybe they only see him through odd clips on the television and think he's a well spoken young man who sounds in control of things?

That's basically it, yeah. Plus, of course, he "looks the part".

The same might well have been true of Lord North, whose memorably ghastly tenure as PM was mentioned at the end of yesterday's thread.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Thu 11 Feb, 2016 10:58 am

Patrick Wintour ‏@patrickwintour 5m5 minutes ago
Government attempt to load democratic dice in mess. Faces PASC inquiry, will consult on Short money cut, defeat in Lords over Labour funding

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Thu 11 Feb, 2016 10:59 am

All we need now are changes to their boundary review pushed through. Its certainly not impossible on present form......

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Thu 11 Feb, 2016 11:00 am

Paul Waugh ‏@paulwaugh 1m1 minute ago
.@BarrySheerman warns minister of looming Tory rebellion re Short Money: "reasonable people wd not give him a majority.." if comes to vote

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Thu 11 Feb, 2016 11:01 am

Isabel Hardman ‏@IsabelHardman 56s56 seconds ago
Extremely well-organised Labour backbench operation going on during this Short money stuff. It's been a while since I saw this in Commons

Paul Waugh Retweeted
Labour Whips ‏@labourwhips 5m5 minutes ago
Less than half a dozen tories in the chamber prepared to support graylings plan on short money cuts. No tories left standing to speak

Very good to hear.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Thu 11 Feb, 2016 11:07 am

Paul Waugh ‏@paulwaugh 41s42 seconds ago
Labour giving Govt a real kicking over Short Money. Minister has no Tory MPs left to back him. No protection from repeat salvos from Lab

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Thu 11 Feb, 2016 11:08 am

rebeccariots2 wrote:
Isabel Hardman ‏@IsabelHardman 56s56 seconds ago
Extremely well-organised Labour backbench operation going on during this Short money stuff. It's been a while since I saw this in Commons

Paul Waugh Retweeted
Labour Whips ‏@labourwhips 5m5 minutes ago
Less than half a dozen tories in the chamber prepared to support graylings plan on short money cuts. No tories left standing to speak
Very good to hear.

Unlike Cameron, some of them are expecting to be in politics for more than a couple more years and can no doubt see themselves and their own party being on the receiving end of the short money cuts at some point in the future.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Thu 11 Feb, 2016 11:16 am

This continues the discussion here yesterday.

Cameron aims low in EU negotiation despite UK’s favourable hand
The Prime Minister demonstrated his inner lack of confidence in British strengths, in spite of boasts
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/cam ... 65366.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The French newspaper reported that at Brussels, the Europhiles “no longer hide their fear that the European Union will break up”. What they see as particularly serious is the way the member states are pulling away from each other – the west from the east, the north from the south. They describe 2015 as an annus horribilis and expect 2016 to be just as bad. One diplomat said he had “never before lived through such an absence of solidarity between European countries”.

What frightens the true believers most is the sheer unpopularity of ‘their’ EU. A Belgian member of the European Parliament since 1984, Gérard Deprez, told Le Monde that Europe had been “the great affair of my life” but now, and for the first time, he was worried: “I don’t see the dynamic that will lead us out of this crisis.”

That is what I find so depressing - I see no sign that the EU is able to deal with the big issues and challenges at present. And those are the qualities and abilities that I value - or valued - it for. It seems the reverse is happening - as the leaders pull away from each other there is a sense of chaos and limbo in which the far right and all manner of bad things can bubble up and be destructive forces. A decision to scrap Schengen and reinstate internal borders as Cooper called for yesterday would, at least, start to show some capability of managing together - of rebuilding some solidarity.

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Thu 11 Feb, 2016 11:22 am

Typically what is the loss of MPs per parliament through retirement, sickness, death? I'm trying to get a feel for how smooth the boundary changes are likely to be on the government benches given their majority.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Thu 11 Feb, 2016 11:33 am

Here’s the report from the Press Association of the exchange between Bryant and Cabinet Office Minister John Penrose.

Replying to an urgent question from Labour, Cabinet Office Minister John Penrose told MPs a consultation will start “shortly”.

Opening his remarks, Mr Bryant quoted previous Conservative comments objecting to opposition parties being under-resourced at a time when spending has increased on taxpayer-funded special advisers.

He said: “In opposition the Prime Minister said he would cut the number and cost of special advisers, yet in Government he has appointed 27 more special advisers than ever before and the cost has gone up to the taxpayer by 2.5 million a year.

“There’s a word for that Mr Speaker but it’s not parliamentary.”

From AS.

“In opposition, the Conservatives banked 46 million a year in short money but in Government they want to cut short money by 20% for the Opposition.

“There’s a word for that Mr Speaker but it’s not parliamentary.

“How can it be right for the Government to cut the policy development grant for political parties by 19% when it’s not cutting the amount of money spent on special advisers of its own?

“Surely history has taught us that an overweening executive is always a mistake.

“Surely if a party in Government needs financial support in addition to the civil service then it’s in the national interest that all the opposition parties should be properly resourced as well.”

Mr Byrant said the Government has been briefing journalists that its proposals will be published on Friday - when Parliament is in recess.

Excellent.

Bryant really is very good in this job. And Grayling is awful in every job he's ever had.

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Thu 11 Feb, 2016 11:39 am

RogerOThornhill wrote:Here’s the report from the Press Association of the exchange between Bryant and Cabinet Office Minister John Penrose.

Replying to an urgent question from Labour, Cabinet Office Minister John Penrose told MPs a consultation will start “shortly”.

Opening his remarks, Mr Bryant quoted previous Conservative comments objecting to opposition parties being under-resourced at a time when spending has increased on taxpayer-funded special advisers.

He said: “In opposition the Prime Minister said he would cut the number and cost of special advisers, yet in Government he has appointed 27 more special advisers than ever before and the cost has gone up to the taxpayer by 2.5 million a year.

“There’s a word for that Mr Speaker but it’s not parliamentary.”

From AS.

“In opposition, the Conservatives banked 46 million a year in short money but in Government they want to cut short money by 20% for the Opposition.

“There’s a word for that Mr Speaker but it’s not parliamentary.

“How can it be right for the Government to cut the policy development grant for political parties by 19% when it’s not cutting the amount of money spent on special advisers of its own?

“Surely history has taught us that an overweening executive is always a mistake.

“Surely if a party in Government needs financial support in addition to the civil service then it’s in the national interest that all the opposition parties should be properly resourced as well.”

Mr Byrant said the Government has been briefing journalists that its proposals will be published on Friday - when Parliament is in recess.
Excellent.

Bryant really is very good in this job. And Grayling is awful in every job he's ever had.

Brilliant stuff. Looking forward to Little Nicky and Laura Kuenssberg running with this major constitutional story.

gilsey · Post by **gilsey** » Thu 11 Feb, 2016 11:41 am

I heard Bryant just now, he's on a roll, made me laugh.
Bit like shooting fish in a barrel though, against Grayling.

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Thu 11 Feb, 2016 11:45 am

gilsey wrote:I heard Bryant just now, he's on a roll, made me laugh.
Bit like shooting fish in a barrel though, against Grayling.

If there's a tory bruise, keep punching it.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Thu 11 Feb, 2016 11:58 am

From Politics Live, Guardian -

1m ago 11:55
Jeremy Hunt in the House of Commons

I’m switching now to cover Jeremy Hunt’s statement on the junior doctors’ contract in the House of Commons, he’s expected to impose the contract on the doctors this summer.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Thu 11 Feb, 2016 12:08 pm

I can't be the only one to find it odd that people who constantly rail at layabouts on benefits and tell people to get back to work or else have the time (when presumably they should be working) to post on social media during the day.

Wonder if my other half has time even to have her lunchbreak today let alone sit at a PC? Possibly not.

Just sayin'...

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Thu 11 Feb, 2016 12:16 pm

Take a look at what's going on in the markets.

https://medium.com/@DuncanWeldon/absurd ... .ux1d2wuc4

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Thu 11 Feb, 2016 12:25 pm

RogerOThornhill wrote:I can't be the only one to find it odd that people who constantly rail at layabouts on benefits and tell people to get back to work or else have the time (when presumably they should be working) to post on social media during the day.

Wonder if my other half has time even to have her lunchbreak today let alone sit at a PC? Possibly not.

Just sayin'...

Heh.

Well that did the trick - hook, line and sinker...yesterday it was whining about us being a depressing read. There was an alternative suggestion that one could have made but it's so flippin' obvious that I dare not say it...

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Thu 11 Feb, 2016 12:35 pm

Incidentally, I thought Lansley's reforms meant that the Secretary of State gave up all responsibility for the NHS to the CEO.

Or is it a case of "The CEO's in charge until I tell him he's not"?

seeingclearly · Post by **seeingclearly** » Thu 11 Feb, 2016 12:55 pm

ephemerid wrote:Looks like Hunt will impose the new contract - things could get interesting.....

If he imposes it now, we know that all new posts from 1st.August - when the teams change over - will be under the new terms and conditions.

Very junior doctors - house officers, usually - rotate through specialties every 6 months in February and August. These are the new posts.

But - SHO's, those in GP training on longer-term rotations, junior registrars, and clinical assistant grades, usually have contracts for longer than 6 months; sometimes, if the doctor is on a specific training progression (eg.GP training), they might have signed up for a few years.

In that scenario, they will have signed up to work/train for X years on the basis of the existing contract. I do not see how Hunt can change that.
If he imposes a new contract on doctors who signed up for the old one, he will be in breach of contract - the doctors would be within their rights to take legal action against him, surely? He can't simply alter their contracts in the middle of their rotations, can he?

Perhaps Robert could clarify this for me.

Even if he doesn't do that, for the house officers and those on 6-month rotations, their next job in August will be under the new contract; and by February 2017 all newly-qualified doctors will be on the new contract.

I think they will vote with their feet. If they can't get a job in Scotland or Wales, they'll go abroad. Some are doing this already.

A lot of them ARE from abroad. They have options. The reason they are here is because our socialised NHS provided an on the job training second to none, and not like working in a privatised environment where specialisms are often kept very distinct.

I've a young cousin down south who is an overseas junior doctor. He does not earn that much, his living costs are very high, basically he lives in the human equivalent of a kennel but doesn't see much of it. He works insanely hard. He could be enjoying a very good lifestyle elsewhere, but chooses to stay here, but I wonder for how long. He paid an absolute fortune to come here and study, I know that, and now he is several years on from when he first qualified and getting his first post. I wouldn't have thought it would take much to nudge him one way or another. There are a huge amount of younger doctors like him, they were the cream of students from their own countries, we were always good at this, and I wonder how much of that ethos will remain once Hunt and co. have had their wicked way with things. They don't understand how this could damage not just what is here at home but the fluidity of discourse in medicine and science in the future. The disciplines these junior doctors will differentiate into eventually will suffer from the decisions made now by breaking the medical and surgical lineage of teaching too early. That is a very hard thing to replace. Break it and in a generation it will be gone. Already happening in places that emulated our model successfully and then had politically determined privatisation. The bare bones of what they once had is still doing the best training and gets lumped with any essential research but is hugely underfunded and the doctors who remain are working in the crumbling remnants of once proud institutions and trying to unravel some of the worlds really pressing medical issues. Toxic pollution and drug resistent disease among them. It was one of our better and more lasting legacies of empire. How to deliver egalitarian healthcare to as many people as possible. Now fucked up by small minded short sighted egotistical politicians.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Thu 11 Feb, 2016 12:59 pm

BMA response

Junior doctors cannot and will not accept a contract that is bad for the future of patient care, the profession and the NHS as a whole, says BMA

(issued Thursday 11 Feb 2016)

Commenting on the announcement by the Government to impose a new contract on junior doctors in England, Dr Johann Malawana, BMA junior doctor committee chair, said:
“The decision to impose a contract is a sign of total failure on the Government’s part. Instead of working with the BMA to reach an agreement that is in the best interests of patients, junior doctors and the NHS as a whole the Government has walked away, rejecting a fair and affordable offer put forward by the BMA. Instead it wants to impose a flawed contract on a generation of junior doctors who have lost all trust in the Health Secretary.

“Junior doctors already work around the clock, seven days a week and they do so under their existing contract. If the Government want more seven-day services then, quite simply, it needs more doctors, nurses and diagnostic staff, and the extra investment needed to deliver it. Rather than addressing these issues, the Health Secretary is ploughing ahead with proposals that are fundamentally unfair.

“This is clearly a political fight for the Government rather than an attempt to come to a reasonable solution for all junior doctors. If it succeeds with its bullying approach of imposing a contract on junior doctors that has been roundly rejected by the profession it will no doubt seek to do the same for other NHS staff.

“It is notable that the rest of the UK has chosen a different, constructive path on junior doctors’ contracts with only the Health Secretary in England choosing imposition over agreement.

“The Government’s shambolic handling of this process from start to finish has totally alienated a generation of junior doctors – the hospital doctors and GPs of the future, and there is a real risk that some will vote with their feet.

“Our message to the Government is clear: junior doctors cannot and will not accept a contract that is bad for the future of patient care, the profession and the NHS as a whole, and we will consider all options open to us.”