Wednesday 17th February 2016

[refitman]

Morning all.

[StephenDolan]

Morning all.

Morning.

Fallon, get told.


"The chairman of the Falkland Islands Legislative Assembly said Argentina remained the greatest threat to security, not the Labour leader."

Fallon reaffirms commitment to defend Falkland Islands - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-35593095" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[frightful_oik]

Morning all.

Morning.

Fallon, get told.


"The chairman of the Falkland Islands Legislative Assembly said Argentina remained the greatest threat to security, not the Labour leader."

Fallon reaffirms commitment to defend Falkland Islands - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-35593095" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Yes, I just listened to toady and there was Fallon making a fool of himself again. "The real danger to the Falklands is not Argentina; it's Jeremy Corbyn" proclaimed the fat chump who poses as the man responsible for our nation's defence. Why might this be? Presumably because JC says we should start a dialogue with Argentina. Where's Fatty Fallon off next? To talk to the Argentinians of course. Some people say Grayling's the most useless minister; others look elsewhere for their prize ninny. For me though there's no doubt; whenever Fallon opens his ill-informed, stupid gob, you can guarantee that guff of the highest quality will come out. And it's the big boys' fault.

[utopiandreams]

@ephemerid & Willow904

My eldest recently started work in recruitment so he's in no position to compare with the past but yes, you're right, they are inundated with unsuitable applicants, a complete waste of their time. Even after they have filtered through the dross there are far too many that simply fail to turn up for interview; unemployed applicants are therefore less likely to be interviewed than once they were. That's Tory planning in practice for you and things shall only get worse with Universal Credit.

Postscript: I hope I shall be forgiven for 'dross', given the reaction that 'stock' received.

[utopiandreams]

Following on from my earlier post, and this is perhaps more pertinent. There has been a marked increase in ill applicants who haven't worked for years. As has been noted before disability can be worked around depending on the condition but in most cases illness is another matter. Anyway whether or not employers are supposed to make such allowances, the DWP are fooling nobody if they insist they do. I've said it before that even being the partner of a stroke victim and a daughter, primarily with learning difficulties I couldn't have employed anybody in their condition when I employed others, no matter my sympathies. The nature of the work, as it is for many, just wasn't suitable.

Postscript: that is aside of any concerns regarding attendance, an issue that simply cannot be ignored. If I'm honest, which of course I am, I wouldn't have employed anybody that didn't look fit.

[PaulfromYorkshire]

I'm just loving Dave's travails

[rebeccariots2]

I link Dave's travails to Fallon's ridiculous statements on Argentina and Corbyn.

He's such a reliable outrage monger - trot him out to deflect attention away from Dave's bungling foreign relations whilst whipping up a national security threat from a man with a peacemaking tendency who is not in power.

[StephenDolan]

I link Dave's travails to Fallon's ridiculous statements on Argentina and Corbyn.

He's such a reliable outrage monger - trot him out to deflect attention away from Dave's bungling foreign relations whilst whipping up a national security threat from a man with a peacemaking tendency who is not in power.

Fallon has form. How can you have a prime minister who stabbed his own brother in the back.

[yahyah]

Morning.

Dave's travails would be more entertaining if he didn't meddle with things that have such an effect on so many of us.

[PaulfromYorkshire]

Morning.

Dave's travails would be more entertaining if he didn't meddle with things that have such an effect on so many of us.

I agree yahyah

But I'm hoping that if Dave really does struggle in Brussels he will have to delay or call off the whole stupid* referendum anyway.

So, my advice is sit back and enjoy

*Edited to say I'm not sure that a referendum on the EU is necessarily "stupid" but if Dave has organised it it will be.

[rebeccariots2]

Re the applications for jobs for which the people applying are patently unqualified or don't really want .... I think there has always been an element of the job centre pushing people to do this - it just sounds as though it has escalated massively and is very punitive in its application. When I was working in London and regularly recruiting we were always being sent job centre referrals and cvs despite telling them we had very rigorous application procedures for jobs with everyone required to fill out the same application form and no cvs or other supporting material considered. They just ignored us and carried on doing it. We were shredding cvs and letters regularly I'm afraid.

I'm also afraid we could also usually spot a job centre pressurised application from a mile away - even when they used the application form - from the lack of appropriate skills / experience for said job and evident lack of effort and interest in the supporting statement.

That job centre employees - and now their equivalent work advisers etc - can't understand the most basic stuff about applying for work in different sectors in the right way and how to maximise your chances of getting an interview and work .... and support their clients in the right way - is a bloody national disgrace. They're not fit for their main purpose.

[yahyah]

I like that positive thinking there Paul. Thanks for reframing the situation.

[yahyah]

Wonder if Mairi Black has anything to say about this ?
All Labour's fault no doubt. Nothing to do with the SNP Utopia.

“Victorian conditions” suffered by female prisoners at Cornton Vale
Women at HMP Cornton Vale have to use their sinks as toilets''

Read more: http://www.scotsman.com/news/victorian- ... z40PpeYjn9" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[RogerOThornhill]

Morning all.

NUT are calling for this year's KS1 and KS2 SATs to be scrapped.

http://www.teachers.org.uk/education-po ... mplemented" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Nicky Morgan’s new system for testing and assessment of KS1 and KS2 pupils has come apart at the seams. As a result the NUT is calling for the 2015/16 SATs to be suspended.

In early February the DfE published its requirements in relation to teacher assessments of children’s writing standards. These have come far too late in the process. The detail in the exemplifications of the required standards and the number of separate pieces of evidence required for each individual assessment mean that they are impossible for teachers to deliver in the few months between February and June. Since these exemplifications are 'interim' and only for this year, they could also change completely again next year.

These proposals add to a chaotic heap of other demands. The reporting date for teachers’ assessments has been brought forward. The 'expected standard' that children are required to meet has been pushed upwards, beyond the reach of far too many pupils. The consequences of this shift on the requirement on schools to meet floor standards have not been thought through.

That'll do wonders for teacher's workload...

Too many changes and too late in the process - they're even changing the way that pupils are supposed to write 'exclamation sentences' even now. This would be hilarious if it wasn't so important to schools.

http://schoolsweek.co.uk/key-stage-1-ch ... h-century/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The definition of an “exclamation sentence” being applied is that it must start with either “how” or “what” and, to be a full sentence, must include a verb.

So, an exclamation such as “How amazing!” would not count. It would need the addition of a verb (e.g. “How amazing it was!”) to qualify. Not exactly common parlance for your average 21st century seven-year-old.

[rebeccariots2]

Christina Rees MP Retweeted
Welsh Government ‏@WelshGovernment 2h2 hours ago
.@WG_FinanceMin announces £9m EU funded scheme to tackle long-term unemployment in South West Wales http://ow.ly/YocPX" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[RogerOThornhill]

I can't imagine that anyone here is too surprised at this...

[StephenDolan]

I can't imagine that anyone here is too surprised at this...

It doesn't matter. Headline news made, impression put out that the Tories are providing extra funding.

[ephemerid]

Following on from my earlier post, and this is perhaps more pertinent. There has been a marked increase in ill applicants who haven't worked for years. As has been noted before disability can be worked around depending on the condition but in most cases illness is another matter. Anyway whether or not employers are supposed to make such allowances, the DWP are fooling nobody if they insist they do. I've said it before that even being the partner of a stroke victim and a daughter, primarily with learning difficulties I couldn't have employed anybody in their condition when I employed others, no matter my sympathies. The nature of the work, as it is for many, just wasn't suitable.

Postscript: that is aside of any concerns regarding attendance, an issue that simply cannot be ignored. If I'm honest, which of course I am, I wouldn't have employed anybody that didn't look fit.

This is, of course, a massive issue, utopiandreams.

This government - and, to a degree, Labour - continually conflate illness with disability. Whenever there is a discussion or debate on ESA, our politicians drone on about how disabled people should be supported into work.
IDS is obviously the worst; but Reeves and Green were guilty of this too. Someone with a chronic, degenerative, or long-term illness is not the same as someone who is as well as they can be but who happens to have a disability.

We have a working-age population which has progressively more people in it at the older end of the spectrum; this is partly due to the increase in the pensionable age, and partly due to people surviving illnesses that used to kill.
As a result, there is a whole new cohort of people who are probably not employable (from an employers' point of view); people like me. What employer would take on a 60-year-old woman with chronic illness?

I have no chance of getting or holding down a job. Yet I will have to jump through hoops to maintain any qualification for benefits; if i'm unlucky - and it is a lottery now - I will be expected to apply for work I can't do to employers who won't even look at me, and when I fail to find this work I'm allegedly capable of I could be sent off to do pointless "training" or mandatory workfare.
I'm due for yet another re-assessment at some point this year. Despite my health being no better than t was last time I was assessed, I am expecting to be given the wrong decision again and to have another battle on my hands. Rinse and repeat for the next 6 years when I get my pension, assuming they don't change the age qualification again.

Employers have a certain amount of sympathy from me - whilst I certainly think that some take the piss with low wages, using the tax credits system to get away with not paying a decent wage or using ZHCs and short-hours contracts - they have to get their work done and they need the right people to do it.
What they don't need is hundreds of speculative CVs arriving daily from people who they would never employ. Jobcentres and WP providers insist that there are "hidden vacancies" and all the jobseeker needs to do is find one by hassling employers in this way. It's nonsense, and it's not helping anyone.

I would have thought that the last thing DWP would want to do is alienate employers, but that's what they're doing. If by putting a job on UJM means they'll be swamped with applicants who may not even have the qualifications for the job, they won't do it.
JCP advisers are telling people to water down good CVs; they're making them apply for things they are unsuitable for; and that's just jobseekers who are fit and able. Sick people have no chance at all of getting a job, and they shouldn't have to apply for them.

The whole situation is ridiculous.

[rebeccariots2]

Anyone else listened to Radio 4 discussion with Steve Hewlett on the arguments going on re BBC being devolved in Scotland? The risk - according to those discussing - is that there aren't sufficient funds to retain both a national element and devolved units of the BBC - so we could get a fragmented BBC across the UK with Wales, Scotland, England, NI being run separately and focusing in the main on their country / region. Different news, views, reach and contributors etc

This points up a problem with devolution - it will be sad if a focus on autonomy for different parts of the UK results in less national and international awareness just as globalisation and other trends make these matters far more crucial.

[rebeccariots2]

Jonathan Portes Retweeted
Chris Dillow ‏@CJFDillow 15m15 minutes ago
ONS says hours worked rose 1.7% in Q4 http://bit.ly/1KVVe1d" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; GDP rose 0.5%, implying a huge (& implausible?) drop in productivity

Guardian Business ‏@BusinessDesk 11m11 minutes ago
UK unemployment rate disappoints while weekly earnings growth slips - live: http://bit.ly/20DfQgu" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[rebeccariots2]

richard ford ‏@RFord4 10m10 minutes ago
Number of EU nationals working in UK tops 2m for first time, ONS figures show.

[ephemerid]

Re the applications for jobs for which the people applying are patently unqualified or don't really want .... I think there has always been an element of the job centre pushing people to do this - it just sounds as though it has escalated massively and is very punitive in its application. When I was working in London and regularly recruiting we were always being sent job centre referrals and cvs despite telling them we had very rigorous application procedures for jobs with everyone required to fill out the same application form and no cvs or other supporting material considered. They just ignored us and carried on doing it. We were shredding cvs and letters regularly I'm afraid.

I'm also afraid we could also usually spot a job centre pressurised application from a mile away - even when they used the application form - from the lack of appropriate skills / experience for said job and evident lack of effort and interest in the supporting statement.

That job centre employees - and now their equivalent work advisers etc - can't understand the most basic stuff about applying for work in different sectors in the right way and how to maximise your chances of getting an interview and work .... and support their clients in the right way - is a bloody national disgrace. They're not fit for their main purpose.

Exactly.

Back when I worked in a Jobcentre, we had a section that dealt with employers. If an employer wanted a particular set of skills or qualifications, the job was posted with "knock-out factors" - ie. if the person didn't have the required whatever, they were not put forward for the job. It worked most of the time.

A few years ago, between appeals for ESA, I had to claim JSA for a little while. I was instructed to apply for a nursing job, which required a current registration. Mine had lapsed.
I pointed out that it is illegal for a person to represent themselves as a qualified professional when they're not - my "adviser" didn't know that very basic piece of work legislation.

I was also told to apply for other work. One of the jobs they sent me for was a cleaning job in a hotel - it involved chambermaid duties in a local hotel, cleaning and making beds, etc. It was for 2 hours a day, 6 days a week, at NMW. The bus fare was more than the hourly rate, so I'd have been working for less than benefit. The job specified hotel experience, and I was told to pretend I had it. I don't.

It's much worse now - this was 5 years ago. At the time, there were about 200 people signing on at Brecon Jobcentre - and every week the same 2 jobs were available locally on the old Job Point machines. If you input jobs in Brecon, hundreds of agency ads would come up - people were sending CVs repeatedly to the same agencies, week in week out.

Brecon Jobcentre is a very small office, and the chances of anyone signing on there getting a job from it are very slim. Now that DWP has UJM, I'm willing to bet it's even worse - but I'm also willing to bet the sanction rates are the same as anywhere else.
There are only half-a-dozen employers big enough to offer much in the way of jobs - supermarkets and a factory or two - but I bet that the folks on JSA and ESA signing on in Brecon have to send CVs to them every few weeks.

[Temulkar]

Morning all.

NUT are calling for this year's KS1 and KS2 SATs to be scrapped.

http://www.teachers.org.uk/education-po ... mplemented" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Nicky Morgan’s new system for testing and assessment of KS1 and KS2 pupils has come apart at the seams. As a result the NUT is calling for the 2015/16 SATs to be suspended.

In early February the DfE published its requirements in relation to teacher assessments of children’s writing standards. These have come far too late in the process. The detail in the exemplifications of the required standards and the number of separate pieces of evidence required for each individual assessment mean that they are impossible for teachers to deliver in the few months between February and June. Since these exemplifications are 'interim' and only for this year, they could also change completely again next year.

These proposals add to a chaotic heap of other demands. The reporting date for teachers’ assessments has been brought forward. The 'expected standard' that children are required to meet has been pushed upwards, beyond the reach of far too many pupils. The consequences of this shift on the requirement on schools to meet floor standards have not been thought through.

That'll do wonders for teacher's workload...

Too many changes and too late in the process - they're even changing the way that pupils are supposed to write 'exclamation sentences' even now. This would be hilarious if it wasn't so important to schools.

http://schoolsweek.co.uk/key-stage-1-ch ... h-century/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The definition of an “exclamation sentence” being applied is that it must start with either “how” or “what” and, to be a full sentence, must include a verb.

So, an exclamation such as “How amazing!” would not count. It would need the addition of a verb (e.g. “How amazing it was!”) to qualify. Not exactly common parlance for your average 21st century seven-year-old.

That's grammatically correct.' "How amazing!" ', isn't a complete sentence, it's a fragment. "How amazing!" said Roger, is the correct sentence grammaticaly, although dropping attribution tags in fiction to improve the flow of the prose is an accepted convention. I was taught these rules when I was in Primary School, and actually I think it is important that kids get taught how to construct a sentence properly, as early as possible.

I used to spend an inordinate amount of time unteaching stuff, with each new cohort, when they arrived in Year 7. Primary teachers are experts in teaching literacy and numeracy, but simply don't have the time to do it properly with everything else the govt has now added to the pot - in which they are not specialists. Poorly taught History etc is far worse than no history lessons at all. Personally, I would prefer Year 7 students arriving with no prior teaching in my subject whatsoever, but who can read + write at an appropriate age.

[HindleA]

http://www.theguardian.com/money/2016/f ... are_btn_tw" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Discounted starter homes plan 'will fail to help most buyers'

In its own analysis, the government has suggested that should 100,000 starter homes be built through the planning system, between 56,000 and 71,000 social and affordable rented homes would not be built.


http://local.gov.uk/web/guest/media-rel ... 94909/NEWS" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[utopiandreams]

I can't imagine that anyone here is too surprised at this...

Not at all, Roger, indeed it was stated, by the Beeb I might add, during the very first day of its announcement although I did see others querying it in news on other channels. Extra money for this or for that was repeatedly announced, at the dispatch box too, during the last parliament but never made a difference to the oft repeated overall figure, which itself was open to question.

I am still left pondering the £12.7bn extra they ploughed into the NHS during their last term, which miraculously became £7bn during the election campaign without raising any questions from the msm.

[rebeccariots2]

Sunny Hundal ‏@sunny_hundal 1m1 minute ago
Sunny Hundal Retweeted Emily Ashton
Boris is sitting on the fence and being indecisive, but no one in the media calls him out on it

Emily AshtonVerified account
‏@elashton
Boris is “genuinely torn” over Cameron’s EU deal, source says.

[rebeccariots2]

Indy Politics Retweeted
The Independent ‏@Independent 17m17 minutes ago
The number of doctors applying to work abroad surged by 1000% on the day Jeremy Hunt imposed new contract http://ind.pn/1OfU77f" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[HindleA]

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style ... 78581.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Fewer than half of all nurseries can afford to extend free childcare to 30 hours a week, survey reveals

[utopiandreams]

By the by and totally off topic I was entertained to a meal out for my birthday by my lads (and granddaughter) yesterday so felt obliged to buy the drinks. Bloody hell, is that what they cost nowadays? For the record and to confirm my cryptic clue in yesterday's post, I am now sixty-four.

[HindleA]

http://www.communitycare.co.uk/2016/02/ ... pt-carpet/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

‘A learning disability scandal is being swept under the carpet

[AnatolyKasparov]

Sunny Hundal ‏@sunny_hundal 1m1 minute ago
Sunny Hundal Retweeted Emily Ashton
Boris is sitting on the fence and being indecisive, but no one in the media calls him out on it

Emily AshtonVerified account
‏@elashton
Boris is “genuinely torn” over Cameron’s EU deal, source says.

"Genuinely torn" on what will suit him best personally, nothing more.

[ephemerid]

Over at the G, the politics thread is all about Boris.
Who is sitting on a fence.
Not good for the fence.

From ATL - "Cameron is believed to be keen to hold a vote on 23rd.June as a quick poll would avoid giving Eurosceptics time to make headway with voters and pre-empt a repeat of the migrant crisis in the Mediterranean and eastern Europe over the summer months"

In what possible way would any vote here, early or late "pre-empt" (dictionary definition - take action to prevent; forestall) another migrant crisis?
Is this silly little islands' opinion so influential that Syrians won't get into un-seaworthy boats and try to cross the Med?

This is risible. The "migrant crisis" has nothing to do with Cameron's idiotic posturing and no amount of it will prevent people from risking their lives trying to get away from wars that we are partly responsible for. FFS.

[rebeccariots2]

What are zero-hours contracts? You asked Google – here’s the answer
Dawn Foster
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... gle-answer" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

... That’s the fear of zero-hours contracts: that one day, you find your hours have dropped to zero and you’ve effectively been sacked. You can’t challenge your employer over their decision, because effectively, contractually, they were doing you a favour by giving you any shifts at all. A man in his 40s in Redcar told me outside the jobcentre that he had been given no shifts by his construction firm for eight weeks. The jobcentre adviser insisted he was employed, so he wasn’t entitled to jobseeker’s allowance. If he left the job, he’d be deemed to have quit voluntarily … so wouldn’t be entitled to jobseeker’s allowance. This paradox is precisely why so many people are against zero-hours contracts: they make low-paid workers completely powerless, and let their bosses act with unaccountable impunity. Everyone deserves a fair wage for a fair day’s work, and to be able to depend upon it.

Sickening.

[HindleA]

http://linkis.com/www.mirror.co.uk/new/zO9uH" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Iain Duncan Smith charging poor families 45p a minute to talk about benefits

[ephemerid]

By the by and totally off topic I was entertained to a meal out for my birthday by my lads (and granddaughter) yesterday so felt obliged to buy the drinks. Bloody hell, is that what they cost nowadays? For the record and to confirm my cryptic clue in yesterday's post, I am now sixty-four.

"Will you still need me, will you still feed me, when I'm sixty-four?"

Evidently, the answer is yes......many happy returns, UD.

[rebeccariots2]

Sunny Hundal ‏@sunny_hundal 1m1 minute ago
Sunny Hundal Retweeted Emily Ashton
Boris is sitting on the fence and being indecisive, but no one in the media calls him out on it

Emily AshtonVerified account
‏@elashton
Boris is “genuinely torn” over Cameron’s EU deal, source says.

"Genuinely torn" on what will suit him best personally, nothing more.

Yes - I agree - it's blatant. He's clearly vacillating to work out which way will suit his leadership prospects. What a shit. Sorry - not in a mincing words mood today. And to follow him in London the Tories are offering us Zac Goldsmith. Any respect I might have had for Goldsmith was pretty much dissolved by his performance on Newsnight yesterday and his 'explanations' re non dom status.

[ephemerid]

Sunny Hundal ‏@sunny_hundal 1m1 minute ago
Sunny Hundal Retweeted Emily Ashton
Boris is sitting on the fence and being indecisive, but no one in the media calls him out on it

Emily AshtonVerified account
‏@elashton
Boris is “genuinely torn” over Cameron’s EU deal, source says.

"Genuinely torn" on what will suit him best personally, nothing more.

I wish he really WAS torn.

To shreds.

Genuinely.

[utopiandreams]

http://www.communitycare.co.uk/2016/02/ ... pt-carpet/

‘A learning disability scandal is being swept under the carpet

I've not read it all yet, A, but agree there appear to be double standards, or should that be lower when applied to those with learning difficulties? We were always taking our daughter to the doctors with chronic stomach or digestive problems and typically prescribed kaolin or similar. She was nineteen before a simple blood test indicated coeliac disease. I have no doubt whatsoever that an 'ordinary' person would have been diagnosed a lot sooner. I dread to think of how much she suffered during those years not to mention the mess we and the family had had to cope with.

[StephenDolan]

"Genuinely torn" on what will suit him best personally, nothing more.

Yes - I agree - it's blatant. He's clearly vacillating to work out which way will suit his leadership prospects. What a shit. Sorry - not in a mincing words mood today. And to follow him in London the Tories are offering us Zac Goldsmith. Any respect I might have had for Goldsmith was pretty much dissolved by his performance on Newsnight yesterday and his 'explanations' re non dom status.

I'm hoping for the following. After Cameron announces the terms, the polling shows a consistent lead for exit. Flush out the ministers plus Boris to back leave. Get the Conservative grassroots looking forward to a win. Global economic news continues to deteriorate, the vote is a narrow win for stay. The bloodbath ensues.

[rebeccariots2]

Andrew Neil ‏@afneil 19s20 seconds ago
After this morning's polls (good for Trump and Sanders), establishment commentators on US TV look shell-shocked, baffled and beaten. Amazing

[AnatolyKasparov]

Hopefully that will happen to our lot before too long. And it is not unknown for us to follow the USA in these things!

[utopiandreams]

@rebeccariots2

About time they woke up to this at the G, I and many others spoke of such things below the line ages ago, primarily agency work. Added to sanctions, i.e. those who had previously been targeted, there are quite a few that drift between occasional work here and occasional work there and never sign on in between. Of course that is not the picture that is portrayed by the DWP. Indeed they maintain it's unlikely that people don't claim.

Of course this is anecdotal but I have and do speak with many youngsters, more than just my sons' circles, many survive in and out of the black market and in odd cases throw in a little criminality, not that I approve. They're not all bad lads but are having to survive, some with family too. It does beg the question that once pushed over a line how much further can they go?

[rebeccariots2]

"Genuinely torn" on what will suit him best personally, nothing more.

Yes - I agree - it's blatant. He's clearly vacillating to work out which way will suit his leadership prospects. What a shit. Sorry - not in a mincing words mood today. And to follow him in London the Tories are offering us Zac Goldsmith. Any respect I might have had for Goldsmith was pretty much dissolved by his performance on Newsnight yesterday and his 'explanations' re non dom status.

I'm hoping for the following. After Cameron announces the terms, the polling shows a consistent lead for exit. Flush out the ministers plus Boris to back leave. Get the Conservative grassroots looking forward to a win. Global economic news continues to deteriorate, the vote is a narrow win for stay. The bloodbath ensues.

I think a narrow win for stay might cause a lot of problems ... but not just for the Tories. Ukip could 'surge' again if it rides the wave of dissatisfaction to their advantage (and they'll try to) ... and Labour will still be copping it for 'letting all the immigrants in' regardless. It will allow all the current blaming of the EU and Labour to carry on and then some - particularly as and when the migrant crisis escalates. If we are going to remain in - we need a decisive win to stop some of the most destructive arguments and rhetoric. At present it doesn't look like we're going to get that though - looking more like a narrow win for in or Brexit.

[AnatolyKasparov]

Which is why Labour needs to keep its distance from Dave's toxic embrace as much as possible. Fortunately, this is surely one definite benefit of electing Corbyn?

[rebeccariots2]

CPS Think Tank ‏@CPSThinkTank 5m5 minutes ago
UK unemployment still at 10 year-low, falling by 60,000 - @BBCNews http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-35594650" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; … #uk #economy #news

That’s the fear of zero-hours contracts: that one day, you find your hours have dropped to zero and you’ve effectively been sacked. You can’t challenge your employer over their decision, because effectively, contractually, they were doing you a favour by giving you any shifts at all. A man in his 40s in Redcar told me outside the jobcentre that he had been given no shifts by his construction firm for eight weeks. The jobcentre adviser insisted he was employed, so he wasn’t entitled to jobseeker’s allowance. If he left the job, he’d be deemed to have quit voluntarily … so wouldn’t be entitled to jobseeker’s allowance. This paradox is precisely why so many people are against zero-hours contracts: they make low-paid workers completely powerless, and let their bosses act with unaccountable impunity. Everyone deserves a fair wage for a fair day’s work, and to be able to depend upon it.

Jobs that aren't jobs. The latest mass emperor's clothes.

[PorFavor]

"Genuinely torn" on what will suit him best personally, nothing more.

Yes - I agree - it's blatant. He's clearly vacillating to work out which way will suit his leadership prospects. What a shit. Sorry - not in a mincing words mood today. And to follow him in London the Tories are offering us Zac Goldsmith. Any respect I might have had for Goldsmith was pretty much dissolved by his performance on Newsnight yesterday and his 'explanations' re non dom status.

I'm hoping for the following. After Cameron announces the terms, the polling shows a consistent lead for exit. Flush out the ministers plus Boris to back leave. Get the Conservative grassroots looking forward to a win. Global economic news continues to deteriorate, the vote is a narrow win for stay. The bloodbath ensues.

Is Boris Johnson really as important in all this (or, indeed, anything else) as both he and the media like to portray him? I may be the odd one out but I couldn't give a toss for his views on the In\Out question. Although I suppose I must assume that David Cameron thinks he's (BJ) got some clout. But is that any sort of endorsement?

[PorFavor]

Good morfternoon.

[Lonewolfie]

Morning all.

Morning.

Fallon, get told.


"The chairman of the Falkland Islands Legislative Assembly said Argentina remained the greatest threat to security, not the Labour leader."

Fallon reaffirms commitment to defend Falkland Islands - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-35593095" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Once again the Tories act for short term political gain at considerable risk of damaging things in the long term. Of course there should be no question of debating sovereignty, but inflaming tensions with Argentina risks weakening Britain's position. The last thing we want to do is to start pushing other countries into backing Argentina on this.

The Tories always want us to forget it was they who were pushing through leaseback against the islanders' wishes before the 1982 invasion.

Morfterning...

A couple of 'anecdotals' re the Falklands...from a good friend who is Argentinian...

Argentina are (IMHO rightly) very proud of their record of protection of the South Atlantic ecosystems, to the extent that, still, any unauthorised fishing vessels (usually Chinese) are impounded and the crew flown home - the Falklands Conflict came about 149 years after the first British occupation - funnily enough, there is apparently an international understanding/convention that at 150 years, the occupiers retain ownership in perpetuity, so by conveniently 'invading', Argentina allowed Britain to retain 'ownership' - not just of the land of course, but also to all the mineral rights (mostly oil) on the sea bed...I believe(TM) the oil companies now have the technology to start the deep water exploration and drilling and are doing so - just as they assumed they would eventually be able to 34 years ago. Interesting to note as well, that Chile (Thatchers bestie, Pinochet) sabre-rattled at the Chile-Argentina Patagonian border, thereby reducing the Argentinian military capability to engage with British forces...who were so incompetently led (mostly from Whitehall, but sometimes on the ground) that it was a very close run thing as to whether the entire venture would implode - 1 bomb from a vulcan (you may remember the exploit - massively long flight and just one bomb hit the runway, but it did render it unusable) did more to win the conflict than anything else.

Another angle - the Argentinian conscripts, very young men, underfed, cold and badly trained and equipped, were forced to stay in the line by their superiors with the story that the British soldiers were animals, who would torture them, burn them and eat them alive (verbatim from my friend from Mendoza)...so they fought desperately...only to find, firstly, that the British soldier has some sort of odd 'this is what we want to do so it will be done' mentality and, secondly, once they were 'de-militarised', far from being tortured they were given blankets, cigarettes, food and, of course, the obligatory cup of tea...which, when the news reached home, was when the Argentinian population realised they'd also been lied to.

I am not an apologist for Galtieri/The Junta/Argentina (or Thatcher/Pinochet come to that) and I was a serving soldier in 1982. I believe(TM) that military action should only ever be used as the absolute last resort and that jaw jaw is always better than war war...so starting the 'conversation' with Argentina from a standpoint that recognises the complexities (including 'sovereignty', but also including the environmental impact of British policy) would work best (IMVHO). (I know - hell will freeze over before that etc etc)

Not at all sure that makes any sense, having re-read it - so, as ever, apologies - it's really just meant as a bit of 'extra backstory' to the whole subject, so I'm going to post it anyway (and for those who eat meat - try a steak with a bottle of Malbec from Mendoza (starting to become more available and affordable)...it's stucking funning )

[utopiandreams]

... "Will you still need me, will you still feed me, when I'm sixty-four?"

Evidently, the answer is yes......many happy returns, UD.

Evidently, ephe, that thought also occurred to me but I hardly think my progeny count; they're certainly not who I've ever sung it to. Blimey I am a bit slow, I've only just remembered that today would have been our wedding anniversary.

[ephemerid]

What are zero-hours contracts? You asked Google – here’s the answer
Dawn Foster
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... gle-answer" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

... That’s the fear of zero-hours contracts: that one day, you find your hours have dropped to zero and you’ve effectively been sacked. You can’t challenge your employer over their decision, because effectively, contractually, they were doing you a favour by giving you any shifts at all. A man in his 40s in Redcar told me outside the jobcentre that he had been given no shifts by his construction firm for eight weeks. The jobcentre adviser insisted he was employed, so he wasn’t entitled to jobseeker’s allowance. If he left the job, he’d be deemed to have quit voluntarily … so wouldn’t be entitled to jobseeker’s allowance. This paradox is precisely why so many people are against zero-hours contracts: they make low-paid workers completely powerless, and let their bosses act with unaccountable impunity. Everyone deserves a fair wage for a fair day’s work, and to be able to depend upon it.

Sickening.

Welcome to the wacky world of DWP - yes, it is sickening, and it is going to get much much worse.

If you are claiming JSA, ESA WRAG, or Income Support, you can do a few odd hours now and then, declare it when you sign on, and it will be lopped off your benefits penny-for-penny after a disregard (£5 to £15).
As long as you work no more than 16 hours in any "benefit week" you can keep your claim open; thus if you get HB/LHA it won't be stopped automatically as it would be if your DWP benefit claim was closed.

If you have a ZHC, you are (in legal terms) under a contract of employment and thus "employed" whether you work or not; you may have entitlement to HB/LHA (which will vary with whatever you earn).
You cannot claim working tax credits (for which you must work 30 hours as a single person, 24 if in a couple) but you might be able to get child tax credits. You can't get JSA. ESA, or Income Support.

At the moment, DWP cannot force claimants of out-of-work benefits to accept a ZHC.

Under Universal Credit, claimants will be expected to accept any work they are offered. If they refuse, they will be sanctioned.
They can be mandated to take a ZHC; the theory is that if they don't earn any money they will have their UC in full, and if they do get a few hours now and again their UC will be recalculated accordingly. HB/LHA and all the other elements.

Of course, this UC recalculation is done every 4 weeks - so the claimant, employer, DWP, HMRC, and the local authority, all have to do their own calculations based on whatever the claimant earns and the evidence the claimant and employer provides; this could be different every week of the four, plus HB/LHA and tax credit is worked out on a calendar month basis so it gets a bit more complicated.

While all that's going on, the claimant has to prove that they are conducting a "more or better work" jobsearch on a pro-rata basis.
One week they could be having to prove jobsearch for 20 hours, another 6 hours, another 35 hours - depending on hours worked.

Even worse - if you do agency work as a self-employed person, you will not get UC at all unless you earn enough to meet the "minimum income floor", ie. the money equivalent to 35 hours at NMW. Even if you do, you will have to satisfy "better work" jobsearch conditions.

Pissing employers off with a tsunami of unsolicited CVs and letters is one thing - facing sanctions on a weekly basis when you are already working as much as you can is quite another.

It's even more sickening than many people think, RR.