Wednesday 24th September 2014

Post by **refitman** » Wed 24 Sep, 2014 7:28 am

Morning all. Labour lead at 6 points on Yougov:

Latest YouGov / The Sun results 23rd Sept -

Con 31%, (-2)
Lab 37%, (+2)
LD 7%, (no change)
UKIP 15%; (+1)

APP -23 (-2)

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 24 Sep, 2014 8:05 am

Morning all. Just to say a big thanks to all posting here yesterday for a lively and fascinating read. Lovely to come back to such a vigorous debate after a long day's badger action.

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Wed 24 Sep, 2014 8:22 am

refitman wrote:Morning all. Labour lead at 6 points on Yougov:

Latest YouGov / The Sun results 23rd Sept -

Con 31%, (-2)
Lab 37%, (+2)
LD 7%, (no change)
UKIP 15%; (+1)

APP -23 (-2)

Morning Dan and all.

DWP breaking it's own rules again. This time, it's Shirebrook Jobcentre in Derbyshire - who are sending appointment letters for Back To Work Interviews to poorly people in the Support Group of ESA threatening sanctions if they don't attend.
See - samedifference1.com/2014/09/17/more-details-of-the-shirebrook-jobcentre-situation/

This is, of course, illegal. The legislation and guidance is very clear - SG claimants have no jobsearch conditionality (unless they choose to engage in work-related activity themselves) and their claims are never subject to sanction on any grounds. I do not know if this is just one jobcentre making a mistake, or if it's some management directive from on high to attempt to frighten people off benefits.

When Reeves made her speech the other day, I posted here what I thought of her failure to address the many problems claimants generally and ESA claimants in particular actually face on a daily basis. So I won't do it again.
However - her plans for "reforms" to the WCA (unspecified), announcing that "disabled" people will have new rights (unspecified), claiming that disabled people will have more dignity whilst failing to mention the sick, yadda yadda yadda, did not address the fact that DWP is a department out of control - at local jobcentre level as well as at the very top.

Disability Labour is an "affiliate" to the Labour Party. To join, you pay £15 annually, or £10 if you are un-waged.
The website has a section called "Issues". In it, there is nothing about sick people, disabled people, sickness benefits, disability benefits.
There's a lot about Labour policies generally, and getting people into work.
The website has a little menu in which you will find the Blog. This, too, has nothing on sickness or disability and is basically a puff for Labour policies in general and Ed in particular; including an invitation from Harriet Harman to join Ed on stage yesterday.

Yesterday, according to the Morning Star, disabled delegates were required to move from the front row when Ed delivered his speech.
Can't have them cluttering up the space the top bods want to sit in, can we? After all, we need lots of happy shiny people sitting at the front to show what a happy shiny normal party we are, don't we?

Having read the impassioned posts here yesterday, I have to agree with Michael - Labour really can and should do better than this.
I will vote for them; I will campaign for them; only because I doubt I'd survive another 5 years of the coalition.
It seems to me that the upper echelons of Labour are doing nothing more than paying lip service to grass roots members generally and the sick and/or disabled in particular. What was the point of asking people to submit policy ideas to YourBritain if they were not even acknowledged? Why bother to pretend that Labour is listening when it clearly isn't?

I said, when I joined Labour last year, that I believed Ed Miliband had the makings of a statesman. I still do believe that.
But I do not believe that the party has the right policies on social security, and abolition of the bedroom tax while important simply is not enough. I am more than disappointed - I am actually very angry.
I joined Labour because I thought, after the conference last year, that I had something to vote for - now I feel I'm back where I started and I'll be voting for the least worst option.

Labour IS different - but on this subject, it really is not different enough.

Post by **refitman** » Wed 24 Sep, 2014 8:36 am

So, Abu Qatada has been cleared of terrorist charges by a court in Jordan. Will May shut up about this now?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-29340656" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 24 Sep, 2014 8:37 am

Protesters succeeding in disrupting badger cull, company tells farmers
Anti-cull campaigners’ night vigil giving ‘headache’ to marskmen as they fall short of achieving kill targets in Gloucestershire
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/ ... estershire

Warning: there's a sad picture of the badger found shot in the abdomen at top of this article. You know, the one that the NFU denies was part of the cull (excuse me while I have a coughing fit).

As one of the commenters BTL says - this year's cull has already failed re effectiveness and humaneness - but of course we've got no independent monitoring to assess and confirm so.

The word is that they are also failing to meet their kill targets in Somerset - and by some way.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Wed 24 Sep, 2014 8:45 am

refitman wrote:Morning all. Labour lead at 6 points on Yougov:

Latest YouGov / The Sun results 23rd Sept -

Con 31%, (-2)
Lab 37%, (+2)
LD 7%, (no change)
UKIP 15%; (+1)

APP -23 (-2)

I am delighted.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Wed 24 Sep, 2014 8:49 am

Sorry, Good morning!

As I've written on the Sparrow thread this morning, it's a stunning day here in Stoke.

It rained last night & the sunny, clear, clean air is delightful. It's one of those days it's good to be alive. My spouse is in an equally good mood.

May you all be having good mornings, you are my good friends.

xx
JA

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Wed 24 Sep, 2014 8:52 am

rebeccariots2 wrote:Morning all. Just to say a big thanks to all posting here yesterday for a lively and fascinating read. Lovely to come back to such a vigorous debate after a long day's badger action.

Thank you, Rebeccariots2, I thought it was outstanding too. I'm glad to be among friends, dissenting or agreeing. Intelligent conversation is welcome.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Wed 24 Sep, 2014 8:56 am

Morning all.

Second RR2's appreciation of last night's debate, I really enoyed the posts and thanks to OneButtonMonkey for dipping in.

From the Welsh press - a new post referendum poll for BBC Wales shows enthusiasm for Welsh independence, already low, has dropped since the Yes/No vote.

3% want Welsh independence, [that's the lowest recorded level].
49% back more powers being devolved to the Welsh Government.
12% want the Welsh Assembly abolished.

Bad news on voting intention - changes are since the last BBC Wales poll in March

Labour 38% [ -4 points]
Conservatives 23% [-1]
UKIP 14% [ +7 points]
Plaid Cymru on 13% [-1]
Liberal Democrats on 7% [down 2]

Cardiff uni's Professor Scully suggests that, on a uniform swing, 'Labour would gain two seats in the Cardiff North and Cardiff Central – at next May’s election. The Conservatives would lose Cardiff North but gain Brecon and Radnor from the Lib Dems; Plaid Cymru would retain their three seats but the Liberal Democrats would be reduced to a solitary Welsh seat at Westminster – Ceredigion.'

But hopefully the 3% support for independence will mean we don't have to read anymore daft stuff about 'Wales independence next'.
And it looks as if my MP, Mark Williams, would require a political hurricane to unseat him.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 24 Sep, 2014 8:57 am

RobertSnozers wrote:Hmmm. Interesting interview with Ed Miliband on Today just now. I have to say, I wasn't 100% convinced about how Labour intends to deal with the funding crisis in the NHS, though he was on the right lines by suggesting that access to GPs, more home (and presumably community) care for older people, and proper integration with social care will take place. This is definitely a good way to stop further haemorrhaging of funds pointlessly. Nick Robinson pointed out that the extra money would be less than 3% of the overall budget and even Thatcher spent 4% extra a year. He conveniently forgot that spending increases have been virtually flat since the coalition took over, so although 3% would be a 'very tight funding settlement' in historical terms it would be riches beyond compare for the current NHS. How they're going to integrate health and social care properly - not the current fudge which is basically chucking a bit of NHS money at local authorities - without some kind of reorganisation, I'm not sure. They'd have to have common management at a certain level, preferably all the way up. Don't get me wrong, I think a National Care Service is a great idea, it's just a case of how to achieve it without upsetting the applecart again. Everyone agrees now that changing the architecture of the NHS just doesn't get you the transformation you need. I've said this ad nauseum but it's true - the government's reforms have wasted four vital years that should have been spent on addressing the challenges of the next decade or two, and now the situation is at crisis point. I suspect this is what at least some Tories wanted.

In truth, a lot of this won't be solved by the government, but by the NHS at a local and regional level rolling its sleeves up and getting on with it, and the government just has to listen to it and give it what it needs (in terms of support, 'air cover' and freedom as well as money). A big help would be to scrap the CQC. Assurance is done perfectly well by NHS England's area teams, which provide much more value in this area than the CQC does. Inspection is a busted flush. We also need to see things like halting the Foundation Trust pipeline and reinstituting a mechanism for de-FTing trusts if they fall over. Foundation status has proved not to be the panacea for safe, sustainable trusts, so we need to get rid of it - but one step at a time.

Broadly I'm positive about it, but I want to see what Andy Burnham says today. I know it's more about mood music than hard policy, but some of these things need to be done, and I'd like to get a sense that Labour has a grip on it.

That's pretty much what I heard and thought as well. Thanks for an excellent summary. The other thing that worried me a bit - heard a small sigh escape as he said it - was the explanation that integration would be achieved by 'pooling budgets' rather than a reorganisation. The sigh is because pooling budgets has been around for a very long time ... and without amazing leadership and resulting co-operation throughout existing systems it can, and has, cause tension and fights and passing the parcel between the various agencies.

Like you - I'll wait to hear more. Labour want the right outcomes - I agree that putting more into providing the access and mobility in the blocked parts of the primary and older people's care systems is crucial - but how and when they can be achieved that needs more detail and clarity.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Wed 24 Sep, 2014 8:59 am

citizenJA wrote:Sorry, Good morning!

As I've written on the Sparrow thread this morning, it's a stunning day here in Stoke.

It rained last night & the sunny, clear, clean air is delightful. It's one of those days it's good to be alive. My spouse is in an equally good mood.

May you all be having good mornings, you are my good friends.

xx
JA

Good morning JA.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Wed 24 Sep, 2014 9:03 am

Ephemerid -

Excellent post, clearly specifying failings of Labour policy - I'm taking notes

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Wed 24 Sep, 2014 9:06 am

yahyah wrote:
citizenJA wrote:Sorry, Good morning!

As I've written on the Sparrow thread this morning, it's a stunning day here in Stoke.

It rained last night & the sunny, clear, clean air is delightful. It's one of those days it's good to be alive. My spouse is in an equally good mood.

May you all be having good mornings, you are my good friends.

xx
JA
Good morning JA.

Yahyah! My friend! I read everything you post on the other thread & it's good. I'm glad to be here again.

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Wed 24 Sep, 2014 9:09 am

Morning all.

A quick peek at the Guardian confirms it isn't worth posting there today ....again. Really can't be bothered to thrash over the same old ground with the goat munchers, and I suspect I'd get modded if Notso started on one of his "painting into a corner" episodes.

Actually, to be honest, I'm not convinced I will be going back to the Guardian at all now that they have openly declared war on the Labour Party. Pretty much all the people worth talking to are on here or on Twitter, and I don't think FTN is an "echo chamber" by any means, we've seen plenty of ...erm, robust debate over the past week or so, Ephe's latest contribution being a valuable addition to that debate.

RR2, you and I both know that the cull is nothing more than a bunch of farmers getting their rocks off now that they can't watch foxes torn to shreds. Serious kudos to you and anybody else who puts a spoke in their wheel!

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Wed 24 Sep, 2014 9:19 am

@TheGrimSqueaker

I know about Sparrow's blog - saw it, posted a couple passages & came here. It's wholly the Guardian's loss if you're not posting there. I rely on your comments.

It's not that I'm unable to withstand criticism, really, I don't need to be agreed with. But I'm not wasting my time replying to commentators who have no interest in an exchange of information & opinion.

I think many people read Sparrow's blog but don't comment. They'll miss intelligent conversation.

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Wed 24 Sep, 2014 9:23 am

Morning all. Third (or are we up to fourth?) the enjoyment of such quality postings here yesterday.

Without FTN representation BTL the sparrow blog is going to be a nightmare.

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Wed 24 Sep, 2014 9:29 am

@ephemerid - great post - thanks

@robert - likewise - the issues you raise about actually making it work are important, but I continue to be reassured by the involvement of Debbie Abrahams who has in depth experience

JackPranker · Post by **JackPranker** » Wed 24 Sep, 2014 9:39 am

Apologies, Rebecca, I had a Rik Mayall moment.

JackPranker · Post by **JackPranker** » Wed 24 Sep, 2014 9:43 am

As we currently understand the initials DFH to mean Dan *ahem* Hodges, I think we may need to address how we refer to Nick Robinson. To reference the percentage rise EM was proposing for the NHS to being "less than Thatcher" has, inevitably I suppose, reduce my impression of him to a caricature.

Spitting Image would have had a field day with him, I sometimes think the politics in this country are poorer for its absence.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Wed 24 Sep, 2014 9:46 am

rebeccariots2 wrote:At all of you - responses so far. If yahyah is right - pathetic - and I'd hoped that wasn't it.

How it came across to me was the kind of lazy casual sniping for saying something positive about fellow FTNers - or for actually being committed to something - the kind of comment I hate about the Guardian. And it has really peed me off.

I wonder whether some of us are less used to the banter of Twitter and other social media and don't 'get' it sometimes ? I know I don't always.

The work you and Mr RR2 have done for the badgers is fantastic, and I know from another post that you helped abandoned horses in the past. Truly compassionate work and much appreciated.

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Wed 24 Sep, 2014 10:00 am

I've just been out for an hour delivering Labour leaflets introducing our PPC Matthew Dorrance.

It's the last place on my list - a new-ish small estate of "executive homes" which sell for about £400,000 to anyone daft enough to buy one.

I saw lots and lots of swanky motors (the residents are very keen on shiny new 4x4's) and just one person, a man aged about 60 wearing very smart tweedy clothes (the sort of thing people think they should be wearing in "the country")
As I approached his drive, he asked me what I was doing. I told him, and he asked me for one reason why he should vote Labour.
I said - "Because you're next".
He looked puzzled, and I said that if the Conservatives win next time, he and his group/class/whatever will be next for the Tory treatment.
I said the sick, the disabled, the working poor, the squeezed middle, all had been shafted by the Tories and the LibDems.
I asked him if he felt richer now than he did 4 years ago - he said he was about the same....but didn't eat out any more and would not be replacing his car again this year (a BMW) as he usually does.
I said think about it......and if he thinks the Tories are better on the economy, he could have a little look at the borrowing figures....

I'm under no illusions about the likelihood of success here in Brecon/Radnor. Roger Hugh Williams has defied all expectation and will not be retiring; and although his majority isn't huge (3,747, 9.6%) he's likely to get in again. Last time he polled 17,929 and the Tories were close behind on 14,182. The Labour candidate (who was about 12) polled 4,096.
I think Matthew will increase the vote share, but we won't be returning a Labour MP here any time soon. There's a lot of money here in Powys, not just in farming; even the hippies in the hills who were likely to vote Green didn't manage as much as UKIP here.
Of course, here in Hay the population is at least 30% English, many of whom haven't been here all that long (me included).

So I've done my bit for now - though I have to admit I am rapidly losing enthusiasm.....

JackPranker · Post by **JackPranker** » Wed 24 Sep, 2014 10:00 am

Sat in my office where a guy behind me has just received the new iPhone by courier. There are 20 people stood by his desk, ooing and ahhing.

We're doomed, aren't we?

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Wed 24 Sep, 2014 10:02 am

yahyah wrote:
rebeccariots2 wrote:At all of you - responses so far. If yahyah is right - pathetic - and I'd hoped that wasn't it.

How it came across to me was the kind of lazy casual sniping for saying something positive about fellow FTNers - or for actually being committed to something - the kind of comment I hate about the Guardian. And it has really peed me off.

I wonder whether some of us are less used to the banter of Twitter and other social media and don't 'get' it sometimes ? I know I don't always.

The work you and Mr RR2 have done for the badgers is fantastic, and I know from another post that you helped abandoned horses in the past. Truly compassionate work and much appreciated.

+1 on that. Actually, + lots.

JackPranker wrote:As we currently understand the initials DFH to mean Dan *ahem* Hodges, I think we may need to address how we refer to Nick Robinson. To reference the percentage rise EM was proposing for the NHS to being "less than Thatcher" has, inevitably I suppose, reduce my impression of him to a caricature.

Spitting Image would have had a field day with him, I sometimes think the politics in this country are poorer for its absence.

I always refer to him as "that Tory Tosser", is not that correct form of address?

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Wed 24 Sep, 2014 10:03 am

JackPranker wrote:Apologies, Rebecca, I had a Rik Mayall moment.

And from me too. We've agreed to delete those comments.

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Wed 24 Sep, 2014 10:13 am

JackPranker wrote:Sat in my office where a guy behind me has just received the new iPhone by courier. There are 20 people stood by his desk, ooing and ahhing.

We're doomed, aren't we?

4 were delivered to my office on launch day. It's open plan. You can imagine.

JackPranker · Post by **JackPranker** » Wed 24 Sep, 2014 10:26 am

StephenDolan wrote:
JackPranker wrote:Sat in my office where a guy behind me has just received the new iPhone by courier. There are 20 people stood by his desk, ooing and ahhing.

We're doomed, aren't we?
4 were delivered to my office on launch day. It's open plan. You can imagine.

Did I post up that vom smiley yesterday?

rearofthestore · Post by **rearofthestore** » Wed 24 Sep, 2014 10:48 am

Good Morning
When I get depressed about whether Labour will win in 7+ months Mike Smithson tweets something to bring me back together.

Mike Smithson ‏@MSmithsonPB 2m
REMINDER FROM OUTSIDE WESTMINSTER BUBBLE: To win GE2015 LAB needs to suffer less seepage to UKIP than CON and retain current LD switchers
Expand Reply Retweet Favorite More

pk1 · Post by **pk1** » Wed 24 Sep, 2014 10:56 am

I've no idea what comments were made nor by whom but whatever they were, I hope the air has been cleared & we can get back to being the alternative to the Graun as was the original intention of setting up this haven.

The debate yesterday just highlighted for me how Labour have a coalition of sorts within the party. Some want it to swing ever more to the left, some want it to go more to the right & if the polls are to be believed, many are happy with where they currently are. It's a broad church & it must appeal to the many not the few.

Personally I'm a middle of the road kinda gal & I know my stance must frustrate those wishing the party would head one way or the other.

@Ephe - Diabolical news about that jobcentre.
I'm not sure the bit about disabled folks being moved from the front row for the MP's is correct. Most of them were sitting a few rows back & mainly on the ends of the rows I think ?

@yahyah - I watched 'Free Speech' on BBC 3 last night & Leanne Woods was a guest. I know you have a very high opinion of her

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b0 ... -episode-6" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The topic was benefit rates & the discrimination of rates between age groups. A young lad asked her why she didn't do anything about it seeing as her party were in a coalition in the Welsh AM. She replied that PC weren't in power, that was Labour. What she didn't point out was that the Welsh Assembly didn't set benefit rates, Westminster do so it's down to the ConDems. Her omission of the facts was I'm sure, entirely innocent....

@RobertSnozers - iPad Air ? Lucky you, I'd like one of those to replace my iPad 2 but it won't be happening for a good while yet !

@all - if what we hear about the SNP membership figures is true & they retain the fervent support had for the referendum & as a result, overtake the LDs, could we be in a situation where there might be a Lab/SNP coalition in 2015 ? Ha, that would scare the bejaysus out of the right !!

Spacedone · Post by **Spacedone** » Wed 24 Sep, 2014 11:03 am

Powerful speech right now at the Conference from Harry Lesley Smith telling the people there about what life was like for a poor family before the NHS and the Welfare State.

"We should never ever let the NHS from our grasp, because if we do your future will be my past."

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Wed 24 Sep, 2014 11:03 am

StephenDolan wrote:
JackPranker wrote:Sat in my office where a guy behind me has just received the new iPhone by courier. There are 20 people stood by his desk, ooing and ahhing.

We're doomed, aren't we?
4 were delivered to my office on launch day. It's open plan. You can imagine.

Mobile phones?

Never had one. Seriously.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Wed 24 Sep, 2014 11:09 am

Oh dear, the New Schools network effectively just got a rap over the knuckles for their constant trumpeting of "Free Schools get rated Outstanding twice as much as other schools".

Who by?

Why, the DfE...

Free schools: Ofsted inspection grades

It should be noted that Ofsted operates a policy of proportionate inspection, with inspection carried out where it is likely to have most impact. For example, a school judged outstanding at its last inspection is exempt from further inspection unless risk assessment indicates a serious risk of decline. Therefore, within any one year, the sample of schools inspected by Ofsted is not representative of all schools: outstanding and good schools are under-represented, whilst those requiring improvement or inadequate are over-represented. The findings cannot be interpreted as a balanced view of the quality of education nationally. In addition, the sample selected for inspection varies over time, so it is difficult to make meaningful comparisons between the inspections conducted during different periods of time.

Finally, only a minority of open free schools has been inspected to date. At the time of the press statement, 36% of all open free schools had been inspected. Added to this, only free schools which opened in 2011 and 2012 have been subject to inspection so far. Caution should therefore be taken when drawing conclusions about the performance of all open free schools and when comparing free schools to other schools. However Ofsted inspection grades provide a valuable source of information, in the absence of attainment data, to begin to judge the performance of free schools.

I want Labour to commit to withdrawing the NSN's funding and telling them that they're not needed. Parasites feeding off Tory policy and pretending to be a charity.

Spacedone · Post by **Spacedone** » Wed 24 Sep, 2014 11:13 am

Survation poll results post-Miliband conference speech about the public support for some of the things in the speech.

http://cf.datawrapper.de/5Me7Q/1/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Wed 24 Sep, 2014 11:20 am

Good morning.

Thinking back to Ed Miliband's speech yesterday, I'd like to see the Conservative Party combine their logo with the Ukip logo. That is to say, a hybrid image of a tree with an enormous £ sign in front of it. Below "When It's Gone It's Gone".

Edited to add -

PS

I'm aware the Conservatives say they are no longer considering selling off the forests - but if you believe that, you'll believe anything.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Wed 24 Sep, 2014 11:41 am

Peter Oborne seems to be going off Cameron quite a bit these days......

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Wed 24 Sep, 2014 11:45 am

AnatolyKasparov wrote:Peter Oborne seems to be going off Cameron quite a bit these days......

Indeed. I disagree with Oborne on a lot of policy but his critiques of Cameron and Osborne are spot on.

Flaky, back of a fag packet, say anything, principles and scruples free PR disasters that disgrace the positions of 10&11.

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Wed 24 Sep, 2014 11:48 am

I'd avoid PoliticsHome if you like your blood pressure below Mercury explosion.

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Wed 24 Sep, 2014 11:48 am

Spacedone wrote:Powerful speech right now at the Conference from Harry Lesley Smith telling the people there about what life was like for a poor family before the NHS and the Welfare State.

"We should never ever let the NHS from our grasp, because if we do your future will be my past."

There was a lot of whining (no other word for it) on Twitter earlier in the week when Harry gave his speech at a fringe meeting, "but it should have been on the main stage". I've been waiting patiently for their "my apology, I should have been more patient" tweets but, inexplicably, they don't seem to have appeared yet. Probably just a Twitter glitch.

Very passionate and very moving from Harry (even Sparrow didn't sneer at it), let us hope Burnham's contribution is worthy of such a wonderful warm up man.

Post by **letsskiptotheleft** » Wed 24 Sep, 2014 12:20 pm

StephenDolan wrote:
AnatolyKasparov wrote:Peter Oborne seems to be going off Cameron quite a bit these days......
Indeed. I disagree with Oborne on a lot of policy but his critiques of Cameron and Osborne are spot on.

Flaky, back of a fag packet, say anything, principles and scruples free PR disasters that disgrace the positions of 10&11.

No monarchist, not by any stretch but I even thought ''wtf'' when Cameron described the Queen as ''purring'' she's in her 80s, something creepy about it imo.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/peter ... ond-rater/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Wed 24 Sep, 2014 12:31 pm

TheGrimSqueaker wrote: Very passionate and very moving from Harry (even Sparrow didn't sneer at it), let us hope Burnham's contribution is worthy of such a wonderful warm up man.

It was!! Well done to Andy Burnham. Sadly Sparrow was too busy to cover it, he's promised to post hghlights "in a moment" - mind you, that was a good half an hour ago.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Wed 24 Sep, 2014 12:33 pm

Paxman joins Channel 4 to anchor election coverage
Jeremy Paxman is to anchor Channel 4's 2015 election night coverage, saying: 'This should be fun'

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/ ... erage.html

Channel 4 it is then.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Wed 24 Sep, 2014 12:36 pm

Its an "alternative" look at the GE apparently - ho hum. Though it will still struggle to be worse than the Beeb's execrable coverage last time

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Wed 24 Sep, 2014 12:41 pm

Interesting Tweet.

Jim Pickard ‏@PickardJE 6m
Burnham leadership speculation part38: "It's a running joke in shadow cabinet how many union branch meetings he goes to" says Labour source

JackPranker · Post by **JackPranker** » Wed 24 Sep, 2014 12:43 pm

AnatolyKasparov wrote:Its an "alternative" look at the GE apparently - ho hum. Though it will still struggle to be worse than the Beeb's execrable coverage last time

Don't think I can bear another round of Stumblebum, Nick F Robinson, Fiona "Grrrr" Bruce et al.

Mind you, the alternative would appear to be Hoo Edwards.

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Wed 24 Sep, 2014 12:43 pm

TheGrimSqueaker wrote:
TheGrimSqueaker wrote: Very passionate and very moving from Harry (even Sparrow didn't sneer at it), let us hope Burnham's contribution is worthy of such a wonderful warm up man.
It was!! Well done to Andy Burnham. Sadly Sparrow was too busy to cover it, he's promised to post hghlights "in a moment" - mind you, that was a good half an hour ago.

35 minutes later .....

Well, finally he managed to find time for it, although Rusty beat him to the punch considerably earlier (but given his brief appears to be trolling on behalf of Hunt that is no surprise. He has posted a link to the speech and some considerable extracts, but one sentence of his caught my eye:

One journalist colleague who heard it came out of the hall talking about Burnham as a future leader.

So despite it being one of the key speeches of the Conference and it being televised on the BBC (mostly, apart from a cutaway near the end for the weather) the man writing the Politics Blog couldn't be arsed to watch it and was reliant on colleagues for colour? Yeah, time to move to the Indy for keeps I think.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Wed 24 Sep, 2014 12:44 pm

AnatolyKasparov wrote:Its an "alternative" look at the GE apparently - ho hum. Though it will still struggle to be worse than the Beeb's execrable coverage last time

Evidently they grabbed a large amount of younger voters last time.

I'm on a mental age of around 45.

Do you think that's too old?

Post by **refitman** » Wed 24 Sep, 2014 12:44 pm

TheGrimSqueaker wrote:
TheGrimSqueaker wrote: Very passionate and very moving from Harry (even Sparrow didn't sneer at it), let us hope Burnham's contribution is worthy of such a wonderful warm up man.
It was!! Well done to Andy Burnham. Sadly Sparrow was too busy to cover it, he's promised to post hghlights "in a moment" - mind you, that was a good half an hour ago.

Andrew's posted a summary and a link to the full speech: http://www.theguardian.com/politics/blo ... 3fd1642829

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Wed 24 Sep, 2014 12:47 pm

There's a little video of Harry on YouTube. And he has a book out about his life. It's doing well.

I like autobiographies by working class people about their early lives...I have quite a few.

JackPranker · Post by **JackPranker** » Wed 24 Sep, 2014 12:54 pm

ohsocynical wrote:
AnatolyKasparov wrote:Its an "alternative" look at the GE apparently - ho hum. Though it will still struggle to be worse than the Beeb's execrable coverage last time
Evidently they grabbed a large amount of younger voters last time.

I'm on a mental age of around 45. Do you think that's too old?

Quick test: Do you know, without resorting to Google, who Jack Whitehall is? If no, stick with the BBC.

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Wed 24 Sep, 2014 12:58 pm

The mods are on top "form", I'm expecting a new world record for Roger's posts being deleted from the blog.

Post by **letsskiptotheleft** » Wed 24 Sep, 2014 1:21 pm

ohsocynical wrote:Interesting Tweet.

Jim Pickard ‏@PickardJE 6m
Burnham leadership speculation part38: "It's a running joke in shadow cabinet how many union branch meetings he goes to" says Labour source

You can imagine the headlines in the event of a Burnham led Labour Party ''Burnham, too northern to win in the south?'' the press are long beyond pathetic.

Michael Foot ''too scruffy''
Neil Kinnock ''too Welsh''
Gordon Brown ''dour one eyed Scot''
Ed Miliband ''plainly weird''
Tony Blair ''mmn, we can do something with him''

Too depressing and predictable for words.