OT. Having just heard about Operation Pallial an investigation into sexual and physical abuse in North Wales I am seriously thinking of getting in touch. I was at school in North Wales during that time and though I didn't see any sexual abuse the physical abuse was clear.
The policeman interviewed specifically said that the passage of time doesn't alter what constitutes abuse. Boys from the age of eight doing a two mile run in the snow with nothing on except for shorts several times a week before lessons would surely get the torturer a lengthy stretch in jail.
Being interfered with by a male or female pervert would at least have been warm!
Things happened when I was at school in the 1950's and 1960's which would nowadays be classed as physical abuse . I believe that one of UKIP's policies is to return to the much stricter discipline of those days
Discipline, yes. Abuse, no. All my schooling was in the 1940's and early 1950's, (I was conscripted in 1952). It is a fact that caning was frequently practised - on hands mostly, but on the bottom also - and punishments for educational or disciplinary infringements of having to write out up to 500 lines of some peculiarly banal comments, common.
Mind you, all us pupils used to laugh off these punishments, mainly because this was the norm for the times and corporal punishment was widespread.
But the problem is that people's definitions of discipline and abuse differ and have changed over the years . Caning nowadays would be looked on by most people as abuse and even those in UKIP who would want to see it return might accept that in some cases there could be a sexual connotation .
See this is why Nick Clegg and the Lib Dems deserve all the praise for vetoing the snoopers charter. The law is designed for one use, and it gets misused.
Tax officials used intrusive investigative powers meant to catch serious criminals to try to prove that a whistleblower who uncovered a "sweetheart" deal with Goldman Sachs had spoken to the Guardian, it has emerged.
The belongings, emails, internet search records and telephone calls of the HM Revenue and Customs solicitor Osita Mba and the telephone records of his wife, Claudia, were examined by revenue investigators, according to previously undisclosed documents.
The powers, which are supposed to be used to combat large-scale criminal tax frauds, were used because the tax inspectors suspected that Mba had been in contact with the Guardian's former investigations editor, David Leigh.
You seem to be forgetting Osborne has given up on deficit reduction.
So you keep claiming, although no else in the entire world agrees with you.
But let's assume you are right, and that the criticism is that Osborne has given up on deficit reduction, and hasn't cut spending enough. Fine, in that case what further cuts are Labour advocating to get him back on course, and why are they still criticising almost every saving the coalition makes?
Alternatively, if the criticism is the opposite - that he's cutting too fast - that's at least a coherent position, or it would be if they actually admitted that that was their position. They could say 'Osborne should be borrowing another £50bn or so this year and spending it on X'. If that is what they think, why don't they say so?
They could coherently make one criticism or the other. But not both simultaneously.
@tim - The deficit reduction programme is of course 'stalled' in the sense that world economic conditions are such that it will take longer than originally forecast; the 'automatic stabilisers' are operating and that is masking the discretionary cuts.
That doesn't alter the fact that governments don't set deficits, they take decisions on spending and taxation. If Labour's view is that the government should take decisions to cut VAT and spend a few zillion on some pet project, thus increasing borrowing at least for a year or two even if you take the most optimistic Krugman-like view, then they should say so. Trying to pretend that the laws of arithmetic don't apply is just bonkers.
The WATO multi vehicle pile up wasn't mentioned on BBC1 news...Miliband is fortunate that he didn't screw up on live tv...It has only to be a matter of time for him not to stay in control in front of the cameras.
The problem with Ed Milband is not that he is a poor communicator (although he is, of course), but that there is nothing to communicate, since his only political strategy is to avoid anything which his potential supporters don't want to hear. On the most basic question of all - would you seek to increase or reduce the deficit? - Labour hasn't got an answer. No-one expects them to have a fully-worked out plan, but surely it's not asking too much to expect them at least to be be able to say whether Osborne is supposed to have cut too little or too much.
And the reason they are in this pickle is perfectly clear: it's a combination of Brown's deficit-denial, which left Labour in a strategic cul-de-sac, and the fact that Osborne has actually judged things correctly. There really is no alternative to the gentle course towards sanity which he has set out.
I am not convinced that Ed is a poor communicator. At his best, e.g. the HoC eulogy to Thatcher, he can be reflective, intelligent, sincere and persuasive. In his natural environment of the political salon, the Islington dinner party, the tutorial with the LSE professor, the young boy impressing Uncle Tony at dinner he comes across as genuinely inquiring, intellectual: droll and perceptive.
Ed's problem is that he doesn't have the confidence in this metropolitan intellectual persona and therefore excludes it from the image he projects to the public as Labour leader.
So he gets excited and, both metaphorically and literally, starts flailing with his arms indignantly. The word rate of his speech accelerates. He becomes like a boy learning to swim who starts treading water, panics and calls out for help believing he is drowning.
Ed has allowed himself to become convinced that what he says in public should be fashioned into a string of digestible political soundbites. All the wry, ironic and questioning rhetoric of the true intellectual is subsumed into strings of repetitive poltical cliché - "up and down the country" - and AmDram indignation - rhetorical questions like "do you know how much Osborne will be borrowing by the end of this parliament?" followed by the mock punchline of feigned surprise and shock as he announces the figure.
If Ed could only talk to Martha Kearney like he talks to his dinner party guests he would woo the country with his dry wit and observant intelligence and show up Cameron's similar but more successful makeover to be as shallow as tim would have us believe.
@Neil - Setting targets for deficit redcution is not the same as setting the deficit, which tim seems to think is directly within a Chancellor's power.
And, yes, when external factors deteriorated, Osborne had a choice to make: he could leave his decisions in place and let the automatic stabilisers operate (accepting that it would take longer to meet the targets), or he could try to cut faster to get back on course faster. Wisely, he chose the former, since he was already doing as much as could be done without causing disruption and hitting employment too badly.
Perhaps Labour think he should do something different. OK, let's hear what it is, but not this utter nonsense about cutting taxes and increasing spending without the national accounts being in the slightest bit affected. What fools do they take voters for?
If David Cameron wants to stop journalists and assorted members of the commentariat reprising their Yvonne Elliman impersonation ("ooooh it should've been me") under the guise of complaints about the chumocracy, I'd be very happy to take a position of some sort or another. I might not be any good at the role, but that hasn't stopped some of the others who have got jobs in this administration. I'm not so good at Fruit Ninja, but I'm fairly good at Angry Birds.
On topic the above graph shows just how much Labour has to do.
Labour will do OK. But the counties really are the toughest set of results for us. To regain all the seats we lost in 2009 we would have to do as well as the day when we won a general election. Which is almost impossible
@TimMontgomerie Extraordinary that Cameron has appointed yet another mate to Number 10. Where's the openness to new thinking from different backgrounds?
No.10 is now a closed Camaroon society. For openness, vote UKIP!
That doesn't alter the fact that governments don't set deficits, they take decisions on spending and taxation.
Osborne did set targets for the deficit. When they proved to be inconsistent with his spending / tax plans he ditched them.
Untrue, Neil.
Osborne set himself a primary fiscal mandate, to balance the cyclically adjusted current budget (CACB) by the end of a five year rolling budget (currently 2016-17) and a supplementary target that public sector net debt (PSND) should fall as a share of GDP by 2015-16.
Currently the OBR has forecast that he is more likely than not to meet the fiscal mandate (a small but improving trend in the forecast) and has predicted that meeting the debt ratio target will be delayed by two years.
The OBR's forecast is based on known economic outcomes and policies that applied prior to the March budget. It is based on growth this year being 0.6% (annual rate is currently 1.2%) and does not include any impact, for example, from the sale of bank shares.
The June edition of the OBR's EFO is likely to see large increase in forecast deficit reduction over the next two years based on the current performance of the economy alone. As any meaningful sale of bank shares will bring the debt ratio back into line with the original supplementary target, then there is a reasonable probability that Osborne will complete his first term as Chancellor in compliance with his fiscal goals.
There are of course substantial downside risks, but these come mainly from the continent in the form of the stability of the Eurozone.
History A-level can be very demanding. Just watching "Pointless" and a Law Student at U. of York has just been challenged on "Countries which were members of the Warsaw Pact". Answer = Japan!
History A-level can be very demanding. Just watching "Pointless" and a Law Student at U. of York has just been challenged on "Countries which were members of the Warsaw Pact". Answer = Japan!
Maybe he was referring to the Kurile Islands!
Anyway, Japan was occupied by Anglo-American forces 1945-1952. Also, the Japanese drive on the left too!
'It’s not actually a bad video. But the problem is it’s got Ed Miliband in it. And Ed Miliband isn’t an asset to his party at the moment, he’s a liability.
The polls are quite clear. Ed Miliband’s approval ratings are sliding. Indeed, the most recent ICM poll recorded the worst ratings since he was elected Labour leader.
So why is Labour putting Ed at the heart of the Labour’s campaign? Whatever you think of him, no one can plausibly argue he’s a political asset at this point in time.'.
I've just listened to Ed Miliband's interview on The World At One earlier. For once, all the comments about how poorly Ed Miliband performed are entirely justified. He sounded oddly rattled from the start and fails completely to make his argument by getting totally bogged down on a question where he should just concede the point (Ed Balls correctly had already done so). Martha Kearney, however, was much more aggressive than I had gathered from the reports to date.
I did not count Ed Miliband's borrowing prevarications. Sorry about that.
If Holborn & St Pancras becomes vacant in the next 2 years, we will check if she has finished fighting Gove's reforms
I think Sunil should become MP for Holborn and St Pancras.
It has at least three major train stations in that seat.
Sounds tempting! Ilford North isn't too bad, has 7 Central line stations!
But, you have three major termini in St Pancras.
Think of all the places you could go.
Yes that's true, if you count King's Cross main line, St Pancras International and their common tube station, King's Cross St Pancras as one station, it has a grand total of 35 individual platforms*, with connections to places like Heathrow, Paris, Brussels, Sheffield, Edinburgh, Aberdeen, Brighton and even more exotic locations like Barking, Uxbridge, Hammersmith and Cockfosters.
But do they actually vote Tory there?
(* 4 East Midlands, 6 Eurostar, 3 Southeastern, 2 Thameslink at St Pancras International, 12 at King's Cross - including platform 0! - and 8 Tube (2 each Circle/Met/H & C, Northern, Piccadilly, Victoria lines).
You seem to have missed the fact that Osborne is involved in a huge programme of state subsidised house price inflation costing tens of billions. It makes Krugman look conservative.
You've just swallowed the old Brownite ruse that it's "off the books"
HM Land Registry published today statistics for house price inflation in March 2013.
Your test for today is to tell us all how much annual house price inflation was in Middlesbrough in the year to March 2013.
If Holborn & St Pancras becomes vacant in the next 2 years, we will check if she has finished fighting Gove's reforms
I think Sunil should become MP for Holborn and St Pancras.
It has at least three major train stations in that seat.
Sounds tempting! Ilford North isn't too bad, has 7 Central line stations!
But, you have three major termini in St Pancras.
Think of all the places you could go.
Yes that's true, if you count King's Cross main line, St Pancras International and their common tube station, King's Cross St Pancras as one station, it has a grand total of 35 individual platforms*, with connections to places like Heathrow, Paris, Brussels, Manchester, Birmingham, Sheffield, Edinburgh, Glasgow, Aberdeen, Brighton and even more exotic locations like Barking, Uxbridge, Hammersmith and Cockfosters.
But do they actually vote Tory there?
(* 4 East Midlands, 6 Eurostar, 3 Southeastern, 2 Thameslink at St Pancras International, 12 at King's Cross - including platform 0! - and 8 Tube (2 each Circle/Met/H & C, Northern, Piccadilly, Victoria lines).
I do love St Pancras.
When I left London last week I made sure I departed from St Pancras.
@Sunil_Prasannan The Constituency of Cities of London and Westminster is the way to go. You get Marylebone, Victoria, Charing Cross, Blackfriars, Cannon Street, Fenchurch Street and Liverpool Street, and it's safely Conservative.
@Sunil_Prasannan The Constituency of Cities of London and Westminster is the way to go. You get Marylebone, Victoria, Charing Cross, Blackfriars, Cannon Street, Fenchurch Street and Liverpool Street, and it's safely Conservative.
I've just listened to Ed Miliband's interview on The World At One earlier. For once, all the comments about how poorly Ed Miliband performed are entirely justified. .
I wonder if Miliband suffers from a similar issue to Humphries - when he interviews face to face he's fine - but without visual contact with the interviewer/ee he gets very shouty and interrupts - doesn't seem able to stand back and listen?
'It’s not actually a bad video. But the problem is it’s got Ed Miliband in it. And Ed Miliband isn’t an asset to his party at the moment, he’s a liability.
The polls are quite clear. Ed Miliband’s approval ratings are sliding. Indeed, the most recent ICM poll recorded the worst ratings since he was elected Labour leader.
So why is Labour putting Ed at the heart of the Labour’s campaign? Whatever you think of him, no one can plausibly argue he’s a political asset at this point in time.'.
Which fool is that who doesn't understand the polls?
@Sunil_Prasannan The Constituency of Cities of London and Westminster is the way to go. You get Marylebone, Victoria, Charing Cross, Blackfriars, Cannon Street, Fenchurch Street and Liverpool Street, and it's safely Conservative.
That's better
Not to mention over 20 tube stations and the northern end of the Drain.
Must be difficult to tell if there's a measles outbreak in Number Ten or if the red faces are because a woman walked into the room.
It's Nurse Lagarde arriving to tell them they are all on the mend and that they shouldn't have listened to her junior chiropractors as they tend to mistake bone for muscle.
@Cyclefree I'm not happy with your paraphrase. Religious bodies are free to believe what they wish. They can believe that disabled people did bad things in previous lives, that eating shellfish is immoral or that pieces of bread turn into flesh in their mouths. I would not withdraw tax advantages from organisations that espoused such views even though many would find them offensive or bizarre.
But when those bodies start putting their views into practice in such a way as treats minority groups as inferior, the state is entitled to say "you hold those views, fine, but don't expect a tax advantage to be maintained for you when you put yourself outside society's norms today in a way that harms others."
Antifrank: Apologies if I did not summarise your views correctly. I was trying to write the comment quickly!
I think we are in agreement: you can believe what you want but if you treat people in a harmful way (contrary to the laws of the land) e.g. by refusing a homeless shelter to a person because they are gay or Jewish or whatever then the state is entitled to intervene and say that you cannot do that. But what the state cannot do, IMO, is tell people that this is what they must believe or else. That seems to me to be a totalitarian attitude. Freedom of conscience means the freedom to believe what is outside society's norms at any particular time. Most of the great thinkers that we now think of as having advanced the cause of freedom and liberty were thinking outside society's then norms and, in some cases, were seen as scandalous for holding the views they did.
We should be alive to the possibility that what we now generally believe may be viewed in a similar light in the future, just as we look back at the way that - for instance - society viewed homosexuality at the turn of the 19th/20th centuries as a mental illness as a disgrace.
Treat others as you would be done by seems to be a good maxim. A pity it's not followed more often.
Silver did observe that trying to predict an election two years out is a fool's game!
I had the pleasure of going to a speech (and book sign) by him last night. He's a surprisingly captivating speaker - and the sort of bigging up the media did after 2012 isn't something he seems to do by himself, he's rather modest in person. He said the three limiting factors on UK predictions are - the third party/tactical voter effect; the lack of constituency polling; and less attachment to the incumbent; although he said to me that he'd like to do more in the future.
Heard a wonderful tale tonight about Ed M from a distant relative - who put him through to her youngest sister on her mobile while he was travelling by train in The Fylde - he was affable and encouraged her to watch the PPB. The whole thing sounds like a candid camera stunt or prank calls. Good for him to go along with her; but it was a good job she didn't get me to speak to him, I wouldn't have been converted, but was impressed by hearing how Ed M conducted himself.
@MrHarryCole: They've done it. They've actually done it. Guardian call for Ed to bring in Krugman to replace Balls: http://gu.com/p/3d7d8/tw 1/4 joking?
No worries, after to-day's policy malarkey & car crash interview this months 28% with ICM may be a high point for Ed..
'Even more concerning for Labour is the leadership polling figures. A mere 28% in this poll think that Ed Miliband is doing a good job as Labour leader. 51% think he is doing a bad job.
Leaving him with a negative rating of -23%. In May 2012 Miliband was rated as -12%; so his position is almost twice as bad as it was then!'
The campaign for an independent Scotland had a fresh setback yesterday when a poll showed that 60 per cent of Scots think that neither Alex Salmond, the First Minister, nor the Scottish National Party has made a convincing case so far.
The YouGov poll for the pro-Union Better Together group revealed that 62 per cent of the 1,000-plus sample of Scots voters said the SNP’s case was either “not very convincing” or “not convincing at all”.
More than a fifth of those respondents were people who claimed to have voted for the Nationalists in the Scottish and UK parliamentary elections.
The campaign for an independent Scotland had a fresh setback yesterday when a poll showed that 60 per cent of Scots think that neither Alex Salmond, the First Minister, nor the Scottish National Party has made a convincing case so far.
The YouGov poll for the pro-Union Better Together group revealed that 62 per cent of the 1,000-plus sample of Scots voters said the SNP’s case was either “not very convincing” or “not convincing at all”.
More than a fifth of those respondents were people who claimed to have voted for the Nationalists in the Scottish and UK parliamentary elections.
Unfortunately they don't seem to have asked the direct Yes/No question, and according to JamesKelly they are sitting on a VI question for Holyrood.
'With Labour's poll lead showing signs of decreasing in recent weeks, some at the top of the party believe there is also a need for the leadership to "crack the whip" and use the prospect of a reshuffle to ensure loyalty and encourage frontbenchers to make their mark.
"There are too many people in frontbench positions who are invisible," said a source. "We don't know what they do.'
Talking of invisible,has anyone seen Chuka Harrison recently?
Must be difficult to tell if there's a measles outbreak in Number Ten or if all the red faces are because a woman walked into the room.
Do you think there'll ever be a lady leader of the Labour Party?
It won't come from the current shadow cabinet, Andrea.
As for the leaders in waiting, even a voice and hair makeover won't do it for Rachel Reeves.
Perhaps we need to wait for the 2015 intake?
Did you just call me Andrea???
My goodness, I did, Sunil!
My fullest apologies though I can't think of any more complimentary example of mistaken identity!
Not offended but merely surprised! Yes, there are other less complimentary posters on PB that you could have confused me with!
What I think caused me to be so careless was the running interplay between Andrea and myself on Labour's women parliamentary candidates: Ms. Bluebell Woods in Rotherham, Ms. Rowenna Davies (so near but so far) in Eastleigh, Wing Commander Soph[ie|i|y] in Gloucester and now Ms. Double-Barreled Name in South Shields.
I just saw the question and jumped to conclusions!
Oh dear poor Francois is even more desperate than Osborne to get growth going. he's even announced some measures which would bring France into the twentieth century.
Difficult to see how anyone could vote for Ed Miliband after listening to that WATO interview. Staggeringly juvenile and inane, and notably charmless.
God help us if and when he wins.
Peter Kellner agrees
Tone matters, and yesterday, on Radio 4’s World at One, Ed Miliband got his tone all wrong. One radio interview two years away from a general election will not shift the arc of history, but more performances like this will make it harder for Labour’s leader to persuade people that he is fit to be Prime Minister.
Oh dear poor Francois is even more desperate than Osborne to get growth going. he's even announced some measures which would bring France into the twentieth century.
If we note the French origin of the English word entrepreneur, I think the Figaro report contains the heart of France's problem here: the French for a start up company appears to be the distinctly Anglo Saxon "un start up", ie there ain't no French word!
Should I have received a polling card for Thursday by now? Or do you just turn up at the station? Recently moved so may not be eligible to vote
It's fine to just turn up, but probably you have to do it where you lived before, since it sounds as though you haven't registered in your new place yet. It's too late to get a postal vote for this time.
Oh dear poor Francois is even more desperate than Osborne to get growth going. he's even announced some measures which would bring France into the twentieth century.
If we note the French origin of the English word entrepreneur, I think the Figaro report contains the heart of France's problem here: the French for a start up company appears to be the distinctly Anglo Saxon "un start up", ie there ain't no French word!
It always reminds me of my favourite Bushism " the french have no word for entrepreneur". Well riiight, but we know what he means.
That is the measure of Ed's unelectability: he just has to be OK and he will surely coast to victory against a flailing opposition.
But Ed is not even "OK". He is nowhere near "OK".
for Mr Miliband to be seen as a true contender, he must sound like a future Prime Minister. Yesterday he failed that harsh but vital test. And what should really terrify him is this: if he has difficulty fending off the courteous if persistent Martha Kearney on World at One, how can he hope to dodge the daggers that even now Lynton Crosby, the Tories’ Wizard of Oz, is doubtless planning to hurl at him when the election campaign proper gets under way?
I am close to loathing Cameron and his Etonocracy, yet I would still far prefer to be governed by Cameron's cabal of chinless Tory gits than be forced to endure the reality of Prime Minister Ed Miliband.
Doesnt hating all the mainstream options (I presume you arent hiding your love of Lib Dems under a bushel) make you a UKIP target voter?
Why do we still think Ed is crap? Ed is most definitely not crap! He is merely misunderstood, and I put it to you that is the chief reason why he is so maligned and ridiculed by the evil right-wing media.
I am certain you will agree with me that Ed is magnificently charismatic and eloquent. He is an inspiring and refreshing standard bearer for the social democratic tradition in our great nation. Yes, indeed: One Nation. Nay, his performance at Conference last year must surely have been amongst the greatest (if not the greatest) ever given by a leader of the Labour Party, or indeed of any party leader! Such magnificence, such poise, such alacrity. Wow! And his wonderful repertoire of jokes would put even Harry Hill to shame!
He is articulate, passionate, an accomplished orator, and I think a real progressive alternative to the smarmy, posh boy Cameron!
Oh dear poor Francois is even more desperate than Osborne to get growth going. he's even announced some measures which would bring France into the twentieth century.
If we note the French origin of the English word entrepreneur, I think the Figaro report contains the heart of France's problem here: the French for a start up company appears to be the distinctly Anglo Saxon "un start up", ie there ain't no French word!
It always reminds me of my favourite Bushism " the french have no word for entrepreneur". Well riiight, but we know what he means.
The article goes on to say there will be programmes to "diffuse the spirit of entrepreneurship amongst the young", which is fine and dandy but if the Govt leader ( well president ) is on record saying he hates the rich and has set his hat towards a 75% top tax rate you don't need to be Einstein to work out the huge disincentive to the young already set.
Oh dear poor Francois is even more desperate than Osborne to get growth going. he's even announced some measures which would bring France into the twentieth century.
If we note the French origin of the English word entrepreneur, I think the Figaro report contains the heart of France's problem here: the French for a start up company appears to be the distinctly Anglo Saxon "un start up", ie there ain't no French word!
It always reminds me of my favourite Bushism " the french have no word for entrepreneur". Well riiight, but we know what he means.
Apparently he never said such a thing, it was all made up by Shirely Williams of all people.
This is a hoot to watch, we now have Catholic priests coming out in favour of the DUP
“Catholics have started to support Peter Robinson’s Democratic Unionist Party (DUP)…the most consistently pro-life and pro-traditional marriage party in Northern Ireland.”
What do the voters make of their political leaders? In private polling carried out by the Conservatives, their verdict was boiled down to a single word. For David Cameron, it was “privileged”. For Nick Clegg, “confused”. And for Ed Miliband? “No.”
The thing about Ed Miliband is that, just when you think things can’t get worse, they do. And yesterday they did. The day dawned with Ed in Newcastle-under-Lyme delivering what he called an Alternative Queen’s Speech, while standing on a pallet.
Yes, that’s right: a pallet.
But of course once you feel you’re going backwards, it’s hard to stop. Certainly his interview on World at One with Martha Kearney yesterday was like watching someone back up their car into oncoming traffic
Martha: “Given how badly Labour did last time around, it should be fairly easy to claim victory, should it?”
Ed: “I’m not interested in political commentary.”
Martha: “This isn’t political commentary. This is about how you are going to do in the election.”
Ed: “I’d love to talk to you about that on Friday, Martha.”
It was like watching someone repeatedly bang their forehead on a desk. He was vague, over-excitable, puppyish, over-caffeinated, burbling like a teenager making it up as they go along. He refused, at least eight times, to say whether he’d borrow more in the short term to kick-start growth and then Ed was asked a really very easy question about Labour’s proposal (in his fake Queen’s speech) for a temporary VAT cut.
This is a hoot to watch, we now have Catholic priests coming out in favour of the DUP
“Catholics have started to support Peter Robinson’s Democratic Unionist Party (DUP)…the most consistently pro-life and pro-traditional marriage party in Northern Ireland.”
@DPMcBride Finally heard Ed M's WATO i/v. Before the content, there are 2 basic rules broken: never pre-record WATO; never do a big i/v down-the-line.
This is a hoot to watch, we now have Catholic priests coming out in favour of the DUP
“Catholics have started to support Peter Robinson’s Democratic Unionist Party (DUP)…the most consistently pro-life and pro-traditional marriage party in Northern Ireland.”
Blimey.
Well TSE probably a provocative view but fun nonetheless. You can follow the fun on Slugger.
This is a hoot to watch, we now have Catholic priests coming out in favour of the DUP
“Catholics have started to support Peter Robinson’s Democratic Unionist Party (DUP)…the most consistently pro-life and pro-traditional marriage party in Northern Ireland.”
Blimey.
Well TSE probably a provocative view but fun nonetheless. You can follow the fun on Slugger.
Ah, I see someone on Slugger claims Nesbitt abstained. So he has a view on gay marriage that mirrors Nothern Irish people's views of his party - neither can be bothered.
How did Mike Nesbitt vote? I cant find any details online. The poor guy, he used to have a party to lead.
No idea Neill. if you;re getting your Nesbitt lead from JK, as ever he gets an idea in his head that bears no resemblance to reality. From Slugger if you're inetrested.
"Vote was 53 to 42. With three Unionists, McCrea, McCallister & Copeland voting for. Three Alliance MLAs abstained but the biggest abstention, 10 overall, came from SF & SDLP MLAs."
@DPMcBride Finally heard Ed M's WATO i/v. Before the content, there are 2 basic rules broken: never pre-record WATO; never do a big i/v down-the-line.
Surely McBride is being modest by failing to record the 3rd basic rule he invented himself - get some dirt on the interviewer's partner to get a softer ride.
Comments
It has at least three major train stations in that seat.
Tax officials used intrusive investigative powers meant to catch serious criminals to try to prove that a whistleblower who uncovered a "sweetheart" deal with Goldman Sachs had spoken to the Guardian, it has emerged.
The belongings, emails, internet search records and telephone calls of the HM Revenue and Customs solicitor Osita Mba and the telephone records of his wife, Claudia, were examined by revenue investigators, according to previously undisclosed documents.
The powers, which are supposed to be used to combat large-scale criminal tax frauds, were used because the tax inspectors suspected that Mba had been in contact with the Guardian's former investigations editor, David Leigh.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2013/apr/29/hmrc-goldman-sachs-tax-osita-mba
But let's assume you are right, and that the criticism is that Osborne has given up on deficit reduction, and hasn't cut spending enough. Fine, in that case what further cuts are Labour advocating to get him back on course, and why are they still criticising almost every saving the coalition makes?
Alternatively, if the criticism is the opposite - that he's cutting too fast - that's at least a coherent position, or it would be if they actually admitted that that was their position. They could say 'Osborne should be borrowing another £50bn or so this year and spending it on X'. If that is what they think, why don't they say so?
They could coherently make one criticism or the other. But not both simultaneously.
Well said.
Just like RIPA was only for serious criminals like dog walkers and people fibbing on what school catchment area they lived in.
That doesn't alter the fact that governments don't set deficits, they take decisions on spending and taxation. If Labour's view is that the government should take decisions to cut VAT and spend a few zillion on some pet project, thus increasing borrowing at least for a year or two even if you take the most optimistic Krugman-like view, then they should say so. Trying to pretend that the laws of arithmetic don't apply is just bonkers.
After the elections they will probably start love bombing them.
Ed's problem is that he doesn't have the confidence in this metropolitan intellectual persona and therefore excludes it from the image he projects to the public as Labour leader.
So he gets excited and, both metaphorically and literally, starts flailing with his arms indignantly. The word rate of his speech accelerates. He becomes like a boy learning to swim who starts treading water, panics and calls out for help believing he is drowning.
Ed has allowed himself to become convinced that what he says in public should be fashioned into a string of digestible political soundbites. All the wry, ironic and questioning rhetoric of the true intellectual is subsumed into strings of repetitive poltical cliché - "up and down the country" - and AmDram indignation - rhetorical questions like "do you know how much Osborne will be borrowing by the end of this parliament?" followed by the mock punchline of feigned surprise and shock as he announces the figure.
If Ed could only talk to Martha Kearney like he talks to his dinner party guests he would woo the country with his dry wit and observant intelligence and show up Cameron's similar but more successful makeover to be as shallow as tim would have us believe.
And, yes, when external factors deteriorated, Osborne had a choice to make: he could leave his decisions in place and let the automatic stabilisers operate (accepting that it would take longer to meet the targets), or he could try to cut faster to get back on course faster. Wisely, he chose the former, since he was already doing as much as could be done without causing disruption and hitting employment too badly.
Perhaps Labour think he should do something different. OK, let's hear what it is, but not this utter nonsense about cutting taxes and increasing spending without the national accounts being in the slightest bit affected. What fools do they take voters for?
Think of all the places you could go.
Labour will do OK. But the counties really are the toughest set of results for us. To regain all the seats we lost in 2009 we would have to do as well as the day when we won a general election. Which is almost impossible
@TimMontgomerie
Extraordinary that Cameron has appointed yet another mate to Number 10. Where's the openness to new thinking from different backgrounds?
No.10 is now a closed Camaroon society. For openness, vote UKIP!
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/matt/?cartoon=10023143&cc=9980750
Osborne set himself a primary fiscal mandate, to balance the cyclically adjusted current budget (CACB) by the end of a five year rolling budget (currently 2016-17) and a supplementary target that public sector net debt (PSND) should fall as a share of GDP by 2015-16.
Currently the OBR has forecast that he is more likely than not to meet the fiscal mandate (a small but improving trend in the forecast) and has predicted that meeting the debt ratio target will be delayed by two years.
The OBR's forecast is based on known economic outcomes and policies that applied prior to the March budget. It is based on growth this year being 0.6% (annual rate is currently 1.2%) and does not include any impact, for example, from the sale of bank shares.
The June edition of the OBR's EFO is likely to see large increase in forecast deficit reduction over the next two years based on the current performance of the economy alone. As any meaningful sale of bank shares will bring the debt ratio back into line with the original supplementary target, then there is a reasonable probability that Osborne will complete his first term as Chancellor in compliance with his fiscal goals.
There are of course substantial downside risks, but these come mainly from the continent in the form of the stability of the Eurozone.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-22338200
The trouble is both interviewer and interviewee appear to have something in common.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/9661139/BBCs-big-talents-made-staff-after-claims-of-tax-avoidance.html
So Emily are you being economical with the truth?
You're muddling me with someone who has the patience to go this track more than once!
Anyway, Japan was occupied by Anglo-American forces 1945-1952. Also, the Japanese drive on the left too!
That lack of work by the Tories won't stand them in good stead.
If the ambling Lib Dems can make gains when they have a numpty like Clegg at the helm it really doesn't bode well for the Tories.
'It’s not actually a bad video. But the problem is it’s got Ed Miliband in it. And Ed Miliband isn’t an asset to his party at the moment, he’s a liability.
The polls are quite clear. Ed Miliband’s approval ratings are sliding. Indeed, the most recent ICM poll recorded the worst ratings since he was elected Labour leader.
So why is Labour putting Ed at the heart of the Labour’s campaign? Whatever you think of him, no one can plausibly argue he’s a political asset at this point in time.'.
I did not count Ed Miliband's borrowing prevarications. Sorry about that.
But do they actually vote Tory there?
(* 4 East Midlands, 6 Eurostar, 3 Southeastern, 2 Thameslink at St Pancras International, 12 at King's Cross - including platform 0! - and 8 Tube (2 each Circle/Met/H & C, Northern, Piccadilly, Victoria lines).
pic.twitter.com/dQKuFke3t2
Your test for today is to tell us all how much annual house price inflation was in Middlesbrough in the year to March 2013.
We await your answer.
When I left London last week I made sure I departed from St Pancras.
It is why we are on PB.
The eight point gain rather makes the movements in leader approval look insignificant.
Must be all those public school pupils bedridden with measles doing IpsosMORI polls that is making the difference.
Any news on Middlesborough?
@tim - LOL, that's more like it, tim.
I think we are in agreement: you can believe what you want but if you treat people in a harmful way (contrary to the laws of the land) e.g. by refusing a homeless shelter to a person because they are gay or Jewish or whatever then the state is entitled to intervene and say that you cannot do that. But what the state cannot do, IMO, is tell people that this is what they must believe or else. That seems to me to be a totalitarian attitude. Freedom of conscience means the freedom to believe what is outside society's norms at any particular time. Most of the great thinkers that we now think of as having advanced the cause of freedom and liberty were thinking outside society's then norms and, in some cases, were seen as scandalous for holding the views they did.
We should be alive to the possibility that what we now generally believe may be viewed in a similar light in the future, just as we look back at the way that - for instance - society viewed homosexuality at the turn of the 19th/20th centuries as a mental illness as a disgrace.
Treat others as you would be done by seems to be a good maxim. A pity it's not followed more often.
Silver did observe that trying to predict an election two years out is a fool's game!
As for the leaders in waiting, even a voice and hair makeover won't do it for Rachel Reeves.
Perhaps we need to wait for the 2015 intake?
My fullest apologies though I can't think of any more complimentary example of mistaken identity!
And I'm not making this up.
No worries, after to-day's policy malarkey & car crash interview this months 28% with ICM may be a high point for Ed..
'Even more concerning for Labour is the leadership polling figures. A mere 28% in this poll think that Ed Miliband is doing a good job as Labour leader. 51% think he is doing a bad job.
Leaving him with a negative rating of -23%. In May 2012 Miliband was rated as -12%; so his position is almost twice as bad as it was then!'
How are you getting on with the search for Osborne stoked house price inflation in Middlesbrough?
MPs present:623
MPs voting: 606
Abstentions: 17
Yes 453
No 153
'article.wn.com/.../Ed_Miliband_prepares_Labour_for_major_autumn_re...
'With Labour's poll lead showing signs of decreasing in recent weeks, some at the top of the party believe there is also a need for the leadership to "crack the whip" and use the prospect of a reshuffle to ensure loyalty and encourage frontbenchers to make their mark.
"There are too many people in frontbench positions who are invisible," said a source. "We don't know what they do.'
Talking of invisible,has anyone seen Chuka Harrison recently?
I just saw the question and jumped to conclusions!
http://www.lefigaro.fr/flash-eco/2013/04/29/97002-20130429FILWWW00545-entrepreneurs-les-principales-mesures-de-francois-hollande.php
The anecdote I mentioned was about 2.30. I am assured that he was affable, charming - it all sounded as if he enjoyed winding up one of my relatives.
Well riiight, but we know what he means.
I am certain you will agree with me that Ed is magnificently charismatic and eloquent. He is an inspiring and refreshing standard bearer for the social democratic tradition in our great nation. Yes, indeed: One Nation. Nay, his performance at Conference last year must surely have been amongst the greatest (if not the greatest) ever given by a leader of the Labour Party, or indeed of any party leader! Such magnificence, such poise, such alacrity. Wow! And his wonderful repertoire of jokes would put even Harry Hill to shame!
He is articulate, passionate, an accomplished orator, and I think a real progressive alternative to the smarmy, posh boy Cameron!
http://www.rollonfriday.com/TheNews/EuropeNews/tabid/58/Id/2647/fromTab/36/currentIndex/5/Default.aspx
Unionists defeat Northern Irish gay marriage bill
Scene may now be set for gay couple to take case to European Court of Human Rights, says Amnesty International
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2013/apr/29/northern-ireland-gay-marriage-bill-fails
http://www.snopes.com/quotes/bush.asp
“Catholics have started to support Peter Robinson’s Democratic Unionist Party (DUP)…the most consistently pro-life and pro-traditional marriage party in Northern Ireland.”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/telegraph-view/10025503/It-is-all-too-easy-to-say-No-to-Mr-Miliband.html
Finally heard Ed M's WATO i/v. Before the content, there are 2 basic rules broken: never pre-record WATO; never do a big i/v down-the-line.
How did Mike Nesbitt vote? I cant find any details online. The poor guy, he used to have a party to lead.
http://sluggerotoole.com/2013/04/29/sinn-fein-undermining-the-sanctity-of-marriage/
Ah, I see someone on Slugger claims Nesbitt abstained. So he has a view on gay marriage that mirrors Nothern Irish people's views of his party - neither can be bothered.
"Vote was 53 to 42. With three Unionists, McCrea, McCallister & Copeland voting for. Three Alliance MLAs abstained but the biggest abstention, 10 overall, came from SF & SDLP MLAs."