Some clarification of the Sun's front page from the Telegraph
Patricia Hewitt was forced to apologise after it was revealed that she had called for the age of sexual consent to be lowered to ten.
The document published in the former Labour cabinet minister’s name also called for incest to be legalised.
A National Council for Civil Liberties (NCCL) press release quoted in The Sun issued in Miss Hewitt’s sole name in Mach 1976 read: “NCCL proposes that the age of consent should be lowered to 14, with special provision for situations where the partners are close in age or where the consent of a child over ten can be proved.”
The document, which relates to an NCCL report on sexual law reformed continues: "The report argues that the crime of incest should be abolished.
“In our view, no benefit accrues to anyone by making incest a crime when committed between mutually consenting persons over the age of consent.”
"I am trying to say that the papers are concentrating on something that happened 30-40 years ago in the hope that the Labour party of today will be damaged."
At root the NCCL Harman/Hewitt story is another example of the corrupting influence of PC where PC definitions of homophobia and racism and sexism i.e. any criticism at all, take precedence over everything else which leads to cover ups of child abuse like Islington, the grooming gangs or on an even bigger scale by the officially non-existent gang culture that is getting worse every year.
Basically, because a lot of the PIE people initially used gay rights as a cover that gave them protection.
I wonder how David Cameron's "love-bomb" campaign is going?
Whoops-a-Daisy, it's a car crash. Who'd've thunk it?
'Celebrity hairstylist Nicky Clarke says Scots are not educated enough to make political decisions on their own' - The English media personality claims Scots do not understand economics and need to wise up before voting in the independence referendum in September.
That's an improvement on Ms Lamont - who thinks Scots are genetically incapable of making political decisions (an assertion in her recent debate with Ms Sturgeon)!
For Scottish Labour, this is catastrophic. What remains of the party should have at least insisted that Mr Balls did not just parrot the Osborne script. Have they forgotten everything, and learned nothing, in 50 years? Tory threats to Scotland: the plan that never goes wrong. Yet the shadow chancellor signs up to Mr Osborne's scheme? Voters are liable to wonder where real loyalties lie.
That's fine. I was never one of those who thought the referendum would be an after-dinner chat. Mr Osborne has done us a service, in fact, by describing where we stand. There can no longer be uncertainty. It's just a shame, for the sentimental among us, that Labour in Scotland has become the first willing casualty in a Tory scorched earth campaign.
And who do they have leading them at this decisive juncture in their history? A new Tom Johnston? A new Willie Ross? A new John Smith? A new Donald Dewar? A new Robin Cook? A new John Reid? Nope. Johann Lamont and Anas Sarwar. They're f****d.
I know Scotland may seem o/t - but much of what was discussed at the time of Mr Brown's downfall as revolution and uncertainty in London media was absurdly familiar to anyone with a knowledge of Scottish politics, not least what would happen to the LDs as a result of coalition. The difference was that the SNP had managed a minority government pretty well (the Edinburgh Trams disaster aside, and that was imposed on them, ultimately, by the Tories in alliance with Labour and the LDs).
Now we are getting talk of a Labour-Tory Grand Coalition. And yet I wonder about the effect of that talk on northern English and Welsh, not just Scottish, Labour[edit] seats - a self-fulfilling prophecy perhaps? It's not as if they have a fine Scottish leader on the scale of Johnston or Ross to compensate.
Mr. Carnyx, I doubt a grand coalition is realistic. Labour are likely to win the next election with No, and the Conservatives with Yes. Neither will want to share power if they can avoid it.
Clegg's equi-distance (we'll form a coalition with either party) does run the risk of making him appear like a political harlot. On the other hand, it's hard to see the Lib Dem poll share declining any further. 8% seems incredible to me as it is.
Interesting analysis of the Welsh poll by a Cardiff university academic. On the Westminster voting intention Labour would only gain 2 seats as things stands, Tories losing Cardiff North and the Lib dems losing Cardiff central. Interesting as I read Labour needs 8 more seats from Wales for a majority.
Lab 42%+6 Con 24%-2 LD 9-11 Plaid 14+2 UKIP 4+2 (Changes on 2010)
On topic: The central point is that a minority government survives only as long as the shifting interests of the other parties fail to coalesce into a vote of no confidence. It's inherently unstable, subject to pork-barrelling and shady backroom deals in favour of vested interests, before collapsing in acrimony and (very probably) market crisis. If the betting markets are right, that may be what we get after 2015.
Mr. Carnyx, I doubt a grand coalition is realistic. Labour are likely to win the next election with No, and the Conservatives with Yes. Neither will want to share power if they can avoid it.
Clegg's equi-distance (we'll form a coalition with either party) does run the risk of making him appear like a political harlot. On the other hand, it's hard to see the Lib Dem poll share declining any further. 8% seems incredible to me as it is.
Interesting analysis of the Welsh poll by a Cardiff university academic. On the Westminster voting intention Labour would only gain 2 seats as things stands, Tories losing Cardiff North and the Lib dems losing Cardiff central. Interesting as I read Labour needs 8 more seats from Wales for a majority.
Lab 42%+6 Con 24%-2 LD 9-11 Plaid 14+2 UKIP 4+2 (Changes on 2010)
(1) Why do you think the Labour Party should be allowed to contest elections?
(2) Do you check, before spending your hard-earned money, whether the other half of the transaction allows its staff to vote Labour - and if not, why not?
Mr Dancer, I would not say relatively less popular than elsewhere, but much less trusted in Wales than they used to be, largely down to the Assemblies handling of the NHS and Education. And thats with hardly any scrutiny at all, I could imagine them losing more votes if the Tories use Wales as a contrast to whats happening in England. I hear people talking about getting rid of the Assembly, which did not happen a lot before.
Mr. Carnyx, I doubt a grand coalition is realistic. Labour are likely to win the next election with No, and the Conservatives with Yes. Neither will want to share power if they can avoid it.
Clegg's equi-distance (we'll form a coalition with either party) does run the risk of making him appear like a political harlot. On the other hand, it's hard to see the Lib Dem poll share declining any further. 8% seems incredible to me as it is.
Thanks. It does seem odd to me too.
By rights, ideologically, it does seem out of the question- The Tories and Labour like to have us believe that they are polar opposites. Realistically, not so much. There isn't any significant difference between them is there, only at the margins? They want to rule, and have mostly similar aims, it's just the route they take to get there that differs slightly. As the old saying goes, no matter who you vote for, the bloody Government always get in.
Fewer than one in five Welsh voters say they would like to see an independent Scotland, a BBC Cymru Wales poll reveals.
The survey found only 5% of people want to see an independent Wales, but that figure rose to 7% in the event of an independent Scotland.
The number of voters who want to see the Welsh assembly abolished has risen 10% in the past four years.
But more than a third said they would like to see it gain more powers.
BBC Cymru Wales' annual St David's Day poll, carried out by pollsters ICM, found the most popular constitutional preference was for more powers for the Welsh assembly, with 37% support.
But 23% said they wanted to see it abolished, a figure 10% higher than that recorded in 2010.
Surprises me independence is only at 5%, but there again Wales, frankly, would be an economic basket case without England. That is the harsh truth. Strip away "UK back office jobs" such as Companies House - Cardiff, Patent Office - Newport, DVLA - Swansea etc, and the picture would look even worse as these would be relocated to Bolton or Middlesborough or wherever.
I would suspect the Scottish debates on currency, Std Life etc are concentrating minds here.
The NHS issue brewing here is partly, as I personally understand it, because the Assembly Govt has cut the NHS here to soften the blows elsewhere (unlike England). As the NHS budget is so huge cutting there leaves quite a lot more to go round elsewhere so to speak.
My point is that Cameron would never have got the minority government opportunity because Brown would have sat tight as he had every right to do.
It's an interesting point. Ed Milliband may not get a chance even if he is the largest party, the Tories have lost seats and no Tory deal can be done with the Lib Dems.
Same argument applies as previously: Dave could remain PM for a few weeks, but as soon as he tried to get any part of his programme for government (even Cameron can't *completely* avoid having one) through the Commons, it would be voted down unless it had LD backing. He would then have to offer his resignation to the Queen.
The bit I haven't been able to get a clear answer on is: how long after a GE does the Queen dissolve Parliament rather than asking other leaders to attempt to form an administration? It seems clear that within a month or two of the GE, she will try all possibilities and there will only be a new GE if they all fail. Conversely, if a coalition government falls once it's started governing (I guess 3 months plus) the other party leaders are not given the opportunity to form a government, but rather a new GE is called - presumably because it would not be seen as reflecting the will of the country if a minority coalition party could flip from one large party to the other thereby changing the PM with no new elections. Does anyone know if there is a fixed convention on this element?
There is no convention on this aspect. Effectively the Queen may ask any person whether in Parliament or not to form a government at any time should a vacancy arise and without recourse to a dissolution.
Mr. Carnyx, I doubt a grand coalition is realistic. Labour are likely to win the next election with No, and the Conservatives with Yes. Neither will want to share power if they can avoid it.
Clegg's equi-distance (we'll form a coalition with either party) does run the risk of making him appear like a political harlot. On the other hand, it's hard to see the Lib Dem poll share declining any further. 8% seems incredible to me as it is.
Thanks. It does seem odd to me too.
By rights, ideologically, it does seem out of the question- The Tories and Labour like to have us believe that they are polar opposites. Realistically, not so much. There isn't any significant difference between them is there, only at the margins? They want to rule, and have mostly similar aims, it's just the route they take to get there that differs slightly. As the old saying goes, no matter who you vote for, the bloody Government always get in.
Both fairly authoritarian and mildly Europhile too.
My point is that Cameron would never have got the minority government opportunity because Brown would have sat tight as he had every right to do.
It's an interesting point. Ed Milliband may not get a chance even if he is the largest party, the Tories have lost seats and no Tory deal can be done with the Lib Dems.
Same argument applies as previously: Dave could remain PM for a few weeks, but as soon as he tried to get any part of his programme for government (even Cameron can't *completely* avoid having one) through the Commons, it would be voted down unless it had LD backing. He would then have to offer his resignation to the Queen.
The bit I haven't been able to get a clear answer on is: how long after a GE does the Queen dissolve Parliament rather than asking other leaders to attempt to form an administration? It seems clear that within a month or two of the GE, she will try all possibilities and there will only be a new GE if they all fail. Conversely, if a coalition government falls once it's started governing (I guess 3 months plus) the other party leaders are not given the opportunity to form a government, but rather a new GE is called - presumably because it would not be seen as reflecting the will of the country if a minority coalition party could flip from one large party to the other thereby changing the PM with no new elections. Does anyone know if there is a fixed convention on this element?
There is no convention on this aspect. Effectively the Queen may ask any person whether in Parliament or not to form a government at any time should a vacancy arrive and without recourse to a dissolution.
That was my impression too. From what I can tell, in the late 19th century it was relatively common for this to happen halfway through a Parliament and a new GE would be last resort (though the parties were sufficiently evenly balanced that it was frequently impossible to form a Government). Equally, in the post-war period it seems that it would be considered an outrage if a new Government (as opposed to a coalition breaking and the senior parties continuing as a minority) were to be formed a couple of years into a Parliament without new elections. I guess we may get to see more of how it plays out in the next decade.
Is it possible to get net migration to the UK by country anywhere? The ONS just seems to have these ludicrous groupings like "New Commonwealth", which groups Malaysia with Nigeria, and "Other foreign", which groups the USA with Somalia.
"I am trying to say that the papers are concentrating on something that happened 30-40 years ago in the hope that the Labour party of today will be damaged."
At root the NCCL Harman/Hewitt story is another example of the corrupting influence of PC where PC definitions of homophobia and racism and sexism i.e. any criticism at all, take precedence over everything else which leads to cover ups of child abuse like Islington, the grooming gangs or on an even bigger scale by the officially non-existent gang culture that is getting worse every year.
Basically, because a lot of the PIE people initially used gay rights as a cover that gave them protection.
Seems to me that Harman, Dromey and Hewitt were guilty of using the "my enemies enemy is my friend" philosophy too easily.. Conservatives wouldn't like it, so it must have something going for it
We see it here every day... many people decide what they think is worth disagreeing with solely on who said or did it
If David Herdson's fantasy came to pass, and UKIP were to win 245 seats in a general election, then I could easily see a Conservative/Labour grand coalition being formed.
mandy rhodes @holyroodmandy 53 mins Coalition sources calling their #indyref contribution 'Dambusters strategy'. Gone from #projectfear to #lovebomb to #chastise within weeks!
I'm looking forward to their 'Zulu', 'Italian Job' and 'Battle of Britain' strategies.
My point is that Cameron would never have got the minority government opportunity because Brown would have sat tight as he had every right to do.
It's an interesting point. Ed Milliband may not get a chance even if he is the largest party, the Tories have lost seats and no Tory deal can be done with the Lib Dems.
Same argument applies as previously: Dave could remain PM for a few weeks, but as soon as he tried to get any part of his programme for government (even Cameron can't *completely* avoid having one) through the Commons, it would be voted down unless it had LD backing. He would then have to offer his resignation to the Queen.
The bit I haven't been able to get a clear answer on is: how long after a GE does the Queen dissolve Parliament rather than asking other leaders to attempt to form an administration? It seems clear that within a month or two of the GE, she will try all possibilities and there will only be a new GE if they all fail. Conversely, if a coalition government falls once it's started governing (I guess 3 months plus) the other party leaders are not given the opportunity to form a government, but rather a new GE is called - presumably because it would not be seen as reflecting the will of the country if a minority coalition party could flip from one large party to the other thereby changing the PM with no new elections. Does anyone know if there is a fixed convention on this element?
There is no convention on this aspect. Effectively the Queen may ask any person whether in Parliament or not to form a government at any time should a vacancy arrive and without recourse to a dissolution.
That was my impression too. From what I can tell, in the late 19th century it was relatively common for this to happen halfway through a Parliament and a new GE would be last resort (though the parties were sufficiently evenly balanced that it was frequently impossible to form a Government). Equally, in the post-war period it seems that it would be considered an outrage if a new Government (as opposed to a coalition breaking and the senior parties continuing as a minority) were to be formed a couple of years into a Parliament without new elections. I guess we may get to see more of how it plays out in the next decade.
Not so.
Post WWII we have had Eden replace Churchill, MacMillan replace Eden, Home replace MacMillan, Callaghan replace Wilson, Major replace Thatcher and Brown replace Blair all without recourse to fresh elections.
Edit - Although you probably mean a change of party government ?
David Torrance @davidtorrance 3 mins Farage:"I want us to be self-governing nation that makes its own laws & isn't told by Brussels’ bullying bureaucrats what we can & can’t do"
David Torrance @davidtorrance 1 min Farage: "therefore we need a referendum...I’d do a deal with the devil if it got this country the opportunity to win back its independence.”
mandy rhodes @holyroodmandy 53 mins Coalition sources calling their #indyref contribution 'Dambusters strategy'. Gone from #projectfear to #lovebomb to #chastise within weeks!
I'm looking forward to their 'Zulu', 'Italian Job' and 'Battle of Britain' strategies.
Stuart, from here in the East Midlands, I know nothing about this. Are the councils that have left all Labour, or is it across the board? The claim that Glasgow can save 300 grand a year by leaving seems to bode ill for Cosla, not I know anything about it!
mandy rhodes @holyroodmandy 53 mins Coalition sources calling their #indyref contribution 'Dambusters strategy'. Gone from #projectfear to #lovebomb to #chastise within weeks!
I'm looking forward to their 'Zulu', 'Italian Job' and 'Battle of Britain' strategies.
mandy rhodes @holyroodmandy 53 mins Coalition sources calling their #indyref contribution 'Dambusters strategy'. Gone from #projectfear to #lovebomb to #chastise within weeks!
I'm looking forward to their 'Zulu', 'Italian Job' and 'Battle of Britain' strategies.
My point is that Cameron would never have got the minority government opportunity because Brown would have sat tight as he had every right to do.
It's an interesting point. Ed Milliband may not get a chance even if he is the largest party, the Tories have lost seats and no Tory deal can be done with the Lib Dems.
Same argument applies as previously: Dave could remain PM for a few weeks, but as soon as he tried to get any part of his programme for government (even Cameron can't *completely* avoid having one) through the Commons, it would be voted down unless it had LD backing. He would then have to offer his resignation to the Queen.
The bit I haven't been able to get a clear answer on is: how long after a GE does the Queen dissolve Parliament rather than asking other leaders to attempt to form an administration? It seems clear that within a month or two of the GE, she will try all possibilities and there will only be a new GE if they all fail. Conversely, if a coalition government falls once it's started governing (I guess 3 months plus) the other party leaders are not given the opportunity to form a government, but rather a new GE is called - presumably because it would not be seen as reflecting the will of the country if a minority coalition party could flip from one large party to the other thereby changing the PM with no new elections. Does anyone know if there is a fixed convention on this element?
That's governed by the Fixed Term Parliament Act 2011 now so it's no longer a matter of convention. Obviously, that wasn't the case in 2010, as per the thread.
It's now only the case that there'd be a general election before the 5 years are up if:
- Two thirds of parliament votes for an early dissolution, or - The Commons No Confidences the government and no new govermnent can be formed in which the Commons passes a Vote of Confidence within 14 days of the No Confidence vote.
There's no provisions as to who she would ask to try to form a new government in that second case, so existing conventions would apply i.e. the Leader of the Opposition gets first go unless it's clear that there's a majority elsewhere.
For what it's worth, Wilson thought about asking for an immediate dissolution in March 1974 but decided against asking for one as he wasn't sure what HM's response would be.
No. The Ben is a terrible mountain and (apart from the Carn Mor Dearg arete which I've never done) a boring walk. If we have to take a Scottish mountain, then can we swap the equally boring Scafell Pike with Stac Pollaidh. It's a real man's mountain, craggy and tough, yet with a friendly side.
On topic: The central point is that a minority government survives only as long as the shifting interests of the other parties fail to coalesce into a vote of no confidence. It's inherently unstable, subject to pork-barrelling and shady backroom deals in favour of vested interests, before collapsing in acrimony and (very probably) market crisis. If the betting markets are right, that may be what we get after 2015.
All patriotic stability-lovers will be voting for the Liberal Democrats, which is the best way to ensure that whichever of the main parties comes out on top (which as 1992 showed us we can't predict in advance), they can form a government with the numbers.
Mr. Jessop, some mountains have fantastic names. I checked a few when trying to come up with the name for a range in Kingdom Asunder (I went for the Blenscaw Mountains, in the end).
Stuart, from here in the East Midlands, I know nothing about this. Are the councils that have left all Labour, or is it across the board? The claim that Glasgow can save 300 grand a year by leaving seems to bode ill for Cosla, not I know anything about it!
The spectacle of Labour councils departing en masse from an organization which they had built up and whch they used to use to good effect (at least from their point of view) is distinctly odd. One reason mght be that they no longer have a majority. My memory is that traditionally Labour had a majority but perhaps Mr Dickson can confirm that. At any rate, they no longer have overall control, so that mighr have something to do with their suddenly changed attitude.
Personally I always thought we should make a polite effort but basically we'd lost the election and should let the others get together and show what they were like. I thought as a party we'd do much, much better if the LibDems got into bed with the Tories, and it would also be better for the country than a minority Tory government which would do a few populist things and then call another election to get a majority. I still think that was right.
What's surprised me is the lack of clear purpose in the Government. Are they about reducing the deficit, or cutting welfare, or cutiting taxes, or what? As they don't appear to have anything in particular in mind - now a bit of this, then a bit of that - it makes for a diffuse debate. That might be a coalition effect, but Cameron in particular doesn't seem to me to have any real agenda. (I might not like it if he did, so that isn't necessarily a criticism.)
To be fair to Cameron, he has a problem neither Thatcher nor Major had: the need to throw sops to his base to stop it defecting. That is probably why the Government's economic policy seems to vary from week to week. That, and the fact that no one, including themselves, knows what Lib Dem policy on such matters is. Perhaps it too changes from week to week.
I reckon it's his MPs that are the problem, not the base. If it was the base he could do it in a more strategic way, but as it is it seems like he must be getting word that the wingers are threatening to send in no-confidence letters and gets panicked into a renegotiation pledge or whatever that gets him through the week, but then falls apart on the timescale that matters for his reelection.
Thatcher would have had the same problems if they'd had the rules they have now back then.
mandy rhodes @holyroodmandy 53 mins Coalition sources calling their #indyref contribution 'Dambusters strategy'. Gone from #projectfear to #lovebomb to #chastise within weeks!
I'm looking forward to their 'Zulu', 'Italian Job' and 'Battle of Britain' strategies.
Surely a Carry On movie?
Maybe Carry on up the Khyber.
I'll let you decide who is The Khasi of Khalabar.
Oliver Letwin, wearing his orange Sikh turban.
One of my Scottish friends says Ollie Letwin is one of the primary reasons that Scotland is having the Indyref this year (and why yes may win)
It was his Hannibalesque tactical brilliance (sic) to introduce the Poll Tax to Scotland a year before anyone else.
David Torrance @davidtorrance 1 min Farage: "therefore we need a referendum...I’d do a deal with the devil if it got this country the opportunity to win back its independence.”
Devil = Cameron?
It is certainly a mega-bonkers position. The country will have the "opportunity to win back its independence" in 2017 if there's a Conservative government. UKIP doesn't need to do a deal with anyone to help make this happen: just vote Conservative, and meanwhile put together the case for leaving. Instead they are trying to deny the country the opportunity. It really is the weirdest political foot-shooting in modern history.
Dig a little deeper and it looks especially bad for Dromey. It appears that he might have lied about his trenchant opposition to PIE.
To be fair to Dromey and the others, he may not have remembered. And yes, I'm being serious. We're talking nearly forty years ago now, and it would be all too easy to forget the minutiae of an individual meeting, especially as PIE would just have been a tiny peripheral part of the NCCL's business.
But these documents do make Harman's comments about the relationship between NCCL and PIE seem rather incorrect, although the timing may excuse her.
This is something that's going to crop up more and more. The other day I was looking - and cringing - about some comments I made back in 1992 on the Internet. I'm still on the same BBS, and anyone who knows me and has a login can see the comments. As with many people, I've been on a journey since my late teens (i.e. I've grown up a little).
Expect any politician born after 1990 to have a trail of such comments *unless* they a) decided to be a politician at an early age, and realised the dangers, or b) they are automatons who have never had a life.
mandy rhodes @holyroodmandy 53 mins Coalition sources calling their #indyref contribution 'Dambusters strategy'. Gone from #projectfear to #lovebomb to #chastise within weeks!
I'm looking forward to their 'Zulu', 'Italian Job' and 'Battle of Britain' strategies.
Surely a Carry On movie?
Maybe Carry on up the Khyber.
I'll let you decide who is The Khasi of Khalabar.
Oliver Letwin, wearing his orange Sikh turban.
One of my Scottish friends says Ollie Letwin is one of the primary reasons that Scotland is having the Indyref this year (and why yes may win)
It was his Hannibalesque tactical brilliance (sic) to introduce the Poll Tax to Scotland a year before anyone else.
David Torrance @davidtorrance 1 min Farage: "therefore we need a referendum...I’d do a deal with the devil if it got this country the opportunity to win back its independence.”
Devil = Cameron?
It is certainly a mega-bonkers position. The country will have the "opportunity to win back its independence" in 2017 if there's a Conservative government. UKIP doesn't need to do a deal with anyone to help make this happen: just vote Conservative, and meanwhile put together the case for leaving. Instead they are trying to deny the country the opportunity. It really is the weirdest political foot-shooting in modern history.
I thought - in the unlikely case where UKIP sweeps to a majority - UKIP wanted us to leave with no referendum? Has that changed?
No. The Ben is a terrible mountain and (apart from the Carn Mor Dearg arete which I've never done) a boring walk. If we have to take a Scottish mountain, then can we swap the equally boring Scafell Pike with Stac Pollaidh. It's a real man's mountain, craggy and tough, yet with a friendly side.
Mr. Jessop, some mountains have fantastic names. I checked a few when trying to come up with the name for a range in Kingdom Asunder (I went for the Blenscaw Mountains, in the end).
David Torrance @davidtorrance 1 min Farage: "therefore we need a referendum...I’d do a deal with the devil if it got this country the opportunity to win back its independence.”
Devil = Cameron?
It is certainly a mega-bonkers position. The country will have the "opportunity to win back its independence" in 2017 if there's a Conservative government. UKIP doesn't need to do a deal with anyone to help make this happen: just vote Conservative, and meanwhile put together the case for leaving. Instead they are trying to deny the country the opportunity. It really is the weirdest political foot-shooting in modern history.
I thought - in the unlikely case where UKIP sweeps to a majority - UKIP wanted us to leave with no referendum? Has that changed?
I don't think that has ever been the case.. could be wrong
Think they want a referendum at a time when they have the maximum influence possible rather than telling all their voters to vote for Europhiles
So Osborne made the tactical sacrifice of looking like an annoying Tory in Edinburgh, for the strategic gain of Standard Life saying they might move to England.
We'll have to wait for the polls, but dismissals of Osborne's judgement now look premature.
Osborne's remarks were addressed at the financial markets, to reassure them about the UK creditworthiness, at least as much as they were addressed at Scottish voters.
No. The Ben is a terrible mountain and (apart from the Carn Mor Dearg arete which I've never done) a boring walk. If we have to take a Scottish mountain, then can we swap the equally boring Scafell Pike with Stac Pollaidh. It's a real man's mountain, craggy and tough, yet with a friendly side.
Agree on the Pike. Helvellyn and Blencathra are (IMHO) the two finest peaks in England (and the latter is usually wonderfully quiet).
I've never done either of those. My walking in the Lake District has been sadly limited. It should be noted it always seems to rain whenever I am there (yes, I know), and I got one of my few serious walking-related injuries immediately *after* climbing Scafell Pike. Whilst stepping out of a motorhome. Ahem.
Yes, I nip up to England's highest point and get back down before many people have started their ascent, and knacker my foot on a pebble beneath the van's doorstep.
Basically, I haven't got many good memories of the place ...
mandy rhodes @holyroodmandy 53 mins Coalition sources calling their #indyref contribution 'Dambusters strategy'. Gone from #projectfear to #lovebomb to #chastise within weeks!
I'm looking forward to their 'Zulu', 'Italian Job' and 'Battle of Britain' strategies.
Surely a Carry On movie?
Maybe Carry on up the Khyber.
I'll let you decide who is The Khasi of Khalabar.
Oliver Letwin, wearing his orange Sikh turban.
One of my Scottish friends says Ollie Letwin is one of the primary reasons that Scotland is having the Indyref this year (and why yes may win)
It was his Hannibalesque tactical brilliance (sic) to introduce the Poll Tax to Scotland a year before anyone else.
The impressive thing about Letwin is his unerring bad judgement, combined with superb incompetence in every position he's appointed to.
I remember being told the story of this guy, he went to a very good private school, and a red brick university.
Everyone assumed he was intelligent and he was hired for a major organisation.
After a few months it became he was a bit incompetent, but no one had the heart to fire him as he was so polite, affable and a real desire and passion to do good.
So he was shifted across various departments, and a decade later, when the organisation was taken over by another, several senior employees left, he found himself the most experienced person in a department with a budget of 10m per year.
The new employers made him head of that department on the basis of his experience.....
Remember Vince Cable was ready to deploy his nuclear missile all because some pretty female journalists from the Telegraph batted their eyelashes at him.
No. The Ben is a terrible mountain and (apart from the Carn Mor Dearg arete which I've never done) a boring walk. If we have to take a Scottish mountain, then can we swap the equally boring Scafell Pike with Stac Pollaidh. It's a real man's mountain, craggy and tough, yet with a friendly side.
Agree on the Pike. Helvellyn and Blencathra are (IMHO) the two finest peaks in England (and the latter is usually wonderfully quiet).
I've never done either of those. My walking in the Lake District has been sadly limited. It should be noted it always seems to rain whenever I am there (yes, I know), and I got one of my few serious walking-related injuries immediately *after* climbing Scafell Pike. Whilst stepping out of a motorhome. Ahem.
Yes, I nip up to England's highest point and get back down before many people have started their ascent, and knacker my foot on a pebble beneath the van's doorstep.
Basically, I haven't got many good memories of the place ...
Yes, it rains a lot (I grew up there)! If you're an early riser than Scales Tarn on Blencathra, first thing in the morning, is eerie and almost mystical. Great place for a butty and a cuppa
My point is that Cameron would never have got the minority government opportunity because Brown would have sat tight as he had every right to do.
It's an interesting point. Ed Milliband may not get a chance even if he is the largest party, the Tories have lost seats and no Tory deal can be done with the Lib Dems.
Same argument applies as previously: Dave could remain PM for a few weeks, but as soon as he tried to get any part of his programme for government (even Cameron can't *completely* avoid having one) through the Commons, it would be voted down unless it had LD backing. He would then have to offer his resignation to the Queen.
The bit I haven't been able to get a clear answer on is: how long after a GE does the Queen dissolve Parliament rather than asking other leaders to attempt to form an administration? It seems clear that within a month or two of the GE, she will try all possibilities and there will only be a new GE if they all fail. Conversely, if a coalition government falls once it's started governing (I guess 3 months plus) the other party leaders are not given the opportunity to form a government, but rather a new GE is called - presumably because it would not be seen as reflecting the will of the country if a minority coalition party could flip from one large party to the other thereby changing the PM with no new elections. Does anyone know if there is a fixed convention on this element?
There is no convention on this aspect. Effectively the Queen may ask any person whether in Parliament or not to form a government at any time should a vacancy arise and without recourse to a dissolution.
That's a non-sequitur. Yes, the Queen *may* ask any person, in parliament or not, to form a government, but that government must, by historic convention and now by law, command the confidence of the Commons and so she's extremely limited in practice as to her options if she is not to risk either the person commissioned failing to form a government or that government failing to win the Commons' support.
David Torrance @davidtorrance 1 min Farage: "therefore we need a referendum...I’d do a deal with the devil if it got this country the opportunity to win back its independence.”
Devil = Cameron?
It is certainly a mega-bonkers position. The country will have the "opportunity to win back its independence" in 2017 if there's a Conservative government. UKIP doesn't need to do a deal with anyone to help make this happen: just vote Conservative, and meanwhile put together the case for leaving. Instead they are trying to deny the country the opportunity. It really is the weirdest political foot-shooting in modern history.
I thought - in the unlikely case where UKIP sweeps to a majority - UKIP wanted us to leave with no referendum? Has that changed?
More chance of the Lib Dems topping the Euro election poll. Or the Yeti being found on Mars.
No. The Ben is a terrible mountain and (apart from the Carn Mor Dearg arete which I've never done) a boring walk. If we have to take a Scottish mountain, then can we swap the equally boring Scafell Pike with Stac Pollaidh. It's a real man's mountain, craggy and tough, yet with a friendly side.
Agree on the Pike. Helvellyn and Blencathra are (IMHO) the two finest peaks in England (and the latter is usually wonderfully quiet).
Out of my back window I can see CrossFell,highest point in pennines,and out of the front,Saddleback,both excellent climbs,tomorrow is a Helvellyn run. As for the Ben,well I have just received confirmation of my race entry in September,it will be my 25th Ben race,the tourist route is unpleasant,but the race route(Parts are only open for race day)can be spectacular,and the upper scree descent can be amazing,and as for the infamous grassy bank,well..
mandy rhodes @holyroodmandy 53 mins Coalition sources calling their #indyref contribution 'Dambusters strategy'. Gone from #projectfear to #lovebomb to #chastise within weeks!
I'm looking forward to their 'Zulu', 'Italian Job' and 'Battle of Britain' strategies.
Surely a Carry On movie?
Maybe Carry on up the Khyber.
I'll let you decide who is The Khasi of Khalabar.
Oliver Letwin, wearing his orange Sikh turban.
One of my Scottish friends says Ollie Letwin is one of the primary reasons that Scotland is having the Indyref this year (and why yes may win)
It was his Hannibalesque tactical brilliance (sic) to introduce the Poll Tax to Scotland a year before anyone else.
Nah. The stupid decision to introduce the Poll Tax to Scotland early is undoubtedly something the Conservatives paid dearly for north of the border and contributed in a roundabout way to the referendum this year. However, the idea that it might shift votes now (i.e. change them) seems far-fetched. People have had a quarter of a century to decide on these issues. In any case, devolution means that Scotland's largely insulated from that kind of decision now.
A woman who claims she injured her ribs when she was knocked down at an Ann Summers lingerie party has sued the pub where the event was held.
Sylvia Deehan alleges she had been pushed by another woman who was striving to grab a prize, described “as a ring that goes around a certain part of a man,” which had been thrown in the air by an Ann Summers representative in The Lough Inn at Loughlinstown, Co Dublin.
David Aaronavitch wrote a piece in Wednesday's Times about the sexual atmosphere in the 70's, and how things we would be appalled at now were thought of as ok.. Blind Faith LP cover for one..
No. The Ben is a terrible mountain and (apart from the Carn Mor Dearg arete which I've never done) a boring walk. If we have to take a Scottish mountain, then can we swap the equally boring Scafell Pike with Stac Pollaidh. It's a real man's mountain, craggy and tough, yet with a friendly side.
Agree on the Pike. Helvellyn and Blencathra are (IMHO) the two finest peaks in England (and the latter is usually wonderfully quiet).
Out of my back window I can see CrossFell,highest point in pennines,and out of the front,Saddleback,both excellent climbs,tomorrow is a Helvellyn run. As for the Ben,well I have just received confirmation of my race entry in September,it will be my 25th Ben race,the tourist route is unpleasant,but the race route(Parts are only open for race day)can be spectacular,and the upper scree descent can be amazing,and as for the infamous grassy bank,well..
You're a nutter. And I say that with the greatest respect.
Many a time I've been toiling down a hill, pack on my back, only to see some blooming fool come zooming past me as if their feet were not touching the ground.
mandy rhodes @holyroodmandy 53 mins Coalition sources calling their #indyref contribution 'Dambusters strategy'. Gone from #projectfear to #lovebomb to #chastise within weeks!
I'm looking forward to their 'Zulu', 'Italian Job' and 'Battle of Britain' strategies.
Surely a Carry On movie?
Maybe Carry on up the Khyber.
I'll let you decide who is The Khasi of Khalabar.
Oliver Letwin, wearing his orange Sikh turban.
One of my Scottish friends says Ollie Letwin is one of the primary reasons that Scotland is having the Indyref this year (and why yes may win)
It was his Hannibalesque tactical brilliance (sic) to introduce the Poll Tax to Scotland a year before anyone else.
Nah. The stupid decision to introduce the Poll Tax to Scotland early is undoubtedly something the Conservatives paid dearly for north of the border and contributed in a roundabout way to the referendum this year. However, the idea that it might shift votes now (i.e. change them) seems far-fetched. People have had a quarter of a century to decide on these issues. In any case, devolution means that Scotland's largely insulated from that kind of decision now.
My response was well, the Scots loved the Poll Tax and Olly Letwin, because in 1992, the Tories made a net gain in MPs in Scotland.
My second reaction: Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
My first reaction was similar to yours when I first saw the code.
It is really a lesson in how not to write secure code. goto, lack of brackets, misleading labels, default to success etc... The big problem with the code here is really that the default return value is success, so that when it hits the "fail" block it returns a good status. Shifting to an "assume bad" paradigm would have thrown this up as soon as any testing took place.
As for the actual bug itself, my guess is that this is the result of a merge or roll-up. Some auto roll-up process, code still compiles, no QA due to auto process and lack of fail-case auto tests.
I'm not excusing Apple this SNAFU, but I can see how it could have happened without developers being incompetent.
I'm presuming there was a code merge (git) and an extra goto was added accidentally and mechanistically.
Or someone just hit Paste twice. Easily done.
Whatever the cause, you'd have thought (a) they'd get someone to review code as security-critical as this, (b) they'd not be using GOTO in the first place, (c) they'd have the compiler warnings switched on to warn of unreachable code, or use one of the code-analysis tools which check for howlers like this, and, most of all, (d) they'd have done at least some vague testing.
Mind you, all code has bugs in it (my company once won a contract partly on the basis that one of our tools discovered that a line had been commented out for testing and not put back - and this was in the firmware of a leading enterprise-storage device, as used to hold your bank account, credit card and airline bookings!). It's just that normally they're not quite as blatant as that.
It seems that until the 1980s most people were far more appalled by homosexuality than by sex with underage girls (meaning over the age of about 13 but under 16).
I'm presuming there was a code merge (git) and an extra goto was added accidentally and mechanistically.
Or someone just hit Paste twice. Easily done.
Whatever the cause, you'd have thought (a) they'd get someone to review code as security-critical as this, (b) they'd not be using GOTO in the first place, (c) they'd have the compiler warnings switched on to warn of unreachable code, or use one of the code-analysis tools which check for howlers like this, and, most of all, (d) they'd have done at least some vague testing.
Mind you, all code has bugs in it (my company once won a contract partly on the basis that one of our tools discovered that a line had been commented out for testing and not put back - and this was in the firmware of a leading enterprise-storage device, as used to hold your bank account, credit card and airline bookings!). It's just that normally they're not quite as blatant as that.
Wasn't this originally just a port from OpenSSL anyway? If so, the GOTO issue is probably legacy from there rather than a design choice by Apple.
Lack of QA or code inspection is probably due to it being a roll-up/merge issue. Do you have time to QA all the code that is rolled up to a new stream?
I'll admit I've got a particularly visceral hatred for Patricia Hewitt. Brown politically burying her was one of the few things he got right in his premiership.
Anyone remember her sanctimonious tones at the nurses' conference ? She made Lansley look good and Jeremy Hunt like the greatest health minister of all time.
I note she has got on the gravy train of a job related to her time in Government.
If there is one person who deserves to have ten tonnes of shit thrown over her for her past it is Patricia Hewitt, an example of everything that is wrong with Government.
My second reaction: Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
Blimey. Just blimey.
I'm presuming there was a code merge (git) and an extra goto was added accidentally and mechanistically.
I'm guessing that it's more likely that another conditional clause was removed, but not the conditional line. I've seen that several times (and done it myself). It's why I'm a firm believer in the use of curly brackets on all conditionals.
BTW, I'm not against the use of GOTOs, especially in C. I mainly work in embedded code, and they can sometimes be very useful to get efficient execution. But I always tell graduate engineers that if they are used, then they have to expect to be able to justify its use; indeed, to expect the Spanish Inquisition over it.
This should have been picked up by good static analysis tools, code review, or compiler warnings. As it is in security-related section of code, I would have expected it to be reviewed very thoroughly.
My second reaction: Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
Blimey. Just blimey.
I'm presuming there was a code merge (git) and an extra goto was added accidentally and mechanistically.
I'm guessing that it's more likely that another conditional clause was removed, but not the conditional line. I've seen that several times (and done it myself). It's why I'm a firm believer in the use of curly brackets on all conditionals.
BTW, I'm not against the use of GOTOs, especially in C. I mainly work in embedded code, and they can sometimes be very useful to get efficient execution. But I always tell graduate engineers that if they are used, then they have to expect to be able to justify its use; indeed, to expect the Spanish Inquisition over it.
This should have been picked up by good static analysis tools, code review, or compiler warnings. As it is in security-related section of code, I would have expected it to be reviewed very thoroughly.
However: there but for he grace of God go I ...
Using curly brackets is just about the first thing you learn with languages like C and C++.
Comments
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ages_of_consent_in_Europe#History_16
Being the Sun I assume that the full text of the story doesn't add much to the banner:
http://www.thepaperboy.com/uk/the-sun/front-pages-today.cfm?frontpage=34909
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/news/10662977/How-the-web-was-born-WWW-turns-25.html
"I am trying to say that the papers are concentrating on something that happened 30-40 years ago in the hope that the Labour party of today will be damaged."
At root the NCCL Harman/Hewitt story is another example of the corrupting influence of PC where PC definitions of homophobia and racism and sexism i.e. any criticism at all, take precedence over everything else which leads to cover ups of child abuse like Islington, the grooming gangs or on an even bigger scale by the officially non-existent gang culture that is getting worse every year.
Basically, because a lot of the PIE people initially used gay rights as a cover that gave them protection.
And who do they have leading them at this decisive juncture in their history? A new Tom Johnston? A new Willie Ross? A new John Smith? A new Donald Dewar? A new Robin Cook? A new John Reid? Nope. Johann Lamont and Anas Sarwar. They're f****d.
I know Scotland may seem o/t - but much of what was discussed at the time of Mr Brown's downfall as revolution and uncertainty in London media was absurdly familiar to anyone with a knowledge of Scottish politics, not least what would happen to the LDs as a result of coalition. The difference was that the SNP had managed a minority government pretty well (the Edinburgh Trams disaster aside, and that was imposed on them, ultimately, by the Tories in alliance with Labour and the LDs).
Now we are getting talk of a Labour-Tory Grand Coalition. And yet I wonder about the effect of that talk on northern English and Welsh, not just Scottish, Labour[edit] seats - a self-fulfilling prophecy perhaps? It's not as if they have a fine Scottish leader on the scale of Johnston or Ross to compensate.
Clegg's equi-distance (we'll form a coalition with either party) does run the risk of making him appear like a political harlot. On the other hand, it's hard to see the Lib Dem poll share declining any further. 8% seems incredible to me as it is.
Lab 42%+6 Con 24%-2 LD 9-11 Plaid 14+2 UKIP 4+2 (Changes on 2010)
http://blogs.cardiff.ac.uk/electionsinwales/2014/02/28/welsh-labours-sweet-spot/
Mr. W, I can confirm I did not genetically engineer Eric Pickles.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0At91c3wX1Wu5dDRiT1FSRTF2bjVYRThSTnRaNzFXMlE#gid=0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1gkHwU4DRA8
(1) Why do you think the Labour Party should be allowed to contest elections?
(2) Do you check, before spending your hard-earned money, whether the other half of the transaction allows its staff to vote Labour - and if not, why not?
As the old saying goes, no matter who you vote for, the bloody Government always get in.
I would suspect the Scottish debates on currency, Std Life etc are concentrating minds here.
The NHS issue brewing here is partly, as I personally understand it, because the Assembly Govt has cut the NHS here to soften the blows elsewhere (unlike England). As the NHS budget is so huge cutting there leaves quite a lot more to go round elsewhere so to speak.
We see it here every day... many people decide what they think is worth disagreeing with solely on who said or did it
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-26370483
Coalition sources calling their #indyref contribution 'Dambusters strategy'. Gone from #projectfear to #lovebomb to #chastise within weeks!
I'm looking forward to their 'Zulu', 'Italian Job' and 'Battle of Britain' strategies.
Post WWII we have had Eden replace Churchill, MacMillan replace Eden, Home replace MacMillan, Callaghan replace Wilson, Major replace Thatcher and Brown replace Blair all without recourse to fresh elections.
Edit - Although you probably mean a change of party government ?
Farage:"I want us to be self-governing nation that makes its own laws & isn't told by Brussels’ bullying bureaucrats what we can & can’t do"
David Torrance @davidtorrance 1 min
Farage: "therefore we need a referendum...I’d do a deal with the devil if it got this country the opportunity to win back its independence.”
Devil = Cameron?
Maybe Carry on up the Khyber.
I'll let you decide who is The Khasi of Khalabar.
It's now only the case that there'd be a general election before the 5 years are up if:
- Two thirds of parliament votes for an early dissolution, or
- The Commons No Confidences the government and no new govermnent can be formed in which the Commons passes a Vote of Confidence within 14 days of the No Confidence vote.
There's no provisions as to who she would ask to try to form a new government in that second case, so existing conventions would apply i.e. the Leader of the Opposition gets first go unless it's clear that there's a majority elsewhere.
For what it's worth, Wilson thought about asking for an immediate dissolution in March 1974 but decided against asking for one as he wasn't sure what HM's response would be.
http://www.undiscoveredscotland.co.uk/achiltibuie/stacpollaidh/
If you removed Alistair Carmichael's hair, he'd look exactly like Bernard Bresslaw
Bresslaw here
http://www.scotsman.com/webimage/1.3183416.1384163228!/image/3526675223.jpg_gen/derivatives/articleImgDeriv_628px/3526675223.jpg
Carmichael here
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/07/Bernard_Bresslaw.jpg
and a more up to daye repot by a newspaper (which, you need to bear in mind, is normally very, very close to Labour-in-Glasgow)
http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/wider-political-news/row-as-glasgow-is-latest-council-to-quit-cosla.23551885
The spectacle of Labour councils departing en masse from an organization which they had built up and whch they used to use to good effect (at least from their point of view) is distinctly odd. One reason mght be that they no longer have a majority. My memory is that traditionally Labour had a majority but perhaps Mr Dickson can confirm that. At any rate, they no longer have overall control, so that mighr have something to do with their suddenly changed attitude.
Thatcher would have had the same problems if they'd had the rules they have now back then.
It was his Hannibalesque tactical brilliance (sic) to introduce the Poll Tax to Scotland a year before anyone else.
http://www.politicshome.com/uk/story/40624/
http://tinyurl.com/qju56tp
But these documents do make Harman's comments about the relationship between NCCL and PIE seem rather incorrect, although the timing may excuse her.
This is something that's going to crop up more and more. The other day I was looking - and cringing - about some comments I made back in 1992 on the Internet. I'm still on the same BBS, and anyone who knows me and has a login can see the comments. As with many people, I've been on a journey since my late teens (i.e. I've grown up a little).
Expect any politician born after 1990 to have a trail of such comments *unless* they a) decided to be a politician at an early age, and realised the dangers, or b) they are automatons who have never had a life.
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/144138/It-aint-alf-hot-Mum.html
The impressive thing about Letwin is his unerring bad judgement, combined with superb incompetence in every position he's appointed to.
QT was actually quite good last night. Anna Soubry pointed out the woeful performance of the NHS in Wales and people clapped.
That's people clapping an English tory. In Newport, Wales.
And they never even got onto Wales' catastrophic education performance under labour.
Which probably shows my mental age. ;-)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fan_y_Big
Think they want a referendum at a time when they have the maximum influence possible rather than telling all their voters to vote for Europhiles
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/war/uk-most-at-risk-from-sexy-women-says-gchq-2014022884147
Yes, I nip up to England's highest point and get back down before many people have started their ascent, and knacker my foot on a pebble beneath the van's doorstep.
Basically, I haven't got many good memories of the place ...
Everyone assumed he was intelligent and he was hired for a major organisation.
After a few months it became he was a bit incompetent, but no one had the heart to fire him as he was so polite, affable and a real desire and passion to do good.
So he was shifted across various departments, and a decade later, when the organisation was taken over by another, several senior employees left, he found himself the most experienced person in a department with a budget of 10m per year.
The new employers made him head of that department on the basis of his experience.....
About 3 months later he was fired.
Venezuela has shown us that huge oil revenues do not guarantee prosperity. If you are socialist enough, you can still screw it up completely.
Venezuela has far more oil wealth than Scotland, but nobody is advocating a currency union with them.
Remember Vince Cable was ready to deploy his nuclear missile all because some pretty female journalists from the Telegraph batted their eyelashes at him.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/liberaldemocrats/8215481/Vince-Cable-I-have-the-nuclear-option-its-like-fighting-a-war.html
We need a directly elected Tyrant.
No fannying around waiting trying to form a coalition.
Though the Yeti odds are probably shorter.
For anyone who likes Apple products (you fools!), here is an analysis of their latest massive security bug:
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2014/02/gotofail/
My first reaction:
Oh. My. God.
My second reaction:
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
You only have to log in once.
Safari is sub-optimal.
I liked Helvellyn, but I'd already named a city in a previous book Helstein, and I didn't want them to seem too similar.
Mr. Eagles, maybe we should make Tywin Lannister PM. Aside from being fictional, he'd be perfect.
Does this mean we're going to have another battle of Balaclava?
'Cause we've got some unfinished business there.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/
#biasedbbc
As for the Ben,well I have just received confirmation of my race entry in September,it will be my 25th Ben race,the tourist route is unpleasant,but the race route(Parts are only open for race day)can be spectacular,and the upper scree descent can be amazing,and as for the infamous grassy bank,well..
The Green Party is demanding a place in any leaders' debates held before the next general election.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-26379503
Born in 1946, he was first elected in 1997. He leaves a 8.5% majority.
Kate Hoey reselected in Vauxhall
Sylvia Deehan alleges she had been pushed by another woman who was striving to grab a prize, described “as a ring that goes around a certain part of a man,” which had been thrown in the air by an Ann Summers representative in The Lough Inn at Loughlinstown, Co Dublin.
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/woman-sues-pub-after-alleged-mishap-at-ann-summers-party-1.1707236
https://twitter.com/ChrisMarshSE11/status/439128140473192448
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-26352378
David Aaronavitch wrote a piece in Wednesday's Times about the sexual atmosphere in the 70's, and how things we would be appalled at now were thought of as ok.. Blind Faith LP cover for one..
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/ubbu/3253278904/
Many a time I've been toiling down a hill, pack on my back, only to see some blooming fool come zooming past me as if their feet were not touching the ground.
Off the wall?
Thrillers?!
It is really a lesson in how not to write secure code. goto, lack of brackets, misleading labels, default to success etc...
The big problem with the code here is really that the default return value is success, so that when it hits the "fail" block it returns a good status. Shifting to an "assume bad" paradigm would have thrown this up as soon as any testing took place.
As for the actual bug itself, my guess is that this is the result of a merge or roll-up. Some auto roll-up process, code still compiles, no QA due to auto process and lack of fail-case auto tests.
I'm not excusing Apple this SNAFU, but I can see how it could have happened without developers being incompetent.
Whatever the cause, you'd have thought (a) they'd get someone to review code as security-critical as this, (b) they'd not be using GOTO in the first place, (c) they'd have the compiler warnings switched on to warn of unreachable code, or use one of the code-analysis tools which check for howlers like this, and, most of all, (d) they'd have done at least some vague testing.
Mind you, all code has bugs in it (my company once won a contract partly on the basis that one of our tools discovered that a line had been commented out for testing and not put back - and this was in the firmware of a leading enterprise-storage device, as used to hold your bank account, credit card and airline bookings!). It's just that normally they're not quite as blatant as that.
Lack of QA or code inspection is probably due to it being a roll-up/merge issue. Do you have time to QA all the code that is rolled up to a new stream?
Anyone remember her sanctimonious tones at the nurses' conference ? She made Lansley look good and Jeremy Hunt like the greatest health minister of all time.
I note she has got on the gravy train of a job related to her time in Government.
If there is one person who deserves to have ten tonnes of shit thrown over her for her past it is Patricia Hewitt, an example of everything that is wrong with Government.
BTW, I'm not against the use of GOTOs, especially in C. I mainly work in embedded code, and they can sometimes be very useful to get efficient execution. But I always tell graduate engineers that if they are used, then they have to expect to be able to justify its use; indeed, to expect the Spanish Inquisition over it.
This should have been picked up by good static analysis tools, code review, or compiler warnings. As it is in security-related section of code, I would have expected it to be reviewed very thoroughly.
However: there but for he grace of God go I ...