Just a grumble about constituency seat betting with PP and I assume others in the inability to do multiples-doubles,trebles,accas and the like.With odds so skinny anyway,it makes this form of betting even less value.
Mr. Eagles, I'm somewhat surprised. Dogs are delightful creatures. Much better, on average, than humans.
As PB's preeminent Scottish noble of gastronomic and professional baking inclination I have to say humans are much under rated.
Auchenteenach Fine Pies (purveyors to the gentry and culinary cognoscenti since 1745) find the free range Scottish Liberal Democrats to be a delicacy not to be missed.
Grazing in the glens in their mainly rural constituencies, free from the stress of Holyrood government and repeating "winning here" in Gaelic make the Highland sub species an especial treat.
Just a grumble about constituency seat betting with PP and I assume others in the inability to do multiples-doubles,trebles,accas and the like.With odds so skinny anyway,it makes this form of betting even less value.
I am horrified (and that's a deliberate use of the term rather than hyperbolic) that you should even think for a moment that there is a reason for the state to intervene
The state already does intervene in exactly those circumstances.
No - the article is talking about morbidly obese children. That's a different category altogether - at the point where you have co-morbidities you have a lot of health issues
NP originally said, in the post you found "horrifying", "extremely obese". Indeed he cited major health problems as the reason for intervening. It is quite clear that this is precisely what he was talking about.
I'm aware of Hibbert's hotel and I'm familiar with the work of George Cantor. Now he was barmy (seriously) and the explanations are equally barmy. If we have a multiverse, an infinite number of yous are telling an infinite number of mes all about it, and even though an infinite number of mes believe yous, an infinite number of mes don't believe a word.
edit: in response to your other comment, if Nick had been talking about morbidly obese children he should havee said so. He said "extremely obese" which is entirely different.
Yes, Charles, of course it is. The natural reaction to his post was definitely to presume he meant taking every child given crisps for their school lunch into care. Horrifying.
You say the Tories will only take 2/4 of Fett's Four but make up the ground elsewhere. Fair enough. Which seats do you see them making up the ground in?
I have given you one Derby North that looks good for a gain, helped for sure by the sitting MP and council. If you look hard enough there will be others that were not taken in 2010. Labour will gain more Liberal support but could also lose support in other areas, centre ground to the Tories and in many marginals UKIP could take a chunk of the working man's vote in the big mainly white estates. There are 2 huge estates in Derby North.
Mr. Eagles, a sperm whale is a species, not a breed.
Whale hunting reminds me of ivory and tiger bits for Chinese art/medicine. They're hunting species to extinction, which is just ignorant and barbaric.
Although economically rational, if you're long a large stash of ivory and tiger bits.
I keep meaning to get hold of an ivory chess set while there's still ivory to be had.
There are plenty of pre 1947 (Cites Treaty) ivory chess sets to be had. The Chinese made them in vast numbers in the late 19th and early 20th century.
Be a wee bit careful not to get lured into buying a bone set. They look very similar but the bone set will have little flecks (blood vessels) in the pieces that are absent from ivory.
I'm aware of Hibbert's hotel and I'm familiar with the work of George Cantor. Now he was barmy (seriously) and the explanations are equally barmy. If we have a multiverse, an infinite number of yous are telling an infinite number of mes all about it, and even though an infinite number of mes believe yous, an infinite number of mes don't believe a word.
And if there is an infinite number of universes, then there must within those be an infinite number in which there exists a God who made not only that universe but also all of the others.
I know, I know. but Richard Dawkins is one of those people I instinctively want not to agree with.
There can't really be a referendum in the rUK on currency union until an outline deal is agreed. People have to know what they are voting for. I think Darling is wrong about Sturgeon. She must understand what the implications of currency union are. It's more a case of not wanting to talk them through prior to the vote.
Perhaps at some stage someone will ask the SNP leadership what amount of sovereignty they are prepared to cede in order to keep the pound. Is it just the ability to decide monetary and fiscal policy, or will they throw Faslane in as well?
SO , they are running rings round the unionists and what would you expect with an idiot like Darling in charge. They deserve all they get, a YES gets ever more likely.
It is looking that way. But should that happen, Scots voters do need to be aware of what will follow. And what will follow is one of two things: 1. There will be no currency union. 2. There will be a currency union that will see Scotland ceding control of fiscal and monetary policy to a foreign government. I have always thought it would be 2, but the implications of that are pretty major in terms of an independent Scotland's ability to manage its economic trajectory, which is why Osborne, Alexander and Balls all say a monetary union is not in an independent Scotland's best interests. It's a shame these issues are not being properly discussed, but the unionist side can't be seen to back down from a silly position and the SNP clearly do not want to admit that, in practice, their promises on everything from an oil fund through reduced rates of business taxes to higher welfare spending would not be possible.
I know, I know. but Richard Dawkins is one of those people I instinctively want not to agree with.
Dawkins is a truly great man, opposing slaves to superstition, quacks and charlatans in all forms. Note how he consistently opposes alike Romanists, spiritualists like Kumar, and irrationalists such as Lacan and Kristeva with equal force.
I'm aware of Hibbert's hotel and I'm familiar with the work of George Cantor. Now he was barmy (seriously) and the explanations are equally barmy. If we have a multiverse, an infinite number of yous are telling an infinite number of mes all about it, and even though an infinite number of mes believe yous, an infinite number of mes don't believe a word.
Ah, I see now what your original post was getting at. When you said, "I'll go along with any politician who can explain infinity to me", you were actually using the nature of infinity to test a politicians knowledge/intelligence as an examiner might set questions for a student. I read it as though you were a seeker after knowledge.
I do apologise, Old Man.
P.S. Describing Cantor as barmy is a bit unfair. True, he suffered from what we now would class as Depression but his actual mathematics was sound. Some of his philosophical ideas might strike us as odd but, when considered in the context of their age, were they any more eccentric than some of the views of, say, Hardy.
@BobaFett - Have placed £35 on Tories to retain Stroud. Winnings could be £96...almost the first cocktails for the pbTories. Bit more cautious on the other three though may dabble on Northampton North. Thanks to TSE for the linky-linky.
You say the Tories will only take 2/4 of Fett's Four but make up the ground elsewhere. Fair enough. Which seats do you see them making up the ground in?
I have given you one Derby North that looks good for a gain, helped for sure by the sitting MP and council. If you look hard enough there will be others that were not taken in 2010. Labour will gain more Liberal support but could also lose support in other areas, centre ground to the Tories and in many marginals UKIP could take a chunk of the working man's vote in the big mainly white estates. There are 2 huge estates in Derby North.
You are living in fantasy land if you think Derby North is looking good for a Conservative gain in 2015 . There are 7 wards making up the Parliamentary seat , In 2012 the Conservatives won precisely none of them , Labour won 5 and the Lib Dems 2 . In the 7 wards overall the Conservatives finished 3rd behind the Lib Dems .
The only good politician is one who admits their incompetence at times. That leaves ... no one.
Well, my post said "I'm honestly not sure what the right answer is, and would be interested in others' views." Not quite an admission of incompetence, but an admission of uncertainty, better than nothing, eh?
I'd agree with Sean Fear in general that the default assumption should be in favour of parents, if only because intervention causes serious problems itself and the State is at best an absent-minded provider. Charles' comments distinguishing between "extremely" (horrific to intervene) and "morbidly" (fine to intervene) seem to me to nit-pick - this is a discussion on a blog, not a scientific paper.
Like I said, I'm not sure what the answer is. But I'm reasonably sure that's there's a problem, and there are objectively verifiable cases of poor parenting which fall short of the case where the kids are or should be removed. What to do about it isn't clear to me.
There was an interesting betting - and non-partisan debate - last night about the seat by seat markets. The seats the Tories need to hold just to have the narrowest of seat leads look very tricky and are consequently very long with Shadsy. People who forecasted CMS tended to scratch their heads when asked which seats they would cling on to. Interesting indeed, but important from a financial perspective because there is money to be made...
Indeed.
People predicting CON Most Seats need to elaborate on exactly which seats they think they are going to hold on to, because many of them are currently at long prices.
In fact, most CMS-backers would get far better value betting on a basket of marginal seats rather than the overall market.
Indeed.
A few months PP put up a Con marginals at too long Conservative odds - Elmet, Dewsbury, Battersea and Weaver Vale among them.
There was a discussion here which included Pulpstar, Richard Nabavi and myself and after we'd got our money on the Conservative odds shortened.
What is different this time is that nobody is pointing out that the Conservative odds look generous on constituencies recently put up.
As you've guessed, my comment was tongue-in-cheek, but there seems to be a tendency towards a view that this outcome is desirable ... therefore let's do this, and this is my favourite method because I know best.
Obviously I except you from this generalisation.
And if you can explain how Liverpool are currently top of the league, I'll start voting Labour again.
You say the Tories will only take 2/4 of Fett's Four but make up the ground elsewhere. Fair enough. Which seats do you see them making up the ground in?
No, the Labour lead average is decreasing, I am not basing predictions on one YouGov and a Populus that shows a 0.5% swing within MoE.
Let's clarify what I am saying firstly. On the current polling position (last nights YouGov aside for now as it is outwith the others) a Lab lead of 2-3%, I'd favour the Tories holding the two seats mentioned (little move to them in 2010, so capacity to get out more votes, lower Lib Dem squeezables, incumbency), but Labour will be largest party just short of a majority (UKIP at 11% will wreak havoc in some seats). I simply do not believe Labour will get a majority from opposition on a 2% lead, 2005 was different, it was from a position of defence when it's easier to get your vote out (IMO)
However, I expect swing back to a Tory lead of about 3% by polling day (I've posted reasons for this before so won't go into it again). Now on a 3% lead, 3 of those would be relatively comfortable holds for me, the exception being Dewsbury as I expect a big swing here, Tories would need more like 6% to hold (again IMO). However, at a three percent lead and with a strong UKIP turnout playing havoc. I can see seats like Birmingham Edgbaston, Wirral South, Halifax, Wakefield (for example) coming Into play, not to mention Ed Balls seat. You've got two at the top of the target list with Majorities under 100, there will be much activity in seats like that. In Scotland, they will be after Dumfries and Galloway from Labour and a couple of Lib Dem seats. They might lose 35 or so seats to Labour but maintain a seat lead with gains from the Lib Dems.
There's a big difference in good value bets now and good value bets in a years time.
As you've guessed, my comment was tongue-in-cheek, but there seems to be a tendency towards a view that this outcome is desirable ... therefore let's do this, and this is my favourite method because I know best.
Obviously I except you from this generalisation.
And if you can explain how Liverpool are currently top of the league, I'll start voting Labour again.
The astuteness of Brendan Rodgers, the goals of the divine Luis Suarez and Daniel S.
Plus Jordan Henderson.
When he's not playing, Henderson is used as a renewable energy source and powers half the street lights in Northern England.
As you've guessed, my comment was tongue-in-cheek, but there seems to be a tendency towards a view that this outcome is desirable ... therefore let's do this, and this is my favourite method because I know best.
Obviously I except you from this generalisation.
And if you can explain how Liverpool are currently top of the league, I'll start voting Labour again.
When he's not playing, Henderson is used as a renewable energy source and powers half the street lights in Northern England.
Mr. Eagles, in F1 every team to be on the podium so far is based in England, and an Englishman is favourite for the title. Plus, it's 200mph faster than cricket.
Re the proposed "emotional harm" to children law, based on the draft I've seen, there's not a parent in the country who wouldn't be at risk of falling foul of it. And given what we know of what happened to young girls in care, many social services departments would also be liable to prosecution under it.
The answer to extremely poor parenting is early and effective assistance from competent social workers not a law criminalising parents in this way. Given how poor some social services departments are at dealing with physical abuse we'd do better to improve our efforts there rather than add more laws which will be ineffectively or unjustly or inconsistently applied.
In the short term, it's probably canny. If the Conservatives get re-elected, this may well be a pledge that he regrets. But I expect he'd rather be dealing with that problem than the problem of not being re-elected.
I have a feeling your wish will be granted very soon.
Well I did tip and back the Netherlands to win today.
The only consolation is that the size of the defeat would be even larger if Jade had been playing.
Rumour has it Derntatt was going to have his economy rate tattooed on his leg but there wasn't enough skin to take it. He looks like the sort of idiot that wears Jacomo and has boring nights out with other fatuous buffoons.
As you've guessed, my comment was tongue-in-cheek, but there seems to be a tendency towards a view that this outcome is desirable ... therefore let's do this, and this is my favourite method because I know best.
Obviously I except you from this generalisation.
And if you can explain how Liverpool are currently top of the league, I'll start voting Labour again.
When he's not playing, Henderson is used as a renewable energy source and powers half the street lights in Northern England.
That's half a dozen then?
Bah, The North, and Yorkshire in particular is the light of the world.
You say the Tories will only take 2/4 of Fett's Four but make up the ground elsewhere. Fair enough. Which seats do you see them making up the ground in?
No, the Labour lead average is decreasing, I am not basing predictions on one YouGov and a Populus that shows a 0.5% swing within MoE.
Let's clarify what I am saying firstly. On the current polling position (last nights YouGov aside for now as it is outwith the others) a Lab lead of 2-3%, I'd favour the Tories holding the two seats mentioned (little move to them in 2010, so capacity to get out more votes, lower Lib Dem squeezables, incumbency), but Labour will be largest party just short of a majority (UKIP at 11% will wreak havoc in some seats). I simply do not believe Labour will get a majority from opposition on a 2% lead, 2005 was different, it was from a position of defence when it's easier to get your vote out (IMO)
However, I expect swing back to a Tory lead of about 3% by polling day (I've posted reasons for this before so won't go into it again). Now on a 3% lead, 3 of those would be relatively comfortable holds for me, the exception being Dewsbury as I expect a big swing here, Tories would need more like 6% to hold (again IMO). However, at a three percent lead and with a strong UKIP turnout playing havoc. I can see seats like Birmingham Edgbaston, Wirral South, Halifax, Wakefield (for example) coming Into play, not to mention Ed Balls seat. You've got two at the top of the target list with Majorities under 100, there will be much activity in seats like that. In Scotland, they will be after Dumfries and Galloway from Labour and a couple of Lib Dem seats. They might lose 35 or so seats to Labour but maintain a seat lead with gains from the Lib Dems.
There's a big difference in good value bets now and good value bets in a years time.
My opinion FWIW
Stroud Con hold Northampton North too close to call Dewsbury No hope certain Labour gain Hove Labour gain
As I have mentioned before the South coast seats Eastbourne , Hastings and the 3 Brighton/Hove seats and to a lesser extent Worthing have been trending away from the Conservatives for the last 30 years . The trend is still continuing perhaps a bit slower than 20 years ago but long term Hove will only be Conservative in a very good year for them nationally .
In 20/20 I wonder what is the earliest time a match has become a dead rubber. As in the chasing side still has wickets but short of no balls/wides/etc it is impossible for them to make the target.
You say the Tories will only take 2/4 of Fett's Four but make up the ground elsewhere. Fair enough. Which seats do you see them making up the ground in?
No, the Labour lead average is decreasing, I am not basing predictions on one YouGov and a Populus that shows a 0.5% swing within MoE.
Let's clarify what I am saying firstly. On the current polling position (last nights YouGov aside for now as it is outwith the others) a Lab lead of 2-3%, I'd favour the Tories holding the two seats mentioned (little move to them in 2010, so capacity to get out more votes, lower Lib Dem squeezables, incumbency), but Labour will be largest party just short of a majority (UKIP at 11% will wreak havoc in some seats). I simply do not believe Labour will get a majority from opposition on a 2% lead, 2005 was different, it was from a position of defence when it's easier to get your vote out (IMO)
However, I expect swing back to a Tory lead of about 3% by polling day (I've posted reasons for this before so won't go into it again). Now on a 3% lead, 3 of those would be relatively comfortable holds for me, the exception being Dewsbury as I expect a big swing here, Tories would need more like 6% to hold (again IMO). However, at a three percent lead and with a strong UKIP turnout playing havoc. I can see seats like Birmingham Edgbaston, Wirral South, Halifax, Wakefield (for example) coming Into play, not to mention Ed Balls seat. You've got two at the top of the target list with Majorities under 100, there will be much activity in seats like that. In Scotland, they will be after Dumfries and Galloway from Labour and a couple of Lib Dem seats. They might lose 35 or so seats to Labour but maintain a seat lead with gains from the Lib Dems.
There's a big difference in good value bets now and good value bets in a years time.
My opinion FWIW
Stroud Con hold Northampton North too close to call Dewsbury No hope certain Labour gain Hove Labour gain
As I have mentioned before the South coast seats Eastbourne , Hastings and the 3 Brighton/Hove seats and to a lesser extent Worthing have been trending away from the Conservatives for the last 30 years . The trend is still continuing perhaps a bit slower than 20 years ago but long term Hove will only be Conservative in a very good year for them nationally .
Yeah, that would explain the poor swing to the Tories in 2010 in Hove. Northampton North is a curious one. I would back Tory hold but they are going to need to grab as much of any Lib Dem decline if it occurs. I fancy Labour to take advantage unless the Tories go into polling day ahead.
In the short term, it's probably canny. If the Conservatives get re-elected, this may well be a pledge that he regrets. But I expect he'd rather be dealing with that problem than the problem of not being re-elected.
Dewsbury is worthy of careful consideration. The 2010 result was muddied by the intervention of an independent Conservative candidate, who polled 7% of the vote. The underlying Conservative majority may therefore be rather larger than the 2.8% that you might assume from a casual look at the result.
You are living in fantasy land if you think Derby North is looking good for a Conservative gain in 2015 . There are 7 wards making up the Parliamentary seat , In 2012 the Conservatives won precisely none of them , Labour won 5 and the Lib Dems 2 . In the 7 wards overall the Conservatives finished 3rd behind the Lib Dems .
The turnout for those Council elections was completely dire, absolutely zero relevance to the election next year. Since then plenty has happened locally, none of it positive for Labour, having a hard-left local council with it's bin tax and other follies, is only positive let me assure you.
This will be very tight next time, probably even more so than last time.
As you've guessed, my comment was tongue-in-cheek, but there seems to be a tendency towards a view that this outcome is desirable ... therefore let's do this, and this is my favourite method because I know best.
Obviously I except you from this generalisation.
And if you can explain how Liverpool are currently top of the league, I'll start voting Labour again.
It's a hideous conspiracy, probably involving the Illuminati and the Bilderberg Group. OK? We look forward to your support, comrade.
As you've guessed, my comment was tongue-in-cheek, but there seems to be a tendency towards a view that this outcome is desirable ... therefore let's do this, and this is my favourite method because I know best.
Obviously I except you from this generalisation.
And if you can explain how Liverpool are currently top of the league, I'll start voting Labour again.
It's a hideous conspiracy, probably involving the Illuminati and the Bilderberg Group. OK? We look forward to your support, comrade.
John W Henry, Liverpool's principal owner, has in the past attended a Bilderberg Group event.
Well, duh / No shit, Sherlock / Quelle surprise / etc
Was in Iceland last year - restaurants full of Japanese tucking into whale - they love the blubbery grey stuff.
I'm a happy carnivore. Horse, crocodile, kangaroo, springbok, rabbit. All delicious. Cute, fluffy Larry the Lamb? Pass the mint sauce please. Fox hunting - nowt wrong with that. Fur coats - lovely and snuggly.
However, I hate whaling with a passion. Really, really disgusts me. Is that rational? Probably not. The human mind is a funny old thing.
A good rule of thumb is that the cuter something looks, the nicer it will taste. There are obvious exceptions to this rule, notably snails and foxes, but in general it works well.
It doesn't work at all with seafood, but the corresponding rule that does work is that the stupider it is, the better it will taste. On that basis, monkfish and mussels are fine, whereas dolphins and whales aren't.
I'm not sure how smart a tuna is.
Probably not a lot, though I seem to recall that goldfish have surprised biologists. I'm far more impressed with their (tunas') dinky heat exchangers, muscle design, fin morphology, buoyancy control and streamlining optimised for continuous swimming.
Mr. Eagles, I'm somewhat surprised. Dogs are delightful creatures. Much better, on average, than humans.
As PB's preeminent Scottish noble of gastronomic and professional baking inclination I have to say humans are much under rated.
Auchenteenach Fine Pies (purveyors to the gentry and culinary cognoscenti since 1745) find the free range Scottish Liberal Democrats to be a delicacy not to be missed.
Grazing in the glens in their mainly rural constituencies, free from the stress of Holyrood government and repeating "winning here" in Gaelic make the Highland sub species an especial treat.
I think you have the Gaels of Galloway in mind? As marketed by Mr S. Bean?
You are living in fantasy land if you think Derby North is looking good for a Conservative gain in 2015 . There are 7 wards making up the Parliamentary seat , In 2012 the Conservatives won precisely none of them , Labour won 5 and the Lib Dems 2 . In the 7 wards overall the Conservatives finished 3rd behind the Lib Dems .
The turnout for those Council elections was completely dire, absolutely zero relevance to the election next year. Since then plenty has happened locally, none of it positive for Labour, having a hard-left local council with it's bin tax and other follies, is only positive let me assure you.
This will be very tight next time, probably even more so than last time.
If local election results are good for the Conservatives then we would not hear you saying ignore them because the turnout is dire . How many of these 7 wards will the Conservatives win in May , they are defending 1 ward , Labour 3 and Lib Dems 3 . I expect them to win none , Labour 5 and Lib Dems 2 with a slight chance of 4 and 3 for the latter 2 parties .
The Tories have virtually no chance of winning Derby North IMO. Most of the LD vote there will be left-leaning. Lab should win by at least 5,000 votes.
English & Wales cricketers are a bit like English & Welsh politicians - neither Cook, Giles nor Broad are inspirational and you have to scratch around the politicians to find one or two who are.
English & Wales cricketers are a bit like English & Welsh politicians - neither Cook, Giles nor Broad are inspirational and you have to scratch around the politicians to find one or two who are.
And the biggest joke is Ashley Giles is favourite for the England job,what a shambles.
You are living in fantasy land if you think Derby North is looking good for a Conservative gain in 2015 . There are 7 wards making up the Parliamentary seat , In 2012 the Conservatives won precisely none of them , Labour won 5 and the Lib Dems 2 . In the 7 wards overall the Conservatives finished 3rd behind the Lib Dems .
The turnout for those Council elections was completely dire, absolutely zero relevance to the election next year. Since then plenty has happened locally, none of it positive for Labour, having a hard-left local council with it's bin tax and other follies, is only positive let me assure you.
This will be very tight next time, probably even more so than last time.
If local election results are good for the Conservatives then we would not hear you saying ignore them because the turnout is dire . How many of these 7 wards will the Conservatives win in May , they are defending 1 ward , Labour 3 and Lib Dems 3 . I expect them to win none , Labour 5 and Lib Dems 2 with a slight chance of 4 and 3 for the latter 2 parties .
I would totally ignore the council results in Derby whatever the results the turnouts will be extremely low. The election itself totally different. How local you are I have no idea but there will be no incumbency bonus for Williamson, I will guarantee you that, quite the opposite.
While I await the clause (in whatever bill it may be placed) in respect of the Children and Young Persons Act 1933, I am still unconvinced that there is any objection strong enough to rule out this sort of action in principle. There is a strong case - and this has long been reflected in the legislation - that parents assume responsibility for the care of their children.
The appropriate provision for the removal of children from the home is that "the child concerned is suffering, or is likely to suffer, significant harm". "Significant harm" is clearly not intended to mean solely physical harm, and I expect that impairment of development ranks among the reasons given for considering a child at risk of harm. That outcome is without proof of fault but the requirement is still there to show that the harm, or likelihood of harm, is attributable to the care given to the child or the child’s being beyond parental control. Just like the proposed legislation ("in a manner likely to cause him" impairment), there is no requirement that the child has actually suffered the harm contended for, but, there is still a need to understand the harm and show the attribution.
It is simply not enough to object that all parents might potentially be liable as long as the appropriate standard is clear and avoidable. To some extent that will depend on drafting, but in any case there is no reason to believe that impairment is beyond definition or will be construed, contrary to its clear and present meaning, to mean something that occurs widely. I would not place any emphasis on the author's assertion that 1.5 million children are believed to suffer from neglect in the UK, for the reason that the language does not correspond.
Nick Palmer - I wonder if there is still quite a lot of anti-Liverpool feeling amongst the Labour elite?
I do believe the Labour conference held a minute's silence when Bill Shankly died. That was a very different Labour party of course. I guess Arsene Wenger is more the role model to the north London types who run Labour nowadays.
Re the proposed "emotional harm" to children law, based on the draft I've seen, there's not a parent in the country who wouldn't be at risk of falling foul of it. And given what we know of what happened to young girls in care, many social services departments would also be liable to prosecution under it.
The answer to extremely poor parenting is early and effective assistance from competent social workers not a law criminalising parents in this way. Given how poor some social services departments are at dealing with physical abuse we'd do better to improve our efforts there rather than add more laws which will be ineffectively or unjustly or inconsistently applied.
It's pretty much a law of nature, that when you give people power over others, some of them will abuse that power. In some cases, that may be down to personal vendettas, but more often, it's "for the greater good."
Create a law which seems to define emotional harm as widely as this proposal, and you create injustice.
The Tories have virtually no chance of winning Derby North IMO. Most of the LD vote there will be left-leaning. Lab should win by at least 5,000 votes.
Not a prayer of Labour winning this seat by 5,000 votes, this will be mighty close I can tell you that with virtual certainty and I know the seat A/Z. I did also predict we wouldn't win it last time, when even Labour thought we would. Williamson was so pessimistic he kept his council seat.
Nick Palmer - I wonder if there is still quite a lot of anti-Liverpool feeling amongst the Labour elite?
I do believe the Labour conference held a minute's silence when Bill Shankly died. That was a very different Labour party of course. I guess Arsene Wenger is more the role model to the north London types who run Labour nowadays.
There is a growing anti -Liverpool FC feeling amongst myself (I don't know about Labour). Suarez is a diver (and if not an out and out diver then he goes down whenever there is the slightest contact) and Sturridge is learning from him (why the need to dive when leading two nil against Spurs I don't know). I know other teams do it as well but Liverpool and those two especially do it all the time. It makes Premier League football unwatchable for me .
The Tories have virtually no chance of winning Derby North IMO. Most of the LD vote there will be left-leaning. Lab should win by at least 5,000 votes.
Not a prayer of Labour winning this seat by 5,000 votes, this will be mighty close I can tell you that with virtual certainty and I know the seat A/Z. I did also predict we wouldn't win it last time, when even Labour thought we would. Williamson was so pessimistic he kept his council seat.
All the best Tory areas were moved out into the Mid Derbyshire seat in 2010: Allestree, Oakwood, etc. I would be prepared to bet on the Labour majority being at least 3,000 in 2015.
While I await the clause (in whatever bill it may be placed) in respect of the Children and Young Persons Act 1933, I am still unconvinced that there is any objection strong enough to rule out this sort of action in principle. There is a strong case - and this has long been reflected in the legislation - that parents assume responsibility for the care of their children.
The appropriate provision for the removal of children from the home is that "the child concerned is suffering, or is likely to suffer, significant harm". "Significant harm" is clearly not intended to mean solely physical harm, and I expect that impairment of development ranks among the reasons given for considering a child at risk of harm. That outcome is without proof of fault but the requirement is still there to show that the harm, or likelihood of harm, is attributable to the care given to the child or the child’s being beyond parental control. Just like the proposed legislation ("in a manner likely to cause him" impairment), there is no requirement that the child has actually suffered the harm contended for, but, there is still a need to understand the harm and show the attribution.
It is simply not enough to object that all parents might potentially be liable as long as the appropriate standard is clear and avoidable. To some extent that will depend on drafting, but in any case there is no reason to believe that impairment is beyond definition or will be construed, contrary to its clear and present meaning, to mean something that occurs widely. I would not place any emphasis on the author's assertion that 1.5 million children are believed to suffer from neglect in the UK, for the reason that the language does not correspond.
If, as is arguable, one should look for some standard of fault before criminalisation, then it would be quite wrong to understand Buckland to be ruling it out. He asks for the term "wilful" to be replaced, not removed. As any lawyer will tell you, "wilful" imports a wealth of rules - it is a word that does a lot of work. It would be more helpful to have a more obvious standard, whether of intent, closed eyes, subjective or objective recklessness, or gross carelessness. I don't know which civil standard he wants to bring it into line with.
Sky News reporting that a Serious Case Review finds "authorities" missed several opportunities to safeguard 11 month old Callum Wilson, who was murdered by his mother. Are these the same "authorities" who are to decide if we're all mistreating our children? There's just been a talking head on Sky News telling us that we all see evidence of child abuse, we could go into any school and pick out which child was being mistreated, she used the case of Harry Potter being kept under the stairs as an example of what we should be looking for. I worry for my sanity.
You are living in fantasy land if you think Derby North is looking good for a Conservative gain in 2015 . There are 7 wards making up the Parliamentary seat , In 2012 the Conservatives won precisely none of them , Labour won 5 and the Lib Dems 2 . In the 7 wards overall the Conservatives finished 3rd behind the Lib Dems .
The turnout for those Council elections was completely dire, absolutely zero relevance to the election next year. Since then plenty has happened locally, none of it positive for Labour, having a hard-left local council with it's bin tax and other follies, is only positive let me assure you.
This will be very tight next time, probably even more so than last time.
If local election results are good for the Conservatives then we would not hear you saying ignore them because the turnout is dire . How many of these 7 wards will the Conservatives win in May , they are defending 1 ward , Labour 3 and Lib Dems 3 . I expect them to win none , Labour 5 and Lib Dems 2 with a slight chance of 4 and 3 for the latter 2 parties .
I would totally ignore the council results in Derby whatever the results the turnouts will be extremely low. The election itself totally different. How local you are I have no idea but there will be no incumbency bonus for Williamson, I will guarantee you that, quite the opposite.
Clearly you are not expecting good local results for The Conservatives in Derby in May but miraculously expect everyone to turn out for them in a GE next year . How will.you guarantee the opposite of an incumbency bonus for Williamson , will you guarantee our money back on any losing bets on the Conservatives in Derby North , I expect not .
Sky News reporting that a Serious Case Review finds "authorities" missed several opportunities to safeguard 11 month old Callum Wilson, who was murdered by his mother. Are these the same "authorities" who are to decide if we're all mistreating our children? There's just been a talking head on Sky News telling us that we all see evidence of child abuse, we could go into any school and pick out which child was being mistreated, she used the case of Harry Potter being kept under the stairs as an example of what we should be looking for. I worry for my sanity.
So, the rationale for this law comes from Harry Potter and Cinderella?
The proposed law on emotional abuse is the pottiest idea I've heard for a very long time. How about enforcing the law on FGM for example, which has seen precisely zero prosecutions in 29 years? Sort out the serious problems first, rather than wasting time on the minor ones.
Whilst generally not a fan of subjective laws like religious hatred laws etc I think a well defined cruelty law re children is a better idea than protecting 'religion' or even causing offence against somebody's sexuality which we have on our statute book at the moment and used rather disturbingly in some cases
Comments
Auchenteenach Fine Pies (purveyors to the gentry and culinary cognoscenti since 1745) find the free range Scottish Liberal Democrats to be a delicacy not to be missed.
Grazing in the glens in their mainly rural constituencies, free from the stress of Holyrood government and repeating "winning here" in Gaelic make the Highland sub species an especial treat.
Summat about related contingencies.
I'm aware of Hibbert's hotel and I'm familiar with the work of George Cantor. Now he was barmy (seriously) and the explanations are equally barmy. If we have a multiverse, an infinite number of yous are telling an infinite number of mes all about it, and even though an infinite number of mes believe yous, an infinite number of mes don't believe a word.
Be a wee bit careful not to get lured into buying a bone set. They look very similar but the bone set will have little flecks (blood vessels) in the pieces that are absent from ivory.
I know, I know. but Richard Dawkins is one of those people I instinctively want not to agree with.
1. There will be no currency union.
2. There will be a currency union that will see Scotland ceding control of fiscal and monetary policy to a foreign government.
I have always thought it would be 2, but the implications of that are pretty major in terms of an independent Scotland's ability to manage its economic trajectory, which is why Osborne, Alexander and Balls all say a monetary union is not in an independent Scotland's best interests. It's a shame these issues are not being properly discussed, but the unionist side can't be seen to back down from a silly position and the SNP clearly do not want to admit that, in practice, their promises on everything from an oil fund through reduced rates of business taxes to higher welfare spending would not be possible.
Indeed.
Neil,
Would you trust Rotherham council to make an objective decision about childcare?
LOL
Can we leave this team in Bangladesh forever?
I do apologise, Old Man.
P.S. Describing Cantor as barmy is a bit unfair. True, he suffered from what we now would class as Depression but his actual mathematics was sound. Some of his philosophical ideas might strike us as odd but, when considered in the context of their age, were they any more eccentric than some of the views of, say, Hardy.
Good-oh, can he explain infinity, time, the double-slit experiment and quantum uncertainty. By comparison, a sky-fairy sounds reasonably plausible.
I'd agree with Sean Fear in general that the default assumption should be in favour of parents, if only because intervention causes serious problems itself and the State is at best an absent-minded provider. Charles' comments distinguishing between "extremely" (horrific to intervene) and "morbidly" (fine to intervene) seem to me to nit-pick - this is a discussion on a blog, not a scientific paper.
Like I said, I'm not sure what the answer is. But I'm reasonably sure that's there's a problem, and there are objectively verifiable cases of poor parenting which fall short of the case where the kids are or should be removed. What to do about it isn't clear to me.
A few months PP put up a Con marginals at too long Conservative odds - Elmet, Dewsbury, Battersea and Weaver Vale among them.
There was a discussion here which included Pulpstar, Richard Nabavi and myself and after we'd got our money on the Conservative odds shortened.
What is different this time is that nobody is pointing out that the Conservative odds look generous on constituencies recently put up.
As you've guessed, my comment was tongue-in-cheek, but there seems to be a tendency towards a view that this outcome is desirable ... therefore let's do this, and this is my favourite method because I know best.
Obviously I except you from this generalisation.
And if you can explain how Liverpool are currently top of the league, I'll start voting Labour again.
Let's clarify what I am saying firstly. On the current polling position (last nights YouGov aside for now as it is outwith the others) a Lab lead of 2-3%, I'd favour the Tories holding the two seats mentioned (little move to them in 2010, so capacity to get out more votes, lower Lib Dem squeezables, incumbency), but Labour will be largest party just short of a majority (UKIP at 11% will wreak havoc in some seats). I simply do not believe Labour will get a majority from opposition on a 2% lead, 2005 was different, it was from a position of defence when it's easier to get your vote out (IMO)
However, I expect swing back to a Tory lead of about 3% by polling day (I've posted reasons for this before so won't go into it again). Now on a 3% lead, 3 of those would be relatively comfortable holds for me, the exception being Dewsbury as I expect a big swing here, Tories would need more like 6% to hold (again IMO). However, at a three percent lead and with a strong UKIP turnout playing havoc. I can see seats like Birmingham Edgbaston, Wirral South, Halifax, Wakefield (for example) coming Into play, not to mention Ed Balls seat. You've got two at the top of the target list with Majorities under 100, there will be much activity in seats like that. In Scotland, they will be after Dumfries and Galloway from Labour and a couple of Lib Dem seats. They might lose 35 or so seats to Labour but maintain a seat lead with gains from the Lib Dems.
There's a big difference in good value bets now and good value bets in a years time.
Plus Jordan Henderson.
When he's not playing, Henderson is used as a renewable energy source and powers half the street lights in Northern England.
Fair play to you sir. At least you have the cojones to put your cards on the table.
The only consolation is that the size of the defeat would be even larger if Jade had been playing.
Mr. Eagles, in F1 every team to be on the podium so far is based in England, and an Englishman is favourite for the title. Plus, it's 200mph faster than cricket.
The answer to extremely poor parenting is early and effective assistance from competent social workers not a law criminalising parents in this way. Given how poor some social services departments are at dealing with physical abuse we'd do better to improve our efforts there rather than add more laws which will be ineffectively or unjustly or inconsistently applied.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/benedictbrogan/100265629/full-employment-george-osborne-boldly-gives-opponents-a-stick-to-beat-him-with/
In the short term, it's probably canny. If the Conservatives get re-elected, this may well be a pledge that he regrets. But I expect he'd rather be dealing with that problem than the problem of not being re-elected.
He looks like the sort of idiot that wears Jacomo and has boring nights out with other fatuous buffoons.
Stroud Con hold
Northampton North too close to call
Dewsbury No hope certain Labour gain
Hove Labour gain
As I have mentioned before the South coast seats Eastbourne , Hastings and the 3 Brighton/Hove seats and to a lesser extent Worthing have been trending away from the Conservatives for the last 30 years . The trend is still continuing perhaps a bit slower than 20 years ago but long term Hove will only be Conservative in a very good year for them nationally .
#RedHotDutch
We don't need to moan about the NZ and DL result now...
Northampton North is a curious one. I would back Tory hold but they are going to need to grab as much of any Lib Dem decline if it occurs. I fancy Labour to take advantage unless the Tories go into polling day ahead.
Wow, this is a dark day for English cricket. Dark enough to burn the bails again, though I'm not sure that's safe with the flashing ones.
BTW I agree with Mark Senior that Hove is quite a tricky one for the Tories, for demographic and UKIPpy reasons.
http://www1.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2013/10/22/theres-a-mismatch-between-ge2015-overall-outcome-betting-and-the-odds-that-can-be-had-in-individual-seats/
http://sportsbeta.ladbrokes.com/UK-General-Election/Next-General-Election-Constituency-Betting/Politics-N-1z140vgZ1z140v7Z1z141ne/
The turnout for those Council elections was completely dire, absolutely zero relevance to the election next year. Since then plenty has happened locally, none of it positive for Labour, having a hard-left local council with it's bin tax and other follies, is only positive let me assure you.
This will be very tight next time, probably even more so than last time.
Fett's Four are firewall seats - they protect the Tories from a Labour seats lead. Majority gains are way down the list!
Thanks.
Lab (13)
Karin Smyth (Dawn Primarolo, Bristol S)
Liz Evans (Martin Caton, Gower)
Tulip Siddiq (Glenda Jackson, Hampstead & Kilburn)
Vicky Foxcroft (Joan Ruddock, Lewisham Deptford)
Rowenna Davis (John Denham, Southampton Itchen)
Matthew Pennycook (Nick Raynsford, Greenwich & Woolwich)
Karen Whitefield (Eric Joyce, Falkirk)
Colleen Fletcher (Bob Ainsworth, Coventry NE)
Richard Burgon (George Mudie, Leeds E)
Stephen Kinnock (Hywel Francis, Aberavon)
Richard Baker (Frank Doran, Aberdeen N)
Helen Hayes (Tessa Jowell, Dulwich & West Norwood)
Kate Hollern (Jack Straw, Blackburn)
Con (9)
Craig Williams (Jonathan Evans, Cardiff N)
Chris Philp (Richard Ottaway, Croydon S)
Ranil Jayawardena (James Arbuthnot, Hampshire NE)
Robert Jenrick (Patrick Mercer, Newark)
Tom Tugendhat (John Stanley, Tonbridge & Malling)
Nigel Huddleston (Peter Luff, Worcestershire M)
Nusrat Ghani (Charles Hendry, Wealden)
Lucy Frazer (Jim Paice, Cambridgeshire SE)
David Mackintosh (Brian Binley, Northampton S)
LD (7)
Julie Pörksen (Alan Beith, Berwick-upon-Tweed)
Vikki Slade (Annette Brooke, Dorset M & Poole N)
Lisa Smart (Andrew Stunell, Hazel Grove)
Ibrahim Tahuri (Sarah Teather, Brent C)
Christine Jardine (Malcolm Bruce, Gordon)
Sarah Yong (David Heath, Somerton & Frome)
Tim Brett (Menzies Campbell, Fife NE)
PC (1)
Liz Saville Roberts (Elfyn Llwyd, Dwyfor Meirionnydd)
This will be very tight next time, probably even more so than last time.
If local election results are good for the Conservatives then we would not hear you saying ignore them because the turnout is dire . How many of these 7 wards will the Conservatives win in May , they are defending 1 ward , Labour 3 and Lib Dems 3 . I expect them to win none , Labour 5 and Lib Dems 2 with a slight chance of 4 and 3 for the latter 2 parties .
I would totally ignore the council results in Derby whatever the results the turnouts will be extremely low. The election itself totally different. How local you are I have no idea but there will be no incumbency bonus for Williamson, I will guarantee you that, quite the opposite.
The appropriate provision for the removal of children from the home is that "the child concerned is suffering, or is likely to suffer, significant harm". "Significant harm" is clearly not intended to mean solely physical harm, and I expect that impairment of development ranks among the reasons given for considering a child at risk of harm. That outcome is without proof of fault but the requirement is still there to show that the harm, or likelihood of harm, is attributable to the care given to the child or the child’s being beyond parental control. Just like the proposed legislation ("in a manner likely to cause him" impairment), there is no requirement that the child has actually suffered the harm contended for, but, there is still a need to understand the harm and show the attribution.
It is simply not enough to object that all parents might potentially be liable as long as the appropriate standard is clear and avoidable. To some extent that will depend on drafting, but in any case there is no reason to believe that impairment is beyond definition or will be construed, contrary to its clear and present meaning, to mean something that occurs widely. I would not place any emphasis on the author's assertion that 1.5 million children are believed to suffer from neglect in the UK, for the reason that the language does not correspond.
I do believe the Labour conference held a minute's silence when Bill Shankly died. That was a very different Labour party of course. I guess Arsene Wenger is more the role model to the north London types who run Labour nowadays.
Create a law which seems to define emotional harm as widely as this proposal, and you create injustice.
Rugby league is the worst for it, their world cups are essentially Australian get togethers.
I know other teams do it as well but Liverpool and those two especially do it all the time. It makes Premier League football unwatchable for me .
Mark CANN (Labour)
Steve CROWTHER (UKIP)
Nick HARVEY* (Liberal Democrats)
Peter HEATON-JONES (Conservative)
Ricky KNIGHT (Greens)
There's just been a talking head on Sky News telling us that we all see evidence of child abuse, we could go into any school and pick out which child was being mistreated, she used the case of Harry Potter being kept under the stairs as an example of what we should be looking for.
I worry for my sanity.
Clearly you are not expecting good local results for The Conservatives in Derby in May but miraculously expect everyone to turn out for them in a GE next year . How will.you guarantee the opposite of an incumbency bonus for Williamson , will you guarantee our money back on any losing bets on the Conservatives in Derby North , I expect not .