"UKIP today reveals it's new billboard design depicting an escalator running up the White Cliffs of Dover showing how we have lost control of our borders."
Poll thoughts. The key here is holding score until conference season and the starting gun for 2015. The Tories will want to be polling at 33/34 going into conference and average 35 afterwards with a view to UKIP returners and the budget delivering them 37/38 in the GE. Labour, on the other hand, will be looking to maintain 37 plus into conference and ensure there is no drift back to the Lib Dems which may help in the Tory/Lib marginals, but depending on the overall effect on their % might make their own marginal quest harder. It looks likely to me that the big two will score 34-38 each in the GE, with the result being anything from workable but small Lab Maj to Tory largest party, coalition with rump Lib Dems, with Lab short by 20 the centre point. Crossover during conference season.
I'm hoping that UKIP do exceptionally well in the locals, and Con/Lab/LD spend the next 12 months railing at UKIP, the voters, their own leaders, and losing faith in pollsters.
It will be interesting to see how they cope with the nailed on UKIP euro win. I think they will struggle to do as well in the locals, but we shall see. I expect Dave to swing right in response to the Right plurality in VI. Right, but not hard right, and specifically on referendum in/out and immigration and crime. Aim to mop up those dallying with UKIP whilst retaining the core and centre on the back of the improving economy,
"UKIP today reveals it's new billboard design depicting an escalator running up the White Cliffs of Dover showing how we have lost control of our borders."
It's ironic, (albeit fully justified) that Briscoe has received a prison term twice as long as Huhne and Pryce. Huhne has been vindicated again.
In what way, he pleaded guilty. Must admit I never thought on the same day I’d read headlines with judge Briscoe, Gerry Adams and Max Clifford all behind bars.
Never used them, but Ian Cowie did give an overview of peer-to-peer lenders.
"While Funding Circle advertises mouth-watering returns to investors or 9.1pc gross and Zopa offers a more realistic 5.4pc “after charges and annualized average defaults” peer-to-peer lending is not protected by the statutory safety net that safeguards depositors with conventional banks and building societies."
I lend money to Zopa which incorporates (now) bad debt insurance within its rates. I looked at funding circle and although the rates look good you are basically lending to start ups or early life companies a lot of the time. I was put off personally when I saw the accounts of a firm that took out funding circle loans and they were not that impressive to say the least . Its only my little anecdote but it put me off
What sort of cash do you need to do it - the bad debt insurance sounds good. Would a grand be ok or so to earn 50 quid in a year ?
Yes obviously the bad debt insurance lowers the effective rate but ,last year. I got 4% ish. A grand or two is ideal as it does not take too long to get matched and big enough so the returns are worthwhile the time spent registering and entering on tax returns etc (interest paid gross so needs to be declared)
Just re the latest UKIP posters. In a bit of spat with someone over whether they are a blatant dog-whistle to racism. I seem to remember previous use by the BNP or NF in the 90s in a directly racist manner. Just need to see if my memory is faulty.
They used the 'white cliffs of Dover' song. Could it be that you were thinking of?
"UKIP today reveals it's new billboard design depicting an escalator running up the White Cliffs of Dover showing how we have lost control of our borders."
That offends my engineering and health and safety sensibilities.
Firstly, it is not protected from the tide. Wait for the first high tide and the mechanism would be ruined. Then there's the safety aspect of a lack of crowd control or fencing at the top. Disabled access is also not catered for.
Finally there's a practical one: the cliffs must be at least a couple of hundred feet high given the scale of the house at the top, and I count only 25-30 steps. This means each step would be a minimum of six to seven feet high, and therefore utterly useless.
So it's not fit for purpose, dangerous, caters for an uncertain demand, and will last precisely six hours.
Just re the latest UKIP posters. In a bit of spat with someone over whether they are a blatant dog-whistle to racism. I seem to remember previous use by the BNP or NF in the 90s in a directly racist manner. Just need to see if my memory is faulty.
They used the 'white cliffs of Dover' song. Could it be that you were thinking of?
"UKIP today reveals it's new billboard design depicting an escalator running up the White Cliffs of Dover showing how we have lost control of our borders."
That offends my engineering and health and safety sensibilities.
Firstly, it is not protected from the tide. Wait for the first high tide and the mechanism would be ruined. Then there's the safety aspect of a lack of crowd control or fencing at the top. Disabled access is also not catered for.
Finally there's a practical one: the cliffs must be at least a couple of hundred feet high given the scale of the house at the top, and I count only 25-30 steps. This means each step would be a minimum of six to seven feet high, and therefore utterly useless.
So it's not fit for purpose, dangerous, caters for an uncertain demand, and will last precisely six hours.
Needless to say, ;-)
And a Stannah stairlift would be much more UKIP-friendly.
I've had just one leaflet for the EU elections. It featured a picture of Nigel Farage prominently on its front page and lots of purple.
It was a leaflet from the Lib Dems.
Surprised it was not the 'an independence from Europe' upstarts!
I'm doubtful whether either UKIP or their impersonators are going to poll very well in the Liverpool Street/Shoreditch area. They might find pockets of support in the Barbican.
UKIP will do well in the parts of London with a large share of people that are white and were born and raised in London IMO
Not a wide catchment area!
You'd like my Italian PT. He told me, unprompted, the other day: "these UKIP supporters who don't live in London, they should go back to where they came from and leave us Londoners in peace. They're foreigners!" All delivered in his strong Italian accent (he still counts "one-a, two-a, three-a").
Of course, he has a vote in the EU elections, which he firmly intends using. I'm not sure who he's voting for. He's generally left wing - certainly well to the left of me - but he told me that Ed Miliband speaks awfully and looks like an idiot ("Tony Blair, he spoke very well, but then, that's why he got elected").
Do EU citizens resident here get to vote in UK constituencies in the European elections?
I understood EU nationals can vote in both EU elections as well as Local elections. Logical. They are council tax payers.
"UKIP today reveals it's new billboard design depicting an escalator running up the White Cliffs of Dover showing how we have lost control of our borders."
Further meaningless info Got my first Euro literature today. From Dave. Probably remembers I was a party member in 2005 and voted for him. I used to like toffs.
"If you are an EU national living in another EU country, you have the right to vote and stand as a candidate in European Parliament elections in that country."
IIRC someone (wasn't it Clegg?) stood in Holland to get around the fact that Euro-elections were then FPTP in Britain. I think he won, too?
Personally I think anyone should be able to stand anywhere if they put down the necessary deposit - let the voters choose who they want, taking their nationality into account. Perhaps UKIP would put Putin up.
"UKIP today reveals it's new billboard design depicting an escalator running up the White Cliffs of Dover showing how we have lost control of our borders."
What a strange poster. It doesn't really work IMO, and not only because 'the white cliffs of Dover' means nothing to anyone under 60.
It's a dog whistle to racists
What tripe. Even national origin isn't mentioned, let alone race. It is a billboard entirely about immigration. Unless you think opposing open border immigration is racist, which would be ridiculous, you don't have an argument here.
Zopa does have the nice touch where when you lend people your £10 (it splits your money up into £10 lending units to spread risk) it gives them an opportunity to say how grateful they are and what they are using the money for. If you are into feeling like a God (I am) then it is a good feature to warm the heart!
"UKIP today reveals it's new billboard design depicting an escalator running up the White Cliffs of Dover showing how we have lost control of our borders."
"If you are an EU national living in another EU country, you have the right to vote and stand as a candidate in European Parliament elections in that country."
IIRC someone (wasn't it Clegg?) stood in Holland to get around the fact that Euro-elections were then FPTP in Britain. I think he won, too?
Personally I think anyone should be able to stand anywhere if they put down the necessary deposit - let the voters choose who they want, taking their nationality into account. Perhaps UKIP would put Putin up.
@NickPalmer - The lead candidate in the South East region for 'An independence from Europe' is the photogenic Laurence Stassen, who is Dutch. She's currently an MEP for the Netherlands, originally elected for Geert Wilders' party, but she has split off from them:
"If you are an EU national living in another EU country, you have the right to vote and stand as a candidate in European Parliament elections in that country."
IIRC someone (wasn't it Clegg?) stood in Holland to get around the fact that Euro-elections were then FPTP in Britain. I think he won, too?
Personally I think anyone should be able to stand anywhere if they put down the necessary deposit - let the voters choose who they want, taking their nationality into account. Perhaps UKIP would put Putin up.
I seem to remember David Steel standing as/being an italian MEP.
Further meaningless info Got my first Euro literature today. From Dave. Probably remembers I was a party member in 2005 and voted for him. I used to like toffs.
I got a leaflet from the 'Communities United' Party yesterday. No, I had never heard of them before either, and having read the leaflet I am no better informed about what they stand for other than running political surgeries in Ealing and Romford. Anyone care to spread some light?
@NickPalmer - The lead candidate in the South East region for 'An independence from Europe' is the photogenic Laurence Stassen, who is Dutch. She's currently an MEP for the Netherlands, originally elected for Geert Wilders' party, but she has split off from them:
@state_go_away Looks pretty good - the advertised return is high enough to make it worthwhile but you can see clearly that the loan rates are competitive on the other side. And the 1% is the profit margin.
"UKIP today reveals it's new billboard design depicting an escalator running up the White Cliffs of Dover showing how we have lost control of our borders."
Bring back powdered eggs and camp coffee - the good old days.
Don't know about powdered eggs but you can still buy Camp Coffee, Tescos sell it so presumably there must still be people who buy it; possibly as a flavouring for cakes rather than as a beverage.
Thinking about the call for UKIP voters to vote Tory in order to get a referendum on the EU...
Say they/we did just that, elected PM Cameron in a majority Conservative govt, got an EU referendum , won it and left the EU
What is to stop PM Cameron passing a law that allows free movement of people from the EU to the UK and keeping our borders just as open as they were before?
Personally I doubt there would be a referendum anyway if the Tories won a majority. Cameron would surely find a way out of it (assuming he thought there was a genuine risk of losing it).
Thinking about the call for UKIP voters to vote Tory in order to get a referendum on the EU...
Say they/we did just that, elected PM Cameron in a majority Conservative govt, got an EU referendum , won it and left the EU
What is to stop PM Cameron passing a law that allows free movement of people from the EU to the UK and keeping our borders just as open as they were before?
If we were outside the EU that could be changed at the next general election, if the voters so wished.
But I don't believe either the Conservatives' referendum offer, or that they're likely to win the 2015 election.
"UKIP today reveals it's new billboard design depicting an escalator running up the White Cliffs of Dover showing how we have lost control of our borders."
"UKIP today reveals it's new billboard design depicting an escalator running up the White Cliffs of Dover showing how we have lost control of our borders."
"UKIP today reveals it's new billboard design depicting an escalator running up the White Cliffs of Dover showing how we have lost control of our borders."
''What is to stop PM Cameron passing a law that allows free movement of people from the EU to the UK and keeping our borders just as open as they were before?''
I'd have thought Ed Miliband is far more likely to do that when people like you voting UKIP catapult him into power.
Ed may well commit the UK to further and possibly irreversible integration with Europe which will make your aims much more difficult to achieve than they are now.
The consolation is that you will be able to seethe properly when that happens.
Personally I doubt there would be a referendum anyway if the Tories won a majority. Cameron would surely find a way out of it (assuming he thought there was a genuine risk of losing it).
"UKIP today reveals it's new billboard design depicting an escalator running up the White Cliffs of Dover showing how we have lost control of our borders."
That offends my engineering and health and safety sensibilities.
Firstly, it is not protected from the tide. Wait for the first high tide and the mechanism would be ruined. Then there's the safety aspect of a lack of crowd control or fencing at the top. Disabled access is also not catered for.
Finally there's a practical one: the cliffs must be at least a couple of hundred feet high given the scale of the house at the top, and I count only 25-30 steps. This means each step would be a minimum of six to seven feet high, and therefore utterly useless.
So it's not fit for purpose, dangerous, caters for an uncertain demand, and will last precisely six hours.
Needless to say, ;-)
Ha ha, excellent. Also, there is the minor flaw of how you descend? Although I guess in Ukip terms 'they' never leave....
Personally I doubt there would be a referendum anyway if the Tories won a majority. Cameron would surely find a way out of it (assuming he thought there was a genuine risk of losing it).
Today's posters are pretty unambiguous on the subject.
That nice Mr Nabavi was offering evens to anyone of your opinion for stakes up to £1,000 yesterday. If you twisted his arm, he might even make the odds a little more favourable to you, I suspect.
Personally I doubt there would be a referendum anyway if the Tories won a majority. Cameron would surely find a way out of it (assuming he thought there was a genuine risk of losing it).
"UKIP today reveals it's new billboard design depicting an escalator running up the White Cliffs of Dover showing how we have lost control of our borders."
"UKIP today reveals it's new billboard design depicting an escalator running up the White Cliffs of Dover showing how we have lost control of our borders."
What a strange poster. It doesn't really work IMO, and not only because 'the white cliffs of Dover' means nothing to anyone under 60.
It's a dog whistle to racists
What tripe. Even national origin isn't mentioned, let alone race. It is a billboard entirely about immigration. Unless you think opposing open border immigration is racist, which would be ridiculous, you don't have an argument here.
When the Conservatives criticise mass immigration, it's legitimate. When UKIP do so, it's racism, apparently.
Our estimate for Labour this month is 35.3%, down 0.9% on last month, and continuing the past year’s pattern of slow but steady decline. Labour have now hit their lowest point in the polls since Ed Miliband was elected leader of the party in the autumn of 2010.
However, the Conservatives have not been able to capitalise on Labour’s continued decline as their support has fallen even more sharply this month, down 1.4 points at 31.6%. The Liberal Democrats have also seen no electoral benefit from their leader’s high profile combat with Nigel Farage over the EU – we have them down 0.2% this month at 7.4%.
Labour looks a speculative punt in Newark to me; do they have any organisation across the rural parts of the constituency? Is Ed's promise to cap rents going to sweep him to victory here? I'd look for value on low turnout instead; 2 weeks after Euros and dubious reason for by-elex.
Coalition squabble on knives caught my eye. Looks like one where it's in both parties interests to disagree publically, but adds to perception that Grayling is struggling. His savings don't seem as well thought out as some colleagues (just expect same outputs for less money, or the outcry over parcel restrictions) and he seems particularly weak at working in the constraints of coalition - there must be plenty he can offer e.g. on drugs policy reviews to get things like this through. Might Grayling be looking over his shoulder come the reshuffle?
Grayling's so-called savings on Legal Aid resulted yesterday in a fraud trial (following a lengthy investigation by the FCA) being stopped. Another major insider dealing trial faces the same problem. Based on yesterday's judgment there must be a high risk that an investigation which, to my knowledge, has taken at least 5 years will be stopped because the defendants cannot find anyone to defend them at the rates the government is paying. The judge effectively said yesterday that the government's failure to fund the justice system meant that defendants could not receive a fair trial.
What kind of a country are we that we have reached such a pass? What sort of financial centre can we be if the City regulator cannot bring fraud cases because defendants are unable to have a fair trial?
All of this has arisen because of Grayling's inept and ineffective reforms. He should be kicked out of government.
Whatever one's views on the role of the state it is indisputably the case that a proper system of justice is one of its main, basic functions. And on this the government is failing in a way which brings our standing, not least in one of our major industries, into disrepute.
Personally I doubt there would be a referendum anyway if the Tories won a majority. Cameron would surely find a way out of it (assuming he thought there was a genuine risk of losing it).
If he tried to back out of another referendum he would find himself going the same way of Heath, Maggie and IDS.
Our estimate for Labour this month is 35.3%, down 0.9% on last month, and continuing the past year’s pattern of slow but steady decline. Labour have now hit their lowest point in the polls since Ed Miliband was elected leader of the party in the autumn of 2010.
However, the Conservatives have not been able to capitalise on Labour’s continued decline as their support has fallen even more sharply this month, down 1.4 points at 31.6%. The Liberal Democrats have also seen no electoral benefit from their leader’s high profile combat with Nigel Farage over the EU – we have them down 0.2% this month at 7.4%.
The neglected ONS monthly Economic Review often throws up some interesting economic analysis.
This morning's publication looks at the contribution made by energy costs to consumer inflation since the financial crisis.
[T]he primary drivers of higher inflation rates in 2008 were the costs of household energy – including electricity, gas, other household fuels and fuels & lubricants used in transport equipment (primarily petrol and diesel prices) – and price increases in food, drink & tobacco. Combined, these products accounted for around 3.5 percentage points of the 5.2% inflation rate experienced in September 2008.
The ONS goes on to state that energy cost inflation abated during 2009-10 and then peaked again in 2011 before falling again to the very low levels being experienced today.
The following table shows how energy cost inflation has been brought to just just 0.10% in 2014.
=============================================================== Table 1: Contribution of energy components to the annual change in the Consumer Prices Index (CPI) --------------------------------------------------------------- -------------Percentage points------------------ Electricity Gas Fuels & Other | Total Lubricants Fuels | contribution --------------------------------------------------------------- 2007 0.14 0.13 0.12 0.00 | 0.39 2008 0.27 0.31 0.55 0.09 | 1.21 2009 0.10 0.25 -0.27 -0.05 | 0.02 2010 -0.05 -0.14 0.63 0.06 | 0.51 2011 0.14 0.24 0.61 0.06 | 1.04 2012 0.11 0.23 0.09 0.01 | 0.45 2013 0.14 0.23 -0.05 0.01 | 0.33 2014 0.14 0.16 -0.18 -0.02 | 0.10 ===============================================================
The contribution of household energy bills to overall CPI inflation has fallen from 0.37 percentage points (pp) in the year to March 2013, to 0.25 pp in January 2014 and actually reduced inflation in March for the first time since October 2009. The contributions of food, drink & tobacco and housing costs, have fallen sharply between January 2013 and January 2014 (0.8 pp to 0.4 pp and 0.2 pp to 0.1 pp respectively).
I would not normally seeking to score a partisan point out of energy costs as the drivers are mostly beyond governmental control. But given that Labour are crusading on the "cost of living crisis", it may be pertinent to remind ourselves who was appointed Secretary of State for DECC in 2008 and which government since the crisis has done more to reduce energy cost inflation.
It appears where domestic energy is concerned what we truly have is a 'Cost of Labour crisis'.
What is to stop PM Cameron passing a law that allows free movement of people from the EU to the UK and keeping our borders just as open as they were before?
Well, it wouldn't be 'PM Cameron passing a law', but you have put your finger on a key point, which I was discussing with Socrates a few days ago. If we leave the EU, everyone agrees that we'd negotiate a trade deal with the EU - indeed that's a key UKIP point, and a very valid one, when people like Clegg imply there would be a big loss of trade and therefore job losses.
So you have to ask yourself what would be in that trade deal, and my contention is that, like the deal Switzerland has, it would include the free movement of workers, to a greater or lesser extent - probably, in the end, not very different from what we currently have.
So, yes, you are right, but it's got nothing to do with Cameron particularly, it would be equally an issue if PM Farage were doing the negotiating.
There are no free lunches or easy options which give you everything you want and nothing you don't want.
WRT the London local elections, UKIP are only fielding candidates in about a quarter of the seats. Thus, UKIP would have to win 40% per candidate to get the 11% vote share that Survation put them on. I think that's pretty unlikely. I'd expect them to win more like 20% per candidate, and 5% overall. The remaining UKIP voters in that poll will mostly back Conservative council candidates.
Over and above that, the Greens will gain far more than 4% of the vote, mostly at the expense of Labour and the Lib Dems.
The only Conservative councils that I think are vulnerable are Croydon (to Labour) and Havering (to no overall control).
Personally I doubt there would be a referendum anyway if the Tories won a majority. Cameron would surely find a way out of it (assuming he thought there was a genuine risk of losing it).
Today's posters are pretty unambiguous on the subject.
That nice Mr Nabavi was offering evens to anyone of your opinion for stakes up to £1,000 yesterday. If you twisted his arm, he might even make the odds a little more favourable to you, I suspect.
Personally I doubt there would be a referendum anyway if the Tories won a majority. Cameron would surely find a way out of it (assuming he thought there was a genuine risk of losing it).
Today's posters are pretty unambiguous on the subject.
That nice Mr Nabavi was offering evens to anyone of your opinion for stakes up to £1,000 yesterday. If you twisted his arm, he might even make the odds a little more favourable to you, I suspect.
Not my sort of bet - too long term etc.
Re: posters. Um, since when exactly are party adverts meaningful of anything?
Personally I doubt there would be a referendum anyway if the Tories won a majority. Cameron would surely find a way out of it (assuming he thought there was a genuine risk of losing it).
Absolutely mad.
My offer of up to £1000 (or possibly more) at Even remains open to anyone credit-worthy but foolish enough to believe such nonsense.
"UKIP today reveals it's new billboard design depicting an escalator running up the White Cliffs of Dover showing how we have lost control of our borders."
What a strange poster. It doesn't really work IMO, and not only because 'the white cliffs of Dover' means nothing to anyone under 60.
I'd vote for any party that was going to properly equip the country with escalators in places like that where they're obviously needed. I'm pretty sure Tomorrow's World promised it would all be sorted by the year 2000.
"UKIP today reveals it's new billboard design depicting an escalator running up the White Cliffs of Dover showing how we have lost control of our borders."
That offends my engineering and health and safety sensibilities.
Firstly, it is not protected from the tide. Wait for the first high tide and the mechanism would be ruined. Then there's the safety aspect of a lack of crowd control or fencing at the top. Disabled access is also not catered for.
Finally there's a practical one: the cliffs must be at least a couple of hundred feet high given the scale of the house at the top, and I count only 25-30 steps. This means each step would be a minimum of six to seven feet high, and therefore utterly useless.
So it's not fit for purpose, dangerous, caters for an uncertain demand, and will last precisely six hours.
Needless to say, ;-)
Ha ha, excellent. Also, there is the minor flaw of how you descend? Although I guess in Ukip terms 'they' never leave....
The question is, how would they be greeted at the top?
Labour set up a massively expensive welcome gate and only count one in every ten. Conservatives cough politely and look at their shoes. Lib Dems hold a jamboree. UKIP give them a bus ticket to Dover. BNP push them off.
Personally I doubt there would be a referendum anyway if the Tories won a majority. Cameron would surely find a way out of it (assuming he thought there was a genuine risk of losing it).
Absolutely mad.
My offer of up to £1000 (or possibly more) at Even remains open to anyone credit-worthy but foolish enough to believe such nonsense.
I'll also offer £1000 for the same bet. Will no one think of the cocktails?
Even Sean Fear, disillusioned and disgusted as he is with Cameron and all his works, knows that an in-out referendum will take place if his ex party wins a majority next year.
I'll also offer £1000 for the same bet. Will no one think of the cocktails?
Could be quite a party!
The problem is finding a mug to take the bet. There are lots of people who are adamant that Cameron would renege on the committment, we just need to find one who is credit-worthy and not all mouth and no trousers.
Edit: Just had an idea - does anyone have John Rentoul's email address?
I'll also offer £1000 for the same bet. Will no one think of the cocktails?
Could be quite a party!
The problem is finding a mug to take the bet. There are lots of people who are adamant that Cameron would renege on the committment, we just need to find one who is credit-worthy and not all mouth and no trousers.
Edit: Just had an idea - does anyone have John Rentoul's email address?
What is to stop PM Cameron passing a law that allows free movement of people from the EU to the UK and keeping our borders just as open as they were before?
There are no free lunches or easy options which give you everything you want and nothing you don't want.
Unless you are UKIP or the SNP, where your much bigger counter-party will accede to every request......
What kind of a country are we that we have reached such a pass?
And yet 20 million pounds was spent on legal aid for Iraqis who have even never been to Britain to bring a case against the British army.
A case which the court decided was wholly without foundation.
Surely its a question of priorities in defining what legal aid should or shouldn;t cover.
A case, moreover, in which an employee or employee of one of the law firms who represented these bogus claimants appears to have shredded key documents, which would have resulted in the case being thrown out years ago, had they been disclosed.
"UKIP today reveals it's new billboard design depicting an escalator running up the White Cliffs of Dover showing how we have lost control of our borders."
That offends my engineering and health and safety sensibilities.
Firstly, it is not protected from the tide. Wait for the first high tide and the mechanism would be ruined. Then there's the safety aspect of a lack of crowd control or fencing at the top. Disabled access is also not catered for.
Finally there's a practical one: the cliffs must be at least a couple of hundred feet high given the scale of the house at the top, and I count only 25-30 steps. This means each step would be a minimum of six to seven feet high, and therefore utterly useless.
So it's not fit for purpose, dangerous, caters for an uncertain demand, and will last precisely six hours.
Needless to say, ;-)
Ha ha, excellent. Also, there is the minor flaw of how you descend? Although I guess in Ukip terms 'they' never leave....
The escalator is actually running downwards, the Kipper idea being that at high tide all those nasty immigrants are herded on at the top to be gently deposited into the sea.
On the other hand in terms of pub patriots, I was putting up St George bunting on April 23 and one of my regulars, a lad in his 20s, a builder by trade, said 'the World Cup isn't for 2 months' I pointed out it was for St George's Day 'Whats that? Never heard of him'
@TomSkyNews: Max Clifford posed for pictures for 4mins 10seconds before heading into court this morning. He is currently in the cells awaiting sentencing
Labour looks a speculative punt in Newark to me; do they have any organisation across the rural parts of the constituency? Is Ed's promise to cap rents going to sweep him to victory here? I'd look for value on low turnout instead; 2 weeks after Euros and dubious reason for by-elex.
Coalition squabble on knives caught my eye. Looks like one where it's in both parties interests to disagree publically, but adds to perception that Grayling is struggling. His savings don't seem as well thought out as some colleagues (just expect same outputs for less money, or the outcry over parcel restrictions) and he seems particularly weak at working in the constraints of coalition - there must be plenty he can offer e.g. on drugs policy reviews to get things like this through. Might Grayling be looking over his shoulder come the reshuffle?
Grayling's so-called savings on Legal Aid resulted yesterday in a fraud trial (following a lengthy investigation by the FCA) being stopped. Another major insider dealing trial faces the same problem. Based on yesterday's judgment there must be a high risk that an investigation which, to my knowledge, has taken at least 5 years will be stopped because the defendants cannot find anyone to defend them at the rates the government is paying. The judge effectively said yesterday that the government's failure to fund the justice system meant that defendants could not receive a fair trial.
What kind of a country are we that we have reached such a pass? What sort of financial centre can we be if the City regulator cannot bring fraud cases because defendants are unable to have a fair trial?
All of this has arisen because of Grayling's inept and ineffective reforms. He should be kicked out of government.
Whatever one's views on the role of the state it is indisputably the case that a proper system of justice is one of its main, basic functions. And on this the government is failing in a way which brings our standing, not least in one of our major industries, into disrepute.
Ms. Free, I presume that the defendants couldn't find anyone they wanted who was prepared to take on the case. We are frequently told that the junior bar is chock full of people earning, after expenses, less than the minimum wage so it would be very surprising if a few of those in such poverty could not be found to take on a case.
However, perhaps the answer is for HMG to fund a public defence service and pay lawyers a salary. That would get rid of poverty stricken barristers and the dreadful situation you highlight. Doubt if the lawyers would like it much though.
What is to stop PM Cameron passing a law that allows free movement of people from the EU to the UK and keeping our borders just as open as they were before?
There are no free lunches or easy options which give you everything you want and nothing you don't want.
Unless you are UKIP or the SNP, where your much bigger counter-party will accede to every request......
Or, you know, David Cameron in his renegotiation attempts...
"UKIP today reveals it's new billboard design depicting an escalator running up the White Cliffs of Dover showing how we have lost control of our borders."
As always when these things are discussed, the focus is on the wrong aspect. It shouldn't be on who is paying, it should be on why the cases are so mind-blowingly expensive in the first place.
Labour looks a speculative punt in Newark to me; do they have any organisation across the rural parts of the constituency? Is Ed's promise to cap rents going to sweep him to victory here? I'd look for value on low turnout instead; 2 weeks after Euros and dubious reason for by-elex.
Coalition squabble on knives caught my eye. Looks like one where it's in both parties interests to disagree publically, but adds to perception that Grayling is struggling. His savings don't seem as well thought out as some colleagues (just expect same outputs for less money, or the outcry over parcel restrictions) and he seems particularly weak at working in the constraints of coalition - there must be plenty he can offer e.g. on drugs policy reviews to get things like this through. Might Grayling be looking over his shoulder come the reshuffle?
Grayling's so-called savings on Legal Aid resulted yesterday in a fraud trial (following a lengthy investigation by the FCA) being stopped. Another major insider dealing trial faces the same problem. Based on yesterday's judgment there must be a high risk that an investigation which, to my knowledge, has taken at least 5 years will be stopped because the defendants cannot find anyone to defend them at the rates the government is paying. The judge effectively said yesterday that the government's failure to fund the justice system meant that defendants could not receive a fair trial.
What kind of a country are we that we have reached such a pass? What sort of financial centre can we be if the City regulator cannot bring fraud cases because defendants are unable to have a fair trial?
All of this has arisen because of Grayling's inept and ineffective reforms. He should be kicked out of government.
Whatever one's views on the role of the state it is indisputably the case that a proper system of justice is one of its main, basic functions. And on this the government is failing in a way which brings our standing, not least in one of our major industries, into disrepute.
Ms. Free, I presume that the defendants couldn't find anyone they wanted who was prepared to take on the case. We are frequently told that the junior bar is chock full of people earning, after expenses, less than the minimum wage so it would be very surprising if a few of those in such poverty could not be found to take on a case.
However, perhaps the answer is for HMG to fund a public defence service and pay lawyers a salary. That would get rid of poverty stricken barristers and the dreadful situation you highlight. Doubt if the lawyers would like it much though.
And of course, barristers wouldn't turn down work 'en masse' on a reasonably high profile trial to make a political point, would they?
What is to stop PM Cameron passing a law that allows free movement of people from the EU to the UK and keeping our borders just as open as they were before?
There are no free lunches or easy options which give you everything you want and nothing you don't want.
Unless you are UKIP or the SNP, where your much bigger counter-party will accede to every request......
Or, you know, David Cameron in his renegotiation attempts...
He too has an uphill task, tho cannily has not offered hostages to fortune unlike the SNP or UKIP, to the incandescent fury of his critics.....
I've just had a leaflet through the post from No2EU. It reads like a leftist UKIP: No to the EU, protect workers' rights and yes to international solidarity, but also no TTIP with the US.
So far, we've had one election-specific leaflet from each of UKIP and No2EU, and a non-specific one from the Conservatives. Nothing from Labour or the Lib Dems.
I'll also offer £1000 for the same bet. Will no one think of the cocktails?
Could be quite a party!
The problem is finding a mug to take the bet. There are lots of people who are adamant that Cameron would renege on the committment, we just need to find one who is credit-worthy and not all mouth and no trousers.
Edit: Just had an idea - does anyone have John Rentoul's email address?
I don't think he would renege, I would happily back Evens that if he is PM there would be a referendum, if you take more than you want!
But seeing as I want an end to open door immigration, and Cameron doesn't, why would I help to elect him? As PM with a majority he could easily get a bill through parliament that keeps our borders open even in a post EU UK
I'll also offer £1000 for the same bet. Will no one think of the cocktails?
Could be quite a party!
The problem is finding a mug to take the bet. There are lots of people who are adamant that Cameron would renege on the committment, we just need to find one who is credit-worthy and not all mouth and no trousers.
Edit: Just had an idea - does anyone have John Rentoul's email address?
Who is adamant that Cameron would renege on the commitment?
Personally I doubt there would be a referendum anyway if the Tories won a majority. Cameron would surely find a way out of it (assuming he thought there was a genuine risk of losing it).
Today's posters are pretty unambiguous on the subject.
That nice Mr Nabavi was offering evens to anyone of your opinion for stakes up to £1,000 yesterday. If you twisted his arm, he might even make the odds a little more favourable to you, I suspect.
Personally I doubt there would be a referendum anyway if the Tories won a majority. Cameron would surely find a way out of it (assuming he thought there was a genuine risk of losing it).
Today's posters are pretty unambiguous on the subject.
That nice Mr Nabavi was offering evens to anyone of your opinion for stakes up to £1,000 yesterday. If you twisted his arm, he might even make the odds a little more favourable to you, I suspect.
Not my sort of bet - too long term etc.
Re: posters. Um, since when exactly are party adverts meaningful of anything?
@Bobafett I'll make you a lower/better offer, for £20 but at 6-5, bet void if no Conservative majority.
What is to stop PM Cameron passing a law that allows free movement of people from the EU to the UK and keeping our borders just as open as they were before?
There are no free lunches or easy options which give you everything you want and nothing you don't want.
Unless you are UKIP or the SNP, where your much bigger counter-party will accede to every request......
Or, you know, David Cameron in his renegotiation attempts...
He too has an uphill task, tho cannily has not offered hostages to fortune unlike the SNP or UKIP, to the incandescent fury of his critics.....
He insteads says that a renegotiation would solve all our problems with Europe, while keeping all the good bits, but won't actually say what he's aiming for.
I'll also offer £1000 for the same bet. Will no one think of the cocktails?
Could be quite a party!
The problem is finding a mug to take the bet. There are lots of people who are adamant that Cameron would renege on the committment, we just need to find one who is credit-worthy and not all mouth and no trousers.
Edit: Just had an idea - does anyone have John Rentoul's email address?
Who is adamant that Cameron would renege on the commitment?
Very few are adamant. Even less prepared to bet on it.
It is an excuse not a reason. One widely used as a licence for irresponsible voting.
Our estimate for Labour this month is 35.3%, down 0.9% on last month, and continuing the past year’s pattern of slow but steady decline. Labour have now hit their lowest point in the polls since Ed Miliband was elected leader of the party in the autumn of 2010.
However, the Conservatives have not been able to capitalise on Labour’s continued decline as their support has fallen even more sharply this month, down 1.4 points at 31.6%. The Liberal Democrats have also seen no electoral benefit from their leader’s high profile combat with Nigel Farage over the EU – we have them down 0.2% this month at 7.4%.
It seems the Kippers are the only ones who are on the up!
I expected the polls to be distorted by the UKIP Euro effect - but I think the Tories may bounce back more afterwards. I was surprised by today's Populus - time will tell if they are on the button but it's very bad news for Labour if they are.
Who is adamant that Cameron would renege on the commitment?
On this thread, Bobafett and anotherDave.
On any random ConHome or Telegraph comments thread, a whole stream of UKIP nutters, usually in comments laced with words like 'lying' and 'LibLabCon'.
You can see why: if they do actually admit the truth that Cameron is neither lying nor untrustworthy, and that therefore there would be a referendum under Cameron, it completely blows their world-view out of the water.
Our estimate for Labour this month is 35.3%, down 0.9% on last month, and continuing the past year’s pattern of slow but steady decline. Labour have now hit their lowest point in the polls since Ed Miliband was elected leader of the party in the autumn of 2010.
However, the Conservatives have not been able to capitalise on Labour’s continued decline as their support has fallen even more sharply this month, down 1.4 points at 31.6%. The Liberal Democrats have also seen no electoral benefit from their leader’s high profile combat with Nigel Farage over the EU – we have them down 0.2% this month at 7.4%.
I think it's fair to say that whereas the initial UKIP surge was predominantly from the Tories, they are now picking up a bit from all parties. It's probably a mistake, though, to suppose that if this fades it will nearly all go Tory.
Ms. Free, I presume that the defendants couldn't find anyone they wanted who was prepared to take on the case. We are frequently told that the junior bar is chock full of people earning, after expenses, less than the minimum wage so it would be very surprising if a few of those in such poverty could not be found to take on a case.
However, perhaps the answer is for HMG to fund a public defence service and pay lawyers a salary. That would get rid of poverty stricken barristers and the dreadful situation you highlight. Doubt if the lawyers would like it much though.
And of course, barristers wouldn't turn down work 'en masse' on a reasonably high profile trial to make a political point, would they?
No-one at the Bar (70 chambers were approached) or any of the Higher Court Advocates at solicitors' firms or an of the firms in Scotland would take on the case at the fees offered which are 30% lower than previously. This is a case which has been classified as very complex: there are multiple defendants, multiple charges, cut-throat defences etc.
The government is trying to hire public defenders but does not have enough of sufficient experience or skills to defend these cases nor enough of them to deal with all the cases they are coming along the track. So the trials might have had to wait more than a year or more before happening. Justice delayed is justice denied and makes the chances of an acquittal higher given memory issues for witnesses. There is also a problem with having inexperienced advocates in that the trial will take much longer, thus costing more and wiping out any savings and imposing a burden on jurors.
It is a mess - one wholly of the government's making - and they were warned that this was the likely outcome. The FCA will be spitting tacks. Other financial centres and fraudsters will look at us and laugh.
As always when these things are discussed, the focus is on the wrong aspect. It shouldn't be on who is paying, it should be on why the cases are so mind-blowingly expensive in the first place.
Years ago I used occasionally to take a drink with a City of London copper. The City of London then being the foremost force in investigating fraud and like crime. After losing several long and complex cases because, it was thought, the juries couldn't understand the offence let alone the evidence, the plod decided to change tack. At the heart of most complex fraud cases their is usually a simple case of theft or deception so do enough work to get the evidence for that and take that to court. No need then for 5 year long investigations, massively complex and lengthy trials, cheaper and fairer all round and the punishments on conviction need not be dissimilar. Instead HMG set up the Serious Fraud Office whose success rate has been, shall we say, patchy and who now, it would seem, can't even get a case to trial.
Cue endless posts about 'rich' leftie Londoners...
I don't want to get into the boring debate about what makes a Londoner etc.. I don't even know if I am one.. probably not...
But my original point was, and you kind of back it up when you post, is that people born in a place have stronger, and usually more negative, views about the pace of change in an area... lets not try and define whether this makes them "real" whatever they came from or not.
The bloke in the pub, that was born in Custom House and moved to Dagenham.. look what he thinks of Custom House now.. what do you think people like him that haven't left yet think of it? Compare their opinions with people who "decided" to live in Custom House or Canning Town or wherever in London you choose
That's all I ever said, but the debate was dominated by the offence that people took by my calling them "not real" Londoners!
There are loads of junior barristers earning very little (I have a good friend who earned just under £12k last year which barely covered her work expenses), particularly in crime. The issue here was that you can't just get anyone to defend you on legal aid, it needs to be a barrister with a legal aid contract. Now plenty of those are around, but for VHCC cases they need to have a VHCC contract. Last year all the barristers on VHCC contracts had the contracts cancelled and were offered new ones with a 30% fee cut - not a single one has yet signed. There are a set of public defenders, but none could be found with suitable experience for this case. Thus the judge ruled that the defendants didn't have access to a credible legal defence, and thus couldn't have a fair trial.
As always when these things are discussed, the focus is on the wrong aspect. It shouldn't be on who is paying, it should be on why the cases are so mind-blowingly expensive in the first place.
Cue endless posts about 'rich' leftie Londoners...
I don't want to get into the boring debate about what makes a Londoner etc.. I don't even know if I am one.. probably not...
But my original point was, and you kind of back it up when you post, is that people born in a place have stronger, and usually more negative, views about the pace of change in an area... lets not try and define whether this makes them "real" whatever they came from or not.
The bloke in the pub, that was born in Custom House and moved to Dagenham.. look what he thinks of Custom House now.. what do you think people like him that haven't left yet think of it? Compare their opinions with people who "decided" to live in Custom House or Canning Town or wherever in London you choose
That's all I ever said, but the debate was dominated by the offence that people took by my calling them "not real" Londoners!
Probably the difference is that people born there feel they have the right to criticize the change/immigration, whereas people that move there as adults would be seen as being rude if they criticized, and hypocrites as they are immigrants themselves
As always when these things are discussed, the focus is on the wrong aspect. It shouldn't be on who is paying, it should be on why the cases are so mind-blowingly expensive in the first place.
"UKIP today reveals it's new billboard design depicting an escalator running up the White Cliffs of Dover showing how we have lost control of our borders."
I didn't take offence actually - you are entitled to your view which was not offensive. I just strongly disagreed with it.
What upsets me about these ultra white suburbs is that they have few immigrants yet are obsessed by immigration. It's very odd indeed. If they were less insular and left Romford once in a while to see what was on offer in more inner areas, they might change their view.
I am from an ultra white working class part of the north/midlands. It is the guys who stayed who are the racists...
At the heart of most complex fraud cases their is usually a simple case of theft or deception so do enough work to get the evidence for that and take that to court.
Yes, I think that is exactly the point. They get distracted with massive amounts of extraneous stuff, and that in turn is because the entire legal establishment, from top to bottom, including the judges, really have no incentive to keep costs down - in fact, in many cases the reverse. Of course they pay lip-service to cutting costs, but it's ineffectual.
Of course it's not just fraud cases, the same point applies to all aspects of justice.
I've had close experience of this in relation to a civil case a few years ago, where my wife was an expert witness. It was a professional negligence case, and essentially came down to two points: were the defendants liable, and, if so, for how much?
A massive amount of work was done on the second point (which was quite complex), at a cost of many, many hundreds of thousands of pounds.
All a complete waste of time and money, because the case never got that far; it was thrown out a few days' into the trial on the first point.
Surely it should not be beyond the wit of man, even of lawyers, to derive a system where you first decide on liability, and only if liability is proven, go on to do extremely detailed and expensive work on quantifying it?
As always when these things are discussed, the focus is on the wrong aspect. It shouldn't be on who is paying, it should be on why the cases are so mind-blowingly expensive in the first place.
£3 million a case.
I'd love to see a breakdown of that lot !
This has been brewing up for a long time.
Whilst barristers were happy to take on the ridiculously expensive cases for piss takers such as Nadir, this was going to be the outcome.
Did none of them think about standing up, and saying that reforms were desperately needed or was the lure of the fees to great? A lot of the legal profession has grown fat and wealthy on the back of these trials.
Comments
I expect Dave to swing right in response to the Right plurality in VI.
Right, but not hard right, and specifically on referendum in/out and immigration and crime. Aim to mop up those dallying with UKIP whilst retaining the core and centre on the back of the improving economy,
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/4687730/Dame-Vera-Lynn-takes-on-BNP-over-White-Cliffs-of-Dover.html
Firstly, it is not protected from the tide. Wait for the first high tide and the mechanism would be ruined. Then there's the safety aspect of a lack of crowd control or fencing at the top. Disabled access is also not catered for.
Finally there's a practical one: the cliffs must be at least a couple of hundred feet high given the scale of the house at the top, and I count only 25-30 steps. This means each step would be a minimum of six to seven feet high, and therefore utterly useless.
So it's not fit for purpose, dangerous, caters for an uncertain demand, and will last precisely six hours.
Needless to say, ;-)
I understood EU nationals can vote in both EU elections as well as Local elections. Logical. They are council tax payers.
Got my first Euro literature today. From Dave. Probably remembers I was a party member in 2005 and voted for him.
I used to like toffs.
Personally I think anyone should be able to stand anywhere if they put down the necessary deposit - let the voters choose who they want, taking their nationality into account. Perhaps UKIP would put Putin up.
UKIP = "Mrs Brady, Old Lady" from Viz.
http://www.laurencestassen.eu/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laurence_Stassen
http://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2014/05/ukip-thrives-because-the-man-in-the-pub-feels-it-will-not-be-cowed-into-silence.html
Say they/we did just that, elected PM Cameron in a majority Conservative govt, got an EU referendum , won it and left the EU
What is to stop PM Cameron passing a law that allows free movement of people from the EU to the UK and keeping our borders just as open as they were before?
'Member of the Westminster bubble talks to voters shock'
Personally I doubt there would be a referendum anyway if the Tories won a majority. Cameron would surely find a way out of it (assuming he thought there was a genuine risk of losing it).
http://notesfromnorthbritain.wordpress.com/2014/05/02/two-positive-cases/
But I don't believe either the Conservatives' referendum offer, or that they're likely to win the 2015 election.
http://www.ybig.ie/forum/viz-modern-parents_topic10899.html
I'm not sure that the Conservatives or Labour would be ... Labour (Biffa Bacon?); Conservatives (Mr Logic)?
Make of that what you will!
Does anyone doubt my "anecdotes" from my mates who are "sparks" now?
I'd have thought Ed Miliband is far more likely to do that when people like you voting UKIP catapult him into power.
Ed may well commit the UK to further and possibly irreversible integration with Europe which will make your aims much more difficult to achieve than they are now.
The consolation is that you will be able to seethe properly when that happens.
That nice Mr Nabavi was offering evens to anyone of your opinion for stakes up to £1,000 yesterday. If you twisted his arm, he might even make the odds a little more favourable to you, I suspect.
However, the Conservatives have not been able to capitalise on Labour’s continued decline as their support has fallen even more sharply this month, down 1.4 points at 31.6%. The Liberal Democrats have also seen no electoral benefit from their leader’s high profile combat with Nigel Farage over the EU – we have them down 0.2% this month at 7.4%.
http://sotonpolitics.org/2014/05/02/polling-observatory-36-farages-spring-uprising/
What kind of a country are we that we have reached such a pass? What sort of financial centre can we be if the City regulator cannot bring fraud cases because defendants are unable to have a fair trial?
All of this has arisen because of Grayling's inept and ineffective reforms. He should be kicked out of government.
Whatever one's views on the role of the state it is indisputably the case that a proper system of justice is one of its main, basic functions. And on this the government is failing in a way which brings our standing, not least in one of our major industries, into disrepute.
This morning's publication looks at the contribution made by energy costs to consumer inflation since the financial crisis.
[T]he primary drivers of higher inflation rates in 2008 were the costs of household energy – including electricity, gas, other household fuels and fuels & lubricants used in transport equipment (primarily petrol and diesel prices) – and price increases in food, drink & tobacco. Combined, these products accounted for around 3.5 percentage points of the 5.2% inflation rate experienced in September 2008.
The ONS goes on to state that energy cost inflation abated during 2009-10 and then peaked again in 2011 before falling again to the very low levels being experienced today.
The following table shows how energy cost inflation has been brought to just just 0.10% in 2014. The contribution of household energy bills to overall CPI inflation has fallen from 0.37 percentage points (pp) in the year to March 2013, to 0.25 pp in January 2014 and actually reduced inflation in March for the first time since October 2009. The contributions of food, drink & tobacco and housing costs, have fallen sharply between January 2013 and January 2014 (0.8 pp to 0.4 pp and 0.2 pp to 0.1 pp respectively).
I would not normally seeking to score a partisan point out of energy costs as the drivers are mostly beyond governmental control. But given that Labour are crusading on the "cost of living crisis", it may be pertinent to remind ourselves who was appointed Secretary of State for DECC in 2008 and which government since the crisis has done more to reduce energy cost inflation.
It appears where domestic energy is concerned what we truly have is a 'Cost of Labour crisis'.
So you have to ask yourself what would be in that trade deal, and my contention is that, like the deal Switzerland has, it would include the free movement of workers, to a greater or lesser extent - probably, in the end, not very different from what we currently have.
So, yes, you are right, but it's got nothing to do with Cameron particularly, it would be equally an issue if PM Farage were doing the negotiating.
There are no free lunches or easy options which give you everything you want and nothing you don't want.
WRT the London local elections, UKIP are only fielding candidates in about a quarter of the seats. Thus, UKIP would have to win 40% per candidate to get the 11% vote share that Survation put them on. I think that's pretty unlikely. I'd expect them to win more like 20% per candidate, and 5% overall. The remaining UKIP voters in that poll will mostly back Conservative council candidates.
Over and above that, the Greens will gain far more than 4% of the vote, mostly at the expense of Labour and the Lib Dems.
The only Conservative councils that I think are vulnerable are Croydon (to Labour) and Havering (to no overall control).
Re: posters. Um, since when exactly are party adverts meaningful of anything?
And yet 20 million pounds was spent on legal aid for Iraqis who have even never been to Britain to bring a case against the British army.
A case which the court decided was wholly without foundation.
Surely its a question of priorities in defining what legal aid should or shouldn;t cover.
My offer of up to £1000 (or possibly more) at Even remains open to anyone credit-worthy but foolish enough to believe such nonsense.
Labour set up a massively expensive welcome gate and only count one in every ten.
Conservatives cough politely and look at their shoes.
Lib Dems hold a jamboree.
UKIP give them a bus ticket to Dover.
BNP push them off.
:-)
Even Sean Fear, disillusioned and disgusted as he is with Cameron and all his works, knows that an in-out referendum will take place if his ex party wins a majority next year.
true, but do you think they said stuff that isn;t said amongst 'friends' in pubs up and down the land on a daily basis?
The problem is finding a mug to take the bet. There are lots of people who are adamant that Cameron would renege on the committment, we just need to find one who is credit-worthy and not all mouth and no trousers.
Edit: Just had an idea - does anyone have John Rentoul's email address?
I pointed out it was for St George's Day
'Whats that? Never heard of him'
@TomSkyNews: Max Clifford posed for pictures for 4mins 10seconds before heading into court this morning. He is currently in the cells awaiting sentencing
However, perhaps the answer is for HMG to fund a public defence service and pay lawyers a salary. That would get rid of poverty stricken barristers and the dreadful situation you highlight. Doubt if the lawyers would like it much though.
I think UKIP are referring to the white Cliffs of Dover.
The Cliffs are an indigenous Kentish family who live on the north side of Dover Port.
This is the issue:
Official figures show that £600m of legal aid went on lawyers for around 128,000 defendants in the Crown Court in 2012-13
Just 20 VHCCs ["Very High Cost Cases"] soaked up a tenth of all that spending.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-27247592
As always when these things are discussed, the focus is on the wrong aspect. It shouldn't be on who is paying, it should be on why the cases are so mind-blowingly expensive in the first place.
http://www.no2eu.com/
So far, we've had one election-specific leaflet from each of UKIP and No2EU, and a non-specific one from the Conservatives. Nothing from Labour or the Lib Dems.
But seeing as I want an end to open door immigration, and Cameron doesn't, why would I help to elect him? As PM with a majority he could easily get a bill through parliament that keeps our borders open even in a post EU UK
It is an excuse not a reason. One widely used as a licence for irresponsible voting.
Actually it's s fair wager you make but it's just not my sort of bet. Way too long term etc etc.
I am however a fair and honest dealer and never welch on a bet.
Not in the pubs I frequent.
Cue endless posts about 'rich' leftie Londoners...
On any random ConHome or Telegraph comments thread, a whole stream of UKIP nutters, usually in comments laced with words like 'lying' and 'LibLabCon'.
You can see why: if they do actually admit the truth that Cameron is neither lying nor untrustworthy, and that therefore there would be a referendum under Cameron, it completely blows their world-view out of the water.
The government is trying to hire public defenders but does not have enough of sufficient experience or skills to defend these cases nor enough of them to deal with all the cases they are coming along the track. So the trials might have had to wait more than a year or more before happening. Justice delayed is justice denied and makes the chances of an acquittal higher given memory issues for witnesses. There is also a problem with having inexperienced advocates in that the trial will take much longer, thus costing more and wiping out any savings and imposing a burden on jurors.
It is a mess - one wholly of the government's making - and they were warned that this was the likely outcome. The FCA will be spitting tacks. Other financial centres and fraudsters will look at us and laugh.
Perhaps my old chum had a point.
But my original point was, and you kind of back it up when you post, is that people born in a place have stronger, and usually more negative, views about the pace of change in an area... lets not try and define whether this makes them "real" whatever they came from or not.
The bloke in the pub, that was born in Custom House and moved to Dagenham.. look what he thinks of Custom House now.. what do you think people like him that haven't left yet think of it? Compare their opinions with people who "decided" to live in Custom House or Canning Town or wherever in London you choose
That's all I ever said, but the debate was dominated by the offence that people took by my calling them "not real" Londoners!
Another possible explanation for all the parties sinking south is that Ukip is picking up from Nota - hence all shares reduce...
I'd love to see a breakdown of that lot !
Cameron = Raffles the Gentleman Thug
I didn't take offence actually - you are entitled to your view which was not offensive. I just strongly disagreed with it.
What upsets me about these ultra white suburbs is that they have few immigrants yet are obsessed by immigration. It's very odd indeed. If they were less insular and left Romford once in a while to see what was on offer in more inner areas, they might change their view.
I am from an ultra white working class part of the north/midlands. It is the guys who stayed who are the racists...
Of course it's not just fraud cases, the same point applies to all aspects of justice.
I've had close experience of this in relation to a civil case a few years ago, where my wife was an expert witness. It was a professional negligence case, and essentially came down to two points: were the defendants liable, and, if so, for how much?
A massive amount of work was done on the second point (which was quite complex), at a cost of many, many hundreds of thousands of pounds.
All a complete waste of time and money, because the case never got that far; it was thrown out a few days' into the trial on the first point.
Surely it should not be beyond the wit of man, even of lawyers, to derive a system where you first decide on liability, and only if liability is proven, go on to do extremely detailed and expensive work on quantifying it?
So almost the same as the PollingObservatory numbers TSE linked to earlier.
There can't be much doubt this is the true situation at present.
Whilst barristers were happy to take on the ridiculously expensive cases for piss takers such as Nadir, this was going to be the outcome.
Did none of them think about standing up, and saying that reforms were desperately needed or was the lure of the fees to great? A lot of the legal profession has grown fat and wealthy on the back of these trials.