Being in or out of the EU would not make any difference any knock on effect to our economy.
Of course it does. Our export structure is hugely distorted towards the EU, with whom we have free trade, and away from the rest of the world, with whom the EU makes us put up trade barriers. We'd be hugely benefitting from North America's resurgence right now if we were in NAFTA.
Socrates Indeed, at least outside the Orange Book grouping which is now leading the party. The article suggests the Greens are winning a significant percentage of 2010 LDs in seats where the Tories were runners up, making it easier for the Tories to take the seat. It also suggests Lucas is now just a point behind in Brighton and could well hold on
Being in or out of the EU would not make any difference any knock on effect to our economy.
Of course it does. Our export structure is hugely distorted towards the EU, with whom we have free trade, and away from the rest of the world, with whom the EU makes us put up trade barriers. We'd be hugely benefitting from North America's resurgence right now if we were in NAFTA.
I thought the US had made clear that there's no chance of a free trade deal if we're outside the EU. The whole transatlantic trade deal is getting far too little attention IMO.
yet another scandal waiting to break involving the **** that make up whoreminster
one unintended good consequence of EU immigration is lots of EU kids are being snatched now as well so what the secret courts have been doing is filtering got out in other countries
Being in or out of the EU would not make any difference any knock on effect to our economy.
Of course it does. Our export structure is hugely distorted towards the EU, with whom we have free trade, and away from the rest of the world, with whom the EU makes us put up trade barriers. We'd be hugely benefitting from North America's resurgence right now if we were in NAFTA.
We export to the EU we export elswhere. We export where we can. A large proportion of the MINI output is exported and a lot of it goes to the USA and Japan with out too much trouble. If the EU, like the USA catches a cold then we suffer as the rest of the world struggles to take up the capacity. The EU - the Eurozone - is a big market, so is the USA. Where are there bigger markets? China is growing and we for instance export a lot of Rolls Royces there. But the EU and USA are big markets.
NAFTA covers the USA Canada and Mexico. They had enough trouble sorting that out without us complicating it. How would we have dealt with say the agriculture part of it - Mexican agriculture has been devastated. We would have had to enter into various enviromental conditions and food and plan safety laws. Just for starters. We have benefited from direct investment into the EU, as part of NAFTA would we have seen jobs exported to Mexico? In any event - there is a transatlantic deal dragging its feet right now.
I can't see the full article, since I don't subscribe to this esteemed Murdoch publication, but I can see this in the preview: "The analysis suggests that LibDem support is weakening among the young, old, urban, rural, poor, middle class and wealthy".
Still, as long as the weakening is confined to those groups, I guess they shouldn't worry too much!
yet another scandal waiting to break involving the **** that make up whoreminster
one unintended good consequence of EU immigration is lots of EU kids are being snatched now as well so what the secret courts have been doing is filtering got out in other countries
Mr Jones
It is not clear from your garbled text who is accused of doing what to whom, where and when.
Socrates Indeed, at least outside the Orange Book grouping which is now leading the party. The article suggests the Greens are winning a significant percentage of 2010 LDs in seats where the Tories were runners up, making it easier for the Tories to take the seat. It also suggests Lucas is now just a point behind in Brighton and could well hold on
Some fairly absurd comment on this to be honest. Extrapolating from the European elections to the General Election is of course absolutely reliable isn't it - after all, UKIP are bound to top the poll next May, aren't they ? The Greens also polled 8% in 2009 and romped home with 1% the following year.
ON more important matters, I hope everyone is enjoying the evening in Ilkley in what some call God's Own County (I always thought that was Surrey).
Q: What will the driver of this Eurozone crisis be? A: A recession in many of the Eurozone countries, piling on more Government debt.
What is causing the recession? Why have we come out of recession despite the drag of the Eurozone crisis? The Eurozone are being fairly slow cutting their deficits. I suppose pursuing socialist policies. I do not see that helping labour.
TC said I think that a recession would cause the crisis
My further question is what is the cause of the recession? I suppose its them following socialist policies, not really good for Labour I would have thought.
(sorry but I know nothiong about how these quotes thingys work)
yet another scandal waiting to break involving the **** that make up whoreminster
one unintended good consequence of EU immigration is lots of EU kids are being snatched now as well so what the secret courts have been doing is filtering got out in other countries
Mr Jones
It is not clear from your garbled text who is accused of doing what to whom, where and when.
Wasn't that a young gentleman in Khartoum? He took a lesbian up to his room But they argued all night As to who had the right To do what, and with which, and to whom.
(My English teacher had an interesting way of teaching grammar!)
@Gin - you have gone from assuring us that Ed has had it (Thu) to querying his likely satisfaction ratings after he has been in post for three years (Mon).
Yep, Mr Consistent me!
To be fair, Thursday's post was just really to try and wind up lefties. A lot of what I post is tongue in cheek, whch I thought everyone knew by now (think I've been here since 2007 - Blimey!)
I genuinely have no idea what's going to happen.
My instinct is still Con most votes and most seats in a HP, but the polls are still looking good for Lab for now.
Autumn will be important I think.
Ha! Fair enough. I wouldn't know about your track record, being a relatively recent addition to the site ;-)
yet another scandal waiting to break involving the **** that make up whoreminster
one unintended good consequence of EU immigration is lots of EU kids are being snatched now as well so what the secret courts have been doing is filtering got out in other countries
Mr Jones
It is not clear from your garbled text who is accused of doing what to whom, where and when.
Wasn't that a young gentleman in Khartoum? He took a lesbian up to his room But they argued all night As to who had the right To do what, and with which, and to whom.
(My English teacher had an interesting way of teaching grammar!)
Your bowdlerized version lacks the punch and sense of the original;
A pansy who came from Khartoum Took a lesbian up to his room She said "Settle one thing Now, before we begin, Who does what, and with which, and to whom?"
I was just looking at this timeline, does it seem a bit funny to keep referring this to this being exclusively about the 1980's.
Dickens handed his dossier in in 1983, and must have been compiling it for a long time. It seems to me then it is highly likely then that plenty of allegations refer to incidents in the 1970's.
This world of didn't just start up when the clock struck midnight on the 31st December 1979
As you were.... TC said I think that a recession would cause the crisis My further question is what is the cause of the recession? I suppose its them following socialist policies, not really good for Labour I would have thought. (sorry but I know nothiong about how these quotes thingys work)
The causes maybe argued about but France, Greece and (possibly) Spain have not cut back Govt spending/privatised to the levels they were set. Assets are under utilised and entrepreneurs have been persuaded to leave through their taxation policies etc. However even though Labour said that they would have copied Hollande, it does not follow that voters link Hollande's failure with Labour's promise of magic money trees.
The apparent disappearance of files alleging paedophilia linked to institutions in the 1980s http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-28195580 I was just looking at this timeline, does it seem a bit funny to keep referring this to this being exclusively about the 1980's. Dickens handed his dossier in in 1983, and must have been compiling it for a long time. It seems to me then it is highly likely then that plenty of allegations refer to incidents in the 1970's. This world of didn't just start up when the clock struck midnight on the 31st December 1979
It may depend upon how intensely the "investigation" looks at those that condoned/supported PIE. The Dromey/Harman factor.
The apparent disappearance of files alleging paedophilia linked to institutions in the 1980s http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-28195580 I was just looking at this timeline, does it seem a bit funny to keep referring this to this being exclusively about the 1980's. Dickens handed his dossier in in 1983, and must have been compiling it for a long time. It seems to me then it is highly likely then that plenty of allegations refer to incidents in the 1970's. This world of didn't just start up when the clock struck midnight on the 31st December 1979
It may depend upon how intensely the "investigation" looks at those that condoned/supported PIE. The Dromey/Harman factor.
Start whith the home secretary during the period and then go down the food chain.
As you were.... TC said I think that a recession would cause the crisis My further question is what is the cause of the recession? I suppose its them following socialist policies, not really good for Labour I would have thought. (sorry but I know nothiong about how these quotes thingys work)
The causes maybe argued about but France, Greece and (possibly) Spain have not cut back Govt spending/privatised to the levels they were set. Assets are under utilised and entrepreneurs have been persuaded to leave through their taxation policies etc. However even though Labour said that they would have copied Hollande, it does not follow that voters link Hollande's failure with Labour's promise of magic money trees.
Even though government (Spain, Greece) spending on the clear cut government areas of social policy, army, police and civil service has been cut, government spending is still high because of all the support for banks (example, Greece has spend 28 billion euros since mid 2012 on supporting banks, about 7% of GDP per year), someone has to cover all the underperfomed loans and that is the government not private investors so far.
I can't see the full article, since I don't subscribe to this esteemed Murdoch publication, but I can see this in the preview: "The analysis suggests that LibDem support is weakening among the young, old, urban, rural, poor, middle class and wealthy".
Still, as long as the weakening is confined to those groups, I guess they shouldn't worry too much!
They may have potential among the not yet born, although given the number of younger activists obsessed with Thatcher,for good or ill, because of their parents predilections,then perhaps not.
Great to meet everyone in Ilkley. Very nice to put faces to everyone. God I am old all the posters look younger than I anticipated.Think I was probably second oldest at 54
Being in or out of the EU would not make any difference any knock on effect to our economy.
Of course it does. Our export structure is hugely distorted towards the EU, with whom we have free trade, and away from the rest of the world, with whom the EU makes us put up trade barriers. We'd be hugely benefitting from North America's resurgence right now if we were in NAFTA.
We export to the EU we export elswhere. We export where we can. A large proportion of the MINI output is exported and a lot of it goes to the USA and Japan with out too much trouble. If the EU, like the USA catches a cold then we suffer as the rest of the world struggles to take up the capacity. The EU - the Eurozone - is a big market, so is the USA. Where are there bigger markets? China is growing and we for instance export a lot of Rolls Royces there. But the EU and USA are big markets.
NAFTA covers the USA Canada and Mexico. They had enough trouble sorting that out without us complicating it. How would we have dealt with say the agriculture part of it - Mexican agriculture has been devastated. We would have had to enter into various enviromental conditions and food and plan safety laws. Just for starters. We have benefited from direct investment into the EU, as part of NAFTA would we have seen jobs exported to Mexico? In any event - there is a transatlantic deal dragging its feet right now.
If I had to choose it would be NAFTA, the US is going through a phenomenal oil boom that is boosting its currency (the UK is having a financial boom that is also boosting its currency) an overvalued currency is bad for manufacturing and exports, thanks to oil the US can afford a much higher goods deficit before it runs into trouble so over the rest of the decade american manufacturing will suffer from dutch desease and exports to the US will rise faster. The only snag is having to sterilize the hot money flows to London (to stabilize the currency look at foreign reserves boost) in order for Britain to capture market share in america.
Jerry Hayes, the former Conservative MP for Harlow between 1983 and 1987, has written a full and frank blog article on his recall of the 'Dickens incident' during the Thatcher government.
Here are two paragraphs:
Of course we knew about the mortuary exploits of Jimmy Savile and his penchant for amputees. But we had no proof. We knew about Cyril Smith, various peers, senior people within Number 10, but again, no proof. And despite all my years of propping up bars and sifting the most bizarre gossip about the sexual practices of various Home Office ministers, usually served up by vindictive Police Federation whispers, most of the stuff was fairly flaky. My favourite piece of nonsense was about a senior labour Cabinet Minister who was unable to reach orgasm unless he stabbed young bunnies in a shoe box by the bed. And many of us watched, as was our duty, grainy footage of some unidentifiable old boy, grunting over what was said to be an underage boy. We were told it was a well known grandee. It could have been anyone. And the well known rumour that a very senior Labour figure was having sex with underaged boys in car parks, cautioned by the police and the paperwork destroyed, was pure malicious fantasy. The only evidence that seemed to stack was about Cyril Smith; but not enough to safely print.
But there was absolutely no gossip that I can remember about a paedophile ring in the heart of government. This doesn’t mean that there wasn’t one. It’s just that child sex offenders are the most manipulative and deceitful of criminals. They are chameleons, genetic freaks blending into a world of normality, so that they can pounce un-noticed. They are nearly always people you would not suspect. Pillars of the community, God fearing churchgoers, professional men; those of power and influence. Their very respectability gives them an impunity. Stewart Hall? You must be joking. Rolf Harris? Are you out of your mind?
For those who want further and better particulars the blog article can be found here: http://bit.ly/1xI4pYl
I am off to subscribe to a Rabbit Protection Charity.
RichardN Indeed, the analysis could do with finetuning, but basically it says the Greens are doing particularly well in LD-Tory marginals, and thus could help the Tories win more LD seats.
Stodge Of course the fact the Greens now have an MP also means that it is not just the Euros where they have a presence, and Ashcroft's poll suggests Lucas could cling on
Avery You may be interested in this week's popbitch regarding reports of an unnamed Tory minister and his alleged antics when staying at the mansion of the local aristo in the 80s. It is halfway down under the heading 'The world according to Rev_GB'. I am not going to go further, but makes for quite an astonishing story http://popbitch.com/home/2014/07/03/rolfie-wants-a-cuddle/
Jerry Hayes, the former Conservative MP for Harlow between 1983 and 1987, has written a full and frank blog article on his recall of the 'Dickens incident' during the Thatcher government.
Here are two paragraphs:
Of course we knew about the mortuary exploits of Jimmy Savile and his penchant for amputees. But we had no proof. We knew about Cyril Smith, various peers, senior people within Number 10, but again, no proof. And despite all my years of propping up bars and sifting the most bizarre gossip about the sexual practices of various Home Office ministers, usually served up by vindictive Police Federation whispers, most of the stuff was fairly flaky. My favourite piece of nonsense was about a senior labour Cabinet Minister who was unable to reach orgasm unless he stabbed young bunnies in a shoe box by the bed. And many of us watched, as was our duty, grainy footage of some unidentifiable old boy, grunting over what was said to be an underage boy. We were told it was a well known grandee. It could have been anyone. And the well known rumour that a very senior Labour figure was having sex with underaged boys in car parks, cautioned by the police and the paperwork destroyed, was pure malicious fantasy. The only evidence that seemed to stack was about Cyril Smith; but not enough to safely print.
But there was absolutely no gossip that I can remember about a paedophile ring in the heart of government. This doesn’t mean that there wasn’t one. It’s just that child sex offenders are the most manipulative and deceitful of criminals. They are chameleons, genetic freaks blending into a world of normality, so that they can pounce un-noticed. They are nearly always people you would not suspect. Pillars of the community, God fearing churchgoers, professional men; those of power and influence. Their very respectability gives them an impunity. Stewart Hall? You must be joking. Rolf Harris? Are you out of your mind?
For those who want further and better particulars the blog article can be found here: http://bit.ly/1xI4pYl
I am off to subscribe to a Rabbit Protection Charity.
Very interesting blog.
What amaze's me is the level of access Jimmy Savile was given, both to secure NHS facilities and to the highest levels of government and Royalty.
Yet even lowly MP's like Jerry Hayes had heard Savile might be a pedophile and necrophile?
It just seem implausible that MI5/MI6 wouldn't have known that this guy was as bad as it get's and should be kept as far away as possible from Mrs Thatcher, HMQ and Prince Philip, Prince Charles and Princess Diana, etc... Yet it never happened.
Jerry Hayes, the former Conservative MP for Harlow between 1983 and 1987, has written a full and frank blog article on his recall of the 'Dickens incident' during the Thatcher government.
Here are two paragraphs:
Of course we knew about the mortuary exploits of Jimmy Savile and his penchant for amputees. But we had no proof. We knew about Cyril Smith, various peers, senior people within Number 10, but again, no proof. And despite all my years of propping up bars and sifting the most bizarre gossip about the sexual practices of various Home Office ministers, usually served up by vindictive Police Federation whispers, most of the stuff was fairly flaky. My favourite piece of nonsense was about a senior labour Cabinet Minister who was unable to reach orgasm unless he stabbed young bunnies in a shoe box by the bed. And many of us watched, as was our duty, grainy footage of some unidentifiable old boy, grunting over what was said to be an underage boy. We were told it was a well known grandee. It could have been anyone. And the well known rumour that a very senior Labour figure was having sex with underaged boys in car parks, cautioned by the police and the paperwork destroyed, was pure malicious fantasy. The only evidence that seemed to stack was about Cyril Smith; but not enough to safely print.
But there was absolutely no gossip that I can remember about a paedophile ring in the heart of government. This doesn’t mean that there wasn’t one. It’s just that child sex offenders are the most manipulative and deceitful of criminals. They are chameleons, genetic freaks blending into a world of normality, so that they can pounce un-noticed. They are nearly always people you would not suspect. Pillars of the community, God fearing churchgoers, professional men; those of power and influence. Their very respectability gives them an impunity. Stewart Hall? You must be joking. Rolf Harris? Are you out of your mind?
For those who want further and better particulars the blog article can be found here: http://bit.ly/1xI4pYl
I am off to subscribe to a Rabbit Protection Charity.
Sex and Power have a weird relationship. I would stay away from anyone who was infront of a TV camera just in case, but there are so many of them.
About Jimmy Savile and his extrordinary level of access (and some immunity) it might be down to mrs.T, had she not been such a fan it might have been different.
YouGov/Sun poll tonight - Labour ahead by three points: CON 34%, LAB 37%, LD 9%, UKIP 13%
Relief for Con after the two earlier polls today.
Indeed but still not great. Labour seem to have got a real boost from something, not sure what.
Really? There were two 1% leads at the end of last week (Populus and YouGov). All consistent with a Lab lead of 3-4%.
Although it does seem to be the case that whenever the Tories sneak to 1-2% behind something happens to jolt them back to where they started.
I was more looking at the Labour share which has gone up again to mid to high 30s after skirting the lower 30s for a while.
I still expect some swingback and will be surprised if the tories do not get the most votes in 2015 but being the larger party is looking more remote again.
Last time I said this of course things closed right up again but there is little evidence of any true movement to the tories. My guess would be that the Fisher model will once again have a fairly sharp fall in the number of seats the tories can home to win.
About Jimmy Savile and his extrordinary level of access (and some immunity) it might be down to mrs.T, had she not been such a fan it might have been different.
Yes it's clear that May's investigation into "institutions" should include the Conservative Party.
What amaze's me is the level of access Jimmy Savile was given, both to secure NHS facilities and to the highest levels of government and Royalty.
Yet even lowly MP's like Jerry Hayes had heard Savile might be a pedophile and necrophile?
It just seem implausible that MI5/MI6 wouldn't have known that this guy was as bad as it get's and should be kept as far away as possible from Mrs Thatcher, HMQ and Prince Philip, Prince Charles and Princess Diana, etc... Yet it never happened.
Something just doesn't add up with all this.
My guess from reading is Saville operated by getting dirt in advance on the people who could stop him.
So when he was operating in the clubs he got dirt on local plod. Then when he got into the BBC he got dirt on entertainment people. Then when he got involved in political circles via the charity work he got dirt on political figures etc. Like a rock climber always keeping three points of contact before the next move.
Lucky for a lot of people he didn't keep a diary imo.
Great to meet everyone in Ilkley. Very nice to put faces to everyone. God I am old all the posters look younger than I anticipated.Think I was probably second oldest at 54
Sorry I had to leave early. Agree about the age thing - but some of us are older than we look.
"It just seem implausible that MI5/MI6 wouldn't have known that this guy was as bad as it get's "
I think you may have a view of the size and remit of the intelligence services that is more than somewhat detached from reality.
Maybe.
I just find it terribly troubling that someone as sick and evil as Savile apparently had access to the very highest level's of the British establishment for so many years.
About Jimmy Savile and his extrordinary level of access (and some immunity) it might be down to mrs.T, had she not been such a fan it might have been different.
Yes it's clear that May's investigation into "institutions" should include the Conservative Party.
Better trolling, but still not cutting the mustard
Thatcher is not the ex-Tory PM at the heart of these allegations. The allegations go way deeper, and longer ago, and far worse, than any favour that Thatcher may have had for Jimmy Savile.
What amaze's me is the level of access Jimmy Savile was given, both to secure NHS facilities and to the highest levels of government and Royalty.
Yet even lowly MP's like Jerry Hayes had heard Savile might be a pedophile and necrophile?
It just seem implausible that MI5/MI6 wouldn't have known that this guy was as bad as it get's and should be kept as far away as possible from Mrs Thatcher, HMQ and Prince Philip, Prince Charles and Princess Diana, etc... Yet it never happened.
Something just doesn't add up with all this.
My guess from reading is Saville operated by getting dirt in advance on the people who could stop him.
So when he was operating in the clubs he got dirt on local plod. Then when he got into the BBC he got dirt on entertainment people. Then when he got involved in political circles via the charity work he got dirt on political figures etc. Like a rock climber always keeping three points of contact before the next move.
Lucky for a lot of people he didn't keep a diary imo.
Plausible.
It will be interesting to see whether the Inquiry get's to the bottom of any of this.
After so many years and with so many of the main players dead, I'm guessing not.
Lucky1983 Nothing proved though as far as I can see, if you look hard enough you can even find allegations of a former Labour PM too
I quite agree that nothing is proven, but the association with Savile is there, and if true, it's a complete atom bomb in British politics. It will redefine our relationship with everything. I stress if true.
"It just seem implausible that MI5/MI6 wouldn't have known that this guy was as bad as it get's "
I think you may have a view of the size and remit of the intelligence services that is more than somewhat detached from reality.
Maybe.
I just find it terribly troubling that someone as sick and evil as Savile apparently had access to the very highest level's of the British establishment for so many years.
Aye, that is as maybe, but it was no business of the intelligence services to go looking for nonces and perverts except as they might affect national security. They did, and I expect still do, rather have their hands full trying to deal with the remit they have been given by parliament.
And no, a nasty pervert meeting the PM does come into the realm of national security.
In a way you do have to admire Savile for the way he played the game if nothing else.
I mean, here was a guy who wormed his way to the very top of the British establishment and managed to stay there for so many years, yet he was a sick, evil, sexual deviant and predator with complete blackness in his heart and rotten to the core.
And he got away with it!!!
And on that note, I bid you farewell. In the morning we'll see whether Jack's ARSE brings us #CrossOverTuesday
What amaze's me is the level of access Jimmy Savile was given, both to secure NHS facilities and to the highest levels of government and Royalty.
Yet even lowly MP's like Jerry Hayes had heard Savile might be a pedophile and necrophile?
It just seem implausible that MI5/MI6 wouldn't have known that this guy was as bad as it get's and should be kept as far away as possible from Mrs Thatcher, HMQ and Prince Philip, Prince Charles and Princess Diana, etc... Yet it never happened.
Something just doesn't add up with all this.
My guess from reading is Saville operated by getting dirt in advance on the people who could stop him.
So when he was operating in the clubs he got dirt on local plod. Then when he got into the BBC he got dirt on entertainment people. Then when he got involved in political circles via the charity work he got dirt on political figures etc. Like a rock climber always keeping three points of contact before the next move.
Lucky for a lot of people he didn't keep a diary imo.
Plausible.
It will be interesting to see whether the Inquiry get's to the bottom of any of this.
After so many years and with so many of the main players dead, I'm guessing not.
Hard to say. Some of this recent stuff comes from a guy called McKelvie who was a child protection officer for years and kept records of stuff that he felt wanted keeping.
"The existence of the list was disclosed by Peter McKelvie, the whistleblower whose claims prompted Operation Fernbridge, the Scotland Yard investigation into allegations of a paedophile network with links to Downing Street.
Mr McKelvie, a retired child protection team manager who has spent more than 20 years compiling evidence of alleged abuse by authority figures, said he believed there was enough evidence to arrest at least one senior politician."
Elm Tree involved someone similar doing the same thing. There could be quite a few people like that waiting for a time when they thought the info they were holding wouldn't accidentally be dropped in a shredder.
Luckyguy1983 I wouldn't go that far even if it were true and the PM in question is deceased. In any case I don't think he is at 'the heart of the allegations' outside David Icke. There are a few senior politicians and backbenchers of all 3 main parties who you can find allegations about, including household names in Labour
My guess from reading is Saville operated by getting dirt in advance on the people who could stop him.
So when he was operating in the clubs he got dirt on local plod. Then when he got into the BBC he got dirt on entertainment people. Then when he got involved in political circles via the charity work he got dirt on political figures etc. Like a rock climber always keeping three points of contact before the next move.
Lucky for a lot of people he didn't keep a diary imo.
I think you are wrong here, MrJones. I doubt that Savile blackmailed his way to immunity although there might be isolated incidents of pressure brought to bear.
The reason Savile got away with it was that the establishment was prepared to tolerate it provided it remained gossip and not fact. What people at the time feared was being confronted with the evidence and being forced to act upon it.
See Edwina Currie's entry in her diaries about Peter Morrison's appointment as PPS to Margaret Thatcher:
July 24th, 1990:
One appointment in the recent reshuffle has attracted a lot of gossip and could be very dangerous: Peter Morrison has become the PM’s PPS. Now he’s what they call ‘a noted pederast’, with a liking for young boys; he admitted as much to Norman Tebbit when he became deputy chairman of the party, but added, ‘However, I’m very discreet’ – and he must be! She either knows and is taking a chance, or doesn’t; either way it is a really dumb move. Teresa Gorman told me this evening (in a taxi coming back from a drinks party at the BBC) that she inherited Morrison’s (woman) agent, who claimed to have been offered money to keep quiet about his activities. It scares me, as all the press know, and as we get closer to the election someone is going to make trouble, very close to her indeed. (Edwina Currie, Diaries 1987-1992 (London: Little, Brown, 2002), p. 195)
The key to all this is that statement by Morrison "I'm very discreet".
What has changed since the seventies and eighties is that seeing the child as a victim has bcome dominant in our attitude to paedophilia. Protecting the interest of children has become the overriding concern of first the public and now, belatedly, the establishment.
"I'm off to bugger a child"
In 1980 the most likely response (admittedly to an unlikely statement) would have been:
"You filthy old pervert. For god sake don't get caught".
Today the response would be:
"If you are serious - and it isn't a joking matter - the first thing I'll do after you leave is tell the police".
BBC Newsnight (@BBCNewsnight) 07/07/2014 22:47 Judges, senior military figures and politicians are included in abuse allegations, says Peter McKelvie, fmr child protection manager
Luckyguy1983 I wouldn't go that far even if it were true and the PM in question is deceased. In any case I don't think he is at 'the heart of the allegations' outside David Icke. There are a few senior politicians and backbenchers of all 3 main parties who you can find allegations about, including household names in Labour
I tend to avoid David Icke like the plague. I felt this story had gone more mainstream than that.
At the risk of over-interpeting these two rather bouncy polls, maybe we get a brief patriotic sugar rush whenever Cameron sticks it to Johnny Foreigner, followed by a move in the opposite direction when the people who were impressed by that get used to the fact that he doesn't have any kind of workable plan to actually do anything about whatever it is he's just been playing up the importance of.
My guess from reading is Saville operated by getting dirt in advance on the people who could stop him.
Lucky for a lot of people he didn't keep a diary imo.
I think you are wrong here, MrJones. I doubt that Savile blackmailed his way to immunity although there might be isolated incidents of pressure brought to bear.
The reason Savile got away with it was that the establishment was prepared to tolerate it provided it remained gossip and not fact. What people at the time feared was being confronted with the evidence and being forced to act upon it.
See Edwina Currie's entry in her diaries about Peter Morrison's appointment as PPS to Margaret Thatcher:
July 24th, 1990:
One appointment in the recent reshuffle has attracted a lot of gossip and could be very dangerous: Peter Morrison has become the PM’s PPS. Now he’s what they call ‘a noted pederast’, with a liking for young boys; he admitted as much to Norman Tebbit when he became deputy chairman of the party, but added, ‘However, I’m very discreet’ – and he must be! She either knows and is taking a chance, or doesn’t; either way it is a really dumb move. Teresa Gorman told me this evening (in a taxi coming back from a drinks party at the BBC) that she inherited Morrison’s (woman) agent, who claimed to have been offered money to keep quiet about his activities. It scares me, as all the press know, and as we get closer to the election someone is going to make trouble, very close to her indeed. (Edwina Currie, Diaries 1987-1992 (London: Little, Brown, 2002), p. 195)
The key to all this is that statement by Morrison "I'm very discreet".
What has changed since the seventies and eighties is that seeing the child as a victim has bcome dominant in our attitude to paedophilia. Protecting the interest of children has become the overriding concern of first the public and now, belatedly, the establishment.
"I'm off to bugger a child"
In 1980 the most likely response (admittedly to an unlikely statement) would have been:
"You filthy old pervert. For god sake don't get caught".
Today the response would be:
"If you are serious - and it isn't a joking matter - the first thing I'll do after you leave is tell the police".
How could a conservative party have people with such blatant disrepute from a social conservative angle, why did the Tories have people such as Morrison in the party? Not only he was a moral outcast, but it was the political danger of having a person like that in high places. What would the front pages of the papers had been in 1990 if they found out that the PPS to the PM was a peado (and that the tories knew about it)? Thatcher's reign and legacy would have been completely ruined.
Not sure about Ashcrofts polls. They seem all over the place. I would guess that across all polls that Labour have about a 4% lead. Yougov tend to be more accurate in my opinion and they are normally pretty stable.
As for some of the speculation concerning child abuse in the past, I think people need to be pretty careful. What starts out to be general commenting on an issue, can lead to unwise comments being made. It was not that long ago that people who had made comments on Twitter were sued for a lot of money.
My guess from reading is Saville operated by getting dirt in advance on the people who could stop him.
Lucky for a lot of people he didn't keep a diary imo.
I think you are wrong here, MrJones. I doubt that Savile blackmailed his way to immunity although there might be isolated incidents of pressure brought to bear.
The reason Savile got away with it was that the establishment was prepared to tolerate it provided it remained gossip and not fact. What people at the time feared was being confronted with the evidence and being forced to act upon it.
See Edwina Currie's entry in her diaries about Peter Morrison's appointment as PPS to Margaret Thatcher:
July 24th, 1990:
...
The key to all this is that statement by Morrison "I'm very discreet".
What has changed since the seventies and eighties is that seeing the child as a victim has bcome dominant in our attitude to paedophilia. Protecting the interest of children has become the overriding concern of first the public and now, belatedly, the establishment.
"I'm off to bugger a child"
In 1980 the most likely response (admittedly to an unlikely statement) would have been:
"You filthy old pervert. For god sake don't get caught".
Today the response would be:
"If you are serious - and it isn't a joking matter - the first thing I'll do after you leave is tell the police".
How could a conservative party have people with such blatant disrepute from a social conservative angle, why did the Tories have people such as Morrison in the party? Not only he was a moral outcast, but it was the political danger of having a person like that in high places. What would the front pages of the papers had been in 1990 if they found out that the PPS to the PM was a peado (and that the tories knew about it)? Thatcher's reign and legacy would have been completely ruined.
Speedy
This is not a patronising question, but how old are you?
I think this issue is generational so answer first and I will follow up to your question more substantively in a separate post.
@AveryLP If I was a cynic, I might proffer the view that UC is on drip feed till after the election, when they can get rid of the "drip", and find him a job more suited to his intellect Just as well I am not a cynic?.
@AveryLP If I was a cynic, I might proffer the view that UC is on drip feed till after the election, when they can get rid of the "drip", and find him a job more suited to his intellect Just as well I am not a cynic?.
@AveryLP If I was a cynic, I might proffer the view that UC is on drip feed till after the election, when they can get rid of the "drip", and find him a job more suited to his intellect Just as well I am not a cynic?.
Don't think so. There is broad (multiparty) agreement behind the principle of UC, just fear of its costs, implemention complexity and political risks (e.g. avoiding another 'bedroom tax').
Edwinas comments to seem to be hearsay, though it is documented that Morrison was picked up by the police for cottaging.
It is worth bearing in mind that the age of consent for homosexuality was 21 at the time, but now is 16, so some illegal acts then are perfectly legal now.
So for example this harmless piece of celeb gossip:
Would have potentially resulted in criminal charges in the eighties. Times change, and what would have been shocking a generation ago is now banal, and sometimes vice versa.
@AveryLP The principle is sound, but the technology is struggling with even the simplest cases. IDS states that it has been rolled out to married couples. I would hazard a guess that these couples will have no children and no jobs. Send me a yellow box if I am wrong?
If "kiddie fiddling" ever gets banal, the world will be in deep doo doo.
I am not condoning paedophilia, I have merely pointed out that the law has changed so that some offences historically severely treated are now the stuff of Hello magazine.
In the end we're all dead. How long does he need. My sources in the civil service tell me there's big concern about tax credits right now. Having to sort out the backlog of problems there rather than dealing with the tax affairs of big multinationals.
And changes in the law on such issues always lags public attitudes.
So, for example, homosexuality between consenting male adults was generally tolerated and even played a prominent role in public culture long before the law changed.
One legacy of this lag has been a lack of distinction between pederasty and homosexuality in attitudes. Look at the Scallywag articles of the early 1990s which were among the first to expose 'today's' news and its attacks would now be totally unacceptable for being homophobic.
Today we are able to distinguish in our attitudes to homosexuality and paedophilia. The two are very different, but that wasn't the prevailing attitude even as late as 1970s-90s.
And tolerance/acceptance was just the flipside of condemnation. Just as a silent majority just didn't want to know, there was a 'disruptive' minority (e.g. Dickens, Private Eye, Scallywag) who saw an opportunity to attack.
The traditions of single sex public schools also played a role in determining the prevailing attitudes of the age. As long as activity was "discreet" and no one was forced to make a decision, there was no need to object.
Remember we had a PM in the 1950s who was rumoured to have been forced to leave Eton "for the usual reasons".
Edwinas comments to seem to be hearsay, though it is documented that Morrison was picked up by the police for cottaging.
It is worth bearing in mind that the age of consent for homosexuality was 21 at the time, but now is 16, so some illegal acts then are perfectly legal now.
So for example this harmless piece of celeb gossip:
Would have potentially resulted in criminal charges in the eighties. Times change, and what would have been shocking a generation ago is now banal, and sometimes vice versa.
@foxinsoxuk They were breaking the law of the land at the time? Now I can see merit in disregarding a law you see as unjust, but if person in question is supposed to be a pillar of society then it is more serious.
Comments
yet another scandal waiting to break involving the **** that make up whoreminster
one unintended good consequence of EU immigration is lots of EU kids are being snatched now as well so what the secret courts have been doing is filtering got out in other countries
NAFTA covers the USA Canada and Mexico. They had enough trouble sorting that out without us complicating it. How would we have dealt with say the agriculture part of it - Mexican agriculture has been devastated. We would have had to enter into various enviromental conditions and food and plan safety laws. Just for starters.
We have benefited from direct investment into the EU, as part of NAFTA would we have seen jobs exported to Mexico?
In any event - there is a transatlantic deal dragging its feet right now.
Still, as long as the weakening is confined to those groups, I guess they shouldn't worry too much!
Mr Jones
It is not clear from your garbled text who is accused of doing what to whom, where and when.
ON more important matters, I hope everyone is enjoying the evening in Ilkley in what some call God's Own County (I always thought that was Surrey).
TC said I think that a recession would cause the crisis
My further question is what is the cause of the recession?
I suppose its them following socialist policies, not really good for Labour I would have thought.
(sorry but I know nothiong about how these quotes thingys work)
He took a lesbian up to his room
But they argued all night
As to who had the right
To do what, and with which, and to whom.
(My English teacher had an interesting way of teaching grammar!)
A pansy who came from Khartoum
Took a lesbian up to his room
She said "Settle one thing
Now, before we begin,
Who does what, and with which, and to whom?"
The apparent disappearance of files alleging paedophilia linked to institutions in the 1980s
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-28195580
I was just looking at this timeline, does it seem a bit funny to keep referring this to this being exclusively about the 1980's.
Dickens handed his dossier in in 1983, and must have been compiling it for a long time. It seems to me then it is highly likely then that plenty of allegations refer to incidents in the 1970's.
This world of didn't just start up when the clock struck midnight on the 31st December 1979
have not cut back Govt spending/privatised to the levels they were set. Assets are under utilised and entrepreneurs have been persuaded to leave through their taxation policies etc.
However even though Labour said that they would have copied Hollande, it does not follow that voters link Hollande's failure with Labour's promise of magic money trees.
The only snag is having to sterilize the hot money flows to London (to stabilize the currency look at foreign reserves boost) in order for Britain to capture market share in america.
Here are two paragraphs:
Of course we knew about the mortuary exploits of Jimmy Savile and his penchant for amputees. But we had no proof. We knew about Cyril Smith, various peers, senior people within Number 10, but again, no proof. And despite all my years of propping up bars and sifting the most bizarre gossip about the sexual practices of various Home Office ministers, usually served up by vindictive Police Federation whispers, most of the stuff was fairly flaky. My favourite piece of nonsense was about a senior labour Cabinet Minister who was unable to reach orgasm unless he stabbed young bunnies in a shoe box by the bed. And many of us watched, as was our duty, grainy footage of some unidentifiable old boy, grunting over what was said to be an underage boy. We were told it was a well known grandee. It could have been anyone. And the well known rumour that a very senior Labour figure was having sex with underaged boys in car parks, cautioned by the police and the paperwork destroyed, was pure malicious fantasy. The only evidence that seemed to stack was about Cyril Smith; but not enough to safely print.
But there was absolutely no gossip that I can remember about a paedophile ring in the heart of government. This doesn’t mean that there wasn’t one. It’s just that child sex offenders are the most manipulative and deceitful of criminals. They are chameleons, genetic freaks blending into a world of normality, so that they can pounce un-noticed. They are nearly always people you would not suspect. Pillars of the community, God fearing churchgoers, professional men; those of power and influence. Their very respectability gives them an impunity. Stewart Hall? You must be joking. Rolf Harris? Are you out of your mind?
For those who want further and better particulars the blog article can be found here: http://bit.ly/1xI4pYl
I am off to subscribe to a Rabbit Protection Charity.
Evening all - just a final quick reminder if you would like to play the Indonesia game, which closes at 9pm tomorrow:
http://www.electiongame.co.uk/indonesia14/
Many thanks,
DC
Stodge Of course the fact the Greens now have an MP also means that it is not just the Euros where they have a presence, and Ashcroft's poll suggests Lucas could cling on
Repeat and repeat until Mr Miliband walks through the door of Number 10 Downing Street.
http://popbitch.com/home/2014/07/03/rolfie-wants-a-cuddle/
Non-story. Lol.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-28199829
What amaze's me is the level of access Jimmy Savile was given, both to secure NHS facilities and to the highest levels of government and Royalty.
Yet even lowly MP's like Jerry Hayes had heard Savile might be a pedophile and necrophile?
It just seem implausible that MI5/MI6 wouldn't have known that this guy was as bad as it get's and should be kept as far away as possible from Mrs Thatcher, HMQ and Prince Philip, Prince Charles and Princess Diana, etc... Yet it never happened.
Something just doesn't add up with all this.
Relief for Con after the two earlier polls today.
I would stay away from anyone who was infront of a TV camera just in case, but there are so many of them.
Although it does seem to be the case that whenever the Tories sneak to 1-2% behind something happens to jolt them back to where they started.
"It just seem implausible that MI5/MI6 wouldn't have known that this guy was as bad as it get's "
I think you may have a view of the size and remit of the intelligence services that is more than somewhat detached from reality.
I still expect some swingback and will be surprised if the tories do not get the most votes in 2015 but being the larger party is looking more remote again.
Last time I said this of course things closed right up again but there is little evidence of any true movement to the tories. My guess would be that the Fisher model will once again have a fairly sharp fall in the number of seats the tories can home to win.
So when he was operating in the clubs he got dirt on local plod. Then when he got into the BBC he got dirt on entertainment people. Then when he got involved in political circles via the charity work he got dirt on political figures etc. Like a rock climber always keeping three points of contact before the next move.
Lucky for a lot of people he didn't keep a diary imo.
The investigation should look into all parties and the civil service, police. etc.
I just find it terribly troubling that someone as sick and evil as Savile apparently had access to the very highest level's of the British establishment for so many years.
It will be interesting to see whether the Inquiry get's to the bottom of any of this.
After so many years and with so many of the main players dead, I'm guessing not.
And no, a nasty pervert meeting the PM does come into the realm of national security.
I mean, here was a guy who wormed his way to the very top of the British establishment and managed to stay there for so many years, yet he was a sick, evil, sexual deviant and predator with complete blackness in his heart and rotten to the core.
And he got away with it!!!
And on that note, I bid you farewell. In the morning we'll see whether Jack's ARSE brings us #CrossOverTuesday
Hard to say. Some of this recent stuff comes from a guy called McKelvie who was a child protection officer for years and kept records of stuff that he felt wanted keeping.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/10947561/More-than-10-politicians-on-list-held-by-police-investigating-Westminster-paedophile-ring.html
"The existence of the list was disclosed by Peter McKelvie, the whistleblower whose claims prompted Operation Fernbridge, the Scotland Yard investigation into allegations of a paedophile network with links to Downing Street.
Mr McKelvie, a retired child protection team manager who has spent more than 20 years compiling evidence of alleged abuse by authority figures, said he believed there was enough evidence to arrest at least one senior politician."
Elm Tree involved someone similar doing the same thing. There could be quite a few people like that waiting for a time when they thought the info they were holding wouldn't accidentally be dropped in a shredder.
EICIPM Polls closed 10 months tonight
Tick toc, tick tock......
The reason Savile got away with it was that the establishment was prepared to tolerate it provided it remained gossip and not fact. What people at the time feared was being confronted with the evidence and being forced to act upon it.
See Edwina Currie's entry in her diaries about Peter Morrison's appointment as PPS to Margaret Thatcher:
July 24th, 1990:
One appointment in the recent reshuffle has attracted a lot of gossip and could be very dangerous: Peter Morrison has become the PM’s PPS. Now he’s what they call ‘a noted pederast’, with a liking for young boys; he admitted as much to Norman Tebbit when he became deputy chairman of the party, but added, ‘However, I’m very discreet’ – and he must be! She either knows and is taking a chance, or doesn’t; either way it is a really dumb move. Teresa Gorman told me this evening (in a taxi coming back from a drinks party at the BBC) that she inherited Morrison’s (woman) agent, who claimed to have been offered money to keep quiet about his activities. It scares me, as all the press know, and as we get closer to the election someone is going to make trouble, very close to her indeed. (Edwina Currie, Diaries 1987-1992 (London: Little, Brown, 2002), p. 195)
The key to all this is that statement by Morrison "I'm very discreet".
What has changed since the seventies and eighties is that seeing the child as a victim has bcome dominant in our attitude to paedophilia. Protecting the interest of children has become the overriding concern of first the public and now, belatedly, the establishment.
"I'm off to bugger a child"
In 1980 the most likely response (admittedly to an unlikely statement) would have been:
"You filthy old pervert. For god sake don't get caught".
Today the response would be:
"If you are serious - and it isn't a joking matter - the first thing I'll do after you leave is tell the police".
07/07/2014 22:47
Judges, senior military figures and politicians are included in abuse allegations, says Peter McKelvie, fmr child protection manager
When and where is Basil's funeral?
I fell I should attend and would like to pay my last respects.
Not only he was a moral outcast, but it was the political danger of having a person like that in high places.
What would the front pages of the papers had been in 1990 if they found out that the PPS to the PM was a peado (and that the tories knew about it)? Thatcher's reign and legacy would have been completely ruined.
Is this a good time to ask when will the "crossover" take place ?
As for some of the speculation concerning child abuse in the past, I think people need to be pretty careful. What starts out to be general commenting on an issue, can lead to unwise comments being made. It was not that long ago that people who had made comments on Twitter were sued for a lot of money.
This is not a patronising question, but how old are you?
I think this issue is generational so answer first and I will follow up to your question more substantively in a separate post.
P.S. Answer in a new post to clear space.
"Treasury has not signed off on Duncan Smith's universal credit, MPs told"
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/jul/07/treasury-not-signing-off-duncan-smith-universal-credit
Just give him time.
Why are you always so far behind the times?
"Just give him time."
And money?
If I was a cynic, I might proffer the view that UC is on drip feed till after the election, when they can get rid of the "drip", and find him a job more suited to his intellect
Just as well I am not a cynic?.
Universal Credit, I should have said, but I assumed people would have read the original link, sorry.
A case of festina lente.
Edwinas comments to seem to be hearsay, though it is documented that Morrison was picked up by the police for cottaging.
It is worth bearing in mind that the age of consent for homosexuality was 21 at the time, but now is 16, so some illegal acts then are perfectly legal now.
So for example this harmless piece of celeb gossip:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2617247/Tom-Daley-makes-red-carpet-appearance-boyfriend-Dustin-Lance-Black-Battersea-Power-Station-party.html
Would have potentially resulted in criminal charges in the eighties. Times change, and what would have been shocking a generation ago is now banal, and sometimes vice versa.
The principle is sound, but the technology is struggling with even the simplest cases.
IDS states that it has been rolled out to married couples. I would hazard a guess that these couples will have no children and no jobs.
Send me a yellow box if I am wrong?
If "kiddie fiddling" ever gets banal, the world will be in deep doo doo.
And changes in the law on such issues always lags public attitudes.
So, for example, homosexuality between consenting male adults was generally tolerated and even played a prominent role in public culture long before the law changed.
One legacy of this lag has been a lack of distinction between pederasty and homosexuality in attitudes. Look at the Scallywag articles of the early 1990s which were among the first to expose 'today's' news and its attacks would now be totally unacceptable for being homophobic.
Today we are able to distinguish in our attitudes to homosexuality and paedophilia. The two are very different, but that wasn't the prevailing attitude even as late as 1970s-90s.
And tolerance/acceptance was just the flipside of condemnation. Just as a silent majority just didn't want to know, there was a 'disruptive' minority (e.g. Dickens, Private Eye, Scallywag) who saw an opportunity to attack.
The traditions of single sex public schools also played a role in determining the prevailing attitudes of the age. As long as activity was "discreet" and no one was forced to make a decision, there was no need to object.
Remember we had a PM in the 1950s who was rumoured to have been forced to leave Eton "for the usual reasons".
They were breaking the law of the land at the time? Now I can see merit in disregarding a law you see as unjust, but if person in question is supposed to be a pillar of society then it is more serious.