Interesting discussion on recidivism. Anecdote warning, but I work round the corner from Highbury Magistrates' Court and regularly lunch on a sandwich on the benches outside, which usually has diverse bored offenders waiting for hearings, and I chat to them if they want to, to try to get a bit more idea of what they think about life. What's really striking is the complexity of the mess they're in - e.g. the former GBH chap I was talking to yesterday was perfectly affable, quite cheerful and seemingly reasonably fit, but he said he was homeless about half the year, in and out, spent a lot of time trying to get a job and succeeding with the occasional odd temporary doorman/bouncer slot, seriously addicted to Red Bull (showed me his carrier bag with 10 cans, which he said was his usual daily amount) and admitted he had a problem in overreacting to anyone who rubbed him up the wrong way. I said mildly that maybe the last two were related, and he said yeah, maybe there was something in that - apparently a new thought.
That's just one example. The point, I think, is that many offenders don't want to go back into it, but they need support and advice from several angles, not just a job.
One of the farcical things about prison is that, when they are released, a lot of prisoners are released with nothing more than a train ticket and a discharge grant of 40 odd quid
The problem is we try to punish and rehabilitate people at the same time, which just sends mixed message. Every good parent knows that you don't tell your kid how nice he is really, and how much you live him, during his time out. You wait until he's completed his punishment, and you then stop punishing him and have a talk. We need to do the same with prisoners. If they go away for five years, you can do three years of tough punishment - basic cell, basic food, no luxuries. Then when that part of the sentence is served, you should do a rehabilitation phase in nicer surroundings, with trainings etc. They'll feel the criminal/punishment era is a long way behind them by the time they actually get out.
A while back, I suggested to Mike, if there were a future coalition, rather than have a minister in every department, the Lib Dems, should take over whole ministries.
Such as Environment, BIS, etc staffed entirely by Lib Dems.
Don't departments try to protect their own turf enough already?
Ken Clarke on the "Daily Politics" thinks the Tories win be the largest party after May 2015 and a Coalition government is the most viable option.
If the Lib Dems did agree, would they accept the same settlement? Cable could be vulnerable, but that means potentially the next environment or even education position might be a Lib Dem.
Firstly it's a bums on seats count. The LibDems need 4 places at a minimum - Probably the same positions less the SoS for Scotland.
If Cable wanted it then he's safe. He remains very popular with the LibDems and will take the SDP wing with him as will Simon Hughes.
Perhaps they could fix the latter issue by banning capable students from outside London, and bringing in more with criminal records. That's what the Metropolitan Police are doing.
The Metropolitan Police has been damaged by accusations and revelations of corruption.
How does it deal with that problem?
Recruit people with criminal records.
People with spent convictions.
Something people are wilfully ignoring or just not aware about due to tabloid hysteria.
The fact that the convictions are spent doesn't necessarily fill me with confidence.
But the thing is, say someone out of character did a bad thing at 19, but has behaved impeccably for 5 years afterwards, be barred from a job?
Even Freshfields are hiring people with criminal records, some of them unspent.
Given that corruption within police forces is a problem, it would seem sensible to insist on the very highest standards among recruits.
There are other occupations where it's reasonable that people should not have to disclose spent convictions, unless strictly relevant. When it comes to policing, past convictions will always be relevant.
I can understand that viewpoint.
I know I hold a minority view that not all criminals are recividists.
Like David Cameron I believe in giving people second chances
There's all sorts of places for criminals to have second changes. The police force isn't one of them. I could understand if it was relaxed for minor shop lifting or drug possession, but mugging and burgling? Given the state of police corruption, and how few burglaries get convictions, it would seem very difficult to make sure they weren't still passing information on to their buddies outside the force.
Seeing as the purpose of this is to make up for too many white people joining the force from the home counties, it's absolutely idiotic.
One of the stated reasons, I understand, is to make the Met more representative of Londoners and ethnic minority Londoners in particular. It is rather insulting to those groups to assume that hiring people with criminal convictions is the way to do that. Can they not find enough honest ethnic minority Londoners? Is that really what they are saying?
He vowed to die for his beliefs, and it seems he has done so. Very ideologically pure.
Am I alone in seeing certain similarities between such actions and the those of the young men who went off to fight in the Spanish Civil War?
Only if you're making the connection with those who went to fight on the Fascist side. Those - like Orwell - went to fight on the side of the elected government and against fascism. I find it hard to see any similarity between people like him and people who go off to fight for a violent, anti-Semitic, anti-democratic, theocratic cult.
Right, indeed. There's nothing wrong with going to fight for a democratic, foreign government. Many Irishmen proved they had more moral standing then their government when they joined the British to fight the Nazis. The issue is that hundreds of young men that grew up in Britain are going to fight for an evil organisation that beheads prisoners. It's almost like the people that warned about widespread intolerant views among British Muslims, and that were dismissed as bigots and pub bores, should have been listened to.
The problem is we try to punish and rehabilitate people at the same time, which just sends mixed message. Every good parent knows that you don't tell your kid how nice he is really, and how much you live him, during his time out. You wait until he's completed his punishment, and you then stop punishing him and have a talk. We need to do the same with prisoners. If they go away for five years, you can do three years of tough punishment - basic cell, basic food, no luxuries. Then when that part of the sentence is served, you should do a rehabilitation phase in nicer surroundings, with trainings etc. They'll feel the criminal/punishment era is a long way behind them by the time they actually get out.
That is a very sensible suggestion - one thing we do need to do though is build more prisons. Politically unpopular, but more spaces are needed...
Interesting discussion on recidivism. Anecdote warning, but I work round the corner from Highbury Magistrates' Court and regularly lunch on a sandwich on the benches outside, which usually has diverse bored offenders waiting for hearings, and I chat to them if they want to, to try to get a bit more idea of what they think about life. What's really striking is the complexity of the mess they're in - e.g. the former GBH chap I was talking to yesterday was perfectly affable, quite cheerful and seemingly reasonably fit, but he said he was homeless about half the year, in and out, spent a lot of time trying to get a job and succeeding with the occasional odd temporary doorman/bouncer slot, seriously addicted to Red Bull (showed me his carrier bag with 10 cans, which he said was his usual daily amount) and admitted he had a problem in overreacting to anyone who rubbed him up the wrong way. I said mildly that maybe the last two were related, and he said yeah, maybe there was something in that - apparently a new thought.
That's just one example. The point, I think, is that many offenders don't want to go back into it, but they need support and advice from several angles, not just a job.
One of the farcical things about prison is that, when they are released, a lot of prisoners are released with nothing more than a train ticket and a discharge grant of 40 odd quid
We need to do the same with prisoners. If they go away for five years, you can do three years of tough punishment - basic cell, basic food, no luxuries.
What do you think most prisons are like?
Most are basic cells and food, "luxuries" are only available after good behaviour.
FYI - The cost of feeding a prisoner is just over £2 (yes 2 pounds) PER DAY, you can't get more basic than that.
But the thing is, say someone out of character did a bad thing at 19, but has behaved impeccably for 5 years afterwards, be barred from a job?
Even Freshfields are hiring people with criminal records, some of them unspent.
People from Freshfields aren't enforcing the law and consoling recent victims of law breaking.
Well in some instances they are doing the latter.
That's not officially part of their job, and, even so, the client has a choice about which lawyer to go to. With the police, you just get who you're given. There's also a fundamental difference in power between a police officer and a regular citizen. That power should not be given to people who are convicted criminals.
It's such a recipe for corruption. I'm sure every gang in London will try to get one of their own on the inside.
Seeing as the purpose of this is to make up for too many white people joining the force from the home counties, it's absolutely idiotic.
One of the stated reasons, I understand, is to make the Met more representative of Londoners and ethnic minority Londoners in particular. It is rather insulting to those groups to assume that hiring people with criminal convictions is the way to do that. Can they not find enough honest ethnic minority Londoners? Is that really what they are saying?
Well, I suppose quite a high proportion of Londoners do have criminal convictions. I'm not happy about the Met being "representative" of them, though.
Interesting discussion on recidivism. Anecdote warning, but I work round the corner from Highbury Magistrates' Court and regularly lunch on a sandwich on the benches outside, which usually has diverse bored offenders waiting for hearings, and I chat to them if they want to, to try to get a bit more idea of what they think about life. What's really striking is the complexity of the mess they're in - e.g. the former GBH chap I was talking to yesterday was perfectly affable, quite cheerful and seemingly reasonably fit, but he said he was homeless about half the year, in and out, spent a lot of time trying to get a job and succeeding with the occasional odd temporary doorman/bouncer slot, seriously addicted to Red Bull (showed me his carrier bag with 10 cans, which he said was his usual daily amount) and admitted he had a problem in overreacting to anyone who rubbed him up the wrong way. I said mildly that maybe the last two were related, and he said yeah, maybe there was something in that - apparently a new thought.
That's just one example. The point, I think, is that many offenders don't want to go back into it, but they need support and advice from several angles, not just a job.
One of the farcical things about prison is that, when they are released, a lot of prisoners are released with nothing more than a train ticket and a discharge grant of 40 odd quid
The problem is we try to punish and rehabilitate people at the same time, which just sends mixed message. Every good parent knows that you don't tell your kid how nice he is really, and how much you live him, during his time out. You wait until he's completed his punishment, and you then stop punishing him and have a talk. We need to do the same with prisoners. If they go away for five years, you can do three years of tough punishment - basic cell, basic food, no luxuries. Then when that part of the sentence is served, you should do a rehabilitation phase in nicer surroundings, with trainings etc. They'll feel the criminal/punishment era is a long way behind them by the time they actually get out.
The military detention regime at Colchester has much to commend it. All sides in the Criminal Justice System would have a fit if it was translated into civvy street.
Interesting discussion on recidivism. Anecdote warning, but I work round the corner from Highbury Magistrates' Court and regularly lunch on a sandwich on the benches outside, which usually has diverse bored offenders waiting for hearings, and I chat to them if they want to, to try to get a bit more idea of what they think about life. What's really striking is the complexity of the mess they're in - e.g. the former GBH chap I was talking to yesterday was perfectly affable, quite cheerful and seemingly reasonably fit, but he said he was homeless about half the year, in and out, spent a lot of time trying to get a job and succeeding with the occasional odd temporary doorman/bouncer slot, seriously addicted to Red Bull (showed me his carrier bag with 10 cans, which he said was his usual daily amount) and admitted he had a problem in overreacting to anyone who rubbed him up the wrong way. I said mildly that maybe the last two were related, and he said yeah, maybe there was something in that - apparently a new thought.
That's just one example. The point, I think, is that many offenders don't want to go back into it, but they need support and advice from several angles, not just a job.
One of the farcical things about prison is that, when they are released, a lot of prisoners are released with nothing more than a train ticket and a discharge grant of 40 odd quid
We need to do the same with prisoners. If they go away for five years, you can do three years of tough punishment - basic cell, basic food, no luxuries.
What do you think most prisons are like?
Most are basic cells and food, "luxuries" are only available after good behaviour.
FYI - The cost of feeding a prisoner is just over £2 (yes 2 pounds) PER DAY, you can't get more basic than that.
Gyms, TVs, snooker tables. They were providing protein powder to some inmates
However, Labour MPs will be relieved that their party has maintained a three-point lead over the Conservatives since June, with the two parties on 35 and 32 per cent respectively. Ukip has drifted down two points to 12, but is still well ahead of the Liberal Democrats marooned on eight per cent.
Gideon Skinner, head of political research at Ipsos MORI said: “Our poll helps put the reshuffle in perspective, with the lack of popularity for Michael Gove and his policies. More generally, it shows on the key battleground of the economy the Chancellor’s policies are more liked than he is, and Cameron maintains his lead over Ed Miliband.”
Ed Miliband has suffered a drop in his net satisfaction ratings, down 10 points since May from -23 to -33. David Cameron’s score has dipped among Conservative supporters but his overall score is better than those of the other two main party leaders.
Hmm This might be like noting that ursine animals do their business amongst trees, but the group of journos/commentators that hate Ed Miliband the most are definitely the Blairites.
11:52: John Rentoul, Independent on Sunday tweets What are the chances that EdM will make some feeble play on Night of the Long Knives? #BannedList #PMQs
Interesting discussion on recidivism. Anecdote warning, but I work round the corner from Highbury Magistrates' Court and regularly lunch on a sandwich on the benches outside, which usually has diverse bored offenders waiting for hearings, and I chat to them if they want to, to try to get a bit more idea of what they think about life. What's really striking is the complexity of the mess they're in - e.g. the former GBH chap I was talking to yesterday was perfectly affable, quite cheerful and seemingly reasonably fit, but he said he was homeless about half the year, in and out, spent a lot of time trying to get a job and succeeding with the occasional odd temporary doorman/bouncer slot, seriously addicted to Red Bull (showed me his carrier bag with 10 cans, which he said was his usual daily amount) and admitted he had a problem in overreacting to anyone who rubbed him up the wrong way. I said mildly that maybe the last two were related, and he said yeah, maybe there was something in that - apparently a new thought.
That's just one example. The point, I think, is that many offenders don't want to go back into it, but they need support and advice from several angles, not just a job.
One of the farcical things about prison is that, when they are released, a lot of prisoners are released with nothing more than a train ticket and a discharge grant of 40 odd quid
We need to do the same with prisoners. If they go away for five years, you can do three years of tough punishment - basic cell, basic food, no luxuries.
What do you think most prisons are like?
Most are basic cells and food, "luxuries" are only available after good behaviour.
FYI - The cost of feeding a prisoner is just over £2 (yes 2 pounds) PER DAY, you can't get more basic than that.
Gyms, TVs, snooker tables. They were providing protein powder to some inmates
TVs have been useful in reducing inmate suicides.
Snooker tables are in common areas, and are shared amongst hundreds of prisoners for one hour every 3 days.
Rosberg vs Hamilton should be a great battle for the title - two roughly evenly matched drivers in the same car. Both seeming to suffer bad luck at th same sort of rate that is keeping the title wide open between the pair.
A decent situation to have over Webber/Vettel where Vettel was streets ahead as a driver.
Interesting discussion on recidivism. Anecdote warning, but I work round the corner from Highbury Magistrates' Court and regularly lunch on a sandwich on the benches outside, which usually has diverse bored offenders waiting for hearings, and I chat to them if they want to, to try to get a bit more idea of what they think about life. What's really striking is the complexity of the mess they're in - e.g. the former GBH chap I was talking to yesterday was perfectly affable, quite cheerful and seemingly reasonably fit, but he said he was homeless about half the year, in and out, spent a lot of time trying to get a job and succeeding with the occasional odd temporary doorman/bouncer slot, seriously addicted to Red Bull (showed me his carrier bag with 10 cans, which he said was his usual daily amount) and admitted he had a problem in overreacting to anyone who rubbed him up the wrong way. I said mildly that maybe the last two were related, and he said yeah, maybe there was something in that - apparently a new thought.
That's just one example. The point, I think, is that many offenders don't want to go back into it, but they need support and advice from several angles, not just a job.
One of the farcical things about prison is that, when they are released, a lot of prisoners are released with nothing more than a train ticket and a discharge grant of 40 odd quid
We need to do the same with prisoners. If they go away for five years, you can do three years of tough punishment - basic cell, basic food, no luxuries.
What do you think most prisons are like?
Most are basic cells and food, "luxuries" are only available after good behaviour.
FYI - The cost of feeding a prisoner is just over £2 (yes 2 pounds) PER DAY, you can't get more basic than that.
Gyms, TVs, snooker tables. They were providing protein powder to some inmates
Before anyone talks about conditions in Prison they really need to have spent at least a week in one to get a proper perspective rather than the rubbish you read in the press
Favouring parents for giving support, such as flower-arranging"
Immigration not an issue for Clegg
"It found the London Oratory School had the highest proportion of "white British" pupils, the lowest proportion of "non-white" pupils and the lowest proportion of pupils of African heritage."
Perhaps they could fix the latter issue by banning capable students from outside London, and bringing in more with criminal records. That's what the Metropolitan Police are doing.
The Metropolitan Police has been damaged by accusations and revelations of corruption.
How does it deal with that problem?
Recruit people with criminal records.
People with spent convictions.
Something people are wilfully ignoring or just not aware about due to tabloid hysteria.
The fact that the convictions are spent doesn't necessarily fill me with confidence.
But the thing is, say someone out of character did a bad thing at 19, but has behaved impeccably for 5 years afterwards, be barred from a job?
Even Freshfields are hiring people with criminal records, some of them unspent.
Given that corruption within police forces is a problem, it would seem sensible to insist on the very highest standards among recruits.
There are other occupations where it's reasonable that people should not have to disclose spent convictions, unless strictly relevant. When it comes to policing, past convictions will always be relevant.
I can understand that viewpoint.
I know I hold a minority view that not all criminals are recividists.
Like David Cameron I believe in giving people second chances
There's all sorts of places for criminals to have second changes. The police force isn't one of them. I could understand if it was relaxed for minor shop lifting or drug possession, but mugging and burgling? Given the state of police corruption, and how few burglaries get convictions, it would seem very difficult to make sure they weren't still passing information on to their buddies outside the force.
Seeing as the purpose of this is to make up for too many white people joining the force from the home counties, it's absolutely idiotic.
Too many white people are joining the police force so they're recruiting criminals?
One of the stated reasons, I understand, is to make the Met more representative of Londoners and ethnic minority Londoners in particular. It is rather insulting to those groups to assume that hiring people with criminal convictions is the way to do that. Can they not find enough honest ethnic minority Londoners? Is that really what they are saying?
Didn't the Met make it harder for less affluent people to join by requiring they first do two years unpaid in the Specials?
"FYI - The cost of feeding a prisoner is just over £2 (yes 2 pounds) PER DAY, you can't get more basic than that."
How old is that figure? I seem to recall that the amount allowed to a feed a prisoner in HMP gaols was more than that allowed to feed a soldier in Afghanistan? From the top of my head it was something like £2.50 per prisoner and £1.50 per soldier and that is going back a few years.
So the answer to your statement, "You can't get more basic than that", might well still be, "Yes you can, just volunteer to fight at your country's direction and you will be treated lower than the person who volunteered to steal, burgle, rape and murder".
"FYI - The cost of feeding a prisoner is just over £2 (yes 2 pounds) PER DAY, you can't get more basic than that."
How old is that figure? I seem to recall that the amount allowed to a feed a prisoner in HMP gaols was more than that allowed to feed a soldier in Afghanistan? From the top of my head it was something like £2.50 per prisoner and £1.50 per soldier and that is going back a few years.
So the answer to your statement, "You can't get more basic than that", might well still be, "Yes you can, just volunteer to fight at your country's direction and you will be treated lower than the person who volunteered to steal, burgle, rape and murder".
My last figures were for up to April 2011.
Note this is the figure for Scottish Prisons, the England & Wales figure is similar
Interesting discussion on recidivism. Anecdote warning, but I work round the corner from Highbury Magistrates' Court and regularly lunch on a sandwich on the benches outside, which usually has diverse bored offenders waiting for hearings, and I chat to them if they want to, to try to get a bit more idea of what they think about life. What's really striking is the complexity of the mess they're in - e.g. the former GBH chap I was talking to yesterday was perfectly affable, quite cheerful and seemingly reasonably fit, but he said he was homeless about half the year, in and out, spent a lot of time trying to get a job and succeeding with the occasional odd temporary doorman/bouncer slot, seriously addicted to Red Bull (showed me his carrier bag with 10 cans, which he said was his usual daily amount) and admitted he had a problem in overreacting to anyone who rubbed him up the wrong way. I said mildly that maybe the last two were related, and he said yeah, maybe there was something in that - apparently a new thought.
That's just one example. The point, I think, is that many offenders don't want to go back into it, but they need support and advice from several angles, not just a job.
One of the farcical things about prison is that, when they are released, a lot of prisoners are released with nothing more than a train ticket and a discharge grant of 40 odd quid
We need to do the same with prisoners. If they go away for five years, you can do three years of tough punishment - basic cell, basic food, no luxuries.
What do you think most prisons are like?
Most are basic cells and food, "luxuries" are only available after good behaviour.
FYI - The cost of feeding a prisoner is just over £2 (yes 2 pounds) PER DAY, you can't get more basic than that.
Gyms, TVs, snooker tables. They were providing protein powder to some inmates
Before anyone talks about conditions in Prison they really need to have spent at least a week in one to get a proper perspective rather than the rubbish you read in the press
I thought Jeffrey Archer's Prison Diaries Vol 1&II were an illuminating read.
Ross McCormack to be top goalscorer in the Championship League 2014-2015 season.
Back each way at 9/1 with Betfair Sportsbook (i.e. fixed odds, no comm'n)
Ross won this accolade comfortably last season scoring a whopping great 28 league goals while playing for very mediocre Leeds, thereby finishing 3 ahead of the field. This summer he has transferred to Fulham who are likely to be promotion contenders, following their relegation last season. This itself is a positive factor since it's unlikely he'll move again and as a result fall out of the betting, were he to sign for a Premier League team. Provided he remains fit, he seems set for another great season and the each way element provides insurance should he be edged out - this pays one quarter the odds on the Championship's top 4 goalscorers for the season. Good luck should you follow me in, but DYOR.
Disagree. I've been saying for years how toxic he is which didn't go down well with many on here.
As it turned out my view was the same as Lynton's Crosby and appropriate action was taken.
By taking Gove out of the equation Cameron has made a big move towards remaining PM after next May. Is it any wonder that Labour should try to maximise on the Gove issue while this is still current?
Disagree. I've been saying for years how toxic he is which didn't go down well with many on here.
As it turned out my view was the same as Lynton's Crosby and appropriate action was taken.
By taking Gove out of the equation Cameron has made a big move towards remaining PM after next May. Is it any wonder that Labour should try to maximise on the Gove issue while this is still current?
Why did he give up after 2 questions then and walk out onto the motorway of the economy ?
Disagree. I've been saying for years how toxic he is which didn't go down well with many on here.
As it turned out my view was the same as Lynton's Crosby and appropriate action was taken.
By taking Gove out of the equation Cameron has made a big move towards remaining PM after next May. Is it any wonder that Labour should try to maximise on the Gove issue while this is still current?
But Miliband didn't use it well. He could have been clever and witty about it - but went too far and any impact was undermined as a result.
He, of course, was further undermined by the Harman tax reveal.
Both things together allowed Cameron to stay very firmly on the front foot.
Mr. Betting, first PMQs I've watched a bit of for a while. For those who didn't, my attorney general comment was in reference to Jack Straw bemoaning the loss of Dominic Grieve and implying his successor was not quite so neutral.
Labour's Ian Lucas asks about specialist spinal cord injury beds. Why are these beds at Stoke Mandeville being used for patients without spinal injuries?
That must be one of the most obscure questions ever asked at PMQs.
Interesting discussion on recidivism. Anecdote warning, but I work round the corner from Highbury Magistrates' Court and regularly lunch on a sandwich on the benches outside, which usually has diverse bored offenders waiting for hearings, and I chat to them if they want to, to try to get a bit more idea of what they think about life. What's really striking is the complexity of the mess they're in - e.g. the former GBH chap I was talking to yesterday was perfectly affable, quite cheerful and seemingly reasonably fit, but he said he was homeless about half the year, in and out, spent a lot of time trying to get a job and succeeding with the occasional odd temporary doorman/bouncer slot, seriously addicted to Red Bull (showed me his carrier bag with 10 cans, which he said was his usual daily amount) and admitted he had a problem in overreacting to anyone who rubbed him up the wrong way. I said mildly that maybe the last two were related, and he said yeah, maybe there was something in that - apparently a new thought.
That's just one example. The point, I think, is that many offenders don't want to go back into it, but they need support and advice from several angles, not just a job.
I think there's a big difference between someone that loses his temper and lashes out and someone that makes an income through criminality. Both seem inappropriate for being police officers, mind. If this goes through, I don't think I'll have the police over next time I'm burgled. They could be casing the joint.
It's nice to see you are willing to give people a second chance.
Disagree. I've been saying for years how toxic he is which didn't go down well with many on here. As it turned out my view was the same as Lynton's Crosby and appropriate action was taken. By taking Gove out of the equation Cameron has made a big move towards remaining PM after next May. Is it any wonder that Labour should try to maximise on the Gove issue while this is still current?
It is designed to fester the wound between Cameron and Gove. That said EdM does not have much else to go after. On the Gove reshuffle, it was about time as Gove was picking so many fights inside Govt. He now does not have a departmental view to project.
He vowed to die for his beliefs, and it seems he has done so. Very ideologically pure.
Am I alone in seeing certain similarities between such actions and the those of the young men who went off to fight in the Spanish Civil War?
There are no such similarities. The young men from Britain who fought in Spain, volunteered to fight against Fascism and a fascist coup. The young Muslim jihadists on the contrary are seeking to establish a Caliphate based on Fascist ideology fused with an aggressive conquering Islam.
He vowed to die for his beliefs, and it seems he has done so. Very ideologically pure.
Am I alone in seeing certain similarities between such actions and the those of the young men who went off to fight in the Spanish Civil War?
There are no such similarities. The young men from Britain who fought in Spain, volunteered to fight against Fascism and a fascist coup. The young Muslim jihadists on the contrary are seeking to establish a Caliphate based on Fascist ideology fused with an aggressive conquering Islam.
Some of the young men were Communists, though, like the young Sir Alfred Sherman.
Disagree. I've been saying for years how toxic he is which didn't go down well with many on here.
As it turned out my view was the same as Lynton's Crosby and appropriate action was taken.
By taking Gove out of the equation Cameron has made a big move towards remaining PM after next May. Is it any wonder that Labour should try to maximise on the Gove issue while this is still current?
Quite right. Beyond pointing out that Gove has been sacked (and humiliated?), Labour's strategy has to be pushing the "more of the same under Nicky" line, making the point that changing him this late in a parliament is too little too late.
Interesting discussion on recidivism. Anecdote warning, but I work round the corner from Highbury Magistrates' Court and regularly lunch on a sandwich on the benches outside, which usually has diverse bored offenders waiting for hearings, and I chat to them if they want to, to try to get a bit more idea of what they think about life. What's really striking is the complexity of the mess they're in - e.g. the former GBH chap I was talking to yesterday was perfectly affable, quite cheerful and seemingly reasonably fit, but he said he was homeless about half the year, in and out, spent a lot of time trying to get a job and succeeding with the occasional odd temporary doorman/bouncer slot, seriously addicted to Red Bull (showed me his carrier bag with 10 cans, which he said was his usual daily amount) and admitted he had a problem in overreacting to anyone who rubbed him up the wrong way. I said mildly that maybe the last two were related, and he said yeah, maybe there was something in that - apparently a new thought.
That's just one example. The point, I think, is that many offenders don't want to go back into it, but they need support and advice from several angles, not just a job.
I think there's a big difference between someone that loses his temper and lashes out and someone that makes an income through criminality. Both seem inappropriate for being police officers, mind. If this goes through, I don't think I'll have the police over next time I'm burgled. They could be casing the joint.
It's nice to see you are willing to give people a second chance.
Not wanting muggers and burglars in the police force that is supposed to be stopping mugging and burgling isn't the same as not giving people a second chance. There are all sorts of jobs out there these people can go into. Just not the police.
The problem with the left is rather than actually tackle the argument, they instead go into ad hominem attacks about those raising the issue being mean etc.
Mr. Betting, first PMQs I've watched a bit of for a while. For those who didn't, my attorney general comment was in reference to Jack Straw bemoaning the loss of Dominic Grieve and implying his successor was not quite so neutral.
Yes, one of those statements that relies upon people not remembering the past. Almost 1984speak.
Disagree. I've been saying for years how toxic he is which didn't go down well with many on here.
As it turned out my view was the same as Lynton's Crosby and appropriate action was taken.
By taking Gove out of the equation Cameron has made a big move towards remaining PM after next May. Is it any wonder that Labour should try to maximise on the Gove issue while this is still current?
But Miliband didn't use it well. He could have been clever and witty about it - but went too far and any impact was undermined as a result.
He, of course, was further undermined by the Harman tax reveal.
Both things together allowed Cameron to stay very firmly on the front foot.
Interesting discussion on recidivism. Anecdote warning, but I work round the corner from Highbury Magistrates' Court and regularly lunch on a sandwich on the benches outside, which usually has diverse bored offenders waiting for hearings, and I chat to them if they want to, to try to get a bit more idea of what they think about life. What's really striking is the complexity of the mess they're in - e.g. the former GBH chap I was talking to yesterday was perfectly affable, quite cheerful and seemingly reasonably fit, but he said he was homeless about half the year, in and out, spent a lot of time trying to get a job and succeeding with the occasional odd temporary doorman/bouncer slot, seriously addicted to Red Bull (showed me his carrier bag with 10 cans, which he said was his usual daily amount) and admitted he had a problem in overreacting to anyone who rubbed him up the wrong way. I said mildly that maybe the last two were related, and he said yeah, maybe there was something in that - apparently a new thought.
That's just one example. The point, I think, is that many offenders don't want to go back into it, but they need support and advice from several angles, not just a job.
I think there's a big difference between someone that loses his temper and lashes out and someone that makes an income through criminality. Both seem inappropriate for being police officers, mind. If this goes through, I don't think I'll have the police over next time I'm burgled. They could be casing the joint.
It's nice to see you are willing to give people a second chance.
Not wanting muggers and burglars in the police force that is supposed to be stopping mugging and burgling isn't the same as not giving people a second chance. There are all sorts of jobs out there these people can go into. Just not the police.
The problem with the left is rather than actually tackle the argument, they instead go into ad hominem attacks about those raising the issue being mean etc.
You are the one making nasty comments about people who have served their time and whom the Met itself has deemed worthy of a second chance. You also suggest below that you think prisons are an easy option and go on to suggest that the Met is recruiting criminals because it has run out of white candidates.
I see the PB Tories have again declared a clear win for Cameron at PMQs!
Snap PMQs Verdict: Miliband won the early exchanges, but the Harriet Harman quote - which may or may not have been taken out of context; I have no idea, because I have not seen the full thing - gave Cameron the advantage at the end.
Interesting discussion on recidivism. Anecdote warning, but I work round the corner from Highbury Magistrates' Court and regularly lunch on a sandwich on the benches outside, which usually has diverse bored offenders waiting for hearings, and I chat to them if they want to, to try to get a bit more idea of what they think about life. What's really striking is the complexity of the mess they're in - e.g. the former GBH chap I was talking to yesterday was perfectly affable, quite cheerful and seemingly reasonably fit, but he said he was homeless about half the year, in and out, spent a lot of time trying to get a job and succeeding with the occasional odd temporary doorman/bouncer slot, seriously addicted to Red Bull (showed me his carrier bag with 10 cans, which he said was his usual daily amount) and admitted he had a problem in overreacting to anyone who rubbed him up the wrong way. I said mildly that maybe the last two were related, and he said yeah, maybe there was something in that - apparently a new thought.
That's just one example. The point, I think, is that many offenders don't want to go back into it, but they need support and advice from several angles, not just a job.
I think there's a big difference between someone that loses his temper and lashes out and someone that makes an income through criminality. Both seem inappropriate for being police officers, mind. If this goes through, I don't think I'll have the police over next time I'm burgled. They could be casing the joint.
It's nice to see you are willing to give people a second chance.
Not wanting muggers and burglars in the police force that is supposed to be stopping mugging and burgling isn't the same as not giving people a second chance. There are all sorts of jobs out there these people can go into. Just not the police.
The problem with the left is rather than actually tackle the argument, they instead go into ad hominem attacks about those raising the issue being mean etc.
Quite. Perhaps time for Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe to remember the words of one of his more esteemed predecessors: "A good police force is one that catches more criminals than it employs."
For the purposes of comparison, in July 2009, the Tories had a 16% lead with Ipsos-Mori
2009 very different to 2014, because of UKIP and also LD's half what they were.
Whoever wins most seats in 2015, will not exceed the percentage the Tories achieved in 2010. The chances are that Labour and Tories will be in the 32%- 36% range, with it being too close to call, which party will end up with most seats.
Disagree. I've been saying for years how toxic he is which didn't go down well with many on here.
As it turned out my view was the same as Lynton's Crosby and appropriate action was taken.
By taking Gove out of the equation Cameron has made a big move towards remaining PM after next May. Is it any wonder that Labour should try to maximise on the Gove issue while this is still current?
But Miliband didn't use it well. He could have been clever and witty about it - but went too far and any impact was undermined as a result.
He, of course, was further undermined by the Harman tax reveal.
Both things together allowed Cameron to stay very firmly on the front foot.
I see the PB Tories have again declared a clear win for Cameron at PMQs!
You've defected to the PB Tories then ?
I didn't see the session, and have not commented on it other than to say that I agree with Mike that Labour should focus on Gove.
It will be a vastly diminishing return as OGH notes.
I always look around the chamber at PMQ's where the theatre of the occasion rarely allows MP's to hide their real emotions. Labour MP's have for months been the very essence of the glums.
And yet again today Ed weaved and wavered and failed to hit the back of the net.
Interesting discussion on recidivism. Anecdote warning, but I work round the corner from Highbury Magistrates' Court and regularly lunch on a sandwich on the benches outside, which usually has diverse bored offenders waiting for hearings, and I chat to them if they want to, to try to get a bit more idea of what they think about life. What's really striking is the complexity of the mess they're in - e.g. the former GBH chap I was talking to yesterday was perfectly affable, quite cheerful and seemingly reasonably fit, but he said he was homeless about half the year, in and out, spent a lot of time trying to get a job and succeeding with the occasional odd temporary doorman/bouncer slot, seriously addicted to Red Bull (showed me his carrier bag with 10 cans, which he said was his usual daily amount) and admitted he had a problem in overreacting to anyone who rubbed him up the wrong way. I said mildly that maybe the last two were related, and he said yeah, maybe there was something in that - apparently a new thought.
That's just one example. The point, I think, is that many offenders don't want to go back into it, but they need support and advice from several angles, not just a job.
I think there's a big difference between someone that loses his temper and lashes out and someone that makes an income through criminality. Both seem inappropriate for being police officers, mind. If this goes through, I don't think I'll have the police over next time I'm burgled. They could be casing the joint.
It's nice to see you are willing to give people a second chance.
Not wanting muggers and burglars in the police force that is supposed to be stopping mugging and burgling isn't the same as not giving people a second chance. There are all sorts of jobs out there these people can go into. Just not the police.
The problem with the left is rather than actually tackle the argument, they instead go into ad hominem attacks about those raising the issue being mean etc.
They would be getting a second chance if they had previously been in the police force and gone bent, but this seems to suggest being a wrong un is an advantage in getting a decent job...
As it stands it's another world gone mad type story that ukip should wring as much publicity as possible from
For the purposes of comparison, in July 2009, the Tories had a 16% lead with Ipsos-Mori
2009 very different to 2014, because of UKIP and also LD's half what they were.
Whoever wins most seats in 2015, will not exceed the percentage the Tories achieved in 2010. The chances are that Labour and Tories will be in the 32%- 36% range, with it being too close to call, which party will end up with most seats.
If Antifrank were around, he would tell you the most expensive phrase in the English language is "Trust me, this time it'll be different"
Looks like Cameron might have been a touch economical with the actualité in his Harriet quote. In context, it doesn't look as though she was calling for an increase in tax.
You are the one making nasty comments about people who have served their time and whom the Met itself has deemed worthy of a second chance. You also suggest below that you think prisons are an easy option and go on to suggest that the Met is recruiting criminals because it has run out of white candidates.
You write your own script I'm afraid.
What nasty comments have I made about them? The worse I have done is describe muggers and burglars as muggers and burglars.
I have not said prisons are an easy option. I have said they fail because they try to punish and rehabilitate at the same time, and then recommend that they punish first (which would be harder) and then rehabilitate second (which would be nicer). Your huge bias prevents you from seeing this.
As for the Met, again you have proved unable to follow a simple argument. I have not said it is recruiting criminals because it has run out of white candidates. I have said it is doing so because it is voluntarily choosing to exclude candidates from the home counties, on the basis that the home counties "do not reflect London's diversity".
And once again, you fail to address the issue of whether recruiting people with adult criminal convictions is more likely to increase corruption in the force, which is the central point here.
Looks like Cameron might have been a touch economical with the actualité in his Harriet quote. In context, it doesn't look as though she was calling for an increase in tax.
The Met has simultaneously announced that they will not be accepting candidates that have not lived in London for three years, because they "do not reflect London's diversity", and that it is relaxing the ban on recruiting convicted criminals on the basis that they need to in order to meet recruiting targets.
That is the way the game works. Harriet was not in full control of what she said - and thus this will be exploited for maximum political gain by her opponents.
If we want to talk about being economical with the actualité, Labour are the masters of this - with their oft repeated line about £1600 (with regards to income falls) which has never been demonstrated to be accurate by any independent analysis - and yet they keep peddling the line and getting away with it.
Harman left herself (and Miliband) open to attack by her language in that interview - she should have known better.
Quite. Perhaps time for Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe to remember the words of one of his more esteemed predecessors: "A good police force is one that catches more criminals than it employs."
Indeed. That said, I would have no problem with the police employing someone who as a youth had received a youth warning or reprimand for a very minor offence, such as disorderly behaviour while drunk in a public place, and who otherwise had a clean record and was qualified for the post. On the other hand, I would be entirely uncomfortable if a police constable had previously committed an offence of dishonesty, of violence, or an offence against crown, government, or public justice, or if he had been convicted in open court of an any offence whatsoever.
Miliband's spinners say first they knew of Harman quote was at #PMQs.
I am not sure that is going to work as a defensive strategy on this one. Particularly as it would appear that she admitted it was true in the House.
An Iain Martin blog earlier in the week listed out all the tax increases which Labour have announced or are considering: income tax to 50p for higher earners, a possible rise in NI to fund the health service, taxes on pensions, possible restriction on the size of the tax free lump sum from your pension, mansion tax.
So to say that the middle classes should pay more tax seems a pretty accurate summary of Labour's policy. The reality is that if the deficit is to be eliminated more will need to be paid and not just by the rich. And, of course, Labour believe in redistribution so why would anyone be surprised at the middle classes being the obvious target.
For the purposes of comparison, in July 2009, the Tories had a 16% lead with Ipsos-Mori
2009 very different to 2014, because of UKIP and also LD's half what they were.
Whoever wins most seats in 2015, will not exceed the percentage the Tories achieved in 2010. The chances are that Labour and Tories will be in the 32%- 36% range, with it being too close to call, which party will end up with most seats.
If Antifrank were around, he would tell you the most expensive phrase in the English language is "Trust me, this time it'll be different"
Well I'm following his betting tips on his blog...
That is the way the game works. Harriet was not in full control of what she said - and thus this will be exploited for maximum political gain by her opponents.
That is the way the game works. Harriet was not in full control of what she said - and thus this will be exploited for maximum political gain by her opponents.
Sure, all's fair in love, war, and PMQs.
And even in context, it is hard to interpret her words as anything other than a desire to increase taxes.
You are the one making nasty comments about people who have served their time and whom the Met itself has deemed worthy of a second chance. You also suggest below that you think prisons are an easy option and go on to suggest that the Met is recruiting criminals because it has run out of white candidates.
You write your own script I'm afraid.
What nasty comments have I made about them? The worse I have done is describe muggers and burglars as muggers and burglars.
I have not said prisons are an easy option. I have said they fail because they try to punish and rehabilitate at the same time, and then recommend that they punish first (which would be harder) and then rehabilitate second (which would be nicer). Your huge bias prevents you from seeing this.
As for the Met, again you have proved unable to follow a simple argument. I have not said it is recruiting criminals because it has run out of white candidates. I have said it is doing so because it is voluntarily choosing to exclude candidates from the home counties, on the basis that the home counties "do not reflect London's diversity".
And once again, you fail to address the issue of whether recruiting people with adult criminal convictions is more likely to increase corruption in the force, which is the central point here.
Spent convictions. Repeat after me, SPENT convictions.
So we're looking at least nearly 5 years from their last conviction/sentencing of say 7 months before they could apply to join the police.
Do not those five years give an indication they've rehabilitated?
Anyone sentenced between 30 and 48 months would have to wait around ten years, without any intervening convictions before they could to join the police.
Anyone sentenced to more than 48 months could never join the police.
That is the way the game works. Harriet was not in full control of what she said - and thus this will be exploited for maximum political gain by her opponents.
Sure, all's fair in love, war, and PMQs.
And even in context, it is hard to interpret her words as anything other than a desire to increase taxes.
The most striking thing about what she said, taken as a whole, is how patronising and feeble it is.
You'd think every session was 6-0 to Dave if you judged it by the comments here.
Trouble is Ed Miliband is not made of leadership material. He is more of the professorial type: would do well in Oxford. Labour made the biggest mistake when they picked a Miliband; any Miliband. Now if Labour had a leader like Nigel Farage they would be streets ahead by now and would have changed the political narrative 2 years ago in their favour.
''Trouble is Ed Miliband is not made of leadership material. He is more of the professorial type: would do well in Oxford. Labour made the biggest mistake when they picked a Miliband; any Miliband.''
You are making the mistake of thinking that just because a politician is devoid of the usual charisma, they are somehow intellectual.
It was the mistake made about Gordon Brown. Many thought he was some sort of intellectual titan because of his sombre, brooding presence.
Turns out you can be sombre, brooding and also thick as sh*t.
You'd think every session was 6-0 to Dave if you judged it by the comments here.
Trouble is Ed Miliband is not made of leadership material. He is more of the professorial type: would do well in Oxford. Labour made the biggest mistake when they picked a Miliband; any Miliband. Now if Labour had a leader like Nigel Farage they would be streets ahead by now and would have changed the political narrative 2 years ago in their favour.
Given the 2010 Labour Leadership candidates would any of them have done any better. Balls is utterly toxic, Diane Abbot didn't have a pray which leaves Andy Burnham....
Can you really see any of them doing much better...
Oh dear. Despite video footage of Harriet saying "It's true" at PMQs, the Labour line is that when she said people should pay more in taxes, she didn't mean they should pay more in taxes.
Interesting discussion on recidivism. Anecdote warning, but I work round the corner from Highbury Magistrates' Court and regularly lunch on a sandwich on the benches outside, which usually has diverse bored offenders waiting for hearings, and I chat to them if they want to, to try to get a bit more idea of what they think about life. What's really striking is the complexity of the mess they're in - e.g. the former GBH chap I was talking to yesterday was perfectly affable, quite cheerful and seemingly reasonably fit, but he said he was homeless about half the year, in and out, spent a lot of time trying to get a job and succeeding with the occasional odd temporary doorman/bouncer slot, seriously addicted to Red Bull (showed me his carrier bag with 10 cans, which he said was his usual daily amount) and admitted he had a problem in overreacting to anyone who rubbed him up the wrong way. I said mildly that maybe the last two were related, and he said yeah, maybe there was something in that - apparently a new thought.
That's just one example. The point, I think, is that many offenders don't want to go back into it, but they need support and advice from several angles, not just a job.
I think there's a big difference between someone that loses his temper and lashes out and someone that makes an income through criminality. Both seem inappropriate for being police officers, mind. If this goes through, I don't think I'll have the police over next time I'm burgled. They could be casing the joint.
It's nice to see you are willing to give people a second chance.
Not wanting muggers and burglars in the police force that is supposed to be stopping mugging and burgling isn't the same as not giving people a second chance. There are all sorts of jobs out there these people can go into. Just not the police.
The problem with the left is rather than actually tackle the argument, they instead go into ad hominem attacks about those raising the issue being mean etc.
You are the one making nasty comments about people who have served their time and whom the Met itself has deemed worthy of a second chance. You also suggest below that you think prisons are an easy option and go on to suggest that the Met is recruiting criminals because it has run out of white candidates.
You write your own script I'm afraid.
Google "Met corruption" and then tell us more about the Godlike deeming powers of "the Met itself" about acceptable degrees of criminality in its own ranks.
Comments
If Cable wanted it then he's safe. He remains very popular with the LibDems and will take the SDP wing with him as will Simon Hughes.
Most are basic cells and food, "luxuries" are only available after good behaviour.
FYI - The cost of feeding a prisoner is just over £2 (yes 2 pounds) PER DAY, you can't get more basic than that.
It's such a recipe for corruption. I'm sure every gang in London will try to get one of their own on the inside.
Seeing as the purpose of this is to make up for too many white people joining the force from the home counties, it's absolutely idiotic.
One of the stated reasons, I understand, is to make the Met more representative of Londoners and ethnic minority Londoners in particular. It is rather insulting to those groups to assume that hiring people with criminal convictions is the way to do that. Can they not find enough honest ethnic minority Londoners? Is that really what they are saying?
Well, I suppose quite a high proportion of Londoners do have criminal convictions. I'm not happy about the Met being "representative" of them, though.
However, Labour MPs will be relieved that their party has maintained a three-point lead over the Conservatives since June, with the two parties on 35 and 32 per cent respectively. Ukip has drifted down two points to 12, but is still well ahead of the Liberal Democrats marooned on eight per cent.
Gideon Skinner, head of political research at Ipsos MORI said: “Our poll helps put the reshuffle in perspective, with the lack of popularity for Michael Gove and his policies. More generally, it shows on the key battleground of the economy the Chancellor’s policies are more liked than he is, and Cameron maintains his lead over Ed Miliband.”
Ed Miliband has suffered a drop in his net satisfaction ratings, down 10 points since May from -23 to -33. David Cameron’s score has dipped among Conservative supporters but his overall score is better than those of the other two main party leaders.
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/michael-gove-voted-the-most-unpopular-politician-in-britain-9609230.html
11:52: John Rentoul, Independent on Sunday tweets What are the chances that EdM will make some feeble play on Night of the Long Knives? #BannedList #PMQs
Before PMQs even begins !
Lab 35 (nc)
Con 32 (nc)
LD 8 (nc)
UKIP 12 (-2)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/28325147
Snooker tables are in common areas, and are shared amongst hundreds of prisoners for one hour every 3 days.
A decent situation to have over Webber/Vettel where Vettel was streets ahead as a driver.
Hamilton/Rosberg is alot closer.
http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/192/6/446.full
Who said that, Bernard Manning?
The Tories happy, smiling and cheering, Lab side a bit glum
"FYI - The cost of feeding a prisoner is just over £2 (yes 2 pounds) PER DAY, you can't get more basic than that."
How old is that figure? I seem to recall that the amount allowed to a feed a prisoner in HMP gaols was more than that allowed to feed a soldier in Afghanistan? From the top of my head it was something like £2.50 per prisoner and £1.50 per soldier and that is going back a few years.
So the answer to your statement, "You can't get more basic than that", might well still be, "Yes you can, just volunteer to fight at your country's direction and you will be treated lower than the person who volunteered to steal, burgle, rape and murder".
Note this is the figure for Scottish Prisons, the England & Wales figure is similar
http://www.sps.gov.uk/FOI/FOI-4089.aspx
The Army figures go back to 2006 (IIRC, soldiers' food cost less than prisoners and Military dogs)
Edit: Here's the 2006 figures
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-461857/Army-food-cheaper-dogs-dinner.html
Should be fun!
Ross McCormack to be top goalscorer in the Championship League 2014-2015 season.
Back each way at 9/1 with Betfair Sportsbook (i.e. fixed odds, no comm'n)
Ross won this accolade comfortably last season scoring a whopping great 28 league goals while playing for very mediocre Leeds, thereby finishing 3 ahead of the field.
This summer he has transferred to Fulham who are likely to be promotion contenders, following their relegation last season. This itself is a positive factor since it's unlikely he'll move again and as a result fall out of the betting, were he to sign for a Premier League team.
Provided he remains fit, he seems set for another great season and the each way element provides insurance should he be edged out - this pays one quarter the odds on the Championship's top 4 goalscorers for the season.
Good luck should you follow me in, but DYOR.
As it turned out my view was the same as Lynton's Crosby and appropriate action was taken.
By taking Gove out of the equation Cameron has made a big move towards remaining PM after next May. Is it any wonder that Labour should try to maximise on the Gove issue while this is still current?
They should be chosen by a Scottish subsample from a voodoo first-past-the-post poll.
He, of course, was further undermined by the Harman tax reveal.
Both things together allowed Cameron to stay very firmly on the front foot.
Ed is crap is PM 41 weeks tomorrow
That must be one of the most obscure questions ever asked at PMQs.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/2014/jul/16/cameron-and-miliband-at-pmqs-politics-live-blog
The young men from Britain who fought in Spain, volunteered to fight against Fascism and a fascist coup.
The young Muslim jihadists on the contrary are seeking to establish a Caliphate based on Fascist ideology fused with an aggressive conquering Islam.
The problem with the left is rather than actually tackle the argument, they instead go into ad hominem attacks about those raising the issue being mean etc.
You write your own script I'm afraid.
Andrew Sparrow, Grauniad
Whoever wins most seats in 2015, will not exceed the percentage the Tories achieved in 2010. The chances are that Labour and Tories will be in the 32%- 36% range, with it being too close to call, which party will end up with most seats.
You'd think every session was 6-0 to Dave if you judged it by the comments here.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/2014/jul/16/cameron-and-miliband-at-pmqs-politics-live-blog
Miliband's spinners say first they knew of Harman quote was at #PMQs.
I always look around the chamber at PMQ's where the theatre of the occasion rarely allows MP's to hide their real emotions. Labour MP's have for months been the very essence of the glums.
And yet again today Ed weaved and wavered and failed to hit the back of the net.
As it stands it's another world gone mad type story that ukip should wring as much publicity as possible from
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/2014/jul/16/cameron-and-miliband-at-pmqs-politics-live-blog
Here's the UK polling report constituency guide to Chesterfield for 2010, read the comments, even Mr Perkins comments.
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/guide/seat-profiles/chesterfield/
Here's the 2015 guide
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/2015guide/chesterfield/
I have not said prisons are an easy option. I have said they fail because they try to punish and rehabilitate at the same time, and then recommend that they punish first (which would be harder) and then rehabilitate second (which would be nicer). Your huge bias prevents you from seeing this.
As for the Met, again you have proved unable to follow a simple argument. I have not said it is recruiting criminals because it has run out of white candidates. I have said it is doing so because it is voluntarily choosing to exclude candidates from the home counties, on the basis that the home counties "do not reflect London's diversity".
And once again, you fail to address the issue of whether recruiting people with adult criminal convictions is more likely to increase corruption in the force, which is the central point here.
The Met has simultaneously announced that they will not be accepting candidates that have not lived in London for three years, because they "do not reflect London's diversity", and that it is relaxing the ban on recruiting convicted criminals on the basis that they need to in order to meet recruiting targets.
If we want to talk about being economical with the actualité, Labour are the masters of this - with their oft repeated line about £1600 (with regards to income falls) which has never been demonstrated to be accurate by any independent analysis - and yet they keep peddling the line and getting away with it.
Harman left herself (and Miliband) open to attack by her language in that interview - she should have known better.
So to say that the middle classes should pay more tax seems a pretty accurate summary of Labour's policy. The reality is that if the deficit is to be eliminated more will need to be paid and not just by the rich. And, of course, Labour believe in redistribution so why would anyone be surprised at the middle classes being the obvious target.
http://www.ipsos-mori.com/researchpublications/researcharchive/103/Voting-Intention-in-Great-Britain-1976present.aspx?view=wide
17-19 July 2009 (T)
CON 35
LAB 27
LD 19
-8
Where is this 16% lead ???????????????????????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
July 2008 was a year back in the cycle.
@ThescreamingEagles Spinning here ?!
"This time it'll be different".... Indeed.
So we're looking at least nearly 5 years from their last conviction/sentencing of say 7 months before they could apply to join the police.
Do not those five years give an indication they've rehabilitated?
Anyone sentenced between 30 and 48 months would have to wait around ten years, without any intervening convictions before they could to join the police.
Anyone sentenced to more than 48 months could never join the police.
Is Michael Gove less popular than Pol Pot ?
Now if Labour had a leader like Nigel Farage they would be streets ahead by now and would have changed the political narrative 2 years ago in their favour.
You are making the mistake of thinking that just because a politician is devoid of the usual charisma, they are somehow intellectual.
It was the mistake made about Gordon Brown. Many thought he was some sort of intellectual titan because of his sombre, brooding presence.
Turns out you can be sombre, brooding and also thick as sh*t.
Can you really see any of them doing much better...