I do remember being very against ID cards - but what may I ask would the difference have been between an ID card and a passport ?
It wasn't the ID Card that I objected to, it was the database behind it. I already carry an ID card, my driver's licence. And indeed if the national ID card were a similar/replacement for that then I would have no objections.
You believe that driving licences aren't on a database?
As the MP who first proposed ID cards (in a private member's bill, with substantial support from Tories and LibDems, including the later LibDem spokesman), I always felt that the main reason was simply to have a universal form of ID that people could use, instead of the ridiculous faffing about with two utility bills etc. It wasn't proposed to make it compulsory to carry them - as with a passport, it'd simply be something you could produce if you wanted to show you were who you said you were.
The arguments against were generally of the "slippery slope" type - once we all have cards, the database could be linked up to this and that and suddenly The Authorities would know All About Us, whereas now they have no idea about us and are incapable of linking up their records (ahem). Much of the public was in two minds about that - they were uneasy about some monstrous all-encompassing data base developing, but also felt cheesed off that they had to enter the same personal details all over again for two different public services.
We eventually decided it was just too controversial to be worth pursuing for the modest benefits that it would bring. I never felt particularly passionately in favour myself, just thought they'd be useful and it was interesting to discuss the pros and cons. As a curiosity, the original PMB debate was deliberately rigged - it looked as though it would sail through to committee and die there, like most PMBs, so I got a friend, Roger Casale, who actually had no strong views on it either way, to oppose it so we could have a debate and a vote. He made a jolly good speech and won!
No doubt you had good intentions for the scheme, but others would have seen a ball and ran into the distance with it.
Take RIPA as an example. It was originally spun about tackling serious crime and ended up to do with dog fouling and school catchment areas. The extreme porn bill is another good case.
Oh and the last Gov had such a good record at delivering Huge IT Systems... (this one doesn't seem to be much better at that either, but not on the same scale a the NHS NPfIT Clusterf*ck)
Industry sources say that Fujitsu is likely to be awarded about £400 million in compensation in addition to £250 million already paid when the scheme, called the NHS National Programme for IT, began to falter.
The government will also have to foot Fujitsu’s legal bill of nearly £50 million, in addition to its own legal costs of £31.5 million.
£31.5 million for just the government's legal costs? Is that why antifrank has not been posting lately? Are these real costs or has a journalist just totted up the notional time of civil service lawyers who'd otherwise get paid for twiddling their thumbs?
Oh and the last Gov had such a good record at delivering Huge IT Systems... (this one doesn't seem to be much better at that either, but not on the same scale a the NHS NPfIT Clusterf*ck)
Industry sources say that Fujitsu is likely to be awarded about £400 million in compensation in addition to £250 million already paid when the scheme, called the NHS National Programme for IT, began to falter.
The government will also have to foot Fujitsu’s legal bill of nearly £50 million, in addition to its own legal costs of £31.5 million.
£31.5 million for just the government's legal costs? Is that why antifrank has not been posting lately? Are these real costs or has a journalist just totted up the notional time of civil service lawyers who'd otherwise get paid for twiddling their thumbs?
Is it 37m, 31.5m to DLA piper.
The outcome of arbitration is not expected until December. According to papers published with the committee’s report, the total costs in respect of the Fujitsu case are £31.452m, which have have been paid to DLA Piper LLP. However, it says that the total includes third-party costs, such as those for counsel and expert witnesses, where invoices are routed through DLA Piper.
In addition, £3.113m has been paid to US firm Milbank Tweed Hadley & McCloy LLP for commercial support in the management of the Fujitsu contract and in the transition of services to the new contractor, BT.
£31.5 million for just the government's legal costs? Is that why antifrank has not been posting lately? Are these real costs or has a journalist just totted up the notional time of civil service lawyers who'd otherwise get paid for twiddling their thumbs?
I don't know the provenance of the numbers, but the case has been running for 5 years, so it doesn't sound unrealistic
£31.5 million for just the government's legal costs? Is that why antifrank has not been posting lately? Are these real costs or has a journalist just totted up the notional time of civil service lawyers who'd otherwise get paid for twiddling their thumbs?
I don't know the provenance of the numbers, but the case has been running for 5 years, so it doesn't sound unrealistic
I do remember being very against ID cards - but what may I ask would the difference have been between an ID card and a passport ?
It wasn't the ID Card that I objected to, it was the database behind it. I already carry an ID card, my driver's licence. And indeed if the national ID card were a similar/replacement for that then I would have no objections.
You believe that driving licences aren't on a database?
As the MP who first proposed ID cards (in a private member's bill, with substantial support from Tories and LibDems, including the later LibDem spokesman), I always felt that the main reason was simply to have a universal form of ID that people could use, instead of the ridiculous faffing about with two utility bills etc. It wasn't proposed to make it compulsory to carry them - as with a passport, it'd simply be something you could produce if you wanted to show you were who you said you were.
The arguments against were generally of the "slippery slope" type - once we all have cards, the database could be linked up to this and that and suddenly The Authorities would know All About Us, whereas now they have no idea about us and are incapable of linking up their records (ahem). Much of the public was in two minds about that - they were uneasy about some monstrous all-encompassing data base developing, but also felt cheesed off that they had to enter the same personal details all over again for two different public services.
We eventually decided it was just too controversial to be worth pursuing for the modest benefits that it would bring. I never felt particularly passionately in favour myself, just thought they'd be useful and it was interesting to discuss the pros and cons. As a curiosity, the original PMB debate was deliberately rigged - it looked as though it would sail through to committee and die there, like most PMBs, so I got a friend, Roger Casale, who actually had no strong views on it either way, to oppose it so we could have a debate and a vote. He made a jolly good speech and won!
No doubt you had good intentions for the scheme, but others would have seen a ball and ran into the distance with it.
Take RIPA as an example. It was originally spun about tackling serious crime and ended up to do with dog fouling and school catchment areas. The extreme porn bill is another good case.
Care to expand on the last sentence?
How it has been used to go after private acts between consenting adults. The Simon Walsh case was an absolute classic in overreach by the CPS. The jury booted it out in approx 90 minutes iirc.
Oh and the last Gov had such a good record at delivering Huge IT Systems... (this one doesn't seem to be much better at that either, but not on the same scale a the NHS NPfIT Clusterf*ck)
Industry sources say that Fujitsu is likely to be awarded about £400 million in compensation in addition to £250 million already paid when the scheme, called the NHS National Programme for IT, began to falter.
The government will also have to foot Fujitsu’s legal bill of nearly £50 million, in addition to its own legal costs of £31.5 million.
£31.5 million for just the government's legal costs? Is that why antifrank has not been posting lately? Are these real costs or has a journalist just totted up the notional time of civil service lawyers who'd otherwise get paid for twiddling their thumbs?
Is it 37m, 31.5m to DLA piper.
The outcome of arbitration is not expected until December. According to papers published with the committee’s report, the total costs in respect of the Fujitsu case are £31.452m, which have have been paid to DLA Piper LLP. However, it says that the total includes third-party costs, such as those for counsel and expert witnesses, where invoices are routed through DLA Piper.
In addition, £3.113m has been paid to US firm Milbank Tweed Hadley & McCloy LLP for commercial support in the management of the Fujitsu contract and in the transition of services to the new contractor, BT.
Why do we continue to sell to a regime with such awful human rights abuses?
Because every body else does.
Moral stances cost jobs and achieve nothing if they are not multilateral. And multi lateral is going out of fashion.
The sanctions against Russia show that in the world right now its every man for himself. Russia sanctions will hurt the City, whilst France and Germany continue to do business. Read Alistair Heath's piece in the telly if you really want to get angry.
Meanwhile countries like Australia and Israel have simply stopped listening to 'the international community'. More will follow. They could include Britain.
How it has been used to go after private acts between consenting adults. The Simon Walsh case was an absolute classic in overreach by the CPS. The jury booted it out in approx 90 minutes iirc.
I hadn't heard of the Simon Walsh case before, but have just read it now. What a terrible destruction of an individual's reputation for what he does in his own time. And the sort of situation that was entirely forseeable when the law was brought in. It seems like just another case of government power for the sake of trampling on individuals the elite dislike. What a hideous person Harriet Harman is.
Why do we continue to sell to a regime with such awful human rights abuses?
If we did not sell to countries whose regimes/cultures we did not agree with. that would rule out, most of Africa, Asia and South America.
I'm not saying we rule out all of those we disagree with. Just those with gross human rights violations. Saudi is pretty close to the bottom of the list.
I think Austria would be worse than Italy. Austria's role in the game largely seems to be a warm up blooding before the real conflicts start.
It looks that way but it depends on the players and the diplomacy. Austria is not intrinsically weaker than any other country and has as many strategic options at the opening. Uncle Monty in the first PB 2014 game played Austria to my Turkey and, if Andy Cooke had not stepped in as a substitute France, in the late game would probably have got a solo.
Italy however has very few strategic options and consequently very little it can offer in early negotiations and it can never prosper if Turkey stays in the game - Turkey has to get sufficient forces to the West and Italy stands in the way. Italy is I think the one flaw in the balance of the game. One of Italy's major problems is that it starts with two armies and one fleet but there is little it can do with two armies (especially if Germany has a good player). If that were changed to two fleets and one army then Italy would become a much more viable country to play.
If anyone is up for another game I'll set one up.
I actually enjoy playing Italy. The rest of the countries form two triangles: England/afrance/Germany in the west and Austria/Turkey/Russia in the east. Italy usually disrupts the Eastern Triangle but can mess up the Western one, or even bounce between them.
The key is getting past 4 SCs. It seems very easy to stall there and become an easy victim for someone else, but when you get past 5, you can become the King of the Mediterranean.
Why do we continue to sell to a regime with such awful human rights abuses?
Because every body else does.
Moral stances cost jobs and achieve nothing if they are not multilateral. And multi lateral is going out of fashion.
The sanctions against Russia show that in the world right now its every man for himself. Russia sanctions will hurt the City, whilst France and Germany continue to do business. Read Alistair Heath's piece in the telly if you really want to get angry.
Meanwhile countries like Australia and Israel have simply stopped listening to 'the international community'. More will follow. They could include Britain.
I tend to be of the old-fashioned point of view that one should be moral regardless of the actions of others. Just because others shop lift doesn't mean I should do so. I apply a similar mentality to the national level. Providing weapons to a barbaric regime makes you complicit in what they do with such weapons. Denting BAE's profit margin is a cost I am willing to accept for Britain to be a moral country.
How it has been used to go after private acts between consenting adults. The Simon Walsh case was an absolute classic in overreach by the CPS. The jury booted it out in approx 90 minutes iirc.
I hadn't heard of the Simon Walsh case before, but have just read it now. What a terrible destruction of an individual's reputation for what he does in his own time. And the sort of situation that was entirely forseeable when the law was brought in. It seems like just another case of government power for the sake of trampling on individuals the elite dislike. What a hideous person Harriet Harman is.
Mr. Foxinsox, I always feel a bit bad (well, both times) about immediately attacking Austria, but if you're playing as Russia it seems almost inevitable.
Then in a later post you say difficult it was to attack Turkey as Russia. I think the lesson there is if as Russia you want to attack Turkey then don't start by attacking Austria, because that will just allow Turkey time and space to grown stronger.
Sorry to butt in but how does it work? Do you get to make your countries strong or do you have them as they are/were. eg. for Turkey would you be in charge of the Ottoman Third Army, amongst others, and somehow have to make it less insanely incompetent?
Mr. Topping, the game is really very simple. An army is and army with equal combat value no matter who it belongs to. The Map is a stylised version of Europe in 1900. The rules take about half an hour to learn, you can find them here:
The key to the game is its essential paradox. There are seven players each wants to win. However, the structure of the game is that it is impossible to win on your own, you need the help of other players. Why should other players help you to win when they want to win themselves?
Enter diplomacy, the communication between players to persuade, bribe, blackmail, whatever, to get them to do what you want. There are no rules and no restrictions in this part of the game. Normally these days the communication is done by email, but it doesn't have to be. Face to face meetings are quite common (and I have a had a few in some unlikely places), letters, fax, telephone calls can all be and are used. Impersonation and forgery are not unknown either. Generally speaking the more communication that is going on the higher quality the game.
Hope that helps.
The classic, amusingly-written, introduction is here:
Richard Sharp was an archetypal UKIP voter before UKIP was invented - affable and hugely popular, scathing about anything that he construed as political correctness. A heavy smoker, he died of lung cancer some years ago, to which his un-selfpitying only public comment was, "Maybe the health fascists were right after all." I liked him.
Why do we continue to sell to a regime with such awful human rights abuses?
If we did not sell to countries whose regimes/cultures we did not agree with. that would rule out, most of Africa, Asia and South America.
I'm not saying we rule out all of those we disagree with. Just those with gross human rights violations. Saudi is pretty close to the bottom of the list.
That would still exclude China, Russia, the Middle East and a lot of Africa and South & Central America.
As we buy a huge amount of our gas and oil from the Middle East, where do you propose we buy our energy, as renewables are more expensive and less developed?
" Denting BAE's profit margin is a cost I am willing to accept for Britain to be a moral country."
I am sure it is. I am equally sure that if your livelihood depended on BAe you might think a little differently. Being moral is terribly easy until one has to start to deal with the issues that arise from one's moral stance. Who remembers Labour's "Moral Foreign Policy" in 1997 - that lasted about 6 months.
" Denting BAE's profit margin is a cost I am willing to accept for Britain to be a moral country."
I am sure it is. I am equally sure that if your livelihood depended on BAe you might think a little differently. Being moral is terribly easy until one has to start to deal with the issues that arise from one's moral stance. Who remembers Labour's "Moral Foreign Policy" in 1997 - that lasted about 6 months.
We're heading in to the realms of Yes Minister's The Whiskey Priest
Yesterday an act of parliament had its 40th birthday celebrated,one which has saved numerous lives and prevented so many injuries,the 1974 Health and Safety at Work Act.The man who was responsible for it was Michael Foot,much derided in some parts.Here's a tribute to that great man.
On topic,a Labour position on Betfair is the likeliest bet to lay off a bit of a hold.
"In a changing world, some things do not change. It may be fashionable to decry the simple Virtues, but we still like to find them in our friends. Loyalty, honesty, frankness, gratitude, chivalry, magnanimity - these are the hallmarks of the good friend, the good husband and father, the nice guy we all hope our daughters will marry.
In the amoral world of Diplomacy, however, they are the hallmarks of the born loser. If a fallen enemy reaches out a hand for assistance, the wise man lops it off. If a friend does you a good turn when you’re down, wait until he’s down, then beat him to death. If an ally asks for your help in planning the next season’s moves, give it freely and copiously, then do the reverse of what you agreed and let him take the counter-attack. Try to surround yourself with people who trust you, then let them down; find an ally who will gladly die for you and see that he does just that.
In short, Diplomacy is not a nice game; to win, it is necessary to behave like a complete cad. Some people adopt a tone of moral outrage at the philosophy of the game, and refuse to play it at all: though it is already unfashionable, and will soon no doubt be illegal, to acknowledge any difference between the sexes, this attitude is particularly common among women — a cynic might say that Diplomacy threatens to erode the natural advantage their innate duplicity gives them over men in real life. At any event, this moral posture is quite untenable. We all have these anti-social tendencies somewhere within us, and it may be better to give them free rein in a harmless game, suppressing them where they could do real damage.
Not a nice game, as I said; but a marvellously entertaining one. Of all the countless board-games that have followed in the wake of Monopoly, none has acquired the devoted cult-following of Diplomacy: a game of pure skill for seven pedigree rats with time on their hands."
The Introduction to Diplomacy by the late Richard Sharp (RIP)
Anyone interested in another game, do let me know. I am thinking of making it a death match, so an idea of preferences would be helpful.
True, but it remained in force long after the Axis powers were defeated.
It did to our shame. Until at last the courts struck it down! I can't remember the name of the case off the top of my head by the essence of it was that a copper demanded to see the identity card of a member of the public going about his lawful business. Said member of public told the copper to bugger off. The case came before the courts and it was held that, absent a national emergency, such as a fight for a our very survival, HMG has no right to run such a scheme and the member of the public was quite within his rights to tell the copper to bugger off. End of the national identity card scheme shortly afterwards.
His name was Harry Willcock - and he was quite a character. He was a Yorkshireman and had been a councillor and magistrate in Leeds before the war. He stood in Barking as a Liberal in 1945 and 1950 and he died in the National Liberal Club where his last word was thought to be 'freedom'.
"In a changing world, some things do not change. It may be fashionable to decry the simple Virtues, but we still like to find them in our friends. Loyalty, honesty, frankness, gratitude, chivalry, magnanimity - these are the hallmarks of the good friend, the good husband and father, the nice guy we all hope our daughters will marry.
In the amoral world of Diplomacy, however, they are the hallmarks of the born loser. If a fallen enemy reaches out a hand for assistance, the wise man lops it off. If a friend does you a good turn when you’re down, wait until he’s down, then beat him to death. If an ally asks for your help in planning the next season’s moves, give it freely and copiously, then do the reverse of what you agreed and let him take the counter-attack. Try to surround yourself with people who trust you, then let them down; find an ally who will gladly die for you and see that he does just that.
In short, Diplomacy is not a nice game; to win, it is necessary to behave like a complete cad. Some people adopt a tone of moral outrage at the philosophy of the game, and refuse to play it at all: though it is already unfashionable, and will soon no doubt be illegal, to acknowledge any difference between the sexes, this attitude is particularly common among women — a cynic might say that Diplomacy threatens to erode the natural advantage their innate duplicity gives them over men in real life. At any event, this moral posture is quite untenable. We all have these anti-social tendencies somewhere within us, and it may be better to give them free rein in a harmless game, suppressing them where they could do real damage.
Not a nice game, as I said; but a marvellously entertaining one. Of all the countless board-games that have followed in the wake of Monopoly, none has acquired the devoted cult-following of Diplomacy: a game of pure skill for seven pedigree rats with time on their hands."
The Introduction to Diplomacy by the late Richard Sharp (RIP)
Anyone interested in another game, do let me know. I am thinking of making it a death match, so an idea of preferences would be helpful.
The current death match is working well - down to 4 players now, with alliances constantly shifting.
I'd add to Richard's excellent point one that he actually made himself somewhere else. The game is not about routine stabbing - it is in fact about building trust in sensible judgment, recognising that it will sometimes lead to a betrayal. Nobody wants to be allied to a random maniac, but one can deal with people who act in their own interest and remain friendly whether you are cooperating or fighting.
I do remember being very against ID cards - but what may I ask would the difference have been between an ID card and a passport ?
It wasn't the ID Card that I objected to, it was the database behind it. I already carry an ID card, my driver's licence. And indeed if the national ID card were a similar/replacement for that then I would have no objections.
You believe that driving licences aren't on a database?
As the MP who first proposed ID cards (in a private member's bill, with substantial support from Tories and LibDems, including the later LibDem spokesman), I always felt that the main reason was simply to have a universal form of ID that people could use, instead of the ridiculous faffing about with two utility bills etc. It wasn't proposed to make it compulsory to carry them - as with a passport, it'd simply be something you could produce if you wanted to show you were who you said you were.
The arguments against were generally of the "slippery slope" type - once we all have cards, the database could be linked up to this and that and suddenly The Authorities would know All About Us, whereas now they have no idea about us and are incapable of linking up their records (ahem). Much of the public was in two minds about that - they were uneasy about some monstrous all-encompassing data base developing, but also felt cheesed off that they had to enter the same personal details all over again for two different public services.
We eventually decided it was just too controversial to be worth pursuing for the modest benefits that it would bring. I never felt particularly passionately in favour myself, just thought they'd be useful and it was interesting to discuss the pros and cons. As a curiosity, the original PMB debate was deliberately rigged - it looked as though it would sail through to committee and die there, like most PMBs, so I got a friend, Roger Casale, who actually had no strong views on it either way, to oppose it so we could have a debate and a vote. He made a jolly good speech and won!
The irony is that despite this getting killed when it was openly discussed, the government ended up just giving itself access to everybody's databases instead, and in some cases forcing people in the private sector to collect data for them. The privacy argument seems quaint knowing what we do now about the kind of data the government has access to on us.
Anyone interested in another game, do let me know. I am thinking of making it a death match, so an idea of preferences would be helpful.
Please sir
I would like to play.
I am a brilliant military strategist, and my diplomatic skills are legendary for their subtlety.
I will excel at this game and crush you all.
Fair enough. The game is PB 2014 MkIV on Play Diplomacy.com . Come on then if you think your are hard enough.
Noone will get in without a password though
Well spotted Mr. Star.
The password is:
catsandkittens
Apologies for not including that essential piece of information.
I'm added to the game I think now.
If you are in, Mr Eagles, then so am I. The prospect of meeting you across the Diplomacy board is just too delicious to resist.
I see Mr. PulpStar is up for it too. Just four more players required. Surely our reigning champion will want to defend his title, and perhaps Mr. Topping and some others will want to dip their toe in the water.
Remember this is a friendly game where we will all play nicely.
*sound of squadron of Gloucester Old Spot's flying past window*
Anyone interested in another game, do let me know. I am thinking of making it a death match, so an idea of preferences would be helpful.
Please sir
I would like to play.
I am a brilliant military strategist, and my diplomatic skills are legendary for their subtlety.
I will excel at this game and crush you all.
Fair enough. The game is PB 2014 MkIV on Play Diplomacy.com . Come on then if you think your are hard enough.
Noone will get in without a password though
Well spotted Mr. Star.
The password is:
catsandkittens
Apologies for not including that essential piece of information.
I'm added to the game I think now.
If you are in, Mr Eagles, then so am I. The prospect of meeting you across the Diplomacy board is just too delicious to resist.
I see Mr. PulpStar is up for it too. Just four more players required. Surely our reigning champion will want to defend his title, and perhaps Mr. Topping and some others will want to dip their toe in the water.
Remember this is a friendly game where we will all play nicely.
*sound of squadron of Gloucester Old Spot's flying past window*
As a note for a total beginner, how long does a game usually last? I am aware that I am on holiday and thus would have to stop playing the last week in August, but would think about trying my hand at some point.
Anyone interested in another game, do let me know. I am thinking of making it a death match, so an idea of preferences would be helpful.
Please sir
I would like to play.
I am a brilliant military strategist, and my diplomatic skills are legendary for their subtlety.
I will excel at this game and crush you all.
Fair enough. The game is PB 2014 MkIV on Play Diplomacy.com . Come on then if you think your are hard enough.
Noone will get in without a password though
Well spotted Mr. Star.
The password is:
catsandkittens
Apologies for not including that essential piece of information.
I'm added to the game I think now.
If you are in, Mr Eagles, then so am I. The prospect of meeting you across the Diplomacy board is just too delicious to resist.
I see Mr. PulpStar is up for it too. Just four more players required. Surely our reigning champion will want to defend his title, and perhaps Mr. Topping and some others will want to dip their toe in the water.
Remember this is a friendly game where we will all play nicely.
*sound of squadron of Gloucester Old Spot's flying past window*
As a note for a total beginner, how long does a game usually last? I am aware that I am on holiday and thus would have to stop playing the last week in August, but would think about trying my hand at some point.
That's probably one or two turns you'll miss - will there be no net cafes available to you or wi-fi points for a smart phone ?
Just enter a series of mutual holds during that time. It'll take you 2 minutes max before you can be out by the poolside again.
I'm sure there'll be layers upon layers of security and quarantine, but even so it surprises me.
Don't worry Mr. D.
She's going to Emory - as @TimB noted they are plugged in with the CDC.
The cute element (as cute as you get with ebola) is that there were two American patients infected but only enough "experimental serum" for one of them. So the infected doctor insists that his female assistant gets the treatment...
As for cutting the top rate of tax: it's better to have a marginally smaller slice of a larger pie than the reverse.
Doesnt that depend on what you would have done with the money instead? Given the high levels of borrowing I would have thought it would have been better to keep the 50p rate until the Chancellor achieved at least one of his fiscal targets.
We've been through this before.
Cutting the top rate from 50p didn't cost much, if any, revenue
And Osborne explicitly took back any expected savings through an increase in stamp duty.
Oh and the last Gov had such a good record at delivering Huge IT Systems... (this one doesn't seem to be much better at that either, but not on the same scale a the NHS NPfIT Clusterf*ck)
Industry sources say that Fujitsu is likely to be awarded about £400 million in compensation in addition to £250 million already paid when the scheme, called the NHS National Programme for IT, began to falter.
The government will also have to foot Fujitsu’s legal bill of nearly £50 million, in addition to its own legal costs of £31.5 million.
£31.5 million for just the government's legal costs? Is that why antifrank has not been posting lately? Are these real costs or has a journalist just totted up the notional time of civil service lawyers who'd otherwise get paid for twiddling their thumbs?
Is it 37m, 31.5m to DLA piper.
The outcome of arbitration is not expected until December. According to papers published with the committee’s report, the total costs in respect of the Fujitsu case are £31.452m, which have have been paid to DLA Piper LLP. However, it says that the total includes third-party costs, such as those for counsel and expert witnesses, where invoices are routed through DLA Piper.
In addition, £3.113m has been paid to US firm Milbank Tweed Hadley & McCloy LLP for commercial support in the management of the Fujitsu contract and in the transition of services to the new contractor, BT.
Your not kidding,come to my area of my city to prove it,politicians = lying b.....ds
I don't see the problem. Immigrants are net contributors to the exchequer, so all these Roma are surely helping close the deficit. I also can't understand the article about many Eastern European immigrants being criminals - they're just the same as German families and anyone suggesting otherwise deserves to be vilified as a racist.
Comments
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/gay-saudi-arabian-man-sentenced-to-three-years-and-450-lashes-for-meeting-men-via-twitter-9628204.html
Why do we continue to sell to a regime with such awful human rights abuses?
£31.5 million for just the government's legal costs? Is that why antifrank has not been posting lately? Are these real costs or has a journalist just totted up the notional time of civil service lawyers who'd otherwise get paid for twiddling their thumbs?
Is it 37m, 31.5m to DLA piper.
The outcome of arbitration is not expected until December. According to papers published with the committee’s report, the total costs in respect of the Fujitsu case are £31.452m, which have have been paid to DLA Piper LLP. However, it says that the total includes third-party costs, such as those for counsel and expert witnesses, where invoices are routed through DLA Piper.
In addition, £3.113m has been paid to US firm Milbank Tweed Hadley & McCloy LLP for commercial support in the management of the Fujitsu contract and in the transition of services to the new contractor, BT.
http://www.lawgazette.co.uk/practice/37m-legal-bill-for-nhs-computer-scheme/5037706.article
The Simon Walsh case was an absolute classic in overreach by the CPS.
The jury booted it out in approx 90 minutes iirc.
The outcome of arbitration is not expected until December. According to papers published with the committee’s report, the total costs in respect of the Fujitsu case are £31.452m, which have have been paid to DLA Piper LLP. However, it says that the total includes third-party costs, such as those for counsel and expert witnesses, where invoices are routed through DLA Piper.
In addition, £3.113m has been paid to US firm Milbank Tweed Hadley & McCloy LLP for commercial support in the management of the Fujitsu contract and in the transition of services to the new contractor, BT.
http://www.lawgazette.co.uk/practice/37m-legal-bill-for-nhs-computer-scheme/5037706.article
Someone should rescue the top partners at DLA Piper, they must be in serious danger of drowning in all that cash they are trousering !
Because every body else does.
Moral stances cost jobs and achieve nothing if they are not multilateral. And multi lateral is going out of fashion.
The sanctions against Russia show that in the world right now its every man for himself. Russia sanctions will hurt the City, whilst France and Germany continue to do business. Read Alistair Heath's piece in the telly if you really want to get angry.
Meanwhile countries like Australia and Israel have simply stopped listening to 'the international community'. More will follow. They could include Britain.
The key is getting past 4 SCs. It seems very easy to stall there and become an easy victim for someone else, but when you get past 5, you can become the King of the Mediterranean.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/01/06/tiger_police/
http://www.diplomacy-archive.com/god.htm
Richard Sharp was an archetypal UKIP voter before UKIP was invented - affable and hugely popular, scathing about anything that he construed as political correctness. A heavy smoker, he died of lung cancer some years ago, to which his un-selfpitying only public comment was, "Maybe the health fascists were right after all." I liked him.
As we buy a huge amount of our gas and oil from the Middle East, where do you propose we buy our energy, as renewables are more expensive and less developed?
I am sure it is. I am equally sure that if your livelihood depended on BAe you might think a little differently. Being moral is terribly easy until one has to start to deal with the issues that arise from one's moral stance. Who remembers Labour's "Moral Foreign Policy" in 1997 - that lasted about 6 months.
Watch your pockets http://tinyurl.com/pw3t4h2 !
On topic,a Labour position on Betfair is the likeliest bet to lay off a bit of a hold.
http://www.thecitizen.org.uk/archive/articles/vol5/article41h.htm
Game, set & EICIPM has a ring to it!!!!
Your not kidding,come to my area of my city to prove it,politicians = lying b.....ds
And cancelling Trident. Fab.
Lib Dem incumbent MP retirements could cost the party four seats in 2015 before any votes are cast.
http://nottspolitics.org/2014/07/29/lib-dem-incumbent-mp-retirements-could-cost-the-party-four-seats-in-2015-before-any-votes-are-cast/
http://politicalbookie.wordpress.com/2014/08/01/ladbrokes-project-seven-labour-gains-in-eastern-england/
Should be in line for about £3k of damages if he wants to pursue it I'd imagine - precedent is the B&B/Gay couple row.
"In a changing world, some things do not change. It may be fashionable to decry the simple Virtues, but we still like to find them in our friends. Loyalty, honesty, frankness, gratitude, chivalry, magnanimity - these are the hallmarks of the good friend, the good husband and father, the nice guy we all hope our daughters will marry.
In the amoral world of Diplomacy, however, they are the hallmarks of the born loser. If a fallen enemy reaches out a hand for assistance, the wise man lops it off. If a friend does you a good turn when you’re down, wait until he’s down, then beat him to death. If an ally asks for your help in planning the next season’s moves, give it freely and copiously, then do the reverse of what you agreed and let him take the counter-attack. Try to surround yourself with people who trust you, then let them down; find an ally who will gladly die for you and see that he does just that.
In short, Diplomacy is not a nice game; to win, it is necessary to behave like a complete cad. Some people adopt a tone of moral outrage at the philosophy of the game, and refuse to play it at all: though it is already unfashionable, and will soon no doubt be illegal, to acknowledge any difference between the sexes, this attitude is particularly common among women — a cynic might say that Diplomacy threatens to erode the natural advantage their innate duplicity gives them over men in real life. At any event, this moral posture is quite untenable. We all have these anti-social tendencies somewhere within us, and it may be better to give them free rein in a harmless game, suppressing them where they could do real damage.
Not a nice game, as I said; but a marvellously entertaining one. Of all the countless board-games that have followed in the wake of Monopoly, none has acquired the devoted cult-following of Diplomacy: a game of pure skill for seven pedigree rats with time on their hands."
The Introduction to Diplomacy by the late Richard Sharp (RIP)
Anyone interested in another game, do let me know. I am thinking of making it a death match, so an idea of preferences would be helpful.
I would like to play.
I am a brilliant military strategist, and my diplomatic skills are legendary for their subtlety.
I will excel at this game and crush you all.
I'd add to Richard's excellent point one that he actually made himself somewhere else. The game is not about routine stabbing - it is in fact about building trust in sensible judgment, recognising that it will sometimes lead to a betrayal. Nobody wants to be allied to a random maniac, but one can deal with people who act in their own interest and remain friendly whether you are cooperating or fighting.
http://www.lbc.co.uk/ed-miliband-live-on-lbc-94619
Friday 1st August 2014
Ed Miliband is taking your calls on LBC from 5pm - and you can watch it live.
The password is:
catsandkittens
Apologies for not including that essential piece of information.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-28605306
I see Mr. PulpStar is up for it too. Just four more players required. Surely our reigning champion will want to defend his title, and perhaps Mr. Topping and some others will want to dip their toe in the water.
Remember this is a friendly game where we will all play nicely.
*sound of squadron of Gloucester Old Spot's flying past window*
Worth reading. A typically thoughtful piece.
http://hopisen.com/2014/gaza-avoiding-victory/
Next Mars rover will seek to make oxygen on Mars:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-28582903
Just enter a series of mutual holds during that time. It'll take you 2 minutes max before you can be out by the poolside again.
I see that PB's foremost expert on the canine prostate gland has joined the game. Only three places left.
Mr. Charles, you negotiate for a living, can we not tempt you to negotiate for fun, you don't have to stick to your deals in the game.
She's going to Emory - as @TimB noted they are plugged in with the CDC.
The cute element (as cute as you get with ebola) is that there were two American patients infected but only enough "experimental serum" for one of them. So the infected doctor insists that his female assistant gets the treatment...
Cutting the top rate from 50p didn't cost much, if any, revenue
And Osborne explicitly took back any expected savings through an increase in stamp duty.
The outcome of arbitration is not expected until December. According to papers published with the committee’s report, the total costs in respect of the Fujitsu case are £31.452m, which have have been paid to DLA Piper LLP. However, it says that the total includes third-party costs, such as those for counsel and expert witnesses, where invoices are routed through DLA Piper.
In addition, £3.113m has been paid to US firm Milbank Tweed Hadley & McCloy LLP for commercial support in the management of the Fujitsu contract and in the transition of services to the new contractor, BT.
http://www.lawgazette.co.uk/practice/37m-legal-bill-for-nhs-computer-scheme/5037706.article
Is DLA a lockstep firm?
If so, what is Mrs Clegg's share of that fee...
*innocent face*