In 20 days' time David Cameron may resign as prime minister of the United Kingdom. Difficult to believe that's really true, but it is.
If he did he'd be going against public opinion, according to a poll in today's Express. I suspect he'll see his duty as to get Indy negotiations underway well ahead of the GE - and to set out the Westminster timetable, not one dreamt up by 8% of the UK....
People upset by Cameron going , really ?
I can't see that many people being upset a few raised eyebrows perhaps, but Ian leaving Great British Bake Off has a bigger impact on the nation.
There was positive news for David Cameron. While some senior Tory sources confided that the Prime Minister would “inevitably feel he would have to step down” if he “lost Scotland”, members of the public indicated they would be much more forgiving. Only 26 per cent would want Mr Cameron’s scalp, compared with 45 per cent who felt he would be entitled to carry on leading the country. The rest, 29 per cent, were undecided.
Voters don't seem to see giving Scotland a democratic vote a "failure".
Yeah, but that's different from people who would be sad to see him go. Personally I don't think he should resign, but if he chose to it wouldn't concern me in the least.
I think Cameron will survive. He will come out quickly, making a statesmanlike speech that mixes notes of regret with an unimpeachable line that the "yes" vote justifies the referendum; to argue to the contrary is fundamentally undemocratic. Plus the other main parties supported the referendum and Ukip wants one on Europe, so none are really in a position to make capital, though no doubt they will try.The risks for Cameron come from his disillusioned backbenchers and the media. If the loss of the union triggers a mass defection his position will become untenable; he would have to resign and the government could fall. The result would be a massacre at the next election. The Tory right has always had a masochistic streak, but turkeys don't vote for Christmas.
The media could use this as an opportunity to strike back, post Leveson. Certainly the Murdoch papers will be brutal; and the fourth estate never waste an opportunity to exercise their democratic accountability function. But I don't think they have the desire or ability to defenestrate Cameron, nor do I think the man on the street will view this as.Cameron's failure alone.
I still expect a no vote, by the way. But it will be close.
Presumably those saying Cameron should resign in the event if a yes vote are also planning a ticker tape parade for him if it is a no vote? I am still recovering from the party we threw Jeremy Hunt for the excellent Olympics that he organised...
Disagree. If the United Kingdom breaks apart on his watch he is likely to be toast. He made some of the crucial decisions. The union is part of the DNA of the Conservative Party. May not happen immediately but he will go. I imagine Hague would be caretaker leader. However I do think it will be a No (though 2011 continues to cast a shadow).
I think Cameron will survive. He will come out quickly, making a statesmanlike speech that mixes notes of regret with an unimpeachable line that the "yes" vote justifies the referendum; to argue to the contrary is fundamentally undemocratic. Plus the other main parties supported the referendum and Ukip wants one on Europe, so none are really in a position to make capital, though no doubt they will try.The risks for Cameron come from his disillusioned backbenchers and the media. If the loss of the union triggers a mass defection his position will become untenable; he would have to resign and the government could fall. The result would be a massacre at the next election. The Tory right has always had a masochistic streak, but turkeys don't vote for Christmas.
The media could use this as an opportunity to strike back, post Leveson. Certainly the Murdoch papers will be brutal; and the fourth estate never waste an opportunity to exercise their democratic accountability function. But I don't think they have the desire or ability to defenestrate Cameron, nor do I think the man on the street will view this as.Cameron's failure alone.
I still expect a no vote, by the way. But it will be close.
Presumably those saying Cameron should resign in the event if a yes vote are also planning a ticker tape parade for him if it is a no vote? I am still recovering from the party we threw Jeremy Hunt for the excellent Olympics that he organised...
Heaven forbid that you suggest to the right that tory fortunes in Scotland collapsed under Thatcher. Or that devolution is a Labour construct.
The Scottish Government's independent defence policy is "dangerous" and would leave Scotland and Nato less capable of dealing with current and future threats, a former Nato commander has said. General Sir Richard Shirreff, who has just stepped down as Nato's deputy supreme allied commander Europe, said the SNP's plan is "amateurish" and that Scotland's future in Nato is "uncertain" if it leaves the UK and expels nuclear weapons from the Clyde.
If they win it will be the historical Labour non-voters who swing it.
If they lose, it will be down to spending too much time taking to themselves, reassuring each other how clever they are and how "others" (there's always an "other") don't get it.....
I had thought to send a few K for Soubry's election fund, but she seems no better than Palmer.
Ahah! You've found out that they're all the same as well. Time to join UKIP.
I haven't exactly noticed UKIP storming the barricades on the Rotherham story, they're as silent as Cameron.
Farage has spent his time parading Carswell like his latest trophy, and Nuttall is nowhere to be seen.
If they had, they would have been accused of rank opportunism. We've already had a thread full of people accusing them of callously timing this defection and wiping Rotherham off the news agenda. I'm glad they're keeping their powder dry; it's for those responsible to explain.
The Scottish Government's independent defence policy is "dangerous" and would leave Scotland and Nato less capable of dealing with current and future threats, a former Nato commander has said. General Sir Richard Shirreff, who has just stepped down as Nato's deputy supreme allied commander Europe, said the SNP's plan is "amateurish" and that Scotland's future in Nato is "uncertain" if it leaves the UK and expels nuclear weapons from the Clyde.
For once, Ukip may be behaving politically. The anger and shock are there now, there's no need to increase the hyperbole. See, I told you so, na-na na na-na won't win any more votes.
The pressure is on the Government to act decisively, Even some Labour people are saying the right things (not Ed, obviously).
I think Cameron will survive. He will come out quickly, making a statesmanlike speech that mixes notes of regret with an unimpeachable line that the "yes" vote justifies the referendum; to argue to the contrary is fundamentally undemocratic. Plus the other main parties supported the referendum and Ukip wants one on Europe, so none are really in a position to make capital, though no doubt they will try.The risks for Cameron come from his disillusioned backbenchers and the media. If the loss of the union triggers a mass defection his position will become untenable; he would have to resign and the government could fall. The result would be a massacre at the next election. The Tory right has always had a masochistic streak, but turkeys don't vote for Christmas.
The media could use this as an opportunity to strike back, post Leveson. Certainly the Murdoch papers will be brutal; and the fourth estate never waste an opportunity to exercise their democratic accountability function. But I don't think they have the desire or ability to defenestrate Cameron, nor do I think the man on the street will view this as.Cameron's failure alone.
I still expect a no vote, by the way. But it will be close.
Presumably those saying Cameron should resign in the event if a yes vote are also planning a ticker tape parade for him if it is a no vote? I am still recovering from the party we threw Jeremy Hunt for the excellent Olympics that he organised...
Heaven forbid that you suggest to the right that tory fortunes in Scotland collapsed under Thatcher. Or that devolution is a Labour construct.
Actually the vote collapsed after Thatcher when the Tory right were indulging in a period of idiocy they appear to be re-entering.....
"Homage to Catalonia" is better than most novels imo.
I think he's right there's an opposite in the Celtic vs Anglo way of expressing things but I think that's good - the conflict between the two creates a third thing.
Excellent and thought-provoking article by SeanT in the Telegraph.
On the Indy debate I see what you mean - putting half-hearted Labourites in charge of the BT campaign is not the best way of injecting passion into the No campaign. And what kind of campaign can win without some passion?. Well, hopefully, the BT campaign can. For those south of the border, the rationale was that the Labour working classes are key to the referendum and they will not be moved by appeals to British patriotism hence Darling's exclusive focus on the economics. However this has been frustrating to us who are moved by the importance of 300 years of shared history and achievement. And are angered by the sheer baloney, tendentiousness and nihilism of the Yes campaign.
On Clacton. Only chance for the Tories to get an even half-decent result is to go for an open primary and select a striking, preferably local, candidate on the Sarah Wollaston model. If the campaign then becomes a contest between two authentic personalities then Douglas Carswell may come under a bit more pressure. The maverick will always beat the party in a by-election (cf Galloway in Bradford).
Ha Ha Ha , so moved by the importance of 300 years history you appoint those serial losers Darling and Alexander to fight for you.
You have a point, to be fair. A tragedy of Scottish Labour is that no fewer than three of their leaders who could have taken Salmond apart died prematurely - Donald Dewar, John Smith and Robin Cook. It would have been a delight to see the latter, in particular, take a bodkin to the bladder.
On Clacton. Only chance for the Tories to get an even half-decent result is to go for an open primary and select a striking, preferably local, candidate on the Sarah Wollaston model. If the campaign then becomes a contest between two authentic personalities then Douglas Carswell may come under a bit more pressure. The maverick will always beat the party in a by-election (cf Galloway in Bradford).
There have been hundreds and hundreds of by-elections since 1945 across England. In only two has a party other than Con, Lab or LD (or its predecessors) won, of which Galloway was one. He was very much the exception, not the rule. Now, I expect UKIP to provide a third example later this year but not because Carswell is a maverick but because UKIP have established a very strong area of strength in Clacton.
Next week:Iain Dowie on why Thierry Henry was rubbish
ROFLMAO
Will Self calls Orwell a mediocrity.
Perhaps Will would like to name those blockbusters he has written or highlight his huge contribution to English literature nationally or internationally.
Self is a London twathead with his head up his own arse, but as malc would point out turnips like to grow in muck.
In 20 days' time David Cameron may resign as prime minister of the United Kingdom. Difficult to believe that's really true, but it is.
If he did he'd be going against public opinion, according to a poll in today's Express. I suspect he'll see his duty as to get Indy negotiations underway well ahead of the GE - and to set out the Westminster timetable, not one dreamt up by 8% of the UK....
People upset by Cameron going , really ?
I can't see that many people being upset a few raised eyebrows perhaps, but Ian leaving Great British Bake Off has a bigger impact on the nation.
There was positive news for David Cameron. While some senior Tory sources confided that the Prime Minister would “inevitably feel he would have to step down” if he “lost Scotland”, members of the public indicated they would be much more forgiving. Only 26 per cent would want Mr Cameron’s scalp, compared with 45 per cent who felt he would be entitled to carry on leading the country. The rest, 29 per cent, were undecided.
Voters don't seem to see giving Scotland a democratic vote a "failure".
Yeah, but that's different from people who would be sad to see him go. Personally I don't think he should resign, but if he chose to it wouldn't concern me in the least.
Who said "sad" (apart from your good self?)
TBH I was slightly surprised the numbers for "should go" weren't higher - it's unlike the Great British Public to forego the opportunity to give a politician a good kicking when he's down....
In 20 days' time David Cameron may resign as prime minister of the United Kingdom. Difficult to believe that's really true, but it is.
If he did he'd be going against public opinion, according to a poll in today's Express. I suspect he'll see his duty as to get Indy negotiations underway well ahead of the GE - and to set out the Westminster timetable, not one dreamt up by 8% of the UK....
People upset by Cameron going , really ?
I can't see that many people being upset a few raised eyebrows perhaps, but Ian leaving Great British Bake Off has a bigger impact on the nation.
There was positive news for David Cameron. While some senior Tory sources confided that the Prime Minister would “inevitably feel he would have to step down” if he “lost Scotland”, members of the public indicated they would be much more forgiving. Only 26 per cent would want Mr Cameron’s scalp, compared with 45 per cent who felt he would be entitled to carry on leading the country. The rest, 29 per cent, were undecided.
Voters don't seem to see giving Scotland a democratic vote a "failure".
I doubt there will be any great clamoring within rUK for Cameron's head, but I suspect he may well feel he has no option but to "fall on is sword" if Scotland is lost.
There's also the Parliamentary Conservative Party who are quite capable of going completely mad as we all know.
I think, if Scotland goes, Cameron will resign within a few day's.
In 20 days' time David Cameron may resign as prime minister of the United Kingdom. Difficult to believe that's really true, but it is.
If he did he'd be going against public opinion, according to a poll in today's Express. I suspect he'll see his duty as to get Indy negotiations underway well ahead of the GE - and to set out the Westminster timetable, not one dreamt up by 8% of the UK....
People upset by Cameron going , really ?
I can't see that many people being upset a few raised eyebrows perhaps, but Ian leaving Great British Bake Off has a bigger impact on the nation.
There was positive news for David Cameron. While some senior Tory sources confided that the Prime Minister would “inevitably feel he would have to step down” if he “lost Scotland”, members of the public indicated they would be much more forgiving. Only 26 per cent would want Mr Cameron’s scalp, compared with 45 per cent who felt he would be entitled to carry on leading the country. The rest, 29 per cent, were undecided.
Voters don't seem to see giving Scotland a democratic vote a "failure".
Yeah, but that's different from people who would be sad to see him go. Personally I don't think he should resign, but if he chose to it wouldn't concern me in the least.
Who said "sad" (apart from your good self?)
TBH I was slightly surprised the numbers for "should go" weren't higher - it's unlike the Great British Public to forego the opportunity to give a politician a good kicking when he's down....
Ah yes CV you said public opinion, it's just I often think of Cameron as sad.
The hundreds of thousands of Slavs that were killed because they weren't sufficiently German?
I guess my point is that I regularly hear that English isn't a race but the BBC article seems to go big on 'German race'.
Are the Austrians 'German' or Austrian?
From my reading, the Austrians wanted to join Germany after their empire collapsed in 1918, only to be prevented from doing so at Versailles (and related Treaties). For a short while the country was called "German Austria". Then when Hitler took over the country in 1938 (the "Anschluss") there was no resistance, the Nazis being welcomed enthusiastically. But of course after the horrors of WW2, Austria was rehabilitated by the Allies as Germany's "first victim", and since then there has been no mainstream Austrian movement for unification with Germany.
In 20 days' time David Cameron may resign as prime minister of the United Kingdom. Difficult to believe that's really true, but it is.
.
Yes, quite extraordinary when you think of it. Few folk seem to register that the outcome of a Yes vote would be political tumult both north and south of the border. Chickens coming home to roost both sides of the border. ("Whaddya mean we can't have a currency union? It's the sovereign will of the Scottish people.")
Indeed - it would truly be an existential crisis of a type that the UK has not seen since the debates over Irish Home Rule in the early part of the last century. However, it should not be assumed that a narrow yes vote will necessarily be the end of the story, or that it automatically means Scotland would become independent. Suppose there is a 52-48 yes on an 80% turnout. This would mean that only 41% of the electorate had voted yes - not exactly a resounding endorsement for such a major step, as many people on both sides of the border would hasten to point out. Nevertheless, negotiations would begin in a climate of mutual suspicion and ill-will. By the next Holyrood election in 2016 hardly any substantial progress would be made - Scotland's negotaitions with the EU would be bogged down in objections from other coutries with separatist regions (Spain and Belgium for instance) and negotiations with rUK on debt-sharing and currencies are likely to prove very complex and difficult. At the same time the Scottish economy would be under pressure because of continuing uncertainty - investment decisions would be postponed and there could be a rush of companies relocating south of the border. If (when?) Labour returns to power the future of rUK inside the EU will suddenly look much more secure than that of an independent Scotland. The independence ideal could look very tattered and the easy promises Salmond has made will be shown to be unrealistic. Under these circumstance it is by no means certain that the SNP would again be reelected with an overall majority, and if they are not then rUk would find itself negoatiating with a Scottish parliament which contained a majority of members opposed to independence. The likely outcome of this would be some kind of compromise offering greater devolution but short of full independence, which would then be put to another referendum, with the full support of both parliaments. Bearing in mind the strong likelihood that Labour will be back in power at Westminster the Tory bogey will have less significance and, having been confronted with some of the consequences of independence, such a compromise seems a plausible possibility.
Is now a good time to buy Euros? I can get 1.24.5 at the moment. What will happen in next 4 weeks before my hols?
mike,
Pound is a bit off its high against the EURO, but as things are so volatile at the moment, I have ought mine. Best deals are on line but expect you know that.
George Orwell is arguably the most influential writer of the 20th century in any language.
It was a transparent attempt to be controversial and elitist in order to get Self more publicity. Let's not indulge him. The best response was isam's one: a quick mocking and then move on.
On Clacton. Only chance for the Tories to get an even half-decent result is to go for an open primary and select a striking, preferably local, candidate on the Sarah Wollaston model. If the campaign then becomes a contest between two authentic personalities then Douglas Carswell may come under a bit more pressure. The maverick will always beat the party in a by-election (cf Galloway in Bradford).
There have been hundreds and hundreds of by-elections since 1945 across England. In only two has a party other than Con, Lab or LD (or its predecessors) won, of which Galloway was one. He was very much the exception, not the rule. Now, I expect UKIP to provide a third example later this year but not because Carswell is a maverick but because UKIP have established a very strong area of strength in Clacton.
Aye, you're probably right. But hitherto the LibDems existed as a protest vehicle on which the discontented could project their aspirations and discontents. UKIP, I suppose, fulfil a similar function though they are more divisive.But there is more scope for charismatic individuals with a reputation for authenticity to prosper with or without party support (Ken, Boris, Salmond). Carswell + UKIP + Essex seem a pretty strong combination.
The hundreds of thousands of Slavs that were killed because they weren't sufficiently German?
I guess my point is that I regularly hear that English isn't a race but the BBC article seems to go big on 'German race'.
Are the Austrians 'German' or Austrian?
From my reading, the Austrians wanted to join Germany after their empire collapsed in 1918, only to be prevented from doing so at Versailles (and related Treaties). For a short while the country was called "German Austria". Then when Hitler took over the country in 1938 (the "Anschluss") there was no resistance, the Nazis being welcomed enthusiastically. But of course after the horrors of WW2, Austria was rehabilitated by the Allies as Germany's "first victim", and since then there has been no mainstream Austrian movement for unification with Germany.
To be fair to the Austrians, their political leadership opposed the Anschluss. Their Chancellor was assassinated by Nazis for opposing their plans.
"I'm joining UKIP not because I am a conservative who hankers after the past. I want change. Things can be better than this.
I am an optimist. Britain's a better place than it was when I was born in the early 1970s.
We're more open and tolerant. We're, for the most part, more prosperous. More people are free to grow up and live as they want to live than ever before.
As the father of a young daughter, I've come to appreciate what feminism's achieved. Most girls growing up in Britain today will have better life chances than before thanks to greater equality.
There's been a revolution in attitudes towards disabled people.
What was once dismissed as "political correctness gone mad", we recognise as good manners. Good.
So much about Britain is so much better. Except when it comes to how we do politics.
UKIP is not an angry backlash against the modern world. Modernity has raised our expectations of how things could be.
We need change.
People have a right to expect a government that gets the basics right."
There is a poll in The Sun on Sunday (p2) taken by the Conservatives in the days before Carswells defection.. haven't seen this before
How would you vote with or without Carswell as a Tory?
With Carswell standing as a Tory 43% Tory 30% UKIP 16% Labour
Without Carswell standing as a Tory 29% Tory 30% UKIP 21% Labour
(Obviously the UKIP score wihout Carswell as a Tory isn't with Carswell as a Kipper!)
That's broadly consistent with Survation I think (UK = 30% + 14% PV from Carswell*). Means Carswell's PV is around 3,200 so very much at the upper end of the range that @NickPalmer suggested the other day. [Sorry, Nick, still don't believe the *average* MP is anywhere near that]
* Calculated as 43% - 29%
As an aside - this is from the 80s, but looks interesting - academic paper looking at the value of a personal vote
That's getting to the scale of it - and all the while the political class talking about low crime - such a sick joke.
just to add
"but let's assume Rotherham was one of the worst examples"
I think all the old textile towns around Lancashire, Yorkshire etc are about the same level as Rotherham (proportional to size) because they share all the same factors but apart from them yes, the other places mentioned maybe 10-50% Rotherham numbers.
This is a dangerously speculative extrapolation - indeed extrapolation on top of extrapolation. Clearly if anything like true it is deeply worrying. But. First there needs to be some realistic evidence about both other towns (of which there is some) and the scale. There is no doubt about child abuse, but there needs to be some attempt at producing evidence before making such claims. For a start we are talking about 20 children's services and 20 police departments all ignoring similar warnings over similar periods of years. Is there evidence of that? Have newspapers eager for headlines suggested that? We do know that in other areas people have been arrested and jailed - no question, I can think of Oldham and Oxford. And of course its utterly shocking. But have these areas come up with similar numbers to Rotherham? Were they over similar years?
1400 children abused over 16 years is 90 children per year and over any given 3 year period 270 children. Terrible. Just how many abusers is that? If it is one abuser per child that is terrible enough. But could it be less than that? The number of abusers does not I think extrapolate with number of abused children or the number of individual acts of abuse. Saying 4 million rapes conjures up notions of every other Pakistani raping every other child. These speculations are dangerous.
On Clacton. Only chance for the Tories to get an even half-decent result is to go for an open primary and select a striking, preferably local, candidate on the Sarah Wollaston model. If the campaign then becomes a contest between two authentic personalities then Douglas Carswell may come under a bit more pressure. The maverick will always beat the party in a by-election (cf Galloway in Bradford).
There have been hundreds and hundreds of by-elections since 1945 across England. In only two has a party other than Con, Lab or LD (or its predecessors) won, of which Galloway was one. He was very much the exception, not the rule. Now, I expect UKIP to provide a third example later this year but not because Carswell is a maverick but because UKIP have established a very strong area of strength in Clacton.
Aye, you're probably right. But hitherto the LibDems existed as a protest vehicle on which the discontented could project their aspirations and discontents. UKIP, I suppose, fulfil a similar function though they are more divisive.But there is more scope for charismatic individuals with a reputation for authenticity to prosper with or without party support (Ken, Boris, Salmond). Carswell + UKIP + Essex seem a pretty strong combination.
Personalities matter a great deal more in mayoral elections than parliamentary ones. I agree that UKIP in certain circumstances can play the role that the Lib Dems have often done in the past, however that of itself is indicative that the candidate usually isn't all that important providing they're not a liability.
Certainly, a good candidate is an advantage, and that should work to UKIP's advantage in Clacton providing that they can sort out the problem with the previously selected candidate. However, the key sum in the equation is UKIP+Clacton, not Carswell+anything.
First Minister Alex Salmond has rebuffed Treasury demands for Scottish ministers to withdraw their threat to renege on UK debt if they cannot secure a currency union. In a letter to Scottish Finance Secretary John Swinney, Mr Alexander said: "This week you have confirmed your position that the first economic policy of an independent Scotland would be to renege on the debts that have over generations funded public services and built schools, hospitals and more in Scotland.
He added: "Your claim that because the UK Government will not agree a currency union, an independent Scotland should not take a share of the debt is completely bogus.
"A currency is not an asset, as you claim, it is the monetary system of a state. The pound sterling will be - legally - the monetary system of the continuing UK if Scotland votes to separate."
Excellent and thought-provoking article by SeanT in the Telegraph.
On the Indy debate I see what you mean - putting half-hearted Labourites in charge of the BT campaign is not the best way of injecting passion into the No campaign. And what kind of campaign can win without some passion?. Well, hopefully, the BT campaign can. For those south of the border, the rationale was that the Labour working classes are key to the referendum and they will not be moved by appeals to British patriotism hence Darling's exclusive focus on the economics. However this has been frustrating to us who are moved by the importance of 300 years of shared history and achievement. And are angered by the sheer baloney, tendentiousness and nihilism of the Yes campaign.
On Clacton. Only chance for the Tories to get an even half-decent result is to go for an open primary and select a striking, preferably local, candidate on the Sarah Wollaston model. If the campaign then becomes a contest between two authentic personalities then Douglas Carswell may come under a bit more pressure. The maverick will always beat the party in a by-election (cf Galloway in Bradford).
Ha Ha Ha , so moved by the importance of 300 years history you appoint those serial losers Darling and Alexander to fight for you.
You have a point, to be fair. A tragedy of Scottish Labour is that no fewer than three of their leaders who could have taken Salmond apart died prematurely - Donald Dewar, John Smith and Robin Cook. It would have been a delight to see the latter, in particular, take a bodkin to the bladder.
Fantasy
And based on a dangerous assumption that they would all have necessarily been supporters of the Naw.
Well most of the shares in Cadbury would have been institutional investors. So the capital released by the sale would have reinvested in opportunities that they felt offered greater value. Whether they were right or wrong, who knows.
However, we mustn't forget that the Kraft CEO (I forget her name) lied. It is shameful that she wasn't held to account by the panel, and shameful that she refused to appear before a parliamentary committee.
Yeah, you still haven't explained why this takeover was in the national interest.
Start with most acquisitions fail to meet their objectives, then that the tax policies of Kraft moved the base overseas so now the rest of the UK has to make up the difference, then that the taxpayer subsidised the takeover via RBS, followed by the loss of jobs in the UK, I could go on.
In simple terms Charles this is just one of those issues where the national inetrest isn't aligned with investors. I often wonder if harder takeover rules would improve the standard of corporate governance. The objective of the average UK CEO seems to be to sell his business asap, if they were judged by organic growth more then things might improve. Likewise since by investors you mean fund managers rather then the people who actually own the money what if we stop them getting fast bucks just to line their own pockets ?
I start from the position that the owners of companies should have the right to sell them to whoever they wish. It is the over-riding national interest to retain an open and dynamic economy, including the freedom of shareholders.
I spend more of my professional time advising people not to undertake M&A than to do so. Sacrificing near term revenue for a trusted adviser role
As for harder takeover rules: anything that entrenches management is not a good thing. @HurstLlama and I have debated this before - I have a very low opinion of the level of engagement of most fund managers who are virtually absentee landlords. But strengthening management's position is not the right thing to do.
(One idea which you don't hear discussed much is the French system of double voting (only applied by a few companies, usually those with core shareholders) - if a share is owned, without trading, for a period of 12 months you get two votes. That's always struck me as quite a clever way to encourage long term investing)
I had thought to send a few K for Soubry's election fund, but she seems no better than Palmer.
Ahah! You've found out that they're all the same as well. Time to join UKIP.
I haven't exactly noticed UKIP storming the barricades on the Rotherham story, they're as silent as Cameron.
Farage has spent his time parading Carswell like his latest trophy, and Nuttall is nowhere to be seen.
If they had, they would have been accused of rank opportunism. We've already had a thread full of people accusing them of callously timing this defection and wiping Rotherham off the news agenda. I'm glad they're keeping their powder dry; it's for those responsible to explain.
I had thought to send a few K for Soubry's election fund, but she seems no better than Palmer.
Ahah! You've found out that they're all the same as well. Time to join UKIP.
I haven't exactly noticed UKIP storming the barricades on the Rotherham story, they're as silent as Cameron.
Farage has spent his time parading Carswell like his latest trophy, and Nuttall is nowhere to be seen.
If they had, they would have been accused of rank opportunism. We've already had a thread full of people accusing them of callously timing this defection and wiping Rotherham off the news agenda. I'm glad they're keeping their powder dry; it's for those responsible to explain.
‘rank opportunism’, er, so what - as an excuse that’s pretty weak.
It strikes me as a little ironic that while kippers decry everyone else’s failings in Rotherham, Farage has been fairly quiet on the subject.
That's getting to the scale of it - and all the while the political class talking about low crime - such a sick joke.
just to add
"but let's assume Rotherham was one of the worst examples"
I think all the old textile towns around Lancashire, Yorkshire etc are about the same level as Rotherham (proportional to size) because they share all the same factors but apart from them yes, the other places mentioned maybe 10-50% Rotherham numbers.
This is a dangerously speculative extrapolation - indeed extrapolation on top of extrapolation. Clearly if anything like true it is deeply worrying. But. First there needs to be some realistic evidence about both other towns (of which there is some) and the scale. There is no doubt about child abuse, but there needs to be some attempt at producing evidence before making such claims. For a start we are talking about 20 children's services and 20 police departments all ignoring similar warnings over similar periods of years. Is there evidence of that? Have newspapers eager for headlines suggested that? We do know that in other areas people have been arrested and jailed - no question, I can think of Oldham and Oxford. And of course its utterly shocking. But have these areas come up with similar numbers to Rotherham? Were they over similar years?
1400 children abused over 16 years is 90 children per year and over any given 3 year period 270 children. Terrible. Just how many abusers is that? If it is one abuser per child that is terrible enough. But could it be less than that? The number of abusers does not I think extrapolate with number of abused children or the number of individual acts of abuse. Saying 4 million rapes conjures up notions of every other Pakistani raping every other child. These speculations are dangerous.
I had thought to send a few K for Soubry's election fund, but she seems no better than Palmer.
Ahah! You've found out that they're all the same as well. Time to join UKIP.
I haven't exactly noticed UKIP storming the barricades on the Rotherham story, they're as silent as Cameron.
Farage has spent his time parading Carswell like his latest trophy, and Nuttall is nowhere to be seen.
If they had, they would have been accused of rank opportunism. We've already had a thread full of people accusing them of callously timing this defection and wiping Rotherham off the news agenda. I'm glad they're keeping their powder dry; it's for those responsible to explain.
I had thought to send a few K for Soubry's election fund, but she seems no better than Palmer.
Ahah! You've found out that they're all the same as well. Time to join UKIP.
I haven't exactly noticed UKIP storming the barricades on the Rotherham story, they're as silent as Cameron.
Farage has spent his time parading Carswell like his latest trophy, and Nuttall is nowhere to be seen.
If they had, they would have been accused of rank opportunism. We've already had a thread full of people accusing them of callously timing this defection and wiping Rotherham off the news agenda. I'm glad they're keeping their powder dry; it's for those responsible to explain.
‘rank opportunism’, er, so what - as an excuse that’s pretty weak.
It strikes me as a little ironic that while kippers decry everyone else’s failings in Rotherham, Farage has been fairly quiet on the subject.
He is in todays Sun saying it shows Labour "turning a blind eye" to something everyone else finds abominable
The hundreds of thousands of Slavs that were killed because they weren't sufficiently German?
I guess my point is that I regularly hear that English isn't a race but the BBC article seems to go big on 'German race'.
Are the Austrians 'German' or Austrian?
From my reading, the Austrians wanted to join Germany after their empire collapsed in 1918, only to be prevented from doing so at Versailles (and related Treaties). For a short while the country was called "German Austria". Then when Hitler took over the country in 1938 (the "Anschluss") there was no resistance, the Nazis being welcomed enthusiastically. But of course after the horrors of WW2, Austria was rehabilitated by the Allies as Germany's "first victim", and since then there has been no mainstream Austrian movement for unification with Germany.
To be fair to the Austrians, their political leadership opposed the Anschluss. Their Chancellor was assassinated by Nazis for opposing their plans.
True, although those leaders had their own interests in not handing their offices over to anyone else, Nazi or not, German or not. Also, when Hitler visited Austria almost immediately after the Anschluss, he received a rapturous reception across the country, so it's difficult to say how the vote would have gone had it been held freely (both Nazis and the Austrian government expected a popular declaration of independence, but given the reaction after the Anschluss, both may have been wrong). It may well be true that it would have been unwise to express open opposition to the Nazis at the time but that argument doesn't explain why so many turned out and cheered.
"I'm joining UKIP not because I am a conservative who hankers after the past. I want change. Things can be better than this.
I am an optimist. Britain's a better place than it was when I was born in the early 1970s.
We're more open and tolerant. We're, for the most part, more prosperous. More people are free to grow up and live as they want to live than ever before.
As the father of a young daughter, I've come to appreciate what feminism's achieved. Most girls growing up in Britain today will have better life chances than before thanks to greater equality.
There's been a revolution in attitudes towards disabled people.
What was once dismissed as "political correctness gone mad", we recognise as good manners. Good.
So much about Britain is so much better. Except when it comes to how we do politics.
UKIP is not an angry backlash against the modern world. Modernity has raised our expectations of how things could be.
We need change.
People have a right to expect a government that gets the basics right."
He has joined the wrong Party - he should have joined the LibDems. He points out how well we have been doing and then says we need change? And the change he wants is to join a party that wants to stand modern Britain which he says he agrees with) on its head?
His fig leaf is 'how we do politics'. I have news for him, UKIP are no different to any other political party. And for this minor change he wants to make life easy for the socialists. UKIP 'not a backlash against the modern world' ?? This will come as a shock to most kippers. He is clearly delusional.
@david_herdson " It may well be true that it would have been unwise to express open opposition to the Nazis at the time but that argument doesn't explain why so many turned out and cheered. "
For some it would have seemed like the best option, if you were worried about someone denouncing your family to The Nazis. The same thing will be happening in ISIS controlled areas.
Is now a good time to buy Euros? I can get 1.24.5 at the moment. What will happen in next 4 weeks before my hols?
Second guessing the currency markets is notoriously difficult but as long as the EU is sliding into deflation the general consensus is for the euro to subside and the pound to rise - always assuming no other political earthquakes affect the UK!
The hundreds of thousands of Slavs that were killed because they weren't sufficiently German?
I guess my point is that I regularly hear that English isn't a race but the BBC article seems to go big on 'German race'.
Are the Austrians 'German' or Austrian?
From my reading, the Austrians wanted to join Germany after their empire collapsed in 1918, only to be prevented from doing so at Versailles (and related Treaties). For a short while the country was called "German Austria". Then when Hitler took over the country in 1938 (the "Anschluss") there was no resistance, the Nazis being welcomed enthusiastically. But of course after the horrors of WW2, Austria was rehabilitated by the Allies as Germany's "first victim", and since then there has been no mainstream Austrian movement for unification with Germany.
To be fair to the Austrians, their political leadership opposed the Anschluss. Their Chancellor was assassinated by Nazis for opposing their plans.
True, although those leaders had their own interests in not handing their offices over to anyone else, Nazi or not, German or not. Also, when Hitler visited Austria almost immediately after the Anschluss, he received a rapturous reception across the country, so it's difficult to say how the vote would have gone had it been held freely (both Nazis and the Austrian government expected a popular declaration of independence, but given the reaction after the Anschluss, both may have been wrong). It may well be true that it would have been unwise to express open opposition to the Nazis at the time but that argument doesn't explain why so many turned out and cheered.
Well most of the shares in Cadbury would have been institutional investors. So the capital released by t. he refused to appear before a parliamentary committee.
Yeah, you still haven't explained why this takeover was in the national interest.
ctually own the money what if we stop them getting fast bucks just to line their own pockets ?
I start from the position that the owners of companies should have the right to sell them to whoever they wish. It is the over-riding national interest to retain an open and dynamic economy, including the freedom of shareholders.
I spend more of my professional time advising people not to undertake M&A than to do so. Sacrificing near term revenue for a trusted adviser role
As for harder takeover rules: anything that entrenches management is not a good thing. @HurstLlama and I have debated this before - I have a very low opinion of the level of engagement of most fund managers who are virtually absentee landlords. But strengthening management's position is not the right thing to do.
(One idea which you don't hear discussed much is the French system of double voting (only applied by a few companies, usually those with core shareholders) - if a share is owned, without trading, for a period of 12 months you get two votes. That's always struck me as quite a clever way to encourage long term investing)
While I understand where you're coming from I'm still a cynic. The traditional free market model which has been drummed into all Uk managers doesn't actually work the way we think it does.
I have not problem allowing owners to sell their businesses, however the owners of listed companies rarely know they are the owners. Their money is managed by middle men whose eye is constantly on their own remuneration. As for entrenching management shareholders can still sack them if they don't like them the issue we have had to date is those very same shareholders take little interest in what their boards are doing in the first place. plc Boards get an easy time in having to meet the interests of a handful of big shareholders which to me is just as easy a way of entrenching management as making them more takeover proof.
As an aside one of the consequences of working in Germany for me has been to look at the upside of German labour law ( yes I know ! ) which while sclerotic doesn't half force the management to innovate, control costs and seek flexibility in other ways ( annual hours contracts for instance ). Perhaps in having it too easy UK companies don't really stretch themselves to the same extent.
I had thought to send a few K for Soubry's election fund, but she seems no better than Palmer.
Ahah! You've found out that they're all the same as well. Time to join UKIP.
I haven't exactly noticed UKIP storming the barricades on the Rotherham story, they're as silent as Cameron.
Farage has spent his time parading Carswell like his latest trophy, and Nuttall is nowhere to be seen.
If they had, they would have been accused of rank opportunism. We've already had a thread full of people accusing them of callously timing this defection and wiping Rotherham off the news agenda. I'm glad they're keeping their powder dry; it's for those responsible to explain.
I had thought to send a few K for Soubry's election fund, but she seems no better than Palmer.
Ahah! You've found out that they're all the same as well. Time to join UKIP.
I haven't exactly noticed UKIP storming the barricades on the Rotherham story, they're as silent as Cameron.
Farage has spent his time parading Carswell like his latest trophy, and Nuttall is nowhere to be seen.
If they had, they would have been accused of rank opportunism. We've already had a thread full of people accusing them of callously timing this defection and wiping Rotherham off the news agenda. I'm glad they're keeping their powder dry; it's for those responsible to explain.
‘rank opportunism’, er, so what - as an excuse that’s pretty weak.
It strikes me as a little ironic that while kippers decry everyone else’s failings in Rotherham, Farage has been fairly quiet on the subject.
He is in todays Sun saying it shows Labour "turning a blind eye" to something everyone else finds abominable
Opportunist!
Good on Farage. - but the time to speak out on Rotherham was at the time the report was released imho - and that was several days ago.
I had thought to send a few K for Soubry's election fund, but she seems no better than Palmer.
Ahah! You've found out that they're all the same as well. Time to join UKIP.
I haven't exactly noticed UKIP storming the barricades on the Rotherham story, they're as silent as Cameron.
Farage has spent his time parading Carswell like his latest trophy, and Nuttall is nowhere to be seen.
If they had, they would have been accused of rank opportunism. We've already had a thread full of people accusing them of callously timing this defection and wiping Rotherham off the news agenda. I'm glad they're keeping their powder dry; it's for those responsible to explain.
I had thought to send a few K for Soubry's election fund, but she seems no better than Palmer.
Ahah! You've found out that they're all the same as well. Time to join UKIP.
I haven't exactly noticed UKIP storming the barricades on the Rotherham story, they're as silent as Cameron.
Farage has spent his time parading Carswell like his latest trophy, and Nuttall is nowhere to be seen.
If they had, they would have been accused of rank opportunism. We've already had a thread full of people accusing them of callously timing this defection and wiping Rotherham off the news agenda. I'm glad they're keeping their powder dry; it's for those responsible to explain.
‘rank opportunism’, er, so what - as an excuse that’s pretty weak.
It strikes me as a little ironic that while kippers decry everyone else’s failings in Rotherham, Farage has been fairly quiet on the subject.
He is in todays Sun saying it shows Labour "turning a blind eye" to something everyone else finds abominable
Opportunist!
Good on Farage. - but the time to speak out on Rotherham was at the time the report was released imho - and that was several days ago.
Why give Guardian reading wallies the chance to attack you? Anyone with a bit of common will be thinking what he is expected to say anyway
I had thought to send a few K for Soubry's election fund, but she seems no better than Palmer.
Ahah! You've found out that they're all the same as well. Time to join UKIP.
I haven't exactly noticed UKIP storming the barricades on the Rotherham story, they're as silent as Cameron.
Farage has spent his time parading Carswell like his latest trophy, and Nuttall is nowhere to be seen.
If they had, they would have been accused of rank opportunism. We've already had a thread full of people accusing them of callously timing this defection and wiping Rotherham off the news agenda. I'm glad they're keeping their powder dry; it's for those responsible to explain.
I had thought to send a few K for Soubry's election fund, but she seems no better than Palmer.
Ahah! You've found out that they're all the same as well. Time to join UKIP.
I haven't exactly noticed UKIP storming the barricades on the Rotherham story, they're as silent as Cameron.
Farage has spent his time parading Carswell like his latest trophy, and Nuttall is nowhere to be seen.
If they had, they would have been accused of rank opportunism. We've already had a thread full of people accusing them of callously timing this defection and wiping Rotherham off the news agenda. I'm glad they're keeping their powder dry; it's for those responsible to explain.
‘rank opportunism’, er, so what - as an excuse that’s pretty weak.
It strikes me as a little ironic that while kippers decry everyone else’s failings in Rotherham, Farage has been fairly quiet on the subject.
Would you point out UKIP's failings in Rotherham?
Police commission=Labour (until this week) Council=Labour since time immemorial MP=ditto
No, we are not "all in this together", no matter what Miliband and Cameron think.
The bar is being set very high for Clacton as far as standards in the bedroom are concerned.The only way the Tory candidate can possibly win is to declare themselves a Vestal Virgin in favour of complete lifetime chastity.
The hundreds of thousands of Slavs that were killed because they weren't sufficiently German?
I guess my point is that I regularly hear that English isn't a race but the BBC article seems to go big on 'German race'.
Are the Austrians 'German' or Austrian?
From my reading, the Austrians wanted to join Germany after their empire collapsed in 1918, only to be prevented from doing so at Versailles (and related Treaties). For a short while the country was called "German Austria". Then when Hitler took over the country in 1938 (the "Anschluss") there was no resistance, the Nazis being welcomed enthusiastically. But of course after the horrors of WW2, Austria was rehabilitated by the Allies as Germany's "first victim", and since then there has been no mainstream Austrian movement for unification with Germany.
To be fair to the Austrians, their political leadership opposed the Anschluss. Their Chancellor was assassinated by Nazis for opposing their plans.
True, although those leaders had their own interests in not handing their offices over to anyone else, Nazi or not, German or not. Also, when Hitler visited Austria almost immediately after the Anschluss, he received a rapturous reception across the country, so it's difficult to say how the vote would have gone had it been held freely (both Nazis and the Austrian government expected a popular declaration of independence, but given the reaction after the Anschluss, both may have been wrong). It may well be true that it would have been unwise to express open opposition to the Nazis at the time but that argument doesn't explain why so many turned out and cheered.
You've clearly not been to Austria.
I have actually, though admittedly not in 1938. Attitudes may have changed fairly quickly but there's no doubt that there was widespread popular enthusiasm for the unification at the time. Whether it was sufficiently widespread to have formed a majority is perhaps doubtful but if not, it would have been quite close. Culturally, Austria is closer to Bavaria than Bavaria is to Berlin.
The hundreds of thousands of Slavs that were killed because they weren't sufficiently German?
I guess my point is that I regularly hear that English isn't a race but the BBC article seems to go big on 'German race'.
Are the Austrians 'German' or Austrian?
From my reading, the Austrians wanted to join Germany after their empire collapsed in 1918, only to be prevented from doing so at Versailles (and related Treaties). For a short while the country was called "German Austria". Then when Hitler took over the country in 1938 (the "Anschluss") there was no resistance, the Nazis being welcomed enthusiastically. But of course after the horrors of WW2, Austria was rehabilitated by the Allies as Germany's "first victim", and since then there has been no mainstream Austrian movement for unification with Germany.
To be fair to the Austrians, their political leadership opposed the Anschluss. Their Chancellor was assassinated by Nazis for opposing their plans.
True, although those leaders had their own interests in not handing their offices over to anyone else, Nazi or not, German or not. Also, when Hitler visited Austria almost immediately after the Anschluss, he received a rapturous reception across the country, so it's difficult to say how the vote would have gone had it been held freely (both Nazis and the Austrian government expected a popular declaration of independence, but given the reaction after the Anschluss, both may have been wrong). It may well be true that it would have been unwise to express open opposition to the Nazis at the time but that argument doesn't explain why so many turned out and cheered.
You've clearly not been to Austria.
I have actually, though admittedly not in 1938. Attitudes may have changed fairly quickly but there's no doubt that there was widespread popular enthusiasm for the unification at the time. Whether it was sufficiently widespread to have formed a majority is perhaps doubtful but if not, it would have been quite close. Culturally, Austria is closer to Bavaria than Bavaria is to Berlin.
I agree with your last sentence. Equally Vienna is not Austria, have you been to any of the villages, have had Austrian friends to show you around, gone to parties and fetes there?
Schuschnigg's independence referendum actually went through in a few places and it returned a vote in favour of independence. The later Anschluss referendum without a secret ballot returned a vote in favour of union in the same places. That shows the power of political coercion.
We should bear such things in mind when people say things like "Crimea wanted to be Russian."
@david_herdson " It may well be true that it would have been unwise to express open opposition to the Nazis at the time but that argument doesn't explain why so many turned out and cheered. "
For some it would have seemed like the best option, if you were worried about someone denouncing your family to The Nazis. The same thing will be happening in ISIS controlled areas.
The Nazi record by early 1938 wasn't anywhere near as extreme as it later became (or as ISIS is now), so I'm not sure those lines of argument hold: passive silence would have gone unnoticed. Indeed, for all those that did take to the streets, a great many did not do also (as is always the case).
I had thought to send a few K for Soubry's election fund, but she seems no better than Palmer.
Ahah! You've found out that they're all the same as well. Time to join UKIP.
I haven't exactly noticed UKIP storming the barricades on the Rotherham story, they're as silent as Cameron.
Farage has spent his time parading Carswell like his latest trophy, and Nuttall is nowhere to be seen.
If they had, they would have been accused of rank opportunism. We've already had a thread full of people accusing them of callously timing this defection and wiping Rotherham off the news agenda. I'm glad they're keeping their powder dry; it's for those responsible to explain.
I had thought to send a few K for Soubry's election fund, but she seems no better than Palmer.
Ahah! You've found out that they're all the same as well. Time to join UKIP.
I haven't exactly noticed UKIP storming the barricades on the Rotherham story, they're as silent as Cameron.
Farage has spent his time parading Carswell like his latest trophy, and Nuttall is nowhere to be seen.
If they had, they would have been accused of rank opportunism. We've already had a thread full of people accusing them of callously timing this defection and wiping Rotherham off the news agenda. I'm glad they're keeping their powder dry; it's for those responsible to explain.
‘rank opportunism’, er, so what - as an excuse that’s pretty weak.
It strikes me as a little ironic that while kippers decry everyone else’s failings in Rotherham, Farage has been fairly quiet on the subject.
He is in todays Sun saying it shows Labour "turning a blind eye" to something everyone else finds abominable
Opportunist!
Good on Farage. - but the time to speak out on Rotherham was at the time the report was released imho - and that was several days ago.
Why give Guardian reading wallies the chance to attack you? Anyone with a bit of common will be thinking what he is expected to say anyway
I very much doubt Farage gave a second thought to what the Guardian may or may not say about him and nor should he. - that's still not a reason for not speaking out at the time.
I had thought to send a few K for Soubry's election fund, but she seems no better than Palmer.
Ahah! You've found out that they're all the same as well. Time to join UKIP.
I haven't exactly noticed UKIP storming the barricades on the Rotherham story, they're as silent as Cameron.
Farage has spent his time parading Carswell like his latest trophy, and Nuttall is nowhere to be seen.
Suggests that there has been a discussion between the major parties (including UKIP) and the police to avoid any risk of prejudicing any future prosecutions
The hundreds of thousands of Slavs that were killed because they weren't sufficiently German?
I guess my point is that I regularly hear that English isn't a race but the BBC article seems to go big on 'German race'.
Are the Austrians 'German' or Austrian?
From my reading, the Austrians wanted to join Germany after their empire collapsed in 1918, only to be prevented from doing so at Versailles (and related Treaties). For a short while the country was called "German Austria". Then when Hitler took over the country in 1938 (the "Anschluss") there was no resistance, the Nazis being welcomed enthusiastically. But of course after the horrors of WW2, Austria was rehabilitated by the Allies as Germany's "first victim", and since then there has been no mainstream Austrian movement for unification with Germany.
To be fair to the Austrians, their political leadership opposed the Anschluss. Their Chancellor was assassinated by Nazis for opposing their plans.
True, although those leaders had their own interests in not handing their offices over to anyone else, Nazi or not, German or not. Also, when Hitler visited Austria almost immediately after the Anschluss, he received a rapturous reception across the country, so it's difficult to say how the vote would have gone had it been held freely (both Nazis and the Austrian government expected a popular declaration of independence, but given the reaction after the Anschluss, both may have been wrong). It may well be true that it would have been unwise to express open opposition to the Nazis at the time but that argument doesn't explain why so many turned out and cheered.
You've clearly not been to Austria.
I have actually, though admittedly not in 1938. Attitudes may have changed fairly quickly but there's no doubt that there was widespread popular enthusiasm for the unification at the time. Whether it was sufficiently widespread to have formed a majority is perhaps doubtful but if not, it would have been quite close. Culturally, Austria is closer to Bavaria than Bavaria is to Berlin.
I agree with your last sentence. Equally Vienna is not Austria, have you been to any of the villages, have had Austrian friends to show you around, gone to parties and fetes there?
I have been to some of the villages but they were in the tourist-orientated Alps so not necessarily typical. As it happens, I've never been to Vienna, though I'd like to at some stage. I'm not sure what your point is?
I had thought to send a few K for Soubry's election fund, but she seems no better than Palmer.
Ahah! You've found out that they're all the same as well. Time to join UKIP.
I haven't exactly noticed UKIP storming the barricades on the Rotherham story, they're as silent as Cameron.
Farage has spent his time parading Carswell like his latest trophy, and Nuttall is nowhere to be seen.
Suggests that there has been a discussion between the major parties (including UKIP) and the police to avoid any risk of prejudicing any future prosecutions
Could also suggest they're just all keeping their heads down, let's look at the actions.
Why haven't feminists organised a march through Rotherham in support of their ideals? I bet they would have done in the 60s or 70s.
Feminists have a challenge over how to react to Rotherham. A lot of them feel that the focus on the ethnic dimension of the crimes is a distraction from the fact that - as with TV and Radio personalities, as with priests, as with MPs, the perpetrators have something else in common - their gender. Whether the fact that a large proportion of society takes a 19th Century view of women is a reason for turning a blind eye to a section which takes a 13th Century view is left as an exercise to the reader.
Feminism also, while broadly positive, has a case to answer in one particular aspect of the Rotherham debacle - its influence is part of what led to the view that 14-year old women being used for sex by Pakistani gangs were "confident young women making choices about their bodies", and that telling them maybe, no, they can't leave the care home to sh@g Abdul, Mohammed, Naveed and Iqbal tonight, because they're being used as part of a paedophile ring, not engaged in a loving relationship, was an exercise in "slut-shaming".
I had thought to send a few K for Soubry's election fund, but she seems no better than Palmer.
Ahah! You've found out that they're all the same as well. Time to join UKIP.
I haven't exactly noticed UKIP storming the barricades on the Rotherham story, they're as silent as Cameron.
Farage has spent his time parading Carswell like his latest trophy, and Nuttall is nowhere to be seen.
If they had, they would have been accused of rank opportunism. We've already had a thread full of people accusing them of callously timing this defection and wiping Rotherham off the news agenda. I'm glad they're keeping their powder dry; it's for those responsible to explain.
I had thought to send a few K for Soubry's election fund, but she seems no better than Palmer.
Ahah! You've found out that they're all the same as well. Time to join UKIP.
I haven't exactly noticed UKIP storming the barricades on the Rotherham story, they're as silent as Cameron.
Farage has spent his time parading Carswell like his latest trophy, and Nuttall is nowhere to be seen.
If they had, they would have been accused of rank opportunism. We've already had a thread full of people accusing them of callously timing this defection and wiping Rotherham off the news agenda. I'm glad they're keeping their powder dry; it's for those responsible to explain.
‘rank opportunism’, er, so what - as an excuse that’s pretty weak.
It strikes me as a little ironic that while kippers decry everyone else’s failings in Rotherham, Farage has been fairly quiet on the subject.
Would you point out UKIP's failings in Rotherham?
Police commission=Labour (until this week) Council=Labour since time immemorial MP=ditto
No, we are not "all in this together", no matter what Miliband and Cameron think.
I don't think you have quite understood the discussion - no one has accused Ukip of being complicit in the Rotherham scandal.
it looks like the authorities are planning a big counterpunch.
Goodness knows what the cost will be in terms of police time, court time, prison time....it just goes on. and on. and on. That's after the untold human suffering.
It's just a giant catastrophe. There are almost no words.
What's needed is that these men go away for a long, long time. When they're back out on the streets in three and a half years laughing about how free they are it's just appalling.
Another aspect of child abuse that needs to be dealt with is one that was told to me recently. A friend told me how a neighbour was appallingly abused by another man that lived on the street. There was a criminal case and the abuser had to go away for several years. But when he got out he moved back into the same house, directly opposite from the victim. The victim's family eventually had to sell up and move away after how harrowing it was.
This seems like something that should be automatically ended: if you abused a child, you should not be allowed to move within a half mile of them once you get out.
A quote from the Daily Mail article:
'A police source with detailed knowledge of the plans told The Mail on Sunday: ‘This is going to be a day of reckoning – and it’s about time'
Why does anyone in a police force believe it's appropriate to give a quote like that to a newspaper? - Money? - Self importance? - Boasting? - Tipping off the bad guys?
Really, I can't think of a good reason unless it's an attempt to get more witnesses/victims to come forward in the belief that something is actually being done.
Yes, that's my understanding of the situation around 1938 too.
It's obviously difficult to be very accurate but my impression (based on the literature as well as visits and reports from German and Austrian friends) is that in and around Vienna support for the Nazis was around 50%, which would have been more than sufficient for them to engineer an enthusiastic welcome. In other cities and the countryside, support would likely have been less but it's very hard to be sure.
You are absolutely right about the Bavarian comparison however. Ohne Zweigel!
Excellent and thought-provoking article by SeanT in the Telegraph.
On the Indy debate I see what you mean - putting half-hearted Labourites in charge of the BT campaign is not the best way of injecting passion into the No campaign. And what kind of campaign can win without some passion?. Well, hopefully, the BT campaign can. For those south of the border, the rationale was that the Labour working classes are key to the referendum and they will not be moved by appeals to British patriotism hence Darling's exclusive focus on the economics. However this has been frustrating to us who are moved by the importance of 300 years of shared history and achievement. And are angered by the sheer baloney, tendentiousness and nihilism of the Yes campaign.
On Clacton. Only chance for the Tories to get an even half-decent result is to go for an open primary and select a striking, preferably local, candidate on the Sarah Wollaston model. If the campaign then becomes a contest between two authentic personalities then Douglas Carswell may come under a bit more pressure. The maverick will always beat the party in a by-election (cf Galloway in Bradford).
Ha Ha Ha , so moved by the importance of 300 years history you appoint those serial losers Darling and Alexander to fight for you.
You have a point, to be fair. A tragedy of Scottish Labour is that no fewer than three of their leaders who could have taken Salmond apart died prematurely - Donald Dewar, John Smith and Robin Cook. It would have been a delight to see the latter, in particular, take a bodkin to the bladder.
Fantasy
And based on a dangerous assumption that they would all have necessarily been supporters of the Naw.
This is a dangerously speculative extrapolation - indeed extrapolation on top of extrapolation. Clearly if anything like true it is deeply worrying. But. First there needs to be some realistic evidence about both other towns (of which there is some) and the scale. There is no doubt about child abuse, but there needs to be some attempt at producing evidence before making such claims. For a start we are talking about 20 children's services and 20 police departments all ignoring similar warnings over similar periods of years. Is there evidence of that? Have newspapers eager for headlines suggested that? We do know that in other areas people have been arrested and jailed - no question, I can think of Oldham and Oxford. And of course its utterly shocking. But have these areas come up with similar numbers to Rotherham? Were they over similar years?
1400 children abused over 16 years is 90 children per year and over any given 3 year period 270 children. Terrible. Just how many abusers is that? If it is one abuser per child that is terrible enough. But could it be less than that? The number of abusers does not I think extrapolate with number of abused children or the number of individual acts of abuse. Saying 4 million rapes conjures up notions of every other Pakistani raping every other child. These speculations are dangerous.
1. You are putting your only extrapolations on my post and then calling it dangerous. To avoid discussing such things because of what you imagine it "conjures up" is the same mentality that prevented people looking into such things for so many years. It is rather reminiscent of this article: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2011/jan/07/grooming-racialising-crime-tradition
2. At no point in my post did I mention the number of abusers. While one girl claimed 250 men raped her, we do not know whether it was the same rapists preying on most the girls or indeed several different groups. That's why I came up with an estimation that did not depend on it. So your comment on the extrapolation of abusers not coinciding with those of victims does not matter.
3. My estimation did not come up with similar numbers to Rotherham. I made the assumption of it happening with less than half the victims in other towns. No less than Professor Jay suggested similar failings were likely seen elsewhere.
4. The court cases resulting in convictions so far have suggested the abuse has indeed happened over similar years.
The hundreds of thousands of Slavs that were killed because they weren't sufficiently German?
I guess my point is that I regularly hear that English isn't a race but the BBC article seems to go big on 'German race'.
Are the Austrians 'German' or Austrian?
From my reading, the Austrians wanted to join Germany after their empire collapsed in 1918, only to be prevented from doing so at Versailles (and related Treaties). For a short while the country was called "German Austria". Then when Hitler took over the country in 1938 (the "Anschluss") there was no resistance, the Nazis being welcomed enthusiastically. But of course after the horrors of WW2, Austria was rehabilitated by the Allies as Germany's "first victim", and since then there has been no mainstream Austrian movement for unification with Germany.
To be fair to the Austrians, their political leadership opposed the Anschluss. Their Chancellor was assassinated by Nazis for opposing their plans.
True, although those leaders had their own interests in not handing their offices over to anyone else, Nazi or not, German or not. Also, when Hitler visited Austria almost immediately after the Anschluss, he received a rapturous reception across the country, so it's difficult to say how the vote would have gone had it been held freely (both Nazis and the Austrian government expected a popular declaration of independence, but given the reaction after the Anschluss, both may have been wrong). It may well be true that it would have been unwise to express open opposition to the Nazis at the time but that argument doesn't explain why so many turned out and cheered.
You've clearly not been to Austria.
I have actually, though admittedly not in 1938. Attitudes may have changed fairly quickly but there's no doubt that there was widespread popular enthusiasm for the unification at the time. Whether it was sufficiently widespread to have formed a majority is perhaps doubtful but if not, it would have been quite close. Culturally, Austria is closer to Bavaria than Bavaria is to Berlin.
Actually, Austrians made more fanatical Nazis than the Germans. Hitler - the Austrian - was worshipped. There is more than a residue of this taint in Vienna today.
I think Cameron will survive. He will come out quickly, making a statesmanlike speech that mixes notes of regret with an unimpeachable line that the "yes" vote justifies the referendum; to argue to the contrary is fundamentally undemocratic. Plus the other main parties supported the referendum and Ukip wants one on Europe, so none are really in a position to make capital, though no doubt they will try.The risks for Cameron come from his disillusioned backbenchers and the media. If the loss of the union triggers a mass defection his position will become untenable; he would have to resign and the government could fall. The result would be a massacre at the next election. The Tory right has always had a masochistic streak, but turkeys don't vote for Christmas.
The media could use this as an opportunity to strike back, post Leveson. Certainly the Murdoch papers will be brutal; and the fourth estate never waste an opportunity to exercise their democratic accountability function. But I don't think they have the desire or ability to defenestrate Cameron, nor do I think the man on the street will view this as.Cameron's failure alone.
I still expect a no vote, by the way. But it will be close.
Presumably those saying Cameron should resign in the event if a yes vote are also planning a ticker tape parade for him if it is a no vote? I am still recovering from the party we threw Jeremy Hunt for the excellent Olympics that he organised...
Heaven forbid that you suggest to the right that tory fortunes in Scotland collapsed under Thatcher. Or that devolution is a Labour construct.
Actually the vote collapsed after Thatcher when the Tory right were indulging in a period of idiocy they appear to be re-entering.....
In 1979 the Tories had gained 8 seats and had 22. In 1983 it lost 1. In 1987 it lost 11. This was when the damage was done. In 92 it picked up 1 !! But then lost them all. It lost voters steadily under Thatcher followed by Major etc. I think it foolish to ignore the drop in votes under Thatcher - a polittian I admire but whose failings I am not blind to. It did pick up a few under Cameron but no seats. You do not hear the LDs complaining about their 11 seats with 19% of the vote compared to the Tories 1 seat with 17%. What I suggest to you is that this shows how the electrate vote *against* political parties. This might work against UKIP if the tories can steal a march and show they are the second party - the best party to beat them - in Clacton. But you have to think that being the incumbent Carswell will win, indeed he seems very keen to distance himself from everything that UKIP stands for. He wants people to vote for Carswell not UKIP.
Yes, that's my understanding of the situation around 1938 too.
It's obviously difficult to be very accurate but my impression (based on the literature as well as visits and reports from German and Austrian friends) is that in and around Vienna support for the Nazis was around 50%, which would have been more than sufficient for them to engineer an enthusiastic welcome. In other cities and the countryside, support would likely have been less but it's very hard to be sure.
You are absolutely right about the Bavarian comparison however. Ohne Zweigel!
I don't think the Nazis engineered the welcome that much. Supposedly Hitler was so surprised at the welcome that he changed the plans for Austria from being a puppet state to direct annexation into the Reich.
As an aside one of the consequences of working in Germany for me has been to look at the upside of German labour law ( yes I know ! ) which while sclerotic doesn't half force the management to innovate, control costs and seek flexibility in other ways ( annual hours contracts for instance ). Perhaps in having it too easy UK companies don't really stretch themselves to the same extent.
don't talk to me about German labour law just now.
Dealing with the most ridiculous works council right now. Restructuring a conglomerate - we want to grow one part of the business while shrinking others. Result: the works council won't approve any hires in the growing part because they are upset about redundancies in the shrinking part...
They might also issue that kind of threat in order to scare perpetrators they don't know about to take actions to cover-up that they might be watching for.
Why haven't feminists organised a march through Rotherham in support of their ideals? I bet they would have done in the 60s or 70s.
Feminists have a challenge over how to react to Rotherham. A lot of them feel that the focus on the ethnic dimension of the crimes is a distraction from the fact that - as with TV and Radio personalities, as with priests, as with MPs, the perpetrators have something else in common - their gender. Whether the fact that a large proportion of society takes a 19th Century view of women is a reason for turning a blind eye to a section which takes a 13th Century view is left as an exercise to the reader.
Most sex offenders are male; hardly a revelation.
For your information, 81% of victims of clerical child abuse victims in the USA were male, a fact Peter Tatchell, the BBC and our very own TSE seem not to mention, despite their inordinate interest in the subject.
If you spent some time in the villages you would be convinced that they are all racists and Nazis, in Vienna you would probably get the completely opposite impression. A bit like Switzerland vis a vis cities v countryside. I am talking about twenty years ago, things have changed since then.
F1: tempted by 17 on Bottas to win (each way, 1/3 odds for top 2). I'll wait until the full markets come up on Ladbrokes, though. Ricciardo shouldn't be 13. The Red Bull should be murdered at Monza, even if Renault have made more improvements.
They might also issue that kind of threat in order to scare perpetrators they don't know about to take actions to cover-up that they might be watching for.
Doesn't that put victims under threat of being silenced?
As an aside one of the consequences of working in Germany for me has been to look at the upside of German labour law ( yes I know ! ) which while sclerotic doesn't half force the management to innovate, control costs and seek flexibility in other ways ( annual hours contracts for instance ). Perhaps in having it too easy UK companies don't really stretch themselves to the same extent.
don't talk to me about German labour law just now.
Dealing with the most ridiculous works council right now. Restructuring a conglomerate - we want to grow one part of the business while shrinking others. Result: the works council won't approve any hires in the growing part because they are upset about redundancies in the shrinking part...
So they should be, re-skill and keep the existing workforce. Far better than sacking people and then having to hire new staff and also cause morale issues across the whole business.. Sounds like the works council are more knowledgeable and sensible than the management.
As an aside one of the consequences of working in Germany for me has been to look at the upside of German labour law ( yes I know ! ) which while sclerotic doesn't half force the management to innovate, control costs and seek flexibility in other ways ( annual hours contracts for instance ). Perhaps in having it too easy UK companies don't really stretch themselves to the same extent.
don't talk to me about German labour law just now.
Dealing with the most ridiculous works council right now. Restructuring a conglomerate - we want to grow one part of the business while shrinking others. Result: the works council won't approve any hires in the growing part because they are upset about redundancies in the shrinking part...
You are telling us that Germany, under Merkel, has caught the British Disease, which Thatcher tried so hard to quell. Poor old Germany, the DDR temperament has invaded and is colonising the Ferderal Republic. Sob!
Is now a good time to buy Euros? I can get 1.24.5 at the moment. What will happen in next 4 weeks before my hols?
The best, easily accessible rate, that I found before our recent trip to Fuessen was M&S, if you have their credit card. If not Moneycorp, order online and then pick up in person from a limited number of airports. However, it's also really worth looking into the Halifax Clarity card (Mastercard) and putting as much of your purchases on that. Also use it to withdraw Euros from foreign ATMs. BTW the best I could get for cash in the UK a few weeks back was 1.228, so your rate looks quite good.
BBC Scotland News @BBCScotlandNews 5h UKIP leader Nigel Farage is to address a pro-Union rally in Glasgow ahead of the #indyref vote http://bbc.in/1zYWFR5
Comments
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-28971276
Next week:Iain Dowie on why Thierry Henry was rubbish
If they win it will be the historical Labour non-voters who swing it.
If they lose, it will be down to spending too much time taking to themselves, reassuring each other how clever they are and how "others" (there's always an "other") don't get it.....
Someone down thread was wondering why there is no 'backlash' to Rotherham. Turns out a few things have been planned.
So that's "zero" and "nothing" respectively......
For once, Ukip may be behaving politically. The anger and shock are there now, there's no need to increase the hyperbole. See, I told you so, na-na na na-na won't win any more votes.
The pressure is on the Government to act decisively, Even some Labour people are saying the right things (not Ed, obviously).
I think he's right there's an opposite in the Celtic vs Anglo way of expressing things but I think that's good - the conflict between the two creates a third thing.
https://www.facebook.com/timur.olevskiy/posts/10204663143637341
Will Self calls Orwell a mediocrity.
Perhaps Will would like to name those blockbusters he has written or highlight his huge contribution to English literature nationally or internationally.
Self is a London twathead with his head up his own arse, but as malc would point out turnips like to grow in muck.
TBH I was slightly surprised the numbers for "should go" weren't higher - it's unlike the Great British Public to forego the opportunity to give a politician a good kicking when he's down....
There's also the Parliamentary Conservative Party who are quite capable of going completely mad as we all know.
I think, if Scotland goes, Cameron will resign within a few day's.
Is now a good time to buy Euros? I can get 1.24.5 at the moment. What will happen in next 4 weeks before my hols?
George Orwell is arguably the most influential writer of the 20th century in any language.
Nevertheless, negotiations would begin in a climate of mutual suspicion and ill-will. By the next Holyrood election in 2016 hardly any substantial progress would be made - Scotland's negotaitions with the EU would be bogged down in objections from other coutries with separatist regions (Spain and Belgium for instance) and negotiations with rUK on debt-sharing and currencies are likely to prove very complex and difficult. At the same time the Scottish economy would be under pressure because of continuing uncertainty - investment decisions would be postponed and there could be a rush of companies relocating south of the border. If (when?) Labour returns to power the future of rUK inside the EU will suddenly look much more secure than that of an independent Scotland. The independence ideal could look very tattered and the easy promises Salmond has made will be shown to be unrealistic.
Under these circumstance it is by no means certain that the SNP would again be reelected with an overall majority, and if they are not then rUk would find itself negoatiating with a Scottish parliament which contained a majority of members opposed to independence. The likely outcome of this would be some kind of compromise offering greater devolution but short of full independence, which would then be put to another referendum, with the full support of both parliaments. Bearing in mind the strong likelihood that Labour will be back in power at Westminster the Tory bogey will have less significance and, having been confronted with some of the consequences of independence, such a compromise seems a plausible possibility.
That should make for some funny the 1st time but not the 2000th time heckling.
Pound is a bit off its high against the EURO, but as things are so volatile at the moment, I have ought mine. Best deals are on line but expect you know that.
What? He had 2K wife swaps? You're kidding.
British-born jihadists in Iraq and Syria could be temporarily banned from returning to the UK under plans being considered by the government.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29002586
Is Gatwick going to turn in the set for some sort of jihadi version of that terrible Tom Hank's movie The Terminal?
"I'm joining UKIP not because I am a conservative who hankers after the past. I want change. Things can be better than this.
I am an optimist. Britain's a better place than it was when I was born in the early 1970s.
We're more open and tolerant. We're, for the most part, more prosperous. More people are free to grow up and live as they want to live than ever before.
As the father of a young daughter, I've come to appreciate what feminism's achieved. Most girls growing up in Britain today will have better life chances than before thanks to greater equality.
There's been a revolution in attitudes towards disabled people.
What was once dismissed as "political correctness gone mad", we recognise as good manners. Good.
So much about Britain is so much better. Except when it comes to how we do politics.
UKIP is not an angry backlash against the modern world. Modernity has raised our expectations of how things could be.
We need change.
People have a right to expect a government that gets the basics right."
mobile.twitter.com/ollywiseman/status/505318129141297153/photo/1
http://www.talkcarswell.com/home/its-time-for-change/2801
" EXCLUSIVE: Labour's candidate in Clacton is a wife-swapper"
What's he swapping her for?
* Calculated as 43% - 29%
As an aside - this is from the 80s, but looks interesting - academic paper looking at the value of a personal vote
http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=4&ved=0CDsQFjAD&url=http://web.stanford.edu/~mfiorina/Fiorina%20Web%20Files/ConstituencyService.pdf&ei=8EsDVPS5L8vbarS2gtgC&usg=AFQjCNEmNGS9UrscSek5BSDuuvOg04fW_w&bvm=bv.74115972,d.d2s
"What's he swapping her for?"
I like it.
But.
First there needs to be some realistic evidence about both other towns (of which there is some) and the scale. There is no doubt about child abuse, but there needs to be some attempt at producing evidence before making such claims.
For a start we are talking about 20 children's services and 20 police departments all ignoring similar warnings over similar periods of years. Is there evidence of that? Have newspapers eager for headlines suggested that?
We do know that in other areas people have been arrested and jailed - no question, I can think of Oldham and Oxford. And of course its utterly shocking. But have these areas come up with similar numbers to Rotherham? Were they over similar years?
1400 children abused over 16 years is 90 children per year and over any given 3 year period 270 children. Terrible. Just how many abusers is that? If it is one abuser per child that is terrible enough. But could it be less than that? The number of abusers does not I think extrapolate with number of abused children or the number of individual acts of abuse.
Saying 4 million rapes conjures up notions of every other Pakistani raping every other child. These speculations are dangerous.
Certainly, a good candidate is an advantage, and that should work to UKIP's advantage in Clacton providing that they can sort out the problem with the previously selected candidate. However, the key sum in the equation is UKIP+Clacton, not Carswell+anything.
Assuming this was consensual and legal,is this not ordinary behaviour for the many who swing that way?
I can't wait for the sexual history of Farage and Johnson.Should be fun.
In a letter to Scottish Finance Secretary John Swinney, Mr Alexander said: "This week you have confirmed your position that the first economic policy of an independent Scotland would be to renege on the debts that have over generations funded public services and built schools, hospitals and more in Scotland.
He added: "Your claim that because the UK Government will not agree a currency union, an independent Scotland should not take a share of the debt is completely bogus.
"A currency is not an asset, as you claim, it is the monetary system of a state. The pound sterling will be - legally - the monetary system of the continuing UK if Scotland votes to separate."
http://news.stv.tv/scotland/290354-salmond-rebuffs-treasury-demand-to-withdraw-debt-default-plan/
I spend more of my professional time advising people not to undertake M&A than to do so. Sacrificing near term revenue for a trusted adviser role
As for harder takeover rules: anything that entrenches management is not a good thing. @HurstLlama and I have debated this before - I have a very low opinion of the level of engagement of most fund managers who are virtually absentee landlords. But strengthening management's position is not the right thing to do.
(One idea which you don't hear discussed much is the French system of double voting (only applied by a few companies, usually those with core shareholders) - if a share is owned, without trading, for a period of 12 months you get two votes. That's always struck me as quite a clever way to encourage long term investing)
It strikes me as a little ironic that while kippers decry everyone else’s failings in Rotherham, Farage has been fairly quiet on the subject.
Opportunist!
No chance. Sanogo has never scored for Arsenal. Wenger has to accept he keeps making the wrong decision by backing Sanogo.
He points out how well we have been doing and then says we need change? And the change he wants is to join a party that wants to stand modern Britain which he says he agrees with) on its head?
His fig leaf is 'how we do politics'. I have news for him, UKIP are no different to any other political party. And for this minor change he wants to make life easy for the socialists.
UKIP 'not a backlash against the modern world' ?? This will come as a shock to most kippers. He is clearly delusional.
" It may well be true that it would have been unwise to express open opposition to the Nazis at the time but that argument doesn't explain why so many turned out and cheered. "
For some it would have seemed like the best option, if you were worried about someone denouncing your family to The Nazis.
The same thing will be happening in ISIS controlled areas.
"DOVER FOR THE CONTINENT CLACTON FOR THE INCONTINENT. TO WIN CLACTON THE KIPPERS WILL HAVE TO RE NOBBLE THE CARE HOMES"
http://jerryhayes.co.uk/posts/2014/08/28/dover-for-the-continent-clacton-for-the-incontinent-to-win-clacton-the-kippers-will-have-to-re-nobble-the-care-homes
I have not problem allowing owners to sell their businesses, however the owners of listed companies rarely know they are the owners. Their money is managed by middle men whose eye is constantly on their own remuneration. As for entrenching management shareholders can still sack them if they don't like them the issue we have had to date is those very same shareholders take little interest in what their boards are doing in the first place. plc Boards get an easy time in having to meet the interests of a handful of big shareholders which to me is just as easy a way of entrenching management as making them more takeover proof.
As an aside one of the consequences of working in Germany for me has been to look at the upside of German labour law ( yes I know ! ) which while sclerotic doesn't half force the management to innovate, control costs and seek flexibility in other ways ( annual hours contracts for instance ). Perhaps in having it too easy UK companies don't really stretch themselves to the same extent.
They deserve to lose.
Police commission=Labour (until this week)
Council=Labour since time immemorial
MP=ditto
No, we are not "all in this together", no matter what Miliband and Cameron think.
Schuschnigg's independence referendum actually went through in a few places and it returned a vote in favour of independence. The later Anschluss referendum without a secret ballot returned a vote in favour of union in the same places. That shows the power of political coercion.
We should bear such things in mind when people say things like "Crimea wanted to be Russian."
http://www.theguardian.com/books/2014/aug/28/shark-will-self-review
Look forward to a review from @SeanT on lines that Self isn't fit to change Orwell's typewriter ribbons.
So?
Not my thing, but if that's what he and his wife enjoy then it should be up to them. they're both consenting adults.
Feminism also, while broadly positive, has a case to answer in one particular aspect of the Rotherham debacle - its influence is part of what led to the view that 14-year old women being used for sex by Pakistani gangs were "confident young women making choices about their bodies", and that telling them maybe, no, they can't leave the care home to sh@g Abdul, Mohammed, Naveed and Iqbal tonight, because they're being used as part of a paedophile ring, not engaged in a loving relationship, was an exercise in "slut-shaming".
Not my thing, but if that's what he and his wife enjoy then it should be up to them. they're both consenting adults.
Not even sure it goes that far. Pretty certain he was on the TV programme.
'A police source with detailed knowledge of the plans told The Mail on Sunday: ‘This is going to be a day of reckoning – and it’s about time'
Why does anyone in a police force believe it's appropriate to give a quote like that to a newspaper?
- Money?
- Self importance?
- Boasting?
- Tipping off the bad guys?
Really, I can't think of a good reason unless it's an attempt to get more witnesses/victims to come forward in the belief that something is actually being done.
Yes, that's my understanding of the situation around 1938 too.
It's obviously difficult to be very accurate but my impression (based on the literature as well as visits and reports from German and Austrian friends) is that in and around Vienna support for the Nazis was around 50%, which would have been more than sufficient for them to engineer an enthusiastic welcome. In other cities and the countryside, support would likely have been less but it's very hard to be sure.
You are absolutely right about the Bavarian comparison however. Ohne Zweigel!
2. At no point in my post did I mention the number of abusers. While one girl claimed 250 men raped her, we do not know whether it was the same rapists preying on most the girls or indeed several different groups. That's why I came up with an estimation that did not depend on it. So your comment on the extrapolation of abusers not coinciding with those of victims does not matter.
3. My estimation did not come up with similar numbers to Rotherham. I made the assumption of it happening with less than half the victims in other towns. No less than Professor Jay suggested similar failings were likely seen elsewhere.
4. The court cases resulting in convictions so far have suggested the abuse has indeed happened over similar years.
It lost voters steadily under Thatcher followed by Major etc.
I think it foolish to ignore the drop in votes under Thatcher - a polittian I admire but whose failings I am not blind to.
It did pick up a few under Cameron but no seats. You do not hear the LDs complaining about their 11 seats with 19% of the vote compared to the Tories 1 seat with 17%.
What I suggest to you is that this shows how the electrate vote *against* political parties.
This might work against UKIP if the tories can steal a march and show they are the second party - the best party to beat them - in Clacton. But you have to think that being the incumbent Carswell will win, indeed he seems very keen to distance himself from everything that UKIP stands for. He wants people to vote for Carswell not UKIP.
Dealing with the most ridiculous works council right now. Restructuring a conglomerate - we want to grow one part of the business while shrinking others. Result: the works council won't approve any hires in the growing part because they are upset about redundancies in the shrinking part...
They might also issue that kind of threat in order to scare perpetrators they don't know about to take actions to cover-up that they might be watching for.
For your information, 81% of victims of clerical child abuse victims in the USA were male, a fact Peter Tatchell, the BBC and our very own TSE seem not to mention, despite their inordinate interest in the subject.
I note that the chart and its averages currently look similar to this time in 2012.
http://www.mediafire.com/view/vwa71a9s2jz9suc/mike.jpg#
If you spent some time in the villages you would be convinced that they are all racists and Nazis, in Vienna you would probably get the completely opposite impression. A bit like Switzerland vis a vis cities v countryside. I am talking about twenty years ago, things have changed since then.
F1: tempted by 17 on Bottas to win (each way, 1/3 odds for top 2). I'll wait until the full markets come up on Ladbrokes, though. Ricciardo shouldn't be 13. The Red Bull should be murdered at Monza, even if Renault have made more improvements.
http://newstonoone.blogspot.co.uk/2014/08/scotland-pre-referendum-special.html
You didn't see me, right.
I only watch the US version... far more fun.
BTW the best I could get for cash in the UK a few weeks back was 1.228, so your rate looks quite good.
UKIP leader Nigel Farage is to address a pro-Union rally in Glasgow ahead of the #indyref vote http://bbc.in/1zYWFR5