Most EU countries have contributory systems, rather than entitlement systems, so the issue doesn't come up.
benefits to someone in another country when they would not have been eligible for them in the UK.
We'll see how that goes. On past form, HMG will talk tough, and cave by 3 per cent, Iceland by 4.2 per cent, Switzerland by 7 per cent and Estonia by 11 per cent."
You say this as if it were something to be ashamed of. What this government has managed to do in this Parliament is restrain public spending, absorb the higher interest bill, massively reduce the public sector head count but protect the poor and the low paid by largely preserving benefits ( the relatively trivial bedroom tax and the benefit cap being exceptions) whilst significantly reducing the quantity of tax paid by the low paid.
I think that this is something the Coalition can be proud of but it also reflects the fact that the last government was so incredibly wasteful that there were billions of low hanging fruit to be harvested. I fear in the next Parliament that will no longer be the case and many more decisions will have to be made that will hurt our less well off citizens. Given their record in this Parliament I would be more confident of the Tories making those decisions compassionately than a Labour Party who are in denial and will be driven into panic moves by the markets.
Nearly 50% of the benefits bill relates to pensions. This can only grow as our population ages.
The number of pensioners will increase. The amount they are paid will depend on the success or failure of the economy. Many of the cuts in the PIIGS were achieved by fairly brutally cutting the pensions.
Once again our country has so far avoided that but only at the cost of heaping endless debt on the young for their education and to be paid for throughout their working lives. It may be good politics but it is deeply immoral and the fripperies paid to well off pensioners frankly turn my stomach when I see the disabled challenged at every turn. It is one area where I would be quite critical of government policy although I understand the politics of it.
If I applied the psychology angle to that of Mood/Mastery/Positivity the same things pop up.
Do voters feel good about things in general, do they believe the PM is capable and how optimistic do they feel about stuff in general...
Financier said:Often government's abilities are judged on three things: capacity, corporate governance and capability & competence. The first two are (or should be) mainly the area of the civil service but the last is definitely in the area of the ruling political party (though some are open to bribes of all types).
To date a 2015 Labour has shown very little capability to govern from that date and the deal effectively with the home and overseas problems that beset the UK and its people. Certainly EdM has shown only the capability of fratricide and seems to be way out of touch with the rest - or does not want to acknowledge what is happening.
His team's thinking appears to be late of the 1900s, instead of looking at what is required for the 2020s. This can only be a disaster for the UK and lead to a continuing decline in its economic heath. It is the same way that EdM let Energy meander when he was in charge, instead of pursuing a defined and forward looking policy and actions. EdM may not be a leopard, but his skin colour and instincts have not and will not change.
It requires a fair degree of careful perception to undertake a good gap analysis, it takes even more perception and forward thinking to set down an action plan to fill those gaps - qualities that are evidently missing from EdM and most of his team (except a junior few), and class warfare and politics of envy are not the answer for the future.
"Britain has been told to pay more than £10 million in unemployment benefit to eastern European migrants who have left Britain, returned home and now cannot find a job.
Poland, the Czech Republic and Slovakia have demanded that Iain Duncan Smith’s department funds their jobless citizens because they once worked and paid national insurance in the UK."
Surely this whole matter is getting ridiculous and needs sorting out - I am fairly sure that all nation members of the EU have different rules regarding payment of benefits to non-nationals.
Just tell them they have to turn up at the Job Centre every Monday, that will end it.
Financier, do you have a link? It seems a bit of an odd story. Income-related (non-contributory means-tested) benefits are only paid to UK residents, of whatever nationality. There is already an EU scheme whereby EU citizens can claim contributory benefits from other countries, but they should do so in the country they currently reside in and should claim through that country's social security system.
Other than that, if you are on either sort of JSA you have to be in the country - if you go abroad on holiday you have to close your claima nd open a new one on your return.
But there are some strange anomalies, a UK resident can apparently claim Child Benefit for children who live abroad. Which seems bizarre to me.
I know it may seem like "the tail wagging the dog" but I think we need to thoroughly review the way in which you qualify for benefits in the circumstances we now find ourselves in. A long qualification period would be easiest - say 10 years' residence - which could be shortened for people who come here as children.
Most EU countries have contributory systems, rather than entitlement systems, so the issue doesn't come up.
benefits to someone in another country when they would not have been eligible for them in the UK.
We'll see how that goes. On past form, HMG will talk tough, and cave by 3 per cent, Iceland by 4.2 per cent, Switzerland by 7 What this government has managed to do in this Parliament is restrain public spending, absorb the higher interest bill, massively reduce the public sector head count but protect the poor and the low paid by largely preserving benefits ( the relatively trivial bedroom tax and the benefit cap being exceptions) whilst significantly reducing the quantity of tax paid by the low paid.
I think that this is something the Coalition can be proud of but it also reflects the fact that the last government was so incredibly wasteful that there were billions of low hanging fruit to be harvested. I fear in the next Parliament that will no longer be the case and many more decisions will have to be made that will hurt our less well off citizens. Given their record in this Parliament I would be more confident of the Tories making those decisions compassionately than a Labour Party who are in denial and will be driven into panic moves by the markets.
Nearly 50% of the benefits bill relates to pensions. This can only grow as our population ages.
The number of pensioners will increase. The amount they are paid will depend on the success or failure of the economy. Many of the cuts in the PIIGS were achieved by fairly brutally cutting the pensions.
Once again our country has so far avoided that but only at the cost of heaping endless debt on the young for their education and to be paid for throughout their working lives. It may be good politics but it is deeply immoral and the fripperies paid to well off pensioners frankly turn my stomach when I see the disabled challenged at every turn. It is one area where I would be quite critical of government policy although I understand the politics of it.
All the more reason for updating council tax valuations and bands. It would be silly to run two different property tax systems.
What is up with UKIPs WAG tax? Is it going to include cosmetic surgery?
Who knows? They ought to but I wouldn't bank on it.
Is this a serious question? Will the media give Ed M a lot of scrutiny? You bet they will. There is a block of newspaper people who believe he is unfit to be PM. They'll make sure we know about it.
It is a serious question. Hague and IDS both got a right going over from the press practically from Day 1. Admittedly, they were up a against Blair (and Alistair Campbell) at the peak of their powers, but the fact that Miliband has had four years with nothing like the same level of scrutiny makes me question whether it will happen to anything like that degree. Sure, it'll ramp up a bit as polling day approaches but the media rarely hold off stories or articles that they can run now, or at least, this month, which makes me think that there really isn't all that much desire to stick the boot in.
You're beginning to worry me David. I had your card marked as the sensible thread author on here. Again, it comes back to the fact we are in a fixed term parliament. You do actually know that's the case? Unlike your pb bubble no-one out there is thinking about an election. As we draw close to the real thing, and people wake up to the GE, Miliband is going to get scrutinised to the nth. That's putting it politely. I reckon he will be ripped to shreds next spring by some of the media. He has foolishly made significant enemies, and I'm not just referring to The Sun. That he is not up to the job is by now manifestly obvious to everyone except him.
The FTP situation is a bit of a red herring.
Although it didn't apply as such to either Hague or IDS, Labour's massive majorities meant that Blair was guaranteed a minimum of four years and then the luxury of choosing his date. General election concerns were minimal in the first half of both parliaments and yet both leaders came under massive scrutiny, to the extent that one was deposed and the other might well have been had there been a viable alternative who wanted the gig.
When the media feel inclined to have a go at a politician, they'll do so. Whether there's an election in the offing is to a large extent beside the point. It's good sport and good for sales.
The other side is that the May 2015 date is not quite as fixed as it seems. Indeed, it's not impossible that we might have an Autumn election this year (a thread I may write next week depending on what else interesting happens in between).
Maybe it is the beautiful autumn sunshine (always my favourite light of the year) or the fact it is my birthday but I am getting a little more optimistic for the Tories at the next election. Labour are undoubtedly in a very strong position and with a half decent leader, let alone a Blair, they would be home and hosed. But they don't have one, they have Ed.
I rate Cameron far more highly than most on these threads but even if I were wrong about that he is indisputably a different and better class of campaigner than Ed. When I looked at the Labour Conference I did not see wise caution, I saw a party paralysed under a leader that makes Gordon Brown look decisive, who is terrified of sharing the limelight with his team (700 words for the shadow cabinet ) and who cannot decide on anything other than the wonders of the NHS and how much he hates the Tories.
It is not enough and it has given the Tories a chance to once again set the agenda and the nature of the discussion over the next few months.
Thanks Plato. Good to see you posting more regularly again. Hopefully some of the other missing posters will return as the election approaches.
@Plato Years ago the door lock broke on my car. I put a card on the dash saying "The sound system is lousy, and my taste in music, even worse (P.S. the door doesn"t lock)" It never got touched.
there is a theory that immobilsers are so good now that you should make sure there is nothing valuable in the car, and park it unlocked, thus avoiding damage when people try to get into it. You can park a soft-top with the top down without too much trouble.
The Habitual Residence Test for benefits was introduced back in the early 1990s. When it was subjected to case law by social security commissioners they determined that just three months stay was long enough to prove habitual residence.
The contributory principle in many working age, national insurance benefits requires two years adequate contribution to qualify.
I often wonder why they just don't abolish Child Benefit and use the cash to slash income tax most profoundly at the bottom end. £11.4 billion to play with.
"Britain has been told to pay more than £10 million in unemployment benefit to eastern European migrants who have left Britain, returned home and now cannot find a job.
Poland, the Czech Republic and Slovakia have demanded that Iain Duncan Smith’s department funds their jobless citizens because they once worked and paid national insurance in the UK."
Surely this whole matter is getting ridiculous and needs sorting out - I am fairly sure that all nation members of the EU have different rules regarding payment of benefits to non-nationals.
Just tell them they have to turn up at the Job Centre every Monday, that will end it.
Financier, do you have a link? It seems a bit of an odd story. Income-related (non-contributory means-tested) benefits are only paid to UK residents, of whatever nationality. There is already an EU scheme whereby EU citizens can claim contributory benefits from other countries, but they should do so in the country they currently reside in and should claim through that country's social security system.
Other than that, if you are on either sort of JSA you have to be in the country - if you go abroad on holiday you have to close your claima nd open a new one on your return.
But there are some strange anomalies, a UK resident can apparently claim Child Benefit for children who live abroad. Which seems bizarre to me.
I know it may seem like "the tail wagging the dog" but I think we need to thoroughly review the way in which you qualify for benefits in the circumstances we now find ourselves in. A long qualification period would be easiest - say 10 years' residence - which could be shortened for people who come here as children.
I posted a link to the story yesterday but will try and dig it out again.
Nearly 50% of the benefits bill relates to pensions. This can only grow as our population ages.
But isn't that because the tax credit system is excluded, being counted as negative tax receipts instead?
"The UK currently spends around £30 billion a year on tax credits. According to the government's Migration Advisory Committee, £5 billion of that is paid to foreign nationals.
...a single man with no children earning the minimum wage has his pay of £184 a week raised to £254 by tax credits and housing benefits. If he has a wife and two children, this is boosted to £543, so that welfare payments make up 66 per cent of his £28,241 annual income."
@JohnLilburne The problem with leaving it unlocked is that it can invalidate your insurance if the car gets stolen. Not a problem in that particular case, the insurance was far more than the price of the car, and it was "third party" only.
Good article from David as ever. I'd take issue only with one point, but it's an important one: "this week was not about preparing for the election, it was about preparing for government, hence Ed Balls’ claimed commitment to clearing the deficit."
I'd say the opposite: it is very striking that Labour are not doing anything to prepare for government. Their horizon appears to be 7th May 2015 and they seem to be acting as though politics will come to an end the following day, with nothing further to do.
As for Ed Balls' comments on the deficit, I think that supports my point. All he has done is say the maximum he thinks he can get away with without alienating Labour supporters in the hope of trying to regain a smidgen of economic credibility. But that maximum is so tiny that it doesn't even begin to scratch the surface: the paucity of the ambition, and the feebleness of what he announced compared with what everyone agrees is required, were extraordinary. It is all calibrated to the pre-election period, with no care to what they might actually have to do afterwards.
Maybe it is the beautiful autumn sunshine (always my favourite light of the year) or the fact it is my birthday but I am getting a little more optimistic for the Tories at the next election. Labour are undoubtedly in a very strong position and with a half decent leader, let alone a Blair, they would be home and hosed. But they don't have one, they have Ed.
I rate Cameron far more highly than most on these threads but even if I were wrong about that he is indisputably a different and better class of campaigner than Ed. When I looked at the Labour Conference I did not see wise caution, I saw a party paralysed under a leader that makes Gordon Brown look decisive, who is terrified of sharing the limelight with his team (700 words for the shadow cabinet ) and who cannot decide on anything other than the wonders of the NHS and how much he hates the Tories.
It is not enough and it has given the Tories a chance to once again set the agenda and the nature of the discussion over the next few months.
Thanks Plato. Good to see you posting more regularly again. Hopefully some of the other missing posters will return as the election approaches.
I watched a good/odd film the other day: "Premonition"
75 grand in 1974 seems a lot to me, but wouldn't the mansion tax be better if it only applied to new purchases?
Fraser Nelson (@FraserNelson) 27/09/2014 10:08 Fascinating interviews with pensioners who stand to lose quarter of their income under Labour's mansion tax thetimes.co.uk/tto/life/prope…
Did Nelson suggest they sell their mansions, buy somewhere a little cheaper and free up half a million in capital for them to spend ?
There's not going to be much sympathy for self-pitying multi-millionaire pensioners when real wages for workers are falling and home ownership has been in decline for over a decade.
The irony is that Osborne and Cable had agreed to bring in a mansion tax and get rid of the 50% income tax rate but were stopped from doing so by Cameron and Clegg.
I do wonder how sustainable it is to bring in a Mansion Tax and not simultaneously reband the Council Tax, against updated ratings.
Probably being naive here, but isn't it a bit unfair to slap a tax on something after it has been purchased?
Raise the stamp duty for all purchases over £2m would be better IMO
I often wonder why they just don't abolish Child Benefit and use the cash to slash income tax most profoundly at the bottom end. £11.4 billion to play with.
As I understand it, child benefit began as a child tax allowance, which was then converted into a payment to benefit poorer/unemployed parents.
Down the road from me was a Referendum Party/UKIP man - he painted his house that faced the A22 purple and yellow and his car was festooned with stickers/had a light up taxi-style roof light.
I think he was responsible for about 99% of all UKIP activities. Then he died and it vanished. His personal passion gave an entirely different impression to genuine local sentiment locally back then.
We now have a UKIP local councilor - something beyond his wildest dreams a decade ago. Funny ole world.
Cripes - I tend to put the Euro elections in the Bargin Bin bucket of political results as they've little obvious impact on us and it's an enormous protest vote.
Miss Plato, in one poll Labour under Brown went to 19%.
Mori on 31/5/2009 - coincident with the Euro-election campaign and the Expenses scandal - had Labour on 18%, the same as the Lib Dems, with the Tories on 40%.
Change and how to cope with change is the background to the 2015 general election.
There is constant change and the speed of change is accelerating. This is shown in the business world where Allibaba has been the biggest listing in the US, but did not exist in 2000.
The internet, knowledge flow, social media are all aspects of this.
As an open free market economy the UK is at the forefront of this.
This means changes in jobs, careers and lifestyle.
But change bring uncertainty, fear of not being able to cope, keeping up, the unknown.
How do the parties address this issue?
UKIP is tending to focus its attention on those elements of the public who are fearful of change and want it to stop. Hence a tendency towards protectionism.
Labour is focused on its past glories, the NHS which they want to preserve in aspic.
The coalition parties do seem to be adapting to change, but are they addressing the fears, concerns of the populus at large, or only those capable of enjoying change?
I see the Canada-EU trade deal has finally been agreed, a decade after EFTA managed to get one. It covers goods and services, tariff and non-tariff barriers, yet no freedom of movement and no Canada membership fees. Should be a good model for a UK-EU deal after we leave.
UKIP is tending to focus its attention on those elements of the public who are fearful of change and want it to stop. Hence a tendency towards protectionism.
75 grand in 1974 seems a lot to me, but wouldn't the mansion tax be better if it only applied to new purchases?
Fraser Nelson (@FraserNelson) 27/09/2014 10:08 Fascinating interviews with pensioners who stand to lose quarter of their income under Labour's mansion tax thetimes.co.uk/tto/life/prope…
Did Nelson suggest they sell their mansions, buy somewhere a little cheaper and free up half a million in capital for them to spend ?
There's not going to be much sympathy for self-pitying multi-millionaire pensioners when real wages for workers are falling and home ownership has been in decline for over a decade.
The irony is that Osborne and Cable had agreed to bring in a mansion tax and get rid of the 50% income tax rate but were stopped from doing so by Cameron and Clegg.
I do wonder how sustainable it is to bring in a Mansion Tax and not simultaneously reband the Council Tax, against updated ratings.
Adding new bands to council tax would be a better solution I feel personally. For a start the money would go to local councils which are being hammered by cuts. It also removes the need to create a new class of tax, which is effectively a ground rent to the state for owning property. As I've posted before, who knows where that will take us in ten or twenty years time once the principle has been established.
I agree. I think I once posted a suggestion along the lines of increasing the number of bands either side of the central 'D' band, to something like:
A** - 50% - below 70k A* - 60% - 70k to 85k A - 70% - 85k to 105k B - 80% - 105k to 130k C - 90% - 130k to 160k D - 100% - 160k to 200k E - 120% - 200k to 250k F - 140% - 250k to 325k G - 160% - 325k to 410k H - 190% - 410k to 500k I - 220% - 500k to 600k J - 250% - 600k to 750k K - 300% - 750k to 1m L - 400% - 1m to 2m M - 500% - 2m+
Who knows? They ought to but I wouldn't bank on it.
Is this a serious question? Will the media give Ed M a lot of scrutiny? You bet they will. There is a block of newspaper people who believe he is unfit to be PM. They'll make sure we know about it.
It is a serious question. Hague and IDS both got a right going over from the press practically from Day 1. Admittedly, they were up a against Blair (and Alistair Campbell) at the peak of their powers, but the fact that Miliband has had four years with nothing like the same level of scrutiny makes me question whether it will happen to anything like that degree. Sure, it'll ramp up a bit as polling day approaches but the media rarely hold off stories or articles that they can run now, or at least, this month, which makes me think that there really isn't all that much desire to stick the boot in.
You're beginning to worry me David. I had your card marked as the sensible thread author on here. Again, it comes back to the fact we are in a fixed term parliament. You do actually know that's the case? Unlike your pb bubble no-one out there is thinking about an election. As we draw close to the real thing, and people wake up to the GE, Miliband is going to get scrutinised to the nth. That's putting it politely. I reckon he will be ripped to shreds next spring by some of the media. He has foolishly made significant enemies, and I'm not just referring to The Sun. That he is not up to the job is by now manifestly obvious to everyone except him.
Indeed, it's not impossible that we might have an Autumn election this year (a thread I may write next week depending on what else interesting happens in between).
You been imbibing autumnal mushrooms David? Was it you that suggested the collapse of Cameron and Country after the Indyref? I wonder what cataclysmic event you are dreaming up now to bring about such a scenario? It can't be two UKIP by-election wins which are hardly unexpected. Hoardes of defecting Tories? Or perhaps ISIS crossing the Bosphorous? Putin's forces reaching Berlin? Or the final eruption of Bardabunga?
UKIP is tending to focus its attention on those elements of the public who are fearful of change and want it to stop. Hence a tendency towards protectionism.
Tosh. UKIP advocate free trade.
I think UKIP should also advocate traditional grammar, so that should be UKIP advocates free trade.
75 grand in 1974 seems a lot to me, but wouldn't the mansion tax be better if it only applied to new purchases?
Fraser Nelson (@FraserNelson) 27/09/2014 10:08 Fascinating interviews with pensioners who stand to lose quarter of their income under Labour's mansion tax thetimes.co.uk/tto/life/prope…
Did Nelson suggest they sell their mansions, buy somewhere a little cheaper and free up half a million in capital for them to spend ?
There's not going to be much sympathy for self-pitying multi-millionaire pensioners when real wages for workers are falling and home ownership has been in decline for over a decade.
The irony is that Osborne and Cable had agreed to bring in a mansion tax and get rid of the 50% income tax rate but were stopped from doing so by Cameron and Clegg.
I do wonder how sustainable it is to bring in a Mansion Tax and not simultaneously reband the Council Tax, against updated ratings.
Probably being naive here, but isn't it a bit unfair to slap a tax on something after it has been purchased?
Raise the stamp duty for all purchases over £2m would be better IMO
The principle of a land tax has been around for literally centuries and a local government tax based on property for over a century. It's not really any different from changing the nature of the Vehicle Excise License (or whatever it's called these days).
UKIP is tending to focus its attention on those elements of the public who are fearful of change and want it to stop. Hence a tendency towards protectionism.
Tosh. UKIP advocate free trade.
I think UKIP should also advocate traditional grammar, so that should be UKIP advocates free trade.
In British English it is common to use the plural form for singulars that represent groups of people. E.g. "Manchester United are winning" would normally be used over "Manchester United is winning", in the rare circumstances that happens.
Cripes - I tend to put the Euro elections in the Bargin Bin bucket of political results as they've little obvious impact on us and it's an enormous protest vote.
Miss Plato, in one poll Labour under Brown went to 19%.
Mori on 31/5/2009 - coincident with the Euro-election campaign and the Expenses scandal - had Labour on 18%, the same as the Lib Dems, with the Tories on 40%.
That poll was for Westminster; it was just taken at the time of the Euros. (For reference, Labour polled 15.7% in those elections).
UKIP is tending to focus its attention on those elements of the public who are fearful of change and want it to stop. Hence a tendency towards protectionism.
Tosh. UKIP advocate free trade.
I think UKIP should also advocate traditional grammar, so that should be UKIP advocates free trade.
In British English it is common to use the plural form for singulars that represent groups of people. E.g. "Manchester United are winning" would normally be used over "Manchester United is winning", in the rare circumstances that happens.
Hopefully that will be a redundant phrase this afternoon when they lose to West Ham. :-)
It is a serious question. Hague and IDS both got a right going over from the press practically from Day 1. Admittedly, they were up a against Blair (and Alistair Campbell) at the peak of their powers, but the fact that Miliband has had four years with nothing like the same level of scrutiny makes me question whether it will happen to anything like that degree. Sure, it'll ramp up a bit as polling day approaches but the media rarely hold off stories or articles that they can run now, or at least, this month, which makes me think that there really isn't all that much desire to stick the boot in.
You're beginning to worry me David. I had your card marked as the sensible thread author on here. Again, it comes back to the fact we are in a fixed term parliament. You do actually know that's the case? Unlike your pb bubble no-one out there is thinking about an election. As we draw close to the real thing, and people wake up to the GE, Miliband is going to get scrutinised to the nth. That's putting it politely. I reckon he will be ripped to shreds next spring by some of the media. He has foolishly made significant enemies, and I'm not just referring to The Sun. That he is not up to the job is by now manifestly obvious to everyone except him.
Indeed, it's not impossible that we might have an Autumn election this year (a thread I may write next week depending on what else interesting happens in between).
You been imbibing autumnal mushrooms David? Was it you that suggested the collapse of Cameron and Country after the Indyref? I wonder what cataclysmic event you are dreaming up now to bring about such a scenario? It can't be two UKIP by-election wins which are hardly unexpected. Hoardes of defecting Tories? Or perhaps ISIS crossing the Bosphorous? Putin's forces reaching Berlin? Or the final eruption of Bardabunga?
I'll stick to Game of Thrones for my fantasy.
No, I don't think it was me that "suggested the collapse of Cameron and Country after the Indyref" (in fact, in my last article before the vote, I commented that with a Yes vote, the Tories could win most seats without most votes).
However, a potential Autumn election could be related to Scotland, namely via EV4EL. If Labour and the Lib Dems combine to vote it down, why shouldn't Cameron resign his government and seek a mandate from the people? The FTPA would require a couple of weeks wait to see if an alternative government could be formed but I really don't see how one could be as the numbers are practically the same now as in 2010 and Labour could only hold office with Clegg's active support.
Miss Anne, don't be afraid to branch out. I hear Thaddeus White* is an author of splendid fantasy. Look how reasonably priced and highly rated his books are: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Thaddeus-White/e/B008C6RU98/
Labour can breeze into government on only 35% of the vote if that is still higher than the Tory vote, as Blair did in 2005. That is why the Tories have to win back the voters lost to UKIP as their only way of staying in government is to at least match the 36% Cameron got in 2010 and ideally move towards 40%. Thus expect Crosby to ensure their conference targets those Tory 2010 voters now backing Farage. If UKIP start to really hit Labour too, as Heywood and Middleton will show us, that will also make things interesting
Just a thought on the modernisation of the politics due to the internet. I wonder if this will, long-term help Labour or the Conservatives more, or help/hinder the bigger parties.
The power of 'big media' (newspapers and broadcasters) has relatively declined, and the rise of social media allows so-called citizen journalists (private bloggers) to reach large audiences.
It may make it easier for smaller parties to become established and grow, as they can have their own bloggers much more easily than they could persuade newspapers to back them (even the Lib Dems only had a paper or two on-side in 2010).
Mr. HYUFD, depends how things turn out in Scotland with the SNP and in the north of England with UKIP. There's a wide array of realistic results in 2015, which does make things very unpredictable and quite interesting.
It's a perfect example of the state inventing two benefits to do the job of one.
The universal principle of Child Benefit has now been abandoned, and it's relevance has diminished over the years due to the growth in means tested incomes, so it is just a different form of Child Tax Credit.
Merge what's left of Child Benefit with Child Tax Credit, whilst simultaneously taking a very large axe to tax on the wages earned by the less well off.
UKIP is tending to focus its attention on those elements of the public who are fearful of change and want it to stop. Hence a tendency towards protectionism.
Tosh. UKIP advocate free trade.
I think UKIP should also advocate traditional grammar, so that should be UKIP advocates free trade.
I agree historically UKIP has been in favour of free trade in its more libertarian phase, but I think that is changing with its focus on ex Labour supporters. For instance its recent comments on the NHS are protectionist. I would also view free movement of labour as part and parcel of free trade, so I would argue that UKIP is protectionist in that context as well - trying to impede change.
UKIP is tending to focus its attention on those elements of the public who are fearful of change and want it to stop. Hence a tendency towards protectionism.
Tosh. UKIP advocate free trade.
I think UKIP should also advocate traditional grammar, so that should be UKIP advocates free trade.
In British English it is common to use the plural form for singulars that represent groups of people. E.g. "Manchester United are winning" would normally be used over "Manchester United is winning", in the rare circumstances that happens.
Hopefully that will be a redundant phrase this afternoon when they lose to West Ham. :-)
I always like the option.
The Cabinet is united over Iraq. The Cabinet are divided over Europe.
UKIP is tending to focus its attention on those elements of the public who are fearful of change and want it to stop. Hence a tendency towards protectionism.
Tosh. UKIP advocate free trade.
I think UKIP should also advocate traditional grammar, so that should be UKIP advocates free trade.
I agree historically UKIP has been in favour of free trade in its more libertarian phase, but I think that is changing with its focus on ex Labour supporters. For instance its recent comments on the NHS are protectionist. I would also view free movement of labour as part and parcel of free trade, so I would argue that UKIP is protectionist in that context as well - trying to impede change.
Opposing tenets of a trade deal that could privatise the NHS might be less free market, but they're not protectionist. It's a fairly minor thing compared to the other three parties supporting the EU with its trade barriers and huge agricultural subsidies.
Shocking, but how many other towns has this happened in?
That's the question that's not going away. Where is the PM on this?
The PM is being responsible and not rabble rousing.
What's rabble rousing about investigating child sex abuse? Perhaps UKIP got a bit political. Cameron needn't. If we have a UK wide problem, then it's only a matter of time before a Tory council is implicated.
Who knows? They ought to but I wouldn't bank on it.
Is this a serious question? Will the media give Ed M a lot of scrutiny? You bet they will. There is a block of newspaper people who believe he is unfit to be PM. They'll make sure we know about it.
It is a serious question. Hague and IDS both got a right going over from the press practically from Day 1. Admittedly, they were up a against Blair (and Alistair Campbell) at the peak of their powers, but the fact that Miliband has had four years with nothing like the same level of scrutiny makes me question whether it will happen to anything like that degree. Sure, it'll ramp up a bit as polling day approaches but the media rarely hold off stories or articles that they can run now, or at least, this month, which makes me think that there really isn't all that much desire to stick the boot in.
You're beginning to worry me David. I had your card marked as the sensible thread author on here. Again, it comes back to the fact we are in a fixed term parliament. You do actually know that's the case? Unlike your pb bubble no-one out there is thinking about an election. As we draw close to the real thing, and people wake up to the GE, Miliband is going to get scrutinised to the nth. That's putting it politely. I reckon he will be ripped to shreds next spring by some of the media. He has foolishly made significant enemies, and I'm not just referring to The Sun. That he is not up to the job is by now manifestly obvious to everyone except him.
Indeed, it's not impossible that we might have an Autumn election this year (a thread I may write next week depending on what else interesting happens in between).
You been imbibing autumnal mushrooms David? Was it you that suggested the collapse of Cameron and Country after the Indyref? I wonder what cataclysmic event you are dreaming up now to bring about such a scenario? It can't be two UKIP by-election wins which are hardly unexpected. Hoardes of defecting Tories? Or perhaps ISIS crossing the Bosphorous? Putin's forces reaching Berlin? Or the final eruption of Bardabunga?
I'll stick to Game of Thrones for my fantasy.
Miss Anne, If you like fantasy books then please may I recommend those written by our own Morris Dancer under his nomme de plume of Thaddeus White. They are great fun and ridiculously cheap. I would particularly recommend "Sir Edric's Temple", a glorious romp with a real belly laugh per chapter and at least a titter from most pages.
MD Indeed, if the SNP start eating into Labour urban seats in Scotland (while perhaps losing 1 or 2 rural SNP seats to the Tories) and UKIP win a few Labour northern seats that would also be interesting.
UKIP is tending to focus its attention on those elements of the public who are fearful of change and want it to stop. Hence a tendency towards protectionism.
Tosh. UKIP advocate free trade.
I think UKIP should also advocate traditional grammar, so that should be UKIP advocates free trade.
I agree historically UKIP has been in favour of free trade in its more libertarian phase, but I think that is changing with its focus on ex Labour supporters. For instance its recent comments on the NHS are protectionist. I would also view free movement of labour as part and parcel of free trade, so I would argue that UKIP is protectionist in that context as well - trying to impede change.
Opposing tenets of a trade deal that could privatise the NHS might be less free market, but they're not protectionist. It's a fairly minor thing compared to the other three parties supporting the EU with its trade barriers and huge agricultural subsidies.
I agree as far as the point goes, but it's clear that many of the ideas behind UKIP represent a departure from its previous stance. So I await the manifesto (I thought it was being launched about now, but I haven't seen it) for a clearer picture.
I see the Canada-EU trade deal has finally been agreed, a decade after EFTA managed to get one. It covers goods and services, tariff and non-tariff barriers, yet no freedom of movement and no Canada membership fees. Should be a good model for a UK-EU deal after we leave.
Whose in EFTA? Its deal is peanuts compared to this. Canada is on the other side of the Atlantic. (and they have not ratified it yet and Juncker has indicated it could be put to a vote in each EU country.) The EEA is a good model for the UK. But as we look at Norway there is not much difference. There will be increasing free movement between Canada and the EU in future. ''The Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement, CETA, goes far beyond the North American Free Trade Agreement and is designed to eliminate thousands of tariffs, encourage foreign investment and promote movement of labour. '' http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/eu-harper/article14924915/
Its a big trade and economic deal and covers a vast range and some of it is controversial. The Germans (the SDP part of its grand coalition) do not like parts of it. Idiots like Farage and his acolytes in UKIP underestimate (ie lie about) what 'free trade' is in reality. ''European companies will also be able to bid on large provincial and municipal government contracts. Canadian companies and farmers will gain open access to the EU''.
UKIP is tending to focus its attention on those elements of the public who are fearful of change and want it to stop. Hence a tendency towards protectionism.
Tosh. UKIP advocate free trade.
I think UKIP should also advocate traditional grammar, so that should be UKIP advocates free trade.
In British English it is common to use the plural form for singulars that represent groups of people. E.g. "Manchester United are winning" would normally be used over "Manchester United is winning", in the rare circumstances that happens.
I agree that it seems to be accepted for sports teams. But in other cases, where a noun is indubitably singular, I think the singular should be used. So UKIP is, because it stands for The UK Independence Party, and the word Party is indubitably singular. I would always say Parliament is, the Conservative Party is (but here you have the option of the Conservatives are if you want to use a plural verb).
Shocking, but how many other towns has this happened in?
That's the question that's not going away. Where is the PM on this?
I honestly believed it was a matter of time before Cameron did something.
But now, like you, I think he has nothing to say on it.I hope not.
I had assumed he didn't want the horror of the situation to negatively affect the country's mood going into the Scotland referendum. But we're a good week or so past that now, and still nothing. It's amazing. We can have a national police operation for Jimmy Saville but not this? We can have an independent inquiry into newspaper conduct but not thousands of child rapes? Cameron got into power promising to address the problems of "broken Britain", but when it's non-whites committing the crimes he'd rather let it fade into the background. It's a sign of moral collapse, in my opinion.
Shocking, but how many other towns has this happened in?
That's the question that's not going away. Where is the PM on this?
The PM is being responsible and not rabble rousing.
How is completely ignoring the issue not rabble rousing? Is he doing a public inquiry? Is he making any changes to the law to make such crimes easier to prosecute? Is he pushing for a national police operation to address the issue? The man is asleep at the wheel here.
It's not like this is a minor one off incident. This is thousands of children physically, psychologically and spiritually tortured by adult men in our own cities. It's hard to think of a bigger issue affecting our nation, but what has Cameron done about it? Nothing.
UKIP is tending to focus its attention on those elements of the public who are fearful of change and want it to stop. Hence a tendency towards protectionism.
Tosh. UKIP advocate free trade.
I think UKIP should also advocate traditional grammar, so that should be UKIP advocates free trade.
In British English it is common to use the plural form for singulars that represent groups of people. E.g. "Manchester United are winning" would normally be used over "Manchester United is winning", in the rare circumstances that happens.
I agree that it seems to be accepted for sports teams. But in other cases, where a noun is indubitably singular, I think the singular should be used. So UKIP is, because it stands for The UK Independence Party, and the word Party is indubitably singular. I would always say Parliament is, the Conservative Party is (but here you have the option of the Conservatives are if you want to use a plural verb).
"Football Club" is also singular, but people would still say "AFC Wimbledon are winning". I'd also say "The Labour Party are ahead" rather than "The Labour Party is ahead".
Shocking, but how many other towns has this happened in?
That's the question that's not going away. Where is the PM on this?
The PM is being responsible and not rabble rousing.
What's rabble rousing about investigating child sex abuse? Perhaps UKIP got a bit political. Cameron needn't. If we have a UK wide problem, then it's only a matter of time before a Tory council is implicated.
I would still like to know what is being done about it. Dave Lee Travis is prosecuted for squeezing some actress's tits, which agreed is still an offence but on the lower end of the scale. But meanwhile, we should be turning over anyone in Rotherham who took part, or connived, in the mass abuse and rape of teenage girls. Where are the prosecutions? I want it to include social workers and police officers who turned blind eyes to serious criminality. Misconduct in Public Office should cover it.
Shocking, but how many other towns has this happened in?
That's the question that's not going away. Where is the PM on this?
Probably at a gay wedding.
I'm not joking. When the Savile scandal exploded, the minister responsible for the BBC, Maria Miller, gave a speech at the Tory party conference. Her subject? Same sex marriage.
Now, although I'm biased in this, I'm sure I'm not the only one to regard this a rather skewed set of priorities.
UKIP is tending to focus its attention on those elements of the public who are fearful of change and want it to stop. Hence a tendency towards protectionism.
Tosh. UKIP advocate free trade.
I think UKIP should also advocate traditional grammar, so that should be UKIP advocates free trade.
In British English it is common to use the plural form for singulars that represent groups of people. E.g. "Manchester United are winning" would normally be used over "Manchester United is winning", in the rare circumstances that happens.
I agree that it seems to be accepted for sports teams. But in other cases, where a noun is indubitably singular, I think the singular should be used. So UKIP is, because it stands for The UK Independence Party, and the word Party is indubitably singular. I would always say Parliament is, the Conservative Party is (but here you have the option of the Conservatives are if you want to use a plural verb).
"Football Club" is also singular, but people would still say "AFC Wimbledon are winning". I'd also say "The Labour Party are ahead" rather than "The Labour Party is ahead".
Well, as I said, it is accepted for sports teams, but I think they should be the exception. You should learn to talk proper ;-)
Edited to add: as an analogy, I would probably agree that "Labour are ahead" is just about OK, as "Labour" is a sort of vague amorphous noun, not really singular or plural. A bit like saying "Arsenal are ahead" but you would certainly say "Arsenal Football Club was profitable last year", singular. So "The Labour Party is ahead" is preferable.
Mr. Socrates, I think some investigations are underway (Look North recently reported either 18 or 28 suspects were being investigated), but I concur it seems not nearly enough is being done. It's industrial scale abuse over a prolonged period, with rank incompetence by state authorities (the police losing all the clothing one victim cleverly kept as evidence is unforgivable).
UKIP is tending to focus its attention on those elements of the public who are fearful of change and want it to stop. Hence a tendency towards protectionism.
Tosh. UKIP advocate free trade.
I think UKIP should also advocate traditional grammar, so that should be UKIP advocates free trade.
In British English it is common to use the plural form for singulars that represent groups of people. E.g. "Manchester United are winning" would normally be used over "Manchester United is winning", in the rare circumstances that happens.
I agree that it seems to be accepted for sports teams. But in other cases, where a noun is indubitably singular, I think the singular should be used. So UKIP is, because it stands for The UK Independence Party, and the word Party is indubitably singular. I would always say Parliament is, the Conservative Party is (but here you have the option of the Conservatives are if you want to use a plural verb).
An excellent post, Sir! PB at its, non-betting, best.
Shocking, but how many other towns has this happened in?
That's the question that's not going away. Where is the PM on this?
The PM is being responsible and not rabble rousing.
How is completely ignoring the issue not rabble rousing? Is he doing a public inquiry? Is he making any changes to the law to make such crimes easier to prosecute? Is he pushing for a national police operation to address the issue? The man is asleep at the wheel here.
It's not like this is a minor one off incident. This is thousands of children physically, psychologically and spiritually tortured by adult men in our own cities. It's hard to think of a bigger issue affecting our nation, but what has Cameron done about it? Nothing.
The complete silence and lack of activity by HMG and the police does seem difficult to explain. There have been very serious allegations against known police officers, yet no arrests or even suspensions. There have been allegations of corporate, dare I say institutional, corruption, but no action taken. One has to wonder why? Is there actually a racial element to HMGs response to this massive scandal? If so I fear the end result may not be what HMG might wish.
The rate of change is quite alarming and make it very difficult to be at the cutting edge of one's technology/business.
For example, if we look at the oil and gas majors, at one time they were in operation from exploration to the petrol pump. Now many of them, having changed their business model and are looking at each part of their operations as a profit centre in its own right, have got out of many of their downstream operations (retail, refining etc) and focus on exploration and production and in some cases renewable energy.
At the same time return on capital is now perhaps less of a topic than asset management and then in comes sustainability and decommissioning (with environmental impact), and then rig reduction as subsea operations take over.
All of the above have an impact on jobs and skill sets required and are changing perhaps faster than the average education life-cycle. It is only those people/businesses/countries that can adapt quickly will survive at their present economic level. That is why a lot of western Europe (and their political parties) is unprepared for the economic shocks ahead.
Lord Bell On how today's politicians are largely 'pygmies'. Farage is ‘a pub loudmouth with no political brain at all’, Miliband is ‘absolutely hopeless, a terrible politician’, William Hague is ‘fabulous’, George Osborne is ‘a man of great substance’ and Michael Gove is ‘one of the superstars of this Coalition government.’ But Boris is ' a very interesting politician and a proper Conservative. He openly admits his weaknesses and flaws. He’s an exciting person. He has charisma. He bothers with himself — the way he gets across to people.’
The Cambridgeshire at Newmarket has been regular bluesmarket over the years.I have just wasted 75 minutes of my life working it out and am back where I started.Back Gosden at Newmarket who has 2 in the race.7-1 Fav Cornrow and 22-1 shot Maverick Wave.I'm backing both in a 50-50 dutch-to minimum stakes.
Mr. Socrates, I think some investigations are underway (Look North recently reported either 18 or 28 suspects were being investigated), but I concur it seems not nearly enough is being done. It's industrial scale abuse over a prolonged period, with rank incompetence by state authorities (the police losing all the clothing one victim cleverly kept as evidence is unforgivable).
It's simply not good enough.
Cameron is not directly responsible for the police, but there's a lack of political leadership. Perhaps he's waiting for the right moment. Quire apart from principle it would be good politics. Cameron is good at serious, crime is a strong Tory issue, and looking anti establishment would help with the UKIP problem. As I say, he needn't say it's a Labour problem, or focus on multiculturalism. He can just say it's our problem as a nation.
Lord Bell On how today's politicians are largely 'pygmies'. Farage is ‘a pub loudmouth with no political brain at all’, Miliband is ‘absolutely hopeless, a terrible politician’, William Hague is ‘fabulous’, George Osborne is ‘a man of great substance’ and Michael Gove is ‘one of the superstars of this Coalition government.’ But Boris is ' a very interesting politician and a proper Conservative. He openly admits his weaknesses and flaws. He’s an exciting person. He has charisma. He bothers with himself — the way he gets across to people.’
Farage may be point scoring, but Rotherham MBC has been dominated by Labour, so it is open to attack over its behaviour and management of vulnerable children. If the other parties remain silent on this, their silence allows UKIP to make noises, but is it a case of incompetence, maladministration, corruption or not?
Did any major figure from Labour say anything about those cases last week?
William Hague is ‘fabulous’, George Osborne is ‘a man of great substance’ and Michael Gove is ‘one of the superstars of this Coalition government.’ But Boris is ' a very interesting politician and a proper Conservative. He openly admits his weaknesses and flaws. He’s an exciting person. He has charisma. He bothers with himself — the way he gets across to people.’
Good, ole Lord Tim, always noted for his dispassionate, apolitical analysis.
28 suspects is barely scraping the surface of this. One girl in Rotherham gave a list of 250 men that raped her to the police - and those were just the ones she knows the names of. And this has happened in dozens of towns. With this left to the local police forces, it's entirely dependent on those local police forces - the same ones which have failed in their jobs to date - being willing to re-open pandora's box in a way that might show up their previous failures. Some will have good coppers in charge that do that, others will want to avoid it. A national co-ordinated effort led by someone who is trusted and coming from the outside is the only way we can properly appreciate the scale of this. HMG must know this, but the PM and the relevant ministers are now repeating the original failures of the local police and council authorities. It makes me want to tear my hair out.
I adore Hugo Rifkind. His My Week columns have me in stitches. I'm going to buy myself his book of these for Christmas. He also intervened for me on Twitter when The Times subscription dept were being an arse. He's a sweetie.
And Peter Brookes deserves an MBE for Wallace & Gromit re EdM. Those have been a great public service.
We all forget things. But that doesn’t mean they aren’t important. For years, friends, I forgot to get married. And Justine, quite often, forgot to tell me she didn’t mind.
Shocking, but how many other towns has this happened in?
That's the question that's not going away. Where is the PM on this?
Probably at a gay wedding.
I'm not joking. When the Savile scandal exploded, the minister responsible for the BBC, Maria Miller, gave a speech at the Tory party conference. Her subject? Same sex marriage.
Now, although I'm biased in this, I'm sure I'm not the only one to regard this a rather skewed set of priorities.
What is your problem with gay people? Is there something you would care to reveal?
Farage may be point scoring, but Rotherham MBC has been dominated by Labour, so it is open to attack over its behaviour and management of vulnerable children. If the other parties remain silent on this, their silence allows UKIP to make noises, but is it a case of incompetence, maladministration, corruption or not?
Did any major figure from Labour say anything about those cases last week?
Labour politicise everything, good to see UKIP learning.
Speedy/TUD Lord Bell on Cameron '‘He’s a pygmy! I’ve never heard him say anything that sounded like a conviction. EVER.
‘I’ve heard him mouth platitudes. I’ve heard him say things like “the vulnerable” — which is one of the most meaningless phrases ever used. But I don’t think he really believes in anything. All those who fundamentally changed the world had convictions. Real convictions. They did it for the good of the state. They did it despite the fact their actions weren’t popular.
‘He has an over-weaning obsession with popularity and trivialisation — who cares what music he listens to or what biscuits he likes? And all that “chillaxing” — oh please!’'
Politicians used to be giants with a huge grasp of affairs and who made momentous decisions. I don’t think Cameron has ever had a strong view on anything. He blows in the wind. He wants to see everyone’s point of view and then find a settlement.
‘Mrs T had a set of principles she judged everything by — is that going to make the State more successful, or less? She had an iron grip on the affairs of the State and worked incredibly hard.’ Bell was certainly loyal to the cause — all those Christmases at Chequers were not for the faint-hearted.
‘Jolly is not the word I’d use. They were testing. There were no presents. And no, Jimmy Savile was never, ever there. I know he said he was, but people make up all kinds of things.’
Traditional Christmas lunch was followed by a walk round the grounds — accompanied by the sound of sirens as Denis accidentally tripped the security lights — and back sharp for the Queen’s speech.
‘Absolute silence was required. We all stood up. Nobody was allowed to comment apart from Her Greatness, who’d say, “Why don’t they ever light me like that when they make broadcasts?”’ Despite all the time they spent together, Bell remained in awe.
‘She was an incredible, powerful, political person. I never met her without getting a slight frisson beforehand — “Oh God, I hope I don’t waste her time”.
‘I’ve met David Cameron many times and I’ve never got a frisson. They’re chalk and cheese. One’s a giant, one’s a pygmy.
‘He has no charisma. Even Blair has charisma — though he wears make-up most of the time and we don’t agree about very much.’
I hardly call 100 students a revolt. "Over 100 pro-democracy students stormed Hong Kong government headquarters and scuffled with police late on Friday in protest against the Chinese government's tightening grip on the former British colony"
The rate of change is quite alarming and make it very difficult to be at the cutting edge of one's technology/business.
For example, if we look at the oil and gas majors, at one time they were in operation from exploration to the petrol pump. Now many of them, having changed their business model and are looking at each part of their operations as a profit centre in its own right, have got out of many of their downstream operations (retail, refining etc) and focus on exploration and production and in some cases renewable energy.
At the same time return on capital is now perhaps less of a topic than asset management and then in comes sustainability and decommissioning (with environmental impact), and then rig reduction as subsea operations take over.
All of the above have an impact on jobs and skill sets required and are changing perhaps faster than the average education life-cycle. It is only those people/businesses/countries that can adapt quickly will survive at their present economic level. That is why a lot of western Europe (and their political parties) is unprepared for the economic shocks ahead.
I agree and you have put it better than me.
Business are struggling to understand the implications; but at least they are trying.
I'm not sure that any of the political parties have got the vision or the adaptability required to cope with the knock on consequences for businesses, employees, their families, communities and future demands on the public sector.
A gent reversed into my Spitfire in a B&Q carpark/totalled the driver's side door. He was so mortified that he sat and waited for me to return an hour later, as he could see it was in concours condition, and a rare one.
I was still mad, but I really respected him for taking it on the chin rather than running away. I knew every inch of Spitty and the grazed knuckles to prove it.
I can't remember the last time I saw one on the road. Mine was built in 1979.
@Plato Years ago the door lock broke on my car. I put a card on the dash saying "The sound system is lousy, and my taste in music, even worse (P.S. the door doesn"t lock)" It never got touched.
@Innocent_Abroad Housing is no longer seen as a necessity, it has become a banked currency in Britain. Building an insufficient amount of housing is socially bad, but it keeps the ROI for those that can afford to buy into the market high.
Utter garbage. High prices help no one and make it very difficult to invest; running yields are low and there is real uncertainty about the prospect of capital value accretion. Consequently ROIs are terrible in the business unless you can unlock assets of market or change the state of the property.
Speedy/TUD Lord Bell on Cameron '‘He’s a pygmy! I’ve never heard him say anything that sounded like a conviction. EVER.
‘I’ve heard him mouth platitudes. I’ve heard him say things like “the vulnerable” — which is one of the most meaningless phrases ever used. But I don’t think he really believes in anything. All those who fundamentally changed the world had convictions. Real convictions. They did it for the good of the state. They did it despite the fact their actions weren’t popular.
‘He has an over-weaning obsession with popularity and trivialisation — who cares what music he listens to or what biscuits he likes? And all that “chillaxing” — oh please!’'
Most interesting part from Lord Bell's interview: ‘I do loads of general elections around the world and at the moment I’m working with a Ukrainian oligarch.’
I think the credit for the expression belongs to to Simon Heffer, but Cameron is a shallow "PR Spiv". I really wouldn't piss in his ear if his brain was on fire. His saviour has been that Labour went for an even bigger berk.
Had Labour been able to elect a real leader they would be miles ahead by now an have the next election in the bag. Unfortunately for them, the odious Brown had cleared out anyone who might have been a threat to him, but of benefit to the country. I really am not sure what evil the UK committed that leaves us with Miliband and Cameron as the top politicians. Neither of them could lead a squad of ducklings across a fire bucket, let alone a nation.
This should ensure plenty of L/D/Lab, and vice-versa,switching to keep out the Tories who want to take our human rights away as well as rip us all off for our money.The nasty party is back-if it ever went away.
Shocking, but how many other towns has this happened in?
That's the question that's not going away. Where is the PM on this?
Probably at a gay wedding.
I'm not joking. When the Savile scandal exploded, the minister responsible for the BBC, Maria Miller, gave a speech at the Tory party conference. Her subject? Same sex marriage.
Now, although I'm biased in this, I'm sure I'm not the only one to regard this a rather skewed set of priorities.
You must have been watching a different speech to the rest of us
Maybe it is the beautiful autumn sunshine (always my favourite light of the year) or the fact it is my birthday but I am getting a little more optimistic for the Tories at the next election. Labour are undoubtedly in a very strong position and with a half decent leader, let alone a Blair, they would be home and hosed. But they don't have one, they have Ed.
I rate Cameron far more highly than most on these threads but even if I were wrong about that he is indisputably a different and better class of campaigner than Ed. When I looked at the Labour Conference I did not see wise caution, I saw a party paralysed under a leader that makes Gordon Brown look decisive, who is terrified of sharing the limelight with his team (700 words for the shadow cabinet ) and who cannot decide on anything other than the wonders of the NHS and how much he hates the Tories.
It is not enough and it has given the Tories a chance to once again set the agenda and the nature of the discussion over the next few months.
Thanks Plato. Good to see you posting more regularly again. Hopefully some of the other missing posters will return as the election approaches.
I watched a good/odd film the other day: "Premonition"
Hurst Indeed, Miliband has even worse ratings than Cameron. However, I am less critical of Cameron, apart from maybe Boris no other Tory would be doing any better
Comments
Once again our country has so far avoided that but only at the cost of heaping endless debt on the young for their education and to be paid for throughout their working lives. It may be good politics but it is deeply immoral and the fripperies paid to well off pensioners frankly turn my stomach when I see the disabled challenged at every turn. It is one area where I would be quite critical of government policy although I understand the politics of it.
If I applied the psychology angle to that of Mood/Mastery/Positivity the same things pop up.
Do voters feel good about things in general, do they believe the PM is capable and how optimistic do they feel about stuff in general...
Financier said:Often government's abilities are judged on three things: capacity, corporate governance and capability & competence. The first two are (or should be) mainly the area of the civil service but the last is definitely in the area of the ruling political party (though some are open to bribes of all types).
To date a 2015 Labour has shown very little capability to govern from that date and the deal effectively with the home and overseas problems that beset the UK and its people. Certainly EdM has shown only the capability of fratricide and seems to be way out of touch with the rest - or does not want to acknowledge what is happening.
His team's thinking appears to be late of the 1900s, instead of looking at what is required for the 2020s. This can only be a disaster for the UK and lead to a continuing decline in its economic heath. It is the same way that EdM let Energy meander when he was in charge, instead of pursuing a defined and forward looking policy and actions. EdM may not be a leopard, but his skin colour and instincts have not and will not change.
It requires a fair degree of careful perception to undertake a good gap analysis, it takes even more perception and forward thinking to set down an action plan to fill those gaps - qualities that are evidently missing from EdM and most of his team (except a junior few), and class warfare and politics of envy are not the answer for the future.
Other than that, if you are on either sort of JSA you have to be in the country - if you go abroad on holiday you have to close your claima nd open a new one on your return.
But there are some strange anomalies, a UK resident can apparently claim Child Benefit for children who live abroad. Which seems bizarre to me.
I know it may seem like "the tail wagging the dog" but I think we need to thoroughly review the way in which you qualify for benefits in the circumstances we now find ourselves in. A long qualification period would be easiest - say 10 years' residence - which could be shortened for people who come here as children.
Although it didn't apply as such to either Hague or IDS, Labour's massive majorities meant that Blair was guaranteed a minimum of four years and then the luxury of choosing his date. General election concerns were minimal in the first half of both parliaments and yet both leaders came under massive scrutiny, to the extent that one was deposed and the other might well have been had there been a viable alternative who wanted the gig.
When the media feel inclined to have a go at a politician, they'll do so. Whether there's an election in the offing is to a large extent beside the point. It's good sport and good for sales.
The other side is that the May 2015 date is not quite as fixed as it seems. Indeed, it's not impossible that we might have an Autumn election this year (a thread I may write next week depending on what else interesting happens in between).
I've loads to catch up on and not enough disc space to cope. Something's going to get deleted...
The contributory principle in many working age, national insurance benefits requires two years adequate contribution to qualify.
I often wonder why they just don't abolish Child Benefit and use the cash to slash income tax most profoundly at the bottom end. £11.4 billion to play with.
"The UK currently spends around £30 billion a year on tax credits. According to the government's Migration Advisory Committee, £5 billion of that is paid to foreign nationals.
...a single man with no children earning the minimum wage has his pay of £184 a week raised to £254 by tax credits and housing benefits. If he has a wife and two children, this is boosted to £543, so that welfare payments make up 66 per cent of his £28,241 annual income."
http://conservativewoman.co.uk/jill-kirby-pro-immigrant-lobby-dont-say-two-thirds-income-minimum-wage-family-handouts/
The problem with leaving it unlocked is that it can invalidate your insurance if the car gets stolen.
Not a problem in that particular case, the insurance was far more than the price of the car, and it was "third party" only.
I haven't forgotten the huge rumpus from Unite when Mr Balls tried to even talk about a smidgeon of austerity. He immediately shut up and that was it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Premonition_(2007_film)
Raise the stamp duty for all purchases over £2m would be better IMO
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/janetdaley/100141699/ken-clarke-is-wrong-on-child-benefit-cut-no-surprise-there/
Down the road from me was a Referendum Party/UKIP man - he painted his house that faced the A22 purple and yellow and his car was festooned with stickers/had a light up taxi-style roof light.
I think he was responsible for about 99% of all UKIP activities. Then he died and it vanished. His personal passion gave an entirely different impression to genuine local sentiment locally back then.
We now have a UKIP local councilor - something beyond his wildest dreams a decade ago. Funny ole world.
@MPritchardMP
Which Tory MP are UKIP going to unveil for the cameras in next 72hrs? Ladbrokes have me as 2nd favourite - but I wouldn't bet on it - or any
I saw that and thought of posting it, then remembered the nitpicking arguments we get about it all day and thought better of it
I vote Kipper in the Euros just to be awkward.
There is constant change and the speed of change is accelerating. This is shown in the business world where Allibaba has been the biggest listing in the US, but did not exist in 2000.
The internet, knowledge flow, social media are all aspects of this.
As an open free market economy the UK is at the forefront of this.
This means changes in jobs, careers and lifestyle.
But change bring uncertainty, fear of not being able to cope, keeping up, the unknown.
How do the parties address this issue?
UKIP is tending to focus its attention on those elements of the public who are fearful of change and want it to stop. Hence a tendency towards protectionism.
Labour is focused on its past glories, the NHS which they want to preserve in aspic.
The coalition parties do seem to be adapting to change, but are they addressing the fears, concerns of the populus at large, or only those capable of enjoying change?
A** - 50% - below 70k
A* - 60% - 70k to 85k
A - 70% - 85k to 105k
B - 80% - 105k to 130k
C - 90% - 130k to 160k
D - 100% - 160k to 200k
E - 120% - 200k to 250k
F - 140% - 250k to 325k
G - 160% - 325k to 410k
H - 190% - 410k to 500k
I - 220% - 500k to 600k
J - 250% - 600k to 750k
K - 300% - 750k to 1m
L - 400% - 1m to 2m
M - 500% - 2m+
I'll stick to Game of Thrones for my fantasy.
However, a potential Autumn election could be related to Scotland, namely via EV4EL. If Labour and the Lib Dems combine to vote it down, why shouldn't Cameron resign his government and seek a mandate from the people? The FTPA would require a couple of weeks wait to see if an alternative government could be formed but I really don't see how one could be as the numbers are practically the same now as in 2010 and Labour could only hold office with Clegg's active support.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Thaddeus-White/e/B008C6RU98/
*for newcomers, this is my pen name.
The power of 'big media' (newspapers and broadcasters) has relatively declined, and the rise of social media allows so-called citizen journalists (private bloggers) to reach large audiences.
It may make it easier for smaller parties to become established and grow, as they can have their own bloggers much more easily than they could persuade newspapers to back them (even the Lib Dems only had a paper or two on-side in 2010).
The universal principle of Child Benefit has now been abandoned, and it's relevance has diminished over the years due to the growth in means tested incomes, so it is just a different form of Child Tax Credit.
Merge what's left of Child Benefit with Child Tax Credit, whilst simultaneously taking a very large axe to tax on the wages earned by the less well off.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-29390774
Desired date is 9 November. Seems Madrid will try and stop it. Could get rather messy.
The Cabinet is united over Iraq.
The Cabinet are divided over Europe.
But now, like you, I think he has nothing to say on it.I hope not.
Canada is on the other side of the Atlantic.
(and they have not ratified it yet and Juncker has indicated it could be put to a vote in each EU country.)
The EEA is a good model for the UK. But as we look at Norway there is not much difference.
There will be increasing free movement between Canada and the EU in future.
''The Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement, CETA, goes far beyond the North American Free Trade Agreement and is designed to eliminate thousands of tariffs, encourage foreign investment and promote movement of labour. ''
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/eu-harper/article14924915/
Its a big trade and economic deal and covers a vast range and some of it is controversial. The Germans (the SDP part of its grand coalition) do not like parts of it. Idiots like Farage and his acolytes in UKIP underestimate (ie lie about) what 'free trade' is in reality.
''European companies will also be able to bid on large provincial and municipal government contracts. Canadian companies and farmers will gain open access to the EU''.
It's not like this is a minor one off incident. This is thousands of children physically, psychologically and spiritually tortured by adult men in our own cities. It's hard to think of a bigger issue affecting our nation, but what has Cameron done about it? Nothing.
I'm not joking. When the Savile scandal exploded, the minister responsible for the BBC, Maria Miller, gave a speech at the Tory party conference. Her subject? Same sex marriage.
Now, although I'm biased in this, I'm sure I'm not the only one to regard this a rather skewed set of priorities.
Edited to add: as an analogy, I would probably agree that "Labour are ahead" is just about OK, as "Labour" is a sort of vague amorphous noun, not really singular or plural. A bit like saying "Arsenal are ahead" but you would certainly say "Arsenal Football Club was profitable last year", singular. So "The Labour Party is ahead" is preferable.
It's simply not good enough.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-29390774
Catalans pushing for a referendum.
The rate of change is quite alarming and make it very difficult to be at the cutting edge of one's technology/business.
For example, if we look at the oil and gas majors, at one time they were in operation from exploration to the petrol pump. Now many of them, having changed their business model and are looking at each part of their operations as a profit centre in its own right, have got out of many of their downstream operations (retail, refining etc) and focus on exploration and production and in some cases renewable energy.
At the same time return on capital is now perhaps less of a topic than asset management and then in comes sustainability and decommissioning (with environmental impact), and then rig reduction as subsea operations take over.
All of the above have an impact on jobs and skill sets required and are changing perhaps faster than the average education life-cycle. It is only those people/businesses/countries that can adapt quickly will survive at their present economic level. That is why a lot of western Europe (and their political parties) is unprepared for the economic shocks ahead.
It’s the sort of thing which sticks in the memory. For most of us, anyway.
But Boris is ' a very interesting politician and a proper Conservative. He openly admits his weaknesses and flaws. He’s an exciting person. He has charisma. He bothers with himself — the way he gets across to people.’
Also, how Cameron lacks even Blair's charisma, Charles Saatchi and Princess Diana and how wearing jeans did not work for Margaret Thatcher http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2771551/Todays-politicians-pygmies-says-man-moulded-Iron-Lady-Hes-spin-doctor-Maggies-close-confidant-Now-launch-memoirs-Lord-Bell-gives-verdict-todays-leaders.html
If the catalans want to have a chance to win, they should arm militias pretty quickly.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29376266
Farage may be point scoring, but Rotherham MBC has been dominated by Labour, so it is open to attack over its behaviour and management of vulnerable children. If the other parties remain silent on this, their silence allows UKIP to make noises, but is it a case of incompetence, maladministration, corruption or not?
Did any major figure from Labour say anything about those cases last week?
Is there such a thing as a coke flashback?
28 suspects is barely scraping the surface of this. One girl in Rotherham gave a list of 250 men that raped her to the police - and those were just the ones she knows the names of. And this has happened in dozens of towns. With this left to the local police forces, it's entirely dependent on those local police forces - the same ones which have failed in their jobs to date - being willing to re-open pandora's box in a way that might show up their previous failures. Some will have good coppers in charge that do that, others will want to avoid it. A national co-ordinated effort led by someone who is trusted and coming from the outside is the only way we can properly appreciate the scale of this. HMG must know this, but the PM and the relevant ministers are now repeating the original failures of the local police and council authorities. It makes me want to tear my hair out.
http://blogs.independent.co.uk/2014/09/27/poll-alert-47/
And Peter Brookes deserves an MBE for Wallace & Gromit re EdM. Those have been a great public service. http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/politics/article4218985.ece
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/09/26/us-hongkong-china-idUSKCN0HL1T820140926
‘I’ve heard him mouth platitudes. I’ve heard him say things like “the vulnerable” — which is one of the most meaningless phrases ever used. But I don’t think he really believes in anything. All those who fundamentally changed the world had convictions. Real convictions. They did it for the good of the state. They did it despite the fact their actions weren’t popular.
‘He has an over-weaning obsession with popularity and trivialisation — who cares what music he listens to or what biscuits he likes? And all that “chillaxing” — oh please!’'
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2771551/Todays-politicians-pygmies-says-man-moulded-Iron-Lady-Hes-spin-doctor-Maggies-close-confidant-Now-launch-memoirs-Lord-Bell-gives-verdict-todays-leaders.html#ixzz3EW5n9Jhq
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
Politicians used to be giants with a huge grasp of affairs and who made momentous decisions. I don’t think Cameron has ever had a strong view on anything. He blows in the wind. He wants to see everyone’s point of view and then find a settlement.
‘Mrs T had a set of principles she judged everything by — is that going to make the State more successful, or less? She had an iron grip on the affairs of the State and worked incredibly hard.’
Bell was certainly loyal to the cause — all those Christmases at Chequers were not for the faint-hearted.
‘Jolly is not the word I’d use. They were testing. There were no presents. And no, Jimmy Savile was never, ever there. I know he said he was, but people make up all kinds of things.’
Traditional Christmas lunch was followed by a walk round the grounds — accompanied by the sound of sirens as Denis accidentally tripped the security lights — and back sharp for the Queen’s speech.
‘Absolute silence was required. We all stood up. Nobody was allowed to comment apart from Her Greatness, who’d say, “Why don’t they ever light me like that when they make broadcasts?”’
Despite all the time they spent together, Bell remained in awe.
‘She was an incredible, powerful, political person. I never met her without getting a slight frisson beforehand — “Oh God, I hope I don’t waste her time”.
‘I’ve met David Cameron many times and I’ve never got a frisson. They’re chalk and cheese. One’s a giant, one’s a pygmy.
‘He has no charisma. Even Blair has charisma — though he wears make-up most of the time and we don’t agree about very much.’
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2771551/Todays-politicians-pygmies-says-man-moulded-Iron-Lady-Hes-spin-doctor-Maggies-close-confidant-Now-launch-memoirs-Lord-Bell-gives-verdict-todays-leaders.html#ixzz3EW6DPXvu
"Over 100 pro-democracy students stormed Hong Kong government headquarters and scuffled with police late on Friday in protest against the Chinese government's tightening grip on the former British colony"
Business are struggling to understand the implications; but at least they are trying.
I'm not sure that any of the political parties have got the vision or the adaptability required to cope with the knock on consequences for businesses, employees, their families, communities and future demands on the public sector.
A gent reversed into my Spitfire in a B&Q carpark/totalled the driver's side door. He was so mortified that he sat and waited for me to return an hour later, as he could see it was in concours condition, and a rare one.
I was still mad, but I really respected him for taking it on the chin rather than running away. I knew every inch of Spitty and the grazed knuckles to prove it.
I can't remember the last time I saw one on the road. Mine was built in 1979.
‘I do loads of general elections around the world and at the moment I’m working with a Ukrainian oligarch.’
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2771551/Todays-politicians-pygmies-says-man-moulded-Iron-Lady-Hes-spin-doctor-Maggies-close-confidant-Now-launch-memoirs-Lord-Bell-gives-verdict-todays-leaders.html#ixzz3EW98HLNA
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
I think the credit for the expression belongs to to Simon Heffer, but Cameron is a shallow "PR Spiv". I really wouldn't piss in his ear if his brain was on fire. His saviour has been that Labour went for an even bigger berk.
Had Labour been able to elect a real leader they would be miles ahead by now an have the next election in the bag. Unfortunately for them, the odious Brown had cleared out anyone who might have been a threat to him, but of benefit to the country. I really am not sure what evil the UK committed that leaves us with Miliband and Cameron as the top politicians. Neither of them could lead a squad of ducklings across a fire bucket, let alone a nation.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/sep/27/britain-not-fear-eu-exit-culture-secretary-sajid-javid
Here is her speech in full
One reference to gay marriage.
http://www.politics.co.uk/comment-analysis/2012/10/10/maria-miller-speech-in-full
To say her speech was about same sex marriage is causing epistemological problems.
As there were police investigations just beginning, it was probably wise for her not to say anything about Savile.
I'm watching Night Of The Demon this evening. 1957, but a super horror/film noire flick full of homos=communists overtones. The flying Alsatian as a SFX demon is hilarious. piratebayguru.com/torrent/9828591/Night_of_the_Demon_1957_BrRip_Mp4_Lee1001