I might take the headline a bit more seriusly if the tories realised or acted upon how much the other parties hate them. Personally I have nothing but contempt for people who want to give us a Miliband govt.
1/ It is internationally acceptable to have a Labour government but it would an appalling international embarrassment to have a UKIP one
Having Millipede as PM would make us a laughing stock.
UKIP in government would just demonstrate that they're a pretty run of the mill conservative party, and not the neo-Nazi ethnic cleansers of Cameroon imagination.
I am not a Cameron hater, I think he comes across as quite a nice Guy.. and I have never and probably will never vote Conservative anyway, so Im no traitor for being a kipper.
I am also not that pro or anti Royal.
But that is pretty bad I think... twice in a week or two he has been caught now and this is much worse than the first
It's absurd social neediness on Cameron's part. Everyone knows he's the PM, but it's almost as though he feels insecure about it, so he has to tell these little anecdotes to prove that it's all real.
I do agree with you on not hating Cameron, though. He certainly lacks the malevolence vibe that I feel emanating from Balls or IDS. He's just not up to the job. He's the political leader who looks likely to end up as unable to win a majority against Gordon Brown, and ejected from office by David Miliband's younger brother.
David Cameron thinks he was born to rule, and the Tory Party generally oozes an arrogant sense of entitlement.
Instead of getting angry they should reflect on their many mistakes, not least shifting Right in a Lynton Crosby inspired attempt to out-Kip the Kippers.
When the Tories are booted out they should use the opportunity to modernise, move on from the outdated fringe Rightwing Thatcherism they're still hooked on, become a centrist one-nation Party again.
Otherwise they may never win an election again outright in any of our lifetimes. It's going to be at least 28 years since their last as it is. Does that not ring alarm bells for them?
Oh do shut up, Hugh.
Lefties like you are always mired in a slobbering nostalgia for some imagined Tory Party of yesteryear that wasn't all nasty and right wing. The type led by Heath, for example, that you could actually beat in elections without the gerrymandered boundaries.
You know perfectly well we now need four Conservative terms. Without the Tories in for that long there'll be no national prosperity for you deadbeat public sector to55ers to piss away and squander. How will you f>ck the economy if it's as skint as you left it?
So sod off back to the public sector and let the Tories finish fixing the economy you pr1cks wrecked, there's a good Student Gwant.
Hugh is probably a doctor, irritated about being asked to change decades old working practices, and interact with tax paying patients (aka customers) on the odd weekend, rather than play golf.
In 2004 GPs said to government negotiators that the cost of providing out of hours access would be more than £7 000 per GP. The government said that it could do it cheaper and better for less, then got their comeuppance when they found that they could match neither quality or price.
It is already hard to recruit to General Practice. It will be harder still soon if this attitude continues.
May is an authoritarian who tramples on British liberties and hands over powers to Brussels. Not much British about her values at all.
That's odd, I have been expecting you to come here and lavishly praise her speech:
To live in a modern liberal state is not to live in a moral vacuum. We have to stand up for our values as a nation. There will, I know, be some who say that what I describe as extremism is merely social conservatism. But if others described a woman’s intellect as “deficient”, denounced people on the basis of their religious beliefs, or rejected the democratic process, we would quite rightly condemn their bigotry. And there will be others who say I am wrong to link these kinds of beliefs with the violent extremism we agree we must confront. To them I say, yes, not all extremism leads to violence. And not all extremists are violent. But the damage extremists cause to our society is reason enough to act. And there is, undoubtedly, a thread that binds the kind of extremism that promotes intolerance, hatred and a sense of superiority over others to the actions of those who want to impose their values on us through violence.
That reads exactly like one of your better posts.
Indeed: it is good that someone in the government finally realises that extremism can, even if it does not lead to violence, do damage to a society.
The issue I think, Richard, is how to deal with those extremist views i.e. are criminal laws the answer as opposed to a vigorous intellectual challenge to extremism e.g. by ensuring that, for instance, such extremists do not get a toehold in our schools.
I am not a Cameron hater, I think he comes across as quite a nice Guy.. and I have never and probably will never vote Conservative anyway, so Im no traitor for being a kipper.
I am also not that pro or anti Royal.
But that is pretty bad I think... twice in a week or two he has been caught now and this is much worse than the first
I'm not a Cameron-hater either, Isam.
I once had high hopes of him, thinking that he could take the Tories back to the centre ground. I've been disappointed, but I don't think he's a bad man, or a bad Prime Minister, and he is certainly not stupid. The impression has grown on me is that he basically a very good PR man, but not a deep political thinker. He seems to be lacking in strategic vision and depth.
When he has a clear path to follow and is sure of his ground, he is very good and perfectly sound in a crisis. The problem is that his Party and his country needs a bit of strategic vision and direction. He tends to carry on as if warm words can solve everything, which is a fairly characteristic outlook for a PR man, which he once was.
The faux pas with the Queen are not, in the greater scheme of things, particularly important. At worst they betray a lack of care and a certain superficiality. Any harm done to the Queen's position will mend quickly.
But he should be more careful, as a good PR man would appreciate.
I am not a Cameron hater, I think he comes across as quite a nice Guy.. and I have never and probably will never vote Conservative anyway, so Im no traitor for being a kipper.
I am also not that pro or anti Royal.
But that is pretty bad I think... twice in a week or two he has been caught now and this is much worse than the first
Actually the more I ponder it, it is awful
Ungentlemanly, a real faux paus
If Farage had done it, the part of me that thinks UKIP might not be able to cut it when it comes to the big time would be reinforced, and I would be embarrassed for him, proper cringe
The Blairs got a bit jiggy in HM's guest bed, and blabbed about it in a biography. That's the benchmark for embarrassing.
"In my opinion they are unsalvageable, some people would support Tory policies but not if its proposed or supported by Tories, just because they are Tories."
"There's tonnes of research done, that suggests that is precisely the case."
From a marketing point of view their best bet was to change their name. It's been obvious since at least '97 and probably long before when an already whiffy brand was irrecoverably trashed by Thatcher. It was always odd that someone as media savvy as Hilton and Cameron thought they could re brand while keeping the albatross of the name Tory round their necks
David Cameron thinks he was born to rule, and the Tory Party generally oozes an arrogant sense of entitlement.
Instead of getting angry they should reflect on their many mistakes, not least shifting Right in a Lynton Crosby inspired attempt to out-Kip the Kippers.
When the Tories are booted out they should use the opportunity to modernise, move on from the outdated fringe Rightwing Thatcherism they're still hooked on, become a centrist one-nation Party again.
Otherwise they may never win an election again outright in any of our lifetimes. It's going to be at least 28 years since their last as it is. Does that not ring alarm bells for them?
Oh do shut up, Hugh.
Lefties like you are always mired in a slobbering nostalgia for some imagined Tory Party of yesteryear that wasn't all nasty and right wing. The type led by Heath, for example, that you could actually beat in elections without the gerrymandered boundaries.
You know perfectly well we now need four Conservative terms. Without the Tories in for that long there'll be no national prosperity for you deadbeat public sector to55ers to piss away and squander. How will you f>ck the economy if it's as skint as you left it?
So sod off back to the public sector and let the Tories finish fixing the economy you pr1cks wrecked, there's a good Student Gwant.
Hugh is probably a doctor, irritated about being asked to change decades old working practices, and interact with tax paying patients (aka customers) on the odd weekend, rather than play golf.
In 2004 GPs said to government negotiators that the cost of providing out of hours access would be more than £7 000 per GP. The government said that it could do it cheaper and better for less, then got their comeuppance when they found that they could match neither quality or price.
It is already hard to recruit to General Practice. It will be harder still soon if this attitude continues.
Given the salary for GPs is seemingly between £80k and £160k, it is hard to imagine why more doctors are not keen to go down that career path.
I think winning in '92 has turned out to be one huge headache for the Tories. Like Labour in 2010 losing would've been a blessing in disguise. 92-97 cemented a lot of public opinion against them which they still haven't recovered from.
On the other side of the equation, the Major government cemented a lot of things that might otherwise not have happened - rail privatisation, Maastricht opt-outs (particularly on the Euro) - and it also ideologically neutered the Labour party so that it pretty much gave up on offering a distinct alternative - Tory defeat in 1992 means New Labour and Blair don't happen, Labour retains clause 4.
The centre of political gravity in the UK would likely be much further to the left if Kinnock had been PM in the 1990s.
Rail privatisation was rushed and disjointed. Maastricht opened the Europe wound wide open for the Tories which hasn't healed since.
Add to that Hesletine's pit closure debacle in '92, Cash for questions, Major resigning and fighting Redwood....Hardly a shining 5 years of government.
I'm not saying Major's government was a good one, far from it, just that the fact of its existence and the policies he implemented, acted to move the centre of political gravity of the country further to the right.
Objectively this is in the interests of Conservatives and it meant that the Thatcherite consensus was never challenged by Blair or Brown.
It's always better to be in government than not.
Actually agree on your point on 'centre of political gravity'. But in terms of the Tories own fortunes they haven't won outright since, that's my overall point.
Indeed: it is good that someone in the government finally realises that extremism can, even if it does not lead to violence, do damage to a society.
The issue I think, Richard, is how to deal with those extremist views i.e. are criminal laws the answer as opposed to a vigorous intellectual challenge to extremism e.g. by ensuring that, for instance, such extremists do not get a toehold in our schools.
Yes, I don't think anyone is claiming that this is easy, or that it can be fixed by changes to the criminal law alone, or that it can be fixed quickly. Obviously there are concerns about the specific proposal she made. Dominic Grieve articulated these well, but I don't think he went so far as to say that nothing should be done along the lines she has proposed.
David Cameron thinks he was born to rule, and the Tory Party generally oozes an arrogant sense of entitlement.
Instead of getting angry they should reflect on their many mistakes, not least shifting Right in a Lynton Crosby inspired attempt to out-Kip the Kippers.
When the Tories are booted out they should use the opportunity to modernise, move on from the outdated fringe Rightwing Thatcherism they're still hooked on, become a centrist one-nation Party again.
Otherwise they may never win an election again outright in any of our lifetimes. It's going to be at least 28 years since their last as it is. Does that not ring alarm bells for them?
Oh do shut up, Hugh.
Lefties like you are always mired in a slobbering nostalgia for some imagined Tory Party of yesteryear that wasn't all nasty and right wing. The type led by Heath, for example, that you could actually beat in elections without the gerrymandered boundaries.
You know perfectly well we now need four Conservative terms. Without the Tories in for that long there'll be no national prosperity for you deadbeat public sector to55ers to piss away and squander. How will you f>ck the economy if it's as skint as you left it?
So sod off back to the public sector and let the Tories finish fixing the economy you pr1cks wrecked, there's a good Student Gwant.
Hugh is probably a doctor, irritated about being asked to change decades old working practices, and interact with tax paying patients (aka customers) on the odd weekend, rather than play golf.
In 2004 GPs said to government negotiators that the cost of providing out of hours access would be more than £7 000 per GP. The government said that it could do it cheaper and better for less, then got their comeuppance when they found that they could match neither quality or price.
It is already hard to recruit to General Practice. It will be harder still soon if this attitude continues.
Given the salary for GPs is seemingly between £80k and £160k, it is hard to imagine why more doctors are not keen to go down that career path.
There must be thousands of foreign doctors who'd jump at the chance to earn that, and be happy to work the odd weekend. Are the British ones really that greedy and lazy?
Some Tories have at last come to the conclusion that UKIP are an opponent, not just disloyal Tories whom they can mock and disregard to keep people from defecting to them, so it's not much of a surprise that the real anger is finally coming out, especially as it is dawning on them that UKIP (be it from the Tories own weakness or not) have likely cost them what slim chance they had to win in 2015. I'd be bitter as well.
UKIP attracts elderly male people who have had disappointing lives is a great quote from Clarke. Tories attract the retired who are no longer net contributors whilst the majority of people paying the pensions of such folk support neither of the 2 right wing parties!!!
Most pensioners have, of course, earned their pensions during their working lives.
Is that true for State Pensions? Is there any data available on the total payout of the state pension versus the amount of contributions made?
My understanding about state pensions is that current payments should be covered by current contribution and there is a multi million pound fund to smooth over the ups and downs of this. I think new rules at some time in the recent past caused this fund to increase. I'm sure some specialist here will be able to fill all that out.
David Cameron thinks he was born to rule, and the Tory Party generally oozes an arrogant sense of entitlement.
Instead of getting angry they should reflect on their many mistakes, not least shifting Right in a Lynton Crosby inspired attempt to out-Kip the Kippers.
When the Tories are booted out they should use the opportunity to modernise, move on from the outdated fringe Rightwing Thatcherism they're still hooked on, become a centrist one-nation Party again.
Otherwise they may never win an election again outright in any of our lifetimes. It's going to be at least 28 years since their last as it is. Does that not ring alarm bells for them?
Oh do shut up, Hugh.
Lefties like you are always mired in a slobbering nostalgia for some imagined Tory Party of yesteryear that wasn't all nasty and right wing. The type led by Heath, for example, that you could actually beat in elections without the gerrymandered boundaries.
You know perfectly well we now need four Conservative terms. Without the Tories in for that long there'll be no national prosperity for you deadbeat public sector to55ers to piss away and squander. How will you f>ck the economy if it's as skint as you left it?
So sod off back to the public sector and let the Tories finish fixing the economy you pr1cks wrecked, there's a good Student Gwant.
Hugh is probably a doctor, irritated about being asked to change decades old working practices, and interact with tax paying patients (aka customers) on the odd weekend, rather than play golf.
In 2004 GPs said to government negotiators that the cost of providing out of hours access would be more than £7 000 per GP. The government said that it could do it cheaper and better for less, then got their comeuppance when they found that they could match neither quality or price.
It is already hard to recruit to General Practice. It will be harder still soon if this attitude continues.
Given the salary for GPs is seemingly between £80k and £160k, it is hard to imagine why more doctors are not keen to go down that career path.
They are well paid, but many other aspects of the job outweigh that. GP programmes struggle to recruit. So do some other programmes. Emergency Medicine usually has mutiple empty training places despite not being very fussy, and Psychiatry has 93% overseas trainees taking the exams.
Many Doctors do not find these worthwhile careers to go into.
I am not a Cameron hater, I think he comes across as quite a nice Guy.. and I have never and probably will never vote Conservative anyway, so Im no traitor for being a kipper.
I am also not that pro or anti Royal.
But that is pretty bad I think... twice in a week or two he has been caught now and this is much worse than the first
Actually the more I ponder it, it is awful
Ungentlemanly, a real faux paus
If Farage had done it, the part of me that thinks UKIP might not be able to cut it when it comes to the big time would be reinforced, and I would be embarrassed for him, proper cringe
The Blairs got a bit jiggy in HM's guest bed, and blabbed about it in a biography. That's the benchmark for embarrassing.
That comes under the heading 'too much information' rather than 'minor breach of protocol.'
David Cameron thinks he was born to rule, and the Tory Party generally oozes an arrogant sense of entitlement.
Instead of getting angry they should reflect on their many mistakes, not least shifting Right in a Lynton Crosby inspired attempt to out-Kip the Kippers.
When the Tories are booted out they should use the opportunity to modernise, move on from the outdated fringe Rightwing Thatcherism they're still hooked on, become a centrist one-nation Party again.
Otherwise they may never win an election again outright in any of our lifetimes. It's going to be at least 28 years since their last as it is. Does that not ring alarm bells for them?
Oh do shut up, Hugh.
Lefties like you are always mired in a slobbering nostalgia for some imagined Tory Party of yesteryear that wasn't all nasty and right wing. The type led by Heath, for example, that you could actually beat in elections without the gerrymandered boundaries.
You know perfectly well we now need four Conservative terms. Without the Tories in for that long there'll be no national prosperity for you deadbeat public sector to55ers to piss away and squander. How will you f>ck the economy if it's as skint as you left it?
So sod off back to the public sector and let the Tories finish fixing the economy you pr1cks wrecked, there's a good Student Gwant.
Hugh is probably a doctor, irritated about being asked to change decades old working practices, and interact with tax paying patients (aka customers) on the odd weekend, rather than play golf.
In 2004 GPs said to government negotiators that the cost of providing out of hours access would be more than £7 000 per GP. The government said that it could do it cheaper and better for less, then got their comeuppance when they found that they could match neither quality or price.
It is already hard to recruit to General Practice. It will be harder still soon if this attitude continues.
Given the salary for GPs is seemingly between £80k and £160k, it is hard to imagine why more doctors are not keen to go down that career path.
There must be thousands of foreign doctors who'd jump at the chance to earn that, and be happy to work the odd weekend. Are the British ones really that greedy and lazy?
GP's remind me of Tube Drivers.
Therin lies UKIPs dilemma. Many immigrants do jobs that Britons do not want to do.
If the immigrants are forbidden, and the jobs not made more attractive then employers will struggle to staff unpopular jobs.
David Cameron thinks he was born to rule, and the Tory Party generally oozes an arrogant sense of entitlement.
going to be at least 28 years since their last as it is. Does that not ring alarm bells for them?
Hugh is probably a doctor, irritated about being asked to change decades old working practices, and interact with tax paying patients (aka customers) on the odd weekend, rather than play golf.
In 2004 GPs said to government negotiators that the cost of providing out of hours access would be more than £7 000 per GP. The government said that it could do it cheaper and better for less, then got their comeuppance when they found that they could match neither quality or price.
It is already hard to recruit to General Practice. It will be harder still soon if this attitude continues.
Given the salary for GPs is seemingly between £80k and £160k, it is hard to imagine why more doctors are not keen to go down that career path.
There must be thousands of foreign doctors who'd jump at the chance to earn that, and be happy to work the odd weekend. Are the British ones really that greedy and lazy?
Spoke to my Mum about this today.. she works part time in Boots now (having left Tower Hamlets Council a few years back), so speaks with pharmacist etc
Many qualified foreign doctors are itching for work but denied as they aren't qualified here,, that surely has to be the route to take?
I wouldn't think that the British doctors are lazy, but they are stretched already.. if you don't expect them to do a 7 day week, where are you going to magic these other doctors from?
I cant believe people were comparing it with staffing Tesco earlier, has there ever been a less comparable job?
Indeed: it is good that someone in the government finally realises that extremism can, even if it does not lead to violence, do damage to a society.
The issue I think, Richard, is how to deal with those extremist views i.e. are criminal laws the answer as opposed to a vigorous intellectual challenge to extremism e.g. by ensuring that, for instance, such extremists do not get a toehold in our schools.
Yes, I don't think anyone is claiming that this is easy, or that it can be fixed by changes to the criminal law alone, or that it can be fixed quickly. Obviously there are concerns about the specific proposal she made. Dominic Grieve articulated these well, but I don't think he went so far as to say that nothing should be done along the lines she has proposed.
I agree this is not easy but in my opinion Dominic Grieve has shown consistently better judgment of the balance to be struck than May or, ultimately, Cameron. He is a sad loss to this government.
Indeed: it is good that someone in the government finally realises that extremism can, even if it does not lead to violence, do damage to a society.
The issue I think, Richard, is how to deal with those extremist views i.e. are criminal laws the answer as opposed to a vigorous intellectual challenge to extremism e.g. by ensuring that, for instance, such extremists do not get a toehold in our schools.
Yes, I don't think anyone is claiming that this is easy, or that it can be fixed by changes to the criminal law alone, or that it can be fixed quickly. Obviously there are concerns about the specific proposal she made. Dominic Grieve articulated these well, but I don't think he went so far as to say that nothing should be done along the lines she has proposed.
I agree this is not easy but in my opinion Dominic Grieve has shown consistently better judgment of the balance to be struck than May or, ultimately, Cameron. He is a sad loss to this government.
Seconded. He sees beyond the soundbite and quick fix to the longer term consequences....
I am not a Cameron hater, I think he comes across as quite a nice Guy.. and I have never and probably will never vote Conservative anyway, so Im no traitor for being a kipper.
I am also not that pro or anti Royal.
But that is pretty bad I think... twice in a week or two he has been caught now and this is much worse than the first
Actually the more I ponder it, it is awful
Ungentlemanly, a real faux paus
If Farage had done it, the part of me that thinks UKIP might not be able to cut it when it comes to the big time would be reinforced, and I would be embarrassed for him, proper cringe
The Blairs got a bit jiggy in HM's guest bed, and blabbed about it in a biography. That's the benchmark for embarrassing.
In my book this is worse.
I really think this could be a massive story... I m quite shocked by it and I am not a royalist or a republican.. why would you be so uncouth? He is literally ripping the piss out of the Queen!
He either gets on with her so fantastically that its no big deal or it is quite serious
I am not a Cameron hater, I think he comes across as quite a nice Guy.. and I have never and probably will never vote Conservative anyway, so Im no traitor for being a kipper.
I am also not that pro or anti Royal.
But that is pretty bad I think... twice in a week or two he has been caught now and this is much worse than the first
Actually the more I ponder it, it is awful
Ungentlemanly, a real faux paus
If Farage had done it, the part of me that thinks UKIP might not be able to cut it when it comes to the big time would be reinforced, and I would be embarrassed for him, proper cringe
The Blairs got a bit jiggy in HM's guest bed, and blabbed about it in a biography. That's the benchmark for embarrassing.
That comes under the heading 'too much information' rather than 'minor breach of protocol.'
Ha ha - surely the beckham convention states the kid should have been called Buckingham.
David Cameron thinks he was born to rule, and the Tory Party generally oozes an arrogant sense of entitlement.
going to be at least 28 years since their last as it is. Does that not ring alarm bells for them?
Hugh is probably a doctor, irritated about being asked to change decades old working practices, and interact with tax paying patients (aka customers) on the odd weekend, rather than play golf.
In 2004 GPs said to government negotiators that the cost of providing out of hours access would be more than £7 000 per GP. The government said that it could do it cheaper and better for less, then got their comeuppance when they found that they could match neither quality or price.
It is already hard to recruit to General Practice. It will be harder still soon if this attitude continues.
Given the salary for GPs is seemingly between £80k and £160k, it is hard to imagine why more doctors are not keen to go down that career path.
There must be thousands of foreign doctors who'd jump at the chance to earn that, and be happy to work the odd weekend. Are the British ones really that greedy and lazy?
Spoke to my Mum about this today.. she works part time in Boots now (having left Tower Hamlets Council a few years back), so speaks with pharmacist etc
Many qualified foreign doctors are itching for work but denied as they aren't qualified here,, that surely has to be the route to take?
I wouldn't think that the British doctors are lazy, but they are stretched already.. if you don't expect them to do a 7 day week, where are you going to magic these other doctors from?
I cant believe people were comparing it with staffing Tesco earlier, has there ever been a less comparable job?
EU qualifications are automatically recognised. Non EU Doctors have to pass the PLAB test of medical and language skills.
It is possible for a Doctor to get a permanent visa if a job is advertised for 4 weeks and no appointable candidate from the EU applies. I recruit this way fairly regularly.
David Cameron thinks he was born to rule, and the Tory Party generally oozes an arrogant sense of entitlement.
going to be at least 28 years since their last as it is. Does that not ring alarm bells for them?
Hugh is probably a doctor, irritated about being asked to change decades old working practices, and interact with tax paying patients (aka customers) on the odd weekend, rather than play golf.
In 2004 GPs said to government negotiators that the cost of providing out of hours access would be more than £7 000 per GP. The government said that it could do it cheaper and better for less, then got their comeuppance when they found that they could match neither quality or price.
It is already hard to recruit to General Practice. It will be harder still soon if this attitude continues.
Given the salary for GPs is seemingly between £80k and £160k, it is hard to imagine why more doctors are not keen to go down that career path.
There must be thousands of foreign doctors who'd jump at the chance to earn that, and be happy to work the odd weekend. Are the British ones really that greedy and lazy?
I wouldn't think that the British doctors are lazy, but they are stretched already.. if you don't expect them to do a 7 day week, where are you going to magic these other doctors from?
They're not being asked to work a 7 day week. The idea would appear to be for some to shift their working patterns so that some work weekend days and take weekdays off.
Easing the pressure on hospital A&E departments on Saturdays and Sundays would be a good idea, no?
David Cameron thinks he was born to rule, and the Tory Party generally oozes an arrogant sense of entitlement.
going to be at least 28 years since their last as it is. Does that not ring alarm bells for them?
Hugh is probably a doctor, irritated about being asked to change decades old working practices, and interact with tax paying patients (aka customers) on the odd weekend, rather than play golf.
In 2004 GPs said to government negotiators that the cost of providing out of hours access would be more than £7 000 per GP. The government said that it could do it cheaper and better for less, then got their comeuppance when they found that they could match neither quality or price.
It is already hard to recruit to General Practice. It will be harder still soon if this attitude continues.
Given the salary for GPs is seemingly between £80k and £160k, it is hard to imagine why more doctors are not keen to go down that career path.
There must be thousands of foreign doctors who'd jump at the chance to earn that, and be happy to work the odd weekend. Are the British ones really that greedy and lazy?
Spoke to my Mum about this today.. she works part time in Boots now (having left Tower Hamlets Council a few years back), so speaks with pharmacist etc
Many qualified foreign doctors are itching for work but denied as they aren't qualified here,, that surely has to be the route to take?
I wouldn't think that the British doctors are lazy, but they are stretched already.. if you don't expect them to do a 7 day week, where are you going to magic these other doctors from?
I cant believe people were comparing it with staffing Tesco earlier, has there ever been a less comparable job?
No-one - other than you (and a few others determined to twist this) has suggested making GPs work a 7 day week.
What is necessary and desirable is that patients have access to primary medical care at a local level at times that suit the needs of the patients.
People fall ill and require treatment 7 days a week. Our hospitals are not the appropriate place for many of them to go to get that treatment - so it must fall to the GPs to provide this necessary care.
It requires them to change their working hours and to be more flexible. It does not require them to work 7 days a week.
It is about living in the modern world.
And you, of course, know this - you just want to oppose it for the sake of opposing it.
I am not a Cameron hater, I think he comes across as quite a nice Guy.. and I have never and probably will never vote Conservative anyway, so Im no traitor for being a kipper.
I am also not that pro or anti Royal.
But that is pretty bad I think... twice in a week or two he has been caught now and this is much worse than the first
Actually the more I ponder it, it is awful
Ungentlemanly, a real faux paus
If Farage had done it, the part of me that thinks UKIP might not be able to cut it when it comes to the big time would be reinforced, and I would be embarrassed for him, proper cringe
The Blairs got a bit jiggy in HM's guest bed, and blabbed about it in a biography. That's the benchmark for embarrassing.
I remember the media coverage when that story first hit - a true mind-bleach moment.
I agree this is not easy but in my opinion Dominic Grieve has shown consistently better judgment of the balance to be struck than May or, ultimately, Cameron. He is a sad loss to this government.
That's a very funny picture, Ricahrd, and it's mentioned in Rawnesley's excellent book 'The End Of The Party'.
It was one of those excruciating social occasions when one finds oneself in a situation where you are obliged by the circumstances to do something you really don't want to and you know will look awful. Rather like when Prince Charles found himself shaking hands with a number of African Heads of State and suddenly found Robert Mugabe thrusting a hand towards him.
I am not a Cameron hater, I think he comes across as quite a nice Guy.. and I have never and probably will never vote Conservative anyway, so Im no traitor for being a kipper.
I am also not that pro or anti Royal.
But that is pretty bad I think... twice in a week or two he has been caught now and this is much worse than the first
Actually the more I ponder it, it is awful
Ungentlemanly, a real faux paus
If Farage had done it, the part of me that thinks UKIP might not be able to cut it when it comes to the big time would be reinforced, and I would be embarrassed for him, proper cringe
The Blairs got a bit jiggy in HM's guest bed, and blabbed about it in a biography. That's the benchmark for embarrassing.
That comes under the heading 'too much information' rather than 'minor breach of protocol.'
Ha ha - surely the beckham convention states the kid should have been called Buckingham.
David Cameron thinks he was born to rule, and the Tory Party generally oozes an arrogant sense of entitlement.
Instead of getting angry they should reflect on their many mistakes, not least shifting Right in a Lynton Crosby inspired attempt to out-Kip the Kippers.
When the Tories are booted out they should use the opportunity to modernise, move on from the outdated fringe Rightwing Thatcherism they're still hooked on, become a centrist one-nation Party again.
Otherwise they may never win an election again outright in any of our lifetimes. It's going to be at least 28 years since their last as it is. Does that not ring alarm bells for them?
Oh do shut up, Hugh.
Lefties like you are always mired in a slobbering nostalgia for some imagined Tory Party of yesteryear that wasn't all nasty and right wing. The type led by Heath, for example, that you could actually beat in elections without the gerrymandered boundaries.
You know perfectly well we now need four Conservative terms. Without the Tories in for that long there'll be no national prosperity for you deadbeat public sector to55ers to piss away and squander. How will you f>ck the economy if it's as skint as you left it?
So sod off back to the public sector and let the Tories finish fixing the economy you pr1cks wrecked, there's a good Student Gwant.
Hugh is probably a doctor, irritated about being asked to change decades old working practices, and interact with tax paying patients (aka customers) on the odd weekend, rather than play golf.
In 2004 GPs said to government negotiators that the cost of providing out of hours access would be more than £7 000 per GP. The government said that it could do it cheaper and better for less, then got their comeuppance when they found that they could match neither quality or price.
It is already hard to recruit to General Practice. It will be harder still soon if this attitude continues.
Given the salary for GPs is seemingly between £80k and £160k, it is hard to imagine why more doctors are not keen to go down that career path.
There must be thousands of foreign doctors who'd jump at the chance to earn that, and be happy to work the odd weekend. Are the British ones really that greedy and lazy?
GP's remind me of Tube Drivers.
Therin lies UKIPs dilemma. Many immigrants do jobs that Britons do not want to do.
If the immigrants are forbidden, and the jobs not made more attractive then employers will struggle to staff unpopular jobs.
I am not a Cameron hater, I think he comes across as quite a nice Guy.. and I have never and probably will never vote Conservative anyway, so Im no traitor for being a kipper.
I am also not that pro or anti Royal.
But that is pretty bad I think... twice in a week or two he has been caught now and this is much worse than the first
Actually the more I ponder it, it is awful
Ungentlemanly, a real faux paus
If Farage had done it, the part of me that thinks UKIP might not be able to cut it when it comes to the big time would be reinforced, and I would be embarrassed for him, proper cringe
The Blairs got a bit jiggy in HM's guest bed, and blabbed about it in a biography. That's the benchmark for embarrassing.
In my book this is worse.
I really think this could be a massive story... I m quite shocked by it and I am not a royalist or a republican.. why would you be so uncouth? He is literally ripping the piss out of the Queen!
He either gets on with her so fantastically that its no big deal or it is quite serious
I am not a Cameron hater, I think he comes across as quite a nice Guy.. and I have never and probably will never vote Conservative anyway, so Im no traitor for being a kipper.
I am also not that pro or anti Royal.
But that is pretty bad I think... twice in a week or two he has been caught now and this is much worse than the first
Actually the more I ponder it, it is awful
Ungentlemanly, a real faux paus
If Farage had done it, the part of me that thinks UKIP might not be able to cut it when it comes to the big time would be reinforced, and I would be embarrassed for him, proper cringe
The Blairs got a bit jiggy in HM's guest bed, and blabbed about it in a biography. That's the benchmark for embarrassing.
That comes under the heading 'too much information' rather than 'minor breach of protocol.'
Ha ha - surely the beckham convention states the kid should have been called Buckingham.
1/ It is internationally acceptable to have a Labour government but it would an appalling international embarrassment to have a UKIP one
Having Millipede as PM would make us a laughing stock.
Why?
Does that really need a reply?
Not even a majority of Labour voters believe that he is up to the job.
Whereas Cameron out polls the toxic Tories.
Do you not think the right wing Tories are not a complete embarassment to Dave and to the UK and mean Cameron is a complete laughing stock in Europe.
Do you not think the Syrian vote and the fact Cameron dare not proceed to a military action vote unless Ed says so is an embarasment?
Do you not think the Junker episode was not laughing stock time?
Do you not think MPs defecting makes Dave a laughing stock?
You mean the Juncker episode where Miliband agreed with Cameron's decision to oppose him?
Or the Syrian vote where Miliband put party politics above international relations and reneged on an agreement in shameless bit of political posturing?
Or Miliband begging for a meeting with Obama - and puts a photo-op ahead of attending an important debate in the Commons?
1/ It is internationally acceptable to have a Labour government but it would an appalling international embarrassment to have a UKIP one
Having Millipede as PM would make us a laughing stock.
Why?
Does that really need a reply?
Not even a majority of Labour voters believe that he is up to the job.
Whereas Cameron out polls the toxic Tories.
Do you not think the right wing Tories are not a complete embarassment to Dave and to the UK and mean Cameron is a complete laughing stock in Europe.
Do you not think the Syrian vote and the fact Cameron dare not proceed to a military action vote unless Ed says so is an embarasment?
Do you not think the Junker episode was not laughing stock time?
Do you not think MPs defecting makes Dave a laughing stock?
I don't think the Juncker episode was worthy of being a laughing stock. He tried and was unsuccessful, and that does undermine his future efforts, but it's not on the same level a problem as Cameron being unable to control is MPs, facing defecting MPs, and being reliant on the opposition for military action are problems.
On topic, somewhat belatedly, hating Tories never seems to have done Labour any harm.
That's a bit of a myth IMO. I don't think I've ever hated anyone; more to the point, I've been a party member for 42 years and I've never met anyone who said "I hate the Tories", though I occasionally read about people saying it about Mrs Thatcher in particular. I know one chap who admits he's biased against Tories ("Even when they're actually OK I still don't like them!"), but even he wouldn't go as far as hatred, and he's a bit embarrassed about it, like someone admitting to an irrational dislike of all Italians. Is it different in Scotland?
With Labour appearing to be discounting any chance to regain Rochester and Strood, it's interesting to note that they held seven seats in Kent in 2005, but could scrape a majority in 2015 without winning any. The most marginal, Dover, is number 76 on the Labour target list.
One question this raises is whether there are areas of the country that are trending to Labour, if Kent is drifting away from them?
If there are lots of seats that Labour held in 2005 that they are abandoning, are there perhaps some seats that they lost in 2005 that might now be on their radar?
It was always odd that someone as media savvy as Hilton and Cameron thought they could re brand while keeping the albatross of the name Tory round their necks
They can, I suppose, choose what to officially call their party but they can't choose what nicknames other people refer to it by.
You don't really believe, do you, that if the Conservatives changed the name of the party it would result in their opponents ceasing to refer to them as Tories?
I think I've finally given up on any hope of the Tories winning an overall majority. When the party has to resort to ridiculous insults against a party which polled 3% last time you know something had gone wrong from their point of view.
Yes, I don't think anyone is claiming that this is easy, or that it can be fixed by changes to the criminal law alone, or that it can be fixed quickly. Obviously there are concerns about the specific proposal she made. Dominic Grieve articulated these well, but I don't think he went so far as to say that nothing should be done along the lines she has proposed.
It is unsurprising to see you supporting yet more authoritarianism from the government. May is a dangerous charlatan. If it could be proved that there was any link between "extremism" and violence, the conduct is already terrorism within the meaning of s.1 of the Terrorism Act 2000. Moreover, if the "extremist" in question intended the result, he would be amenable to criminal prosecution for encouraging an offence, contrary to Part 2 of the Serious Crime Act 2007. In fact, there is no link between "extremism" and violence which is capable of objective demonstration.
What is actually going on is that the government wants to expose people it doesn't like to criminal sanctions without ever having demonstrated to the requisite standard that they committed an offence. Hence the "reasonable belief" standard for the imposition of the proposed measures. That is the same principle that lay behind ASBOs and control orders, both of which this government initially said should be repealed. It will be interesting to see how the legislation is drafted. It appears it will simply give the Secretary of State powers to ban any view or group she doesn't like. The terrorist legislation has already gone far too far. May's latest proposal is nothing less than despotism.
I think destabilising the Tories by soft pedalling is the strategy, based on the simple Game Theory equation of doing what you chief opponent least wants you to do.
Yesterday you told me it was ludicrous for Labour to even consider fighting in Rochester. Guess party HQ has been on the blower with the "line to take"...
On topic, somewhat belatedly, hating Tories never seems to have done Labour any harm.
That's a bit of a myth IMO. I don't think I've ever hated anyone; more to the point, I've been a party member for 42 years and I've never met anyone who said "I hate the Tories", though I occasionally read about people saying it about Mrs Thatcher in particular. I know one chap who admits he's biased against Tories ("Even when they're actually OK I still don't like them!"), but even he wouldn't go as far as hatred, and he's a bit embarrassed about it, like someone admitting to an irrational dislike of all Italians. Is it different in Scotland?
I think it's a question of different definitions of hatred. I have seen Labour and Conservative politicians get along really well, and put aside political differences in order to get things done without rancour, and saving the ideological and political arguments for other occasions. Such cooperation hardly speaks of hate.
Nevertheless, I do not think it accurate to describe hatred of the Tories as a myth, even if among those who have to actually work with their Tory opponents from time to time, generally a cordial relationship can be easy to achieve. Countless Labour supporters would claim to never ever consider voting for the Tories or, more crucially, supporting a Tory policy, that it is unthinkable (and of course the same can be said of some Tories about voting Labour), and to me, unthinking dismissal of ever considering another political option, instinctive dismissal of a whole political party, is demonstrative of hatred of that party.
It is also frequently deeply irrational, as people may support a policy until they find out it is the policy of a particular party, which is increasingly common as the ideological underpinnings of our parties are to put it mildly pretty darn loose, so they jump all over the political spectrum. That irrationality stems from anger, which is a short step to hatred.
1/ It is internationally acceptable to have a Labour government but it would an appalling international embarrassment to have a UKIP one
Having Millipede as PM would make us a laughing stock.
Why?
Does that really need a reply?
Not even a majority of Labour voters believe that he is up to the job.
Whereas Cameron out polls the toxic Tories.
Do you not think the right wing Tories are not a complete embarassment to Dave and to the UK and mean Cameron is a complete laughing stock in Europe.
Do you not think the Syrian vote and the fact Cameron dare not proceed to a military action vote unless Ed says so is an embarasment?
Do you not think the Junker episode was not laughing stock time?
Do you not think MPs defecting makes Dave a laughing stock?
I don't think the Juncker episode was worthy of being a laughing stock. He tried and was unsuccessful, and that does undermine his future efforts, but it's not on the same level a problem as Cameron being unable to control is MPs, facing defecting MPs, and being reliant on the opposition for military action are problems.
It was 26 for Juncker, 2 for Cameron (thank god for Hungary). For a Prime Minister to make such a spectacle of the matter and then be defeated by so much is a humiliation.
R4 GP running 7 day pilot saying that every A&E attendance would pay for 4 or 5 GP appointments and every admission about 200......
*coughs*
FPT
"I'm scratching my head in bewilderment at the posters who seem to think that it's somehow a bad thing that GPs should be asked to organise themselves in a way that fits in with modern life as it is now lived.
Effectively organised, especially in larger towns, I expect this proposal would actually be money-saving as pressure was taken off A&E departments and sections of the public once again became accultured to using their GPs."
Yes, I don't think anyone is claiming that this is easy, or that it can be fixed by changes to the criminal law alone, or that it can be fixed quickly. Obviously there are concerns about the specific proposal she made. Dominic Grieve articulated these well, but I don't think he went so far as to say that nothing should be done along the lines she has proposed.
It is unsurprising to see you supporting yet more authoritarianism from the government. May is a dangerous charlatan. If it could be proved that there was any link between "extremism" and violence, the conduct is already terrorism within the meaning of s.1 of the Terrorism Act 2000. Moreover, if the "extremist" in question intended the result, he would be amenable to criminal prosecution for encouraging an offence, contrary to Part 2 of the Serious Crime Act 2007. In fact, there is no link between "extremism" and violence which is capable of objective demonstration.
What is actually going on is that the government wants to expose people it doesn't like to criminal sanctions without ever having demonstrated to the requisite standard that they committed an offence. Hence the "reasonable belief" standard for the imposition of the proposed measures. That is the same principle that lay behind ASBOs and control orders, both of which this government initially said should be repealed. It will be interesting to see how the legislation is drafted. It appears it will simply give the Secretary of State powers to ban any view or group she doesn't like. The terrorist legislation has already gone far too far. May's latest proposal is nothing less than despotism.
Yeah, yeah, sure. Nothing needs to be done.
Meanwhile, I look forward to your lavish praise for her stance on stop and search.
Just to show you are consistent about what you claim is concern for civil liberties, you know.
When new security measures are proposed, the question surely has to be why are they necessary given the measures already permitted under the law. It seems strange that no matter what was proposed previously, what snooping was allowed, how long someone could be detained without charge, what torture methods are ok (so long as someone else does them), what someone had to do in order to be charged/punished, it was apparently useless and thus more is needed, always more is needed.
It makes me inclined to be cynical. Additionally, the threats faced and measures needed to tackle them, and the issues those raise, can be very very complex, but sometimes matters can be pretty straightforward but are nevertheless always displayed as extremely complex anyway. I'm not in a knowledgeable enough position to be certain of the correct course, but I remain very very wary.
"That's a bit of a myth IMO. I don't think I've ever hated anyone; more to the point, I've been a party member for 42 years and I've never met anyone who said "I hate the Tories","
I hope I don't sound patronizing but you really have to get out more. I've heard that said multiple times in a week-end!
My favourite lawyers' bills are the ones which read "To considering whether I needed to do anything, and deciding I didn't, £500 + £25 for the email saying I didn't need to do anything" (I paraphrase slightly..)
With Labour appearing to be discounting any chance to regain Rochester and Strood, it's interesting to note that they held seven seats in Kent in 2005, but could scrape a majority in 2015 without winning any. The most marginal, Dover, is number 76 on the Labour target list.
One question this raises is whether there are areas of the country that are trending to Labour, if Kent is drifting away from them?
If there are lots of seats that Labour held in 2005 that they are abandoning, are there perhaps some seats that they lost in 2005 that might now be on their radar?
I would suggest you look for areas surrounding the main urban centres (London, Birmingham, North West corridor, Yorkshire) that are becoming more urban themselves and who seem to be resisting the UKIP advance.
R4 GP running 7 day pilot saying that every A&E attendance would pay for 4 or 5 GP appointments and every admission about 200......
But, but, but, we've been told it's too expensive, and unworkable.
I wonder what the potential savings are to Everyone's NHS?
It can be done, but does require major investment in primary care. That means district nurses as well as GPs and Training and infrastructure not just salaries. It also means affordable and accessible childcare for a predominantly female workforce.
Simply rotaing on a GP on a Sunday without support is just going to be ineffective and demoralising unless they have the back up services required. The same applies to us in hospital practice.
My favourite lawyers' bills are the ones which read "To considering whether I needed to do anything, and deciding I didn't, £500 + £25 for the email saying I didn't need to do anything" (I paraphrase slightly..)
You have favourite lawyers' bills?!
Yes, 'cos those ones are less eye-wateringly expensive than the ones where they do decide they need to do something.
1/ It is internationally acceptable to have a Labour government but it would an appalling international embarrassment to have a UKIP one
Having Millipede as PM would make us a laughing stock.
Why?
Does that really need a reply?
Not even a majority of Labour voters believe that he is up to the job.
Whereas Cameron out polls the toxic Tories.
Do you not think the right wing Tories are not a complete embarassment to Dave and to the UK and mean Cameron is a complete laughing stock in Europe.
Do you not think the Syrian vote and the fact Cameron dare not proceed to a military action vote unless Ed says so is an embarasment?
Do you not think the Junker episode was not laughing stock time?
Do you not think MPs defecting makes Dave a laughing stock?
I don't think the Juncker episode was worthy of being a laughing stock. He tried and was unsuccessful, and that does undermine his future efforts, but it's not on the same level a problem as Cameron being unable to control is MPs, facing defecting MPs, and being reliant on the opposition for military action are problems.
It was 26 for Juncker, 2 for Cameron (thank god for Hungary). For a Prime Minister to make such a spectacle of the matter and then be defeated by so much is a humiliation.
It was a blow, but no-one really thinks a UK PM of any stripe can get anything meaningful from the EU bureaucrats, so it was more a symptom of his wider problem and in any case what everyone expected, whereas the other issues listed are things another leader could have done something about.
With Labour appearing to be discounting any chance to regain Rochester and Strood, it's interesting to note that they held seven seats in Kent in 2005, but could scrape a majority in 2015 without winning any. The most marginal, Dover, is number 76 on the Labour target list.
One question this raises is whether there are areas of the country that are trending to Labour, if Kent is drifting away from them?
If there are lots of seats that Labour held in 2005 that they are abandoning, are there perhaps some seats that they lost in 2005 that might now be on their radar?
It's not so much Kent drifting away from Labour as the Nulab/Blair factor has faded into history. Blair has been the only leader to make serious inroads into Tory territory since Mr Groan was re-elected in 1966
I agree with isam that for David Cameron to be caught twice in the week commenting about the Queen is really poor. I expect better of him.
I'm going to stick up for Cameron here. I don't see why people should be banned from talking about missteps she's made. The argument royalists usually make is that she spreads our culture and brings in the tourists. Well, fine, but I don't see why that means we have to pretend she's perfect and never does anything wrong.
David Cameron thinks he was born to rule, and the Tory Party generally oozes an arrogant sense of entitlement.
going to be at least 28 years since their last as it is. Does that not ring alarm bells for them?
Hugh is probably a doctor, irritated about being asked to change decades old working practices, and interact with tax paying patients (aka customers) on the odd weekend, rather than play golf.
In 2004 GPs said to government negotiators that the cost of providing out of hours access would be more than £7 000 per GP. The government said that it could do it cheaper and better for less, then got their comeuppance when they found that they could match neither quality or price.
It is already hard to recruit to General Practice. It will be harder still soon if this attitude continues.
Given the salary for GPs is seemingly between £80k and £160k, it is hard to imagine why more doctors are not keen to go down that career path.
There must be thousands of foreign doctors who'd jump at the chance to earn that, and be happy to work the odd weekend. Are the British ones really that greedy and lazy?
Spoke to my Mum about this today.. she works part time in Boots now (having left Tower Hamlets Council a few years back), so speaks with pharmacist etc
Many qualified foreign doctors are itching for work but denied as they aren't qualified here,, that surely has to be the route to take?
I wouldn't think that the British doctors are lazy, but they are stretched already.. if you don't expect them to do a 7 day week, where are you going to magic these other doctors from?
I cant believe people were comparing it with staffing Tesco earlier, has there ever been a less comparable job?
EU qualifications are automatically recognised. Non EU Doctors have to pass the PLAB test of medical and language skills.
It is possible for a Doctor to get a permanent visa if a job is advertised for 4 weeks and no appointable candidate from the EU applies. I recruit this way fairly regularly.
R4 GP running 7 day pilot saying that every A&E attendance would pay for 4 or 5 GP appointments and every admission about 200......
But, but, but, we've been told it's too expensive, and unworkable.
I wonder what the potential savings are to Everyone's NHS?
It can be done, but does require major investment in primary care. That means district nurses as well as GPs and Training and infrastructure not just salaries. It also means affordable and accessible childcare for a predominantly female workforce.
Simply rotaing on a GP on a Sunday without support is just going to be ineffective and demoralising unless they have the back up services required. The same applies to us in hospital practice.
But it could be made to work, and ultimately improve the service and save money. Worth trying surely?
And wouldn't the investment in Primary care effectively be money transferred from the hospital budgets?
Indeed: it is good that someone in the government finally realises that extremism can, even if it does not lead to violence, do damage to a society.
The issue I think, Richard, is how to deal with those extremist views i.e. are criminal laws the answer as opposed to a vigorous intellectual challenge to extremism e.g. by ensuring that, for instance, such extremists do not get a toehold in our schools.
Yes, I don't think anyone is claiming that this is easy, or that it can be fixed by changes to the criminal law alone, or that it can be fixed quickly. Obviously there are concerns about the specific proposal she made. Dominic Grieve articulated these well, but I don't think he went so far as to say that nothing should be done along the lines she has proposed.
I agree this is not easy but in my opinion Dominic Grieve has shown consistently better judgment of the balance to be struck than May or, ultimately, Cameron. He is a sad loss to this government.
Meanwhile, I look forward to your lavish praise for her stance on stop and search.
Just to show you are consistent about what you claim is concern for civil liberties, you know.
There is no evidence that anything needs to be done, but for the enforcement of the law of the land if it is broken. My position on stop and search has been clear and consistent. Unless and until the rules providing for stop and search without a warrant are the same as the rules for searches of a residence without a warrant, the legislation should be opposed. An Englishman should be as secure in his person as he is in his home. May is tinkering around the edges.
David Cameron thinks he was born to rule, and the Tory Party generally oozes an arrogant sense of entitlement.
going to be at least 28 years since their last as it is. Does that not ring alarm bells for them?
Hugh is probably a doctor, irritated about being asked to change decades old working practices, and interact with tax paying patients (aka customers) on the odd weekend, rather than play golf.
In 2004 GPs said to government negotiators that the cost of providing out of hours access would be more than £7 000 per GP. The government said that it could do it cheaper and better for less, then got their comeuppance when they found that they could match neither quality or price.
It is already hard to recruit to General Practice. It will be harder still soon if this attitude continues.
Given the salary for GPs is seemingly between £80k and £160k, it is hard to imagine why more doctors are not keen to go down that career path.
There must be thousands of foreign doctors who'd jump at the chance to earn that, and be happy to work the odd weekend. Are the British ones really that greedy and lazy?
I wouldn't think that the British doctors are lazy, but they are stretched already.. if you don't expect them to do a 7 day week, where are you going to magic these other doctors from?
They're not being asked to work a 7 day week. The idea would appear to be for some to shift their working patterns so that some work weekend days and take weekdays off.
Easing the pressure on hospital A&E departments on Saturdays and Sundays would be a good idea, no?
The idea is by 2020 they've trained 5000 extra doctors I think
1/ It is internationally acceptable to have a Labour government but it would an appalling international embarrassment to have a UKIP one
Having Millipede as PM would make us a laughing stock.
Why?
Does that really need a reply?
Not even a majority of Labour voters believe that he is up to the job.
Whereas Cameron out polls the toxic Tories.
Do you not think the right wing Tories are not a complete embarassment to Dave and to the UK and mean Cameron is a complete laughing stock in Europe.
Do you not think the Syrian vote and the fact Cameron dare not proceed to a military action vote unless Ed says so is an embarasment?
Do you not think the Junker episode was not laughing stock time?
Do you not think MPs defecting makes Dave a laughing stock?
I don't think the Juncker episode was worthy of being a laughing stock. He tried and was unsuccessful, and that does undermine his future efforts, but it's not on the same level a problem as Cameron being unable to control is MPs, facing defecting MPs, and being reliant on the opposition for military action are problems.
It was 26 for Juncker, 2 for Cameron (thank god for Hungary). For a Prime Minister to make such a spectacle of the matter and then be defeated by so much is a humiliation.
It was a blow, but no-one really thinks a UK PM of any stripe can get anything meaningful from the EU bureaucrats, so it was more a symptom of his wider problem and in any case what everyone expected, whereas the other issues listed are things another leader could have done something about.
Then why did Cameron bother making such a fuss about it? He clearly thought he could make a stand and they pulled the rug from under him. Given he is trying to get the British people to believe he can have meaningful negotiations with Brussels on a whole raft of things it was a massive blow. The whole credibility of his EU referendum position was at stake and Brussels left it in tatters.
Whether he should have known better or not is a different matter.
1/ It is internationally acceptable to have a Labour government but it would an appalling international embarrassment to have a UKIP one
Having Millipede as PM would make us a laughing stock.
Why?
Does that really need a reply?
Not even a majority of Labour voters believe that he is up to the job.
Whereas Cameron out polls the toxic Tories.
Do you not think the right wing Tories are not a complete embarassment to Dave and to the UK and mean Cameron is a complete laughing stock in Europe.
Do you not think the Syrian vote and the fact Cameron dare not proceed to a military action vote unless Ed says so is an embarasment?
Do you not think the Junker episode was not laughing stock time?
Do you not think MPs defecting makes Dave a laughing stock?
I don't think the Juncker episode was worthy of being a laughing stock. He tried and was unsuccessful, and that does undermine his future efforts, but it's not on the same level a problem as Cameron being unable to control is MPs, facing defecting MPs, and being reliant on the opposition for military action are problems.
It was 26 for Juncker, 2 for Cameron (thank god for Hungary). For a Prime Minister to make such a spectacle of the matter and then be defeated by so much is a humiliation.
It was a blow, but no-one really thinks a UK PM of any stripe can get anything meaningful from the EU bureaucrats, so it was more a symptom of his wider problem and in any case what everyone expected, whereas the other issues listed are things another leader could have done something about.
Then why did Cameron bother making such a fuss about it? He clearly thought he could make a stand and they pulled the rug from under him. Given he is trying to get the British people to believe he can have meaningful negotiations with Brussels on a whole raft of things it was a massive blow. The whole credibility of his EU referendum position was at stake and Brussels left it in tatters.
He thought attempting to make a stand was better than nothing I suspect, as he did need to get people to believe he could get something credible. I think we're quibbling over nothing> I don't think it particularly made him a laughing stock even though it wounded him, because the British position on this is already a laughing stock, so he didn't comparitively get wounded as much as with the other issues.
Too late for that, the Tories are in full survival and revenge mood, they will insult, abuse and attack everyone who even thinks of voting for UKIP, like the SNP did to the NO..
More fantasy. I don't think I've ever heard of any Tory doing anything like that.
It's not unreasonable, however, to point out the consequences of voting UKIP. After all, it's precisely UKIP's target voters - the less affluent WWC - who have the most to lose from a Miliband government.
It may be so if you have not burnt your bridges and might still be listened to but when your leader and others within the party are generally describing UKIP supporters in insulting terms and being thoroughly dishonest about what UKIP is you can pretty much take for granted those bridges are burnt. Tories have thrown away the right to make their case.
Nobody's listening and all those who keep talking are doing is further antagonising the situation. Tories would be better off just outlining what they intend to do policy wise and leave UKIP supporters alone
I really don't see how UKIP can object to this, given its own "critique" of the Conservatives. This is a party whose internet trolls routinely calls Cameron a traitor and liar, and use the BNP's old slogan to argue that there's no difference between the parties. Why exactly does UKIP feel entitled to be treated with special respect?
Too late for that, the Tories are in full survival and revenge mood, they will insult, abuse and attack everyone who even thinks of voting for UKIP, like the SNP did to the NO..
More fantasy. I don't think I've ever heard of any Tory doing anything like that.
It's not unreasonable, however, to point out the consequences of voting UKIP. After all, it's precisely UKIP's target voters - the less affluent WWC - who have the most to lose from a Miliband government.
It may be so if you have not burnt your bridges and might still be listened to but when your leader and others within the party are generally describing UKIP supporters in insulting terms and being thoroughly dishonest about what UKIP is you can pretty much take for granted those bridges are burnt. Tories have thrown away the right to make their case.
Nobody's listening and all those who keep talking are doing is further antagonising the situation. Tories would be better off just outlining what they intend to do policy wise and leave UKIP supporters alone
I really don't see how UKIP can object to this, given its own "critique" of the Conservatives. This is a party whose internet trolls routinely calls Cameron a traitor and liar, and use the BNP's old slogan to argue that there's no difference between the parties. Why exactly does UKIP feel entitled to be treated with special respect?
Lack of self awareness. Like Yes and No in the IndyRef throwing around deep personal insults while so offended at all these insults hurled at their own side.
"In a speech which got a standing ovation from the audience in Birmingham, she said: "In the end, as they have done before, these values, our British values, will win the day and we will prevail."
Really? Are the restrictions she is imposing on free speech etc really British values? It's a tricky one but the need to be seen to be doing something is pushing all our major parties down roads that don't seem particularly "British" to me.
UKIP attracts elderly male people who have had disappointing lives is a great quote from Clarke.
No it isn't. For a man who has such a high intellect and is normally so clear and lucid, its incredibly stupid.
If you want to beat UKIP, or any other political party with more than 10,000 members, beat their arguments.
"Toffs" - regularly used by Kippers. They can dish out but can't take ?
There is no more despicable example of urban liberal elitism than Clarke and no more pernicious and repulsive a mantra than this UKIP are 'poor white thick and old' narrative that Tories seem to love so much.
Do UKIPpers object to this because it's true and they think it's tactless to say it out loud, or do they object because it's not true? It certainly appears to be true.
David Cameron thinks he was born to rule, and the Tory Party generally oozes an arrogant sense of entitlement.
going to be at least 28 years since their last as it is. Does that not ring alarm bells for them?
.
.
Given the salary for GPs is seemingly between £80k and £160k, it is hard to imagine why more doctors are not keen to go down that career path.
There must be thousands of foreign doctors who'd jump at the chance to earn that, and be happy to work the odd weekend. Are the British ones really that greedy and lazy?
Spoke to my Mum about this today.. she works part time in Boots now (having left Tower Hamlets Council a few years back), so speaks with pharmacist etc
No-one - other than you (and a few others determined to twist this) has suggested making GPs work a 7 day week.
What is necessary and desirable is that patients have access to primary medical care at a local level at times that suit the needs of the patients.
People fall ill and require treatment 7 days a week. Our hospitals are not the appropriate place for many of them to go to get that treatment - so it must fall to the GPs to provide this necessary care.
It requires them to change their working hours and to be more flexible. It does not require them to work 7 days a week.
It is about living in the modern world.
And you, of course, know this - you just want to oppose it for the sake of opposing it.
Stop telling me what I think. It is annoying and patronising.. and more to the point you are wrong about what I think
I am not particularly opposing it. Find where I said I did.
I don't see why weekends are all that different really
I only repeated what a GP interviewed on TV said, it wasn't my opinion, you just were so eager to argue you put words in my mouth, then argued against them
Maybe they should start off by making it 6 days a week?
But changing working hours rather than extending them assumes we have a load of doctors on the subs bench ready to fill in the gaps/extra hours, and the point the guy on TV made was that there aren't.
Also the Tescos comparsison, without having a go at Tesco workers, is rubbish, as Tescos is an unskilled job and extra hours are easy to recruit for.. I wouldn't want some disinterested student with a hangover as my Doctor, but I don't mind them on the till at Tescos
David Cameron thinks he was born to rule, and the Tory Party generally oozes an arrogant sense of entitlement.
going to be at least 28 years since their last as it is. Does that not ring alarm bells for them?
.
.
Given the salary for GPs is seemingly between £80k and £160k, it is hard to imagine why more doctors are not keen to go down that career path.
There must be thousands of foreign doctors who'd jump at the chance to earn that, and be happy to work the odd weekend. Are the British ones really that greedy and lazy?
Spoke to my Mum about this today.. she works part time in Boots now (having left Tower Hamlets Council a few years back), so speaks with pharmacist etc
No-one - other than you (and a few others determined to twist this) has suggested making GPs work a 7 day week.
What is necessary and desirable is that patients have access to primary medical care at a local level at times that suit the needs of the patients.
People fall ill and require treatment 7 days a week. Our hospitals are not the appropriate place for many of them to go to get that treatment - so it must fall to the GPs to provide this necessary care.
It requires them to change their working hours and to be more flexible. It does not require them to work 7 days a week.
It is about living in the modern world.
And you, of course, know this - you just want to oppose it for the sake of opposing it.
Also the Tescos comparsison, without having a go at Tesco workers, is rubbish, as Tescos is an unskilled job and extra hours are easy to recruit for.. I wouldn't want some disinterested student with a hangover as my Doctor, but I don't mind them on the till at Tescos
Stop being disingenuous. The suggestion was that supermarkets operated surgeries with fully qualified medical staff that they employed, not students. My local Sainsburys has a pharmacy - why not a doctor too?
Establishing themselves as the third biggest political party in the UK.
Exactly so - it's about their egos, not about actually achieving what they claim are their political goals (which in any case change from one day to the next).
Political goals will come once we are in government.
I'd actually vote Labour to stop that happening.
There's an undercurrent of Right Wing stuff which is wholly unpalatable.
The UKIPpers vision for Britain is not one in which I would wish to live, particularly if it involves people like Neil Hamilton.
If it came down to a choice of government, I'd sooner vote Labour than UKIP.
1/ It is internationally acceptable to have a Labour government but it would an appalling international embarrassment to have a UKIP one 2/ The damage Labour inflicts is gradual, the damage UKIP would inflict would be instant and permanent 3/ people overseas would feel sorry for us if we had a Labour government, but would justifiably hate and despise us if we had a UKIP government 4/ per capita UKIP have the most corrupt MEPs of any British party, so assuming this applied to HoC MPs they would be the most corrupt British government since Blair's and perhaps of all time.
"Justifiably hate and despise"
You're demonstrating how overly emotional you are on matters of UKIP. Classic case of hatred affecting your judgment, as TSE says.
If you want to know how a UKIP presence in government would be received look at the damage Joerg Haider's party did to Austria, or the FN to France; look at the consequences for the Tusks in Poland of being associated with homophobia.
It is a matter not of opinion but of fact that a country's choice of politicians says something overseas about that country. That the sixth largest economy in the world, Britain FGS, should have MPs at Westminster who belong to a party called "United Kingdom Independence Party", as though we are somebody's bitches, would bespeak a deep and frankly embarrassing sense of inadequacy.
Some Tories have at last come to the conclusion that UKIP are an opponent, not just disloyal Tories whom they can mock and disregard to keep people from defecting to them, so it's not much of a surprise that the real anger is finally coming out, especially as it is dawning on them that UKIP (be it from the Tories own weakness or not) have likely cost them what slim chance they had to win in 2015. I'd be bitter as well.
It's more frustration that the country is really at a tipping point.
Osborne has done a huge amount of hard work in turning things around. Not everything is perfect, and the time line has slipped but we are in a much better position than we were in 2010.
And the Kippers are prepared - seemingly in many cases out of a personal loathing for Cameron - to throw that all away. The two Eds will do unmeasurable damage to the country.
Comments
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/deputy-prime-minister-requests-urgent-meeting-with-chinese-ambassador
Personally I have nothing but contempt for people who want to give us a Miliband govt.
I do agree with you on not hating Cameron, though. He certainly lacks the malevolence vibe that I feel emanating from Balls or IDS. He's just not up to the job. He's the political leader who looks likely to end up as unable to win a majority against Gordon Brown, and ejected from office by David Miliband's younger brother.
It is already hard to recruit to General Practice. It will be harder still soon if this attitude continues.
The issue I think, Richard, is how to deal with those extremist views i.e. are criminal laws the answer as opposed to a vigorous intellectual challenge to extremism e.g. by ensuring that, for instance, such extremists do not get a toehold in our schools.
I'm not a Cameron-hater either, Isam.
I once had high hopes of him, thinking that he could take the Tories back to the centre ground. I've been disappointed, but I don't think he's a bad man, or a bad Prime Minister, and he is certainly not stupid. The impression has grown on me is that he basically a very good PR man, but not a deep political thinker. He seems to be lacking in strategic vision and depth.
When he has a clear path to follow and is sure of his ground, he is very good and perfectly sound in a crisis. The problem is that his Party and his country needs a bit of strategic vision and direction. He tends to carry on as if warm words can solve everything, which is a fairly characteristic outlook for a PR man, which he once was.
The faux pas with the Queen are not, in the greater scheme of things, particularly important. At worst they betray a lack of care and a certain superficiality. Any harm done to the Queen's position will mend quickly.
But he should be more careful, as a good PR man would appreciate.
This made me laugh
Isabel Hardman @IsabelHardman · 2h 2 hours ago
I've been leaked the Tory lines to take for conference... http://bit.ly/YH93cq how well are MPs sticking to them?
"In my opinion they are unsalvageable, some people would support Tory policies but not if its proposed or supported by Tories, just because they are Tories."
"There's tonnes of research done, that suggests that is precisely the case."
From a marketing point of view their best bet was to change their name. It's been obvious since at least '97 and probably long before when an already whiffy brand was irrecoverably trashed by Thatcher. It was always odd that someone as media savvy as Hilton and Cameron thought they could re brand while keeping the albatross of the name Tory round their necks
Charlton Edwards
@Charlton_UKIP Medway councillor Chris Irvine leaves #Tories after Rochester & Strood @MarkReckless Mark Reckless defects to @UKIP http://www.kentonline.co.uk/medway/news/tory-councillor-leaves-party-24226/ …
Are Dave & Boris writers for Nuts or Zoo?
http://www.kentonline.co.uk/medway/news/cameron-reckless-is-fat-arse-24301/
Not even a majority of Labour voters believe that he is up to the job.
"Actually the more I ponder it, it is awful."
Nah, it's not that bad.
He has a tendency to blab and to try and impress people with small talk. It's not a good trait, especially in a politician, but I can think of worse.
twitter.com/DouglasCarswell/status/516960617589395456/photo/1
GP's remind me of Tube Drivers.
I'm sure some specialist here will be able to fill all that out.
Many Doctors do not find these worthwhile careers to go into.
Hopefully he will surprise us all.
If the immigrants are forbidden, and the jobs not made more attractive then employers will struggle to staff unpopular jobs.
Many qualified foreign doctors are itching for work but denied as they aren't qualified here,, that surely has to be the route to take?
I wouldn't think that the British doctors are lazy, but they are stretched already.. if you don't expect them to do a 7 day week, where are you going to magic these other doctors from?
I cant believe people were comparing it with staffing Tesco earlier, has there ever been a less comparable job?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/picturegalleries/royalty/6840783/Pictures-of-the-decade-the-Royal-family.html
I think we can be pretty sure that Cameron will not get snubbed like this:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/royal-revenge-we-had-to-draw-the-line-somewhere-2277354.html
What would UKIP do if the positions were reversed?
I really think this could be a massive story... I m quite shocked by it and I am not a royalist or a republican.. why would you be so uncouth? He is literally ripping the piss out of the Queen!
He either gets on with her so fantastically that its no big deal or it is quite serious
But Im probably wrong
It is possible for a Doctor to get a permanent visa if a job is advertised for 4 weeks and no appointable candidate from the EU applies. I recruit this way fairly regularly.
Easing the pressure on hospital A&E departments on Saturdays and Sundays would be a good idea, no?
What is necessary and desirable is that patients have access to primary medical care at a local level at times that suit the needs of the patients.
People fall ill and require treatment 7 days a week. Our hospitals are not the appropriate place for many of them to go to get that treatment - so it must fall to the GPs to provide this necessary care.
It requires them to change their working hours and to be more flexible. It does not require them to work 7 days a week.
It is about living in the modern world.
And you, of course, know this - you just want to oppose it for the sake of opposing it.
Betty B earned her salary that day!!
Cheers for reminding me…! – you rotter. ; )
Do you not think the right wing Tories are not a complete embarassment to Dave and to the UK and mean Cameron is a complete laughing stock in Europe.
Do you not think the Syrian vote and the fact Cameron dare not proceed to a military action vote unless Ed says so is an embarasment?
Do you not think the Junker episode was not laughing stock time?
Do you not think MPs defecting makes Dave a laughing stock?
That's a very funny picture, Ricahrd, and it's mentioned in Rawnesley's excellent book 'The End Of The Party'.
It was one of those excruciating social occasions when one finds oneself in a situation where you are obliged by the circumstances to do something you really don't want to and you know will look awful. Rather like when Prince Charles found himself shaking hands with a number of African Heads of State and suddenly found Robert Mugabe thrusting a hand towards him.
What are you supposed to do?
Jesus some people just don't listen
"RAF jets strike first IS targets"
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-29434628
Not those two.
Smarmy's so clever he's got the Sun scoop though.
Big news day.
Or the Syrian vote where Miliband put party politics above international relations and reneged on an agreement in shameless bit of political posturing?
Or Miliband begging for a meeting with Obama - and puts a photo-op ahead of attending an important debate in the Commons?
Who is more of a statesman?
One question this raises is whether there are areas of the country that are trending to Labour, if Kent is drifting away from them?
If there are lots of seats that Labour held in 2005 that they are abandoning, are there perhaps some seats that they lost in 2005 that might now be on their radar?
You don't really believe, do you, that if the Conservatives changed the name of the party it would result in their opponents ceasing to refer to them as Tories?
What is actually going on is that the government wants to expose people it doesn't like to criminal sanctions without ever having demonstrated to the requisite standard that they committed an offence. Hence the "reasonable belief" standard for the imposition of the proposed measures. That is the same principle that lay behind ASBOs and control orders, both of which this government initially said should be repealed. It will be interesting to see how the legislation is drafted. It appears it will simply give the Secretary of State powers to ban any view or group she doesn't like. The terrorist legislation has already gone far too far. May's latest proposal is nothing less than despotism.
I wonder what the potential savings are to Everyone's NHS?
TSE - Man City are kicking off at 7.45 on normal tv so can you time your next thread (Nabavi or not) appropriately.
Thanks.
You prefer your authoritarians competent do you?
Nevertheless, I do not think it accurate to describe hatred of the Tories as a myth, even if among those who have to actually work with their Tory opponents from time to time, generally a cordial relationship can be easy to achieve. Countless Labour supporters would claim to never ever consider voting for the Tories or, more crucially, supporting a Tory policy, that it is unthinkable (and of course the same can be said of some Tories about voting Labour), and to me, unthinking dismissal of ever considering another political option, instinctive dismissal of a whole political party, is demonstrative of hatred of that party.
It is also frequently deeply irrational, as people may support a policy until they find out it is the policy of a particular party, which is increasingly common as the ideological underpinnings of our parties are to put it mildly pretty darn loose, so they jump all over the political spectrum. That irrationality stems from anger, which is a short step to hatred.
"I think we can be pretty sure that Cameron will not get snubbed like this:"
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/royal-revenge-we-had-to-draw-the-line-somewhere-2277354.html
Fab story by Rentoul! What a ridiculous country we live in
FPT
"I'm scratching my head in bewilderment at the posters who seem to think that it's somehow a bad thing that GPs should be asked to organise themselves in a way that fits in with modern life as it is now lived.
Effectively organised, especially in larger towns, I expect this proposal would actually be money-saving as pressure was taken off A&E departments and sections of the public once again became accultured to using their GPs."
Meanwhile, I look forward to your lavish praise for her stance on stop and search.
Just to show you are consistent about what you claim is concern for civil liberties, you know.
It makes me inclined to be cynical. Additionally, the threats faced and measures needed to tackle them, and the issues those raise, can be very very complex, but sometimes matters can be pretty straightforward but are nevertheless always displayed as extremely complex anyway. I'm not in a knowledgeable enough position to be certain of the correct course, but I remain very very wary.
"That's a bit of a myth IMO. I don't think I've ever hated anyone; more to the point, I've been a party member for 42 years and I've never met anyone who said "I hate the Tories","
I hope I don't sound patronizing but you really have to get out more. I've heard that said multiple times in a week-end!
Simply rotaing on a GP on a Sunday without support is just going to be ineffective and demoralising unless they have the back up services required. The same applies to us in hospital practice.
And wouldn't the investment in Primary care effectively be money transferred from the hospital budgets?
Whether he should have known better or not is a different matter.
I am not particularly opposing it. Find where I said I did.
I don't see why weekends are all that different really
I only repeated what a GP interviewed on TV said, it wasn't my opinion, you just were so eager to argue you put words in my mouth, then argued against them
Maybe they should start off by making it 6 days a week?
But changing working hours rather than extending them assumes we have a load of doctors on the subs bench ready to fill in the gaps/extra hours, and the point the guy on TV made was that there aren't.
Also the Tescos comparsison, without having a go at Tesco workers, is rubbish, as Tescos is an unskilled job and extra hours are easy to recruit for.. I wouldn't want some disinterested student with a hangover as my Doctor, but I don't mind them on the till at Tescos
It is a matter not of opinion but of fact that a country's choice of politicians says something overseas about that country. That the sixth largest economy in the world, Britain FGS, should have MPs at Westminster who belong to a party called "United Kingdom Independence Party", as though we are somebody's bitches, would bespeak a deep and frankly embarrassing sense of inadequacy.
Osborne has done a huge amount of hard work in turning things around. Not everything is perfect, and the time line has slipped but we are in a much better position than we were in 2010.
And the Kippers are prepared - seemingly in many cases out of a personal loathing for Cameron - to throw that all away. The two Eds will do unmeasurable damage to the country.