SquareRoot The Tories picked Hague, followed by IDS, Labour, in picking Brown and Ed Miliband, have simply matched them
When you see your opponents making mistakes, its a good idea not to copy them. Jack W has been right all along. Instinct tells me that ED will never be PM. If he does become PM, it will be even worse than Brown.. if that's possible.. Yikes it might just be....
Quite. If I had to try to pinpoint a particular moment when it seemed UKIP had been accepted as a regular mainstream party in the last few years it was when they were referred to as such by the others when there was that story about foster kids being taken away because the foster parents were UKIP supporters, and I would think there would be few people to defend such an action as reported unless there are some major missing factors that have not emerged.
"So Dave was right about gay marriage it seems, though I think even the kippers are coming round to it. Small c conservatism is fading."
Having listened to the radio this morning where people were queuing up to say a Sheffield footballer should never be allowed near a football ground again and then a similar number up in arms because the parole board have decided to release a 78 year old man after 48 years in prison it doesn't feel like small c conservatism is fading. But I suppose it depends how you define it.
Roger, you should listen with both ears.. many on r2 contradicted the police officer to say he had served long enough. I don't agree ,.. he should rot in prison for what he did...., but hey lets not let the truth get in the way of a political point.
But surely the point is one of natural justice: he has served the penalty that the law deemed appropriate. Now that has been completed, he should be allowed to resume his humdrum existence without fear or favour.
If you believe he served too short a sentence, get the law changed. Don't prevent him working.
Interestingly on this, the "market" seems to be working. Two of Sheffield Utd's shirt sponsors have said they'll withdraw their support if they reemploy him.
What I find odd about this. In recent years there have been 2 footballers jailed for killing people and a number of others for rape / sexual assault. The two killers came out and resumed their careers without hardly any of this noise.
Where was the media outrage in relation to those cases?
I didn't know, or may have forgotten, about them.. What I do know is that I'd be really annoyed if I found out that any of them were footballers that my 10yo nephew admired. Whatever the arguments are for allowing such people to get back to their jobs, I don't want them to be idols to young boys like him.
Mr Miliband said he thought his party could "bear down on low skilled immigration, in a number of ways", but he would not sign up to promises for a cap or limit.
Interesting how this solution has evaded everyone else' attempts; it must be really innovative
"You can't be somebody that represents just a few people in society, which I believe that our prime minister, the current prime minister, is" Whoever wins will be on a pretty low share of the vote, so depending on how you define 'few' it could be the case regardless.
people asking why they are on zero-hours contracts while those at the top get away with zero tax
People at the top get away with zero tax? Man, now I really am angry. Does he mean corporations, as that seems tonally true.
Still sounds like a lot 'acknowledging' this and 'understanding' that, and assurances in vague terms that Labour alone can fix things, while saying very little.
But it should see them over the line. and that's what is important. That I very much doubt he will be as bad as Tories proclaim is not much to write home about unless he has pulled a fast one and his skills will blossom once in office again.
Danny565 Umunna is not a fully fledged Blairite, he was on the management committee of Compass which was far from Blairite, but he can afford to lose a few won over by Miliband if he wins over many more in the centre
"So Dave was right about gay marriage it seems, though I think even the kippers are coming round to it. Small c conservatism is fading."
Having listened to the radio this morning where people were queuing up to say a Sheffield footballer should never be allowed near a football ground again and then a similar number up in arms because the parole board have decided to release a 78 year old man after 48 years in prison it doesn't feel like small c conservatism is fading. But I suppose it depends how you define it.
Roger, you should listen with both ears.. many on r2 contradicted the police officer to say he had served long enough. I don't agree ,.. he should rot in prison for what he did...., but hey lets not let the truth get in the way of a political point.
But surely the point is one of natural justice: he has served the penalty that the law deemed appropriate. Now that has been completed, he should be allowed to resume his humdrum existence without fear or favour.
If you believe he served too short a sentence, get the law changed. Don't prevent him working.
Interestingly on this, the "market" seems to be working. Two of Sheffield Utd's shirt sponsors have said they'll withdraw their support if they reemploy him.
But only because people created a publicity storm about it.
The man was found guilty and served his sentence. If punishment is, for selected crimes, decided by publicists and mobs, extended beyond that deemed appropriate by the courts then we are living in a capricious and unjust society.
MaxPB No, delaying it until after the election would be a huge boost to the SNP. What the Tories look likely to do is pass most of the devomax legislation before May to kill the SNP surge, but press on with EVEL at the same time to harm Labour (albeit passing devomax regardless), if Labour vote EVEL down they will hugely annoy English voters just before the election
The SNP surge will damage Labour far more. Labour stand to lose 30-35 of their 40 MPs in Scotland with current polling figures. The Tories will not gain anywhere near that manybij England even if Labour ham it up with EV4EL.
Another bad day for Ed Miliband with wage now rising faster than inflation following that Mori poll, and he had to welcome it in BBC interview but saying cost of living crisis not over, promising rise in minimum wage, reform of banks etc
As for Chuka Umunna, as a Miliband loyalist (he backed him in 2010) now seeming to have gained the backing of the Blairite group progress, his prospects to succeed Miliband if he is defeated have grown further as someone who can unite all wings of the party
Please. Please. Please.
What do I have to do to get Chuka elected leader of Labour?
Click your heels and say "there's noone more appropriate to be leader of the Labour party than a smarmy City type with little or no idea of how ordinary people live their lives" three times.
I think Ed's fightback may be the greatest fightback since Monty led our boys and our Commonwealth/Empire troops to a brilliant victory at the Second Battle of El Alamein.
My grandfather was killed in that battle. Some bloody idiot behind him managed to throw a grenade in his direction. It's a pretty good illustration of the stupidity of war. Left 3 sons and a widow.
"So Dave was right about gay marriage it seems, though I think even the kippers are coming round to it. Small c conservatism is fading."
Having listened to the radio this morning where people were queuing up to say a Sheffield footballer should never be allowed near a football ground again and then a similar number up in arms because the parole board have decided to release a 78 year old man after 48 years in prison it doesn't feel like small c conservatism is fading. But I suppose it depends how you define it.
Roger, you should listen with both ears.. many on r2 contradicted the police officer to say he had served long enough. I don't agree ,.. he should rot in prison for what he did...., but hey lets not let the truth get in the way of a political point.
But surely the point is one of natural justice: he has served the penalty that the law deemed appropriate. Now that has been completed, he should be allowed to resume his humdrum existence without fear or favour.
If you believe he served too short a sentence, get the law changed. Don't prevent him working.
I'm pretty sure he's on the sex offenders' register, has to inform police of his home address and must disclose his conviction to future employers or some such.
But, he should be entitled to earn his living within those constraints.
"So Dave was right about gay marriage it seems, though I think even the kippers are coming round to it. Small c conservatism is fading."
Having listened to the radio this morning where people were queuing up to say a Sheffield footballer should never be allowed near a football ground again and then a similar number up in arms because the parole board have decided to release a 78 year old man after 48 years in prison it doesn't feel like small c conservatism is fading. But I suppose it depends how you define it.
Roger, you should listen with both ears.. many on r2 contradicted the police officer to say he had served long enough. I don't agree ,.. he should rot in prison for what he did...., but hey lets not let the truth get in the way of a political point.
But surely the point is one of natural justice: he has served the penalty that the law deemed appropriate. Now that has been completed, he should be allowed to resume his humdrum existence without fear or favour.
If you believe he served too short a sentence, get the law changed. Don't prevent him working.
Interestingly on this, the "market" seems to be working. Two of Sheffield Utd's shirt sponsors have said they'll withdraw their support if they reemploy him.
What I find odd about this. In recent years there have been 2 footballers jailed for killing people and a number of others for rape / sexual assault. The two killers came out and resumed their careers without hardly any of this noise.
Where was the media outrage in relation to those cases?
It's a f*cking disgrace is what it is. The man has served his time. Now, having repaid his debt to society, he is being randomly given an extra-judicial punishment, on top of his sentence. He is prevented from doing the only job at which he is any good, just because some people on Twitter are upset. So he must be forced into penury, too.
I hope he takes his employers to Strasbourg and sues them to oblivion.
Football is an entertainment industry, there's no value in being good at football as such, there's value in people paying to watch (etc) and sponsors wanted to be involved with you because of that.
Off-field actions inevitably play a part in that value, if people feel that he is less entertaining because of his off-field actions then that means he is not as good at his job.
Another bad day for Ed Miliband with wage now rising faster than inflation following that Mori poll, and he had to welcome it in BBC interview but saying cost of living crisis not over, promising rise in minimum wage, reform of banks etc
As for Chuka Umunna, as a Miliband loyalist (he backed him in 2010) now seeming to have gained the backing of the Blairite group progress, his prospects to succeed Miliband if he is defeated have grown further as someone who can unite all wings of the party
Please. Please. Please.
What do I have to do to get Chuka elected leader of Labour?
Click your heels and say "there's noone more appropriate to be leader of the Labour party than a smarmy City type with little or no idea of how ordinary people live their lives" three times.
Oi! He's not a smarmy City type.
He's a smarmy lawyer!
Don't bash my kind for things we're not guilty of.
Whilst I think this is awful, if true, and though I'm definitely not trying to make any equivalence between the two parties, I'm tempted to ask.. Would anyone think it appalling if the same had happened to a BNP member? Or if BNP members had been prevented from adopting?
Personally, I think it would be justified for BNP members. But where do we draw the line?
If it were actually because the people are racists who happen to be UKIP members, would that make it ok?
SquareRoot The Tories picked Hague, followed by IDS, Labour, in picking Brown and Ed Miliband, have simply matched them
The weird thing about this is that Hague is now considered quite good, and I don't think he particularly changed in the meantime.
Maybe first-term opposition leaders are just always going to be considered shit. It's a tough job in that if you thought Party X was rubbish on election day, you probably still think they're rubbish a year or two later. The best they can hope for is that you think they're less bad than the government.
"So Dave was right about gay marriage it seems, though I think even the kippers are coming round to it. Small c conservatism is fading."
Having listened to the radio this morning where people were queuing up to say a Sheffield footballer should never be allowed near a football ground again and then a similar number up in arms because the parole board have decided to release a 78 year old man after 48 years in prison it doesn't feel like small c conservatism is fading. But I suppose it depends how you define it.
Roger, you should listen with both ears.. many on r2 contradicted the police officer to say he had served long enough. I don't agree ,.. he should rot in prison for what he did...., but hey lets not let the truth get in the way of a political point.
But surely the point is one of natural justice: he has served the penalty that the law deemed appropriate. Now that has been completed, he should be allowed to resume his humdrum existence without fear or favour.
If you believe he served too short a sentence, get the law changed. Don't prevent him working.
I'm pretty sure he's on the sex offenders' register, has to inform police of his home address and must disclose his conviction to future employers or some such.
But, he should be entitled to earn his living within those constraints.
And I'd assume all those are, technically at least, imposed by the courts.
"So Dave was right about gay marriage it seems, though I think even the kippers are coming round to it. Small c conservatism is fading."
Having listened to the radio this morning where people were queuing up to say a Sheffield footballer should never be allowed near a football ground again and then a similar number up in arms because the parole board have decided to release a 78 year old man after 48 years in prison it doesn't feel like small c conservatism is fading. But I suppose it depends how you define it.
Roger, you should listen with both ears.. many on r2 contradicted the police officer to say he had served long enough. I don't agree ,.. he should rot in prison for what he did...., but hey lets not let the truth get in the way of a political point.
But surely the point is one of natural justice: he has served the penalty that the law deemed appropriate. Now that has been completed, he should be allowed to resume his humdrum existence without fear or favour.
If you believe he served too short a sentence, get the law changed. Don't prevent him working.
Interestingly on this, the "market" seems to be working. Two of Sheffield Utd's shirt sponsors have said they'll withdraw their support if they reemploy him.
But only because people created a publicity storm about it.
The man was found guilty and served his sentence. If punishment is, for selected crimes, decided by publicists and mobs, extended beyond that deemed appropriate by the courts then we are living in a capricious and unjust society.
Quite. Clearly IANAL but I am fairly sure he'd have a good case in the ECHR. He is unjustly being denied the chance to pursue his lawful profession.
Where does this stop? Do we now say all people convicted of sex offences must never do any job in the public eye, even after they complete their sentence, even if this means they are impoverished? If that is the case surely we should factor it into the sentencing:you will do x many years, then be unable to pursue your career, forcing you into bankruptcy, if Twitter gets in a strop, whatevs, lols.
"So Dave was right about gay marriage it seems, though I think even the kippers are coming round to it. Small c conservatism is fading."
Having listened to the radio this morning where people were queuing up to say a Sheffield footballer should never be allowed near a football ground again and then a similar number up in arms because the parole board have decided to release a 78 year old man after 48 years in prison it doesn't feel like small c conservatism is fading. But I suppose it depends how you define it.
Roger, you should listen with both ears.. many on r2 contradicted the police officer to say he had served long enough. I don't agree ,.. he should rot in prison for what he did...., but hey lets not let the truth get in the way of a political point.
But surely the point is one of natural justice: he has served the penalty that the law deemed appropriate. Now that has been completed, he should be allowed to resume his humdrum existence without fear or favour.
If you believe he served too short a sentence, get the law changed. Don't prevent him working.
Interestingly on this, the "market" seems to be working. Two of Sheffield Utd's shirt sponsors have said they'll withdraw their support if they reemploy him.
But only because people created a publicity storm about it.
The man was found guilty and served his sentence. If punishment is, for selected crimes, decided by publicists and mobs, extended beyond that deemed appropriate by the courts then we are living in a capricious and unjust society.
Football's a business that isn't just about having the most talented team though, it's largely about getting sponsors and filling the stadium. If those two are jeopardised by the past action of one of the team, that surely has to be taken into account.
"So Dave was right about gay marriage it seems, though I think even the kippers are coming round to it. Small c conservatism is fading."
Having listened to the radio this morning where people were queuing up to say a Sheffield footballer should never be allowed near a football ground again and then a similar number up in arms because the parole board have decided to release a 78 year old man after 48 years in prison it doesn't feel like small c conservatism is fading. But I suppose it depends how you define it.
Roger, you should listen with both ears.. many on r2 contradicted the police officer to say he had served long enough. I don't agree ,.. he should rot in prison for what he did...., but hey lets not let the truth get in the way of a political point.
But surely the point is one of natural justice: he has served the penalty that the law deemed appropriate. Now that has been completed, he should be allowed to resume his humdrum existence without fear or favour.
If you believe he served too short a sentence, get the law changed. Don't prevent him working.
Interestingly on this, the "market" seems to be working. Two of Sheffield Utd's shirt sponsors have said they'll withdraw their support if they reemploy him.
But only because people created a publicity storm about it.
The man was found guilty and served his sentence. If punishment is, for selected crimes, decided by publicists and mobs, extended beyond that deemed appropriate by the courts then we are living in a capricious and unjust society.
The matter was discussed on This Week recently... I love Portillo and I thought he was the most reasonable although I can see everyone's point of view... Tricky
This does worry me. The mob got Dapper Laughs guy yesterday, despite far more offensive comics out there. Today, they continue to push that Evans doesn't get to play, despite other players who committed equally serious crimes continue in the game, just because the mob either don't know about them or don't care.
"So Dave was right about gay marriage it seems, though I think even the kippers are coming round to it. Small c conservatism is fading."
Having listened to the radio this morning where people were queuing up to say a Sheffield footballer should never be allowed near a football ground again and then a similar number up in arms because the parole board have decided to release a 78 year old man after 48 years in prison it doesn't feel like small c conservatism is fading. But I suppose it depends how you define it.
Roger, you should listen with both ears.. many on r2 contradicted the police officer to say he had served long enough. I don't agree ,.. he should rot in prison for what he did...., but hey lets not let the truth get in the way of a political point.
But surely the point is one of natural justice: he has served the penalty that the law deemed appropriate. Now that has been completed, he should be allowed to resume his humdrum existence without fear or favour.
If you believe he served too short a sentence, get the law changed. Don't prevent him working.
Interestingly on this, the "market" seems to be working. Two of Sheffield Utd's shirt sponsors have said they'll withdraw their support if they reemploy him.
But only because people created a publicity storm about it.
The man was found guilty and served his sentence. If punishment is, for selected crimes, decided by publicists and mobs, extended beyond that deemed appropriate by the courts then we are living in a capricious and unjust society.
Football's a business that isn't just about having the most talented team though, it's largely about getting sponsors and filling the stadium. If those two are jeopardised by the past action of one of the team, that surely has to be taken into account.
I can understand Sheffield United's decision (have they made one?)
My comments are a broader condemnation of the society that we live in.
Whilst I think this is awful, if true, and though I'm definitely not trying to make any equivalence between the two parties, I'm tempted to ask.. Would anyone think it appalling if the same had happened to a BNP member? Or if BNP members had been prevented from adopting?
Personally, I think it would be justified for BNP members. But where do we draw the line?
If it were actually because the people are racists who happen to be UKIP members, would that make it ok?
An interesting question. Being a racist is not itself an issue, technically I suppose, as peoples' thoughts are their own, I suppose it's only if those racist beliefs have led to illegal or inappropriate action, but of course finding out someone was such a racist, how could one be sure that any action taken had not been impacted even unintentionally by those racist beliefs
"So Dave was right about gay marriage it seems, though I think even the kippers are coming round to it. Small c conservatism is fading."
Having listened to the radio this morning where people were queuing up to say a Sheffield footballer should never be allowed near a football ground again and then a similar number up in arms because the parole board have decided to release a 78 year old man after 48 years in prison it doesn't feel like small c conservatism is fading. But I suppose it depends how you define it.
Roger, you should listen with both ears.. many on r2 contradicted the police officer to say he had served long enough. I don't agree ,.. he should rot in prison for what he did...., but hey lets not let the truth get in the way of a political point.
But surely the point is one of natural justice: he has served the penalty that the law deemed appropriate. Now that has been completed, he should be allowed to resume his humdrum existence without fear or favour.
If you believe he served too short a sentence, get the law changed. Don't prevent him working.
Interestingly on this, the "market" seems to be working. Two of Sheffield Utd's shirt sponsors have said they'll withdraw their support if they reemploy him.
What I find odd about this. In recent years there have been 2 footballers jailed for killing people and a number of others for rape / sexual assault. The two killers came out and resumed their careers without hardly any of this noise.
Where was the media outrage in relation to those cases?
It's a f*cking disgrace is what it is. The man has served his time. Now, having repaid his debt to society, he is being randomly given an extra-judicial punishment, on top of his sentence. He is prevented from doing the only job at which he is any good, just because some people on Twitter are upset. So he must be forced into penury, too.
I hope he takes his employers to Strasbourg and sues them to oblivion.
Football is an entertainment industry, there's no value in being good at football as such, there's value in people paying to watch (etc) and sponsors wanted to be involved with you because of that.
Off-field actions inevitably play a part in that value, if people feel that he is less entertaining because of his off-field actions then that means he is not as good at his job.
The fans don't think that though, they literally sing his praises.. So does that make him better at his job now?
"So Dave was right about gay marriage it seems, though I think even the kippers are coming round to it. Small c conservatism is fading."
Having listened to the radio this morning where people were queuing up to say a Sheffield footballer should never be allowed near a football ground again and then a similar number up in arms because the parole board have decided to release a 78 year old man after 48 years in prison it doesn't feel like small c conservatism is fading. But I suppose it depends how you define it.
Roger, you should listen with both ears.. many on r2 contradicted the police officer to say he had served long enough. I don't agree ,.. he should rot in prison for what he did...., but hey lets not let the truth get in the way of a political point.
But surely the point is one of natural justice: he has served the penalty that the law deemed appropriate. Now that has been completed, he should be allowed to resume his humdrum existence without fear or favour.
If you believe he served too short a sentence, get the law changed. Don't prevent him working.
Interestingly on this, the "market" seems to be working. Two of Sheffield Utd's shirt sponsors have said they'll withdraw their support if they reemploy him.
But only because people created a publicity storm about it.
The man was found guilty and served his sentence. If punishment is, for selected crimes, decided by publicists and mobs, extended beyond that deemed appropriate by the courts then we are living in a capricious and unjust society.
Quite. Clearly IANAL but I am fairly sure he'd have a good case in the ECHR. He is unjustly being denied the chance to pursue his lawful profession.
Where does this stop? Do we now say all people convicted of sex offences must never do any job in the public eye, even after they complete their sentence, even if this means they are impoverished? If that is the case surely we should factor it into the sentencing:you will do x many years, then be unable to pursue your career, forcing you into bankruptcy, if Twitter gets in a strop, whatevs, lols.
I think that he would lose such a case. Footballers usually have a clause allowing termination of contract for behaviour likely to bring the Club into disrepute. Being convicted of rape would probably be covered.
Nonetheless I would leave it up to the club. Other players have played after convictions, though this fellow seems not to have expressed remorse.
Re the wee problem Labour have in Scotland - the news about the possible cancellation of the naval orders on the Clyde is not going to help them regain votes,after spending so long fighting for the Union and, now, it seems, effectively for Tory rule over Scotland. And remember the Labour MP who demanded that the ship orders be withdrawn from his own constituents in the event of a Yes vote.
"THE Ministry of Defence has admitted it is considering abandoning its promise to build the new type 26 frigates on the Clyde and instead seek an alternative from abroad, the head of Royal Navy has admitted. [...] If the Royal Navy goes abroad for warships it will be the first time it has done it in peace time and would break a key pledge made to Scottish voters by the UK government during the referendum that the new frigates would be built on the Clyde."
Qatar will be cleared of corruption claims over the 2022 World Cup bidding process when a Fifa report is published on Thursday, BBC Sport has learned.
A gift to UkiP ? Playing into Farages hands !
A gift for Labour perhaps. Cameron aids homophobes.
Labour have called for the selection process for the 2022 World Cup to be re-run, following allegations that key FIFA officials were bribed into awarding the desert state the Games. The regime has criminalised homosexuality and the drinking of alcohol, and is accused of widespread human rights abuses.
The press hated his strong stance over Leveson and the potential fairness agenda.
The Wongas and big 6 energy companies want freedom to continue taking the piss.
Same with the bankers.
Looks like Ed trying to get the voters to line up against the only people in society less popular than
Ed is crap
Oh he has powerful enemies no question; he's the LOTO, how could he not? It doesn't make him special though, and his phrasing makes it sound sinister, thus making him seem braver for normal political enemy making. Some of his powerful enemies are pretty good ones to have though, politically, as you say.
Nonetheless I would leave it up to the club. Other players have played after convictions, though this fellow seems not to have expressed remorse.
He's continued to say that consent was given (I don't know the details of the case - I vaguely remember that the woman involved was as drunk as a skunk).
If he believes that (and I know the court disagrees) then he believes he is not guilty: why should he express remorse?
Whilst I think this is awful, if true, and though I'm definitely not trying to make any equivalence between the two parties, I'm tempted to ask.. Would anyone think it appalling if the same had happened to a BNP member? Or if BNP members had been prevented from adopting?
Personally, I think it would be justified for BNP members. But where do we draw the line?
If it were actually because the people are racists who happen to be UKIP members, would that make it ok?
I think it would be appalling if they were BNP members. If a political party is legal, it is legal. End of. And I'd say the same about Sinn Fein or the SWP or the Lib Dems.
If my sister and my parents had a fatal accident, and I were completely unable to look after my nephew, and I were to find out he'd been adopted by BNP members, I'd be appalled.
And if I found out that he was at a school run by BNP members I'd feel similarly appalled.
I don't have any kids of my own but I know you do. How would you feel about your daughter in an equivalent scenario?
Whilst I think this is awful, if true, and though I'm definitely not trying to make any equivalence between the two parties, I'm tempted to ask.. Would anyone think it appalling if the same had happened to a BNP member? Or if BNP members had been prevented from adopting?
Personally, I think it would be justified for BNP members. But where do we draw the line?
If it were actually because the people are racists who happen to be UKIP members, would that make it ok?
It's a longstanding legal principle that you don't punish individuals for being part of a group - incidentally a principle transgressed by most teachers in the land with the use of "class detentions", but anyway..
So you are on very dodgy legal and moral ground to ask someone to resign because of being part of a group, even one generally thought of as reprehensible. However, most of the BNP members I have been unfortunate enough to come into contact with have been unpleasant, violent and close-minded individuals, so I would think it would be very unlikely that one would make a suitable school governor, when judged as an individual.
Whilst I think this is awful, if true, and though I'm definitely not trying to make any equivalence between the two parties, I'm tempted to ask.. Would anyone think it appalling if the same had happened to a BNP member? Or if BNP members had been prevented from adopting?
Personally, I think it would be justified for BNP members. But where do we draw the line?
If it were actually because the people are racists who happen to be UKIP members, would that make it ok?
I think it would be appalling if they were BNP members. If a political party is legal, it is legal. End of. And I'd say the same about Sinn Fein or the SWP or the Lib Dems.
If my sister and my parents had a fatal accident, and I were completely unable to look after my nephew, and I were to find out he'd been adopted by BNP members, I'd be appalled.
And if I found out that he was at a school run by BNP members I'd feel similarly appalled.
I don't have any kids of my own but I know you do. How would you feel about your daughter in an equivalent scenario?
Just to add, in both cases imagine the relevant authorities knew that they were BNP members
"So Dave was right about gay marriage it seems, though I think even the kippers are coming round to it. Small c conservatism is fading."
Having listened to the radio this morning where people were queuing up to say a Sheffield footballer should never be allowed near a football ground again and then a similar number up in arms because the parole board have decided to release a 78 year old man after 48 years in prison it doesn't feel like small c conservatism is fading. But I suppose it depends how you define it.
Roger, you should listen with both ears.. many on r2 contradicted the police officer to say he had served long enough. I don't agree ,.. he should rot in prison for what he did...., but hey lets not let the truth get in the way of a political point.
But surely the point is one of natural justice: he has served the penalty that the law deemed appropriate. Now that has been completed, he should be allowed to resume his humdrum existence without fear or favour.
If you believe he served too short a sentence, get the law changed. Don't prevent him working.
Interestingly on this, the "market" seems to be working. Two of Sheffield Utd's shirt sponsors have said they'll withdraw their support if they reemploy him.
But only because people created a publicity storm about it.
The man was found guilty and served his sentence. If punishment is, for selected crimes, decided by publicists and mobs, extended beyond that deemed appropriate by the courts then we are living in a capricious and unjust society.
The matter was discussed on This Week recently... I love Portillo and I thought he was the most reasonable although I can see everyone's point of view... Tricky
"So Dave was right about gay marriage it seems, though I think even the kippers are coming round to it. Small c conservatism is fading."
Having listened to the radio this morning where people were queuing up to say a Sheffield footballer should never be allowed near a football ground again and then a similar number up in arms because the parole board have decided to release a 78 year old man after 48 years in prison it doesn't feel like small c conservatism is fading. But I suppose it depends how you define it.
Roger, you should listen with both ears.. many on r2 contradicted the police officer to say he had served long enough. I don't agree ,.. he should rot in prison for what he did...., but hey lets not let the truth get in the way of a political point.
But surely the point is one of natural justice: he has served the penalty that the law deemed appropriate. Now that has been completed, he should be allowed to resume his humdrum existence without fear or favour.
If you believe he served too short a sentence, get the law changed. Don't prevent him working.
Interestingly on this, the "market" seems to be working. Two of Sheffield Utd's shirt sponsors have said they'll withdraw their support if they reemploy him.
The man was found guilty and served his sentence. If punishment is, for selected crimes, decided by publicists and mobs, extended beyond that deemed appropriate by the courts then we are living in a capricious and unjust society.
Quite. Clearly IANAL but I am fairly sure he'd have a good case in the ECHR. He is unjustly being denied the chance to pursue his lawful profession.
Where does this stop? Do we now say all people convicted of sex offences must never do any job in the public eye, even after they complete their sentence, even if this means they are impoverished? If that is the case surely we should factor it into the sentencing:you will do x many years, then be unable to pursue your career, forcing you into bankruptcy, if Twitter gets in a strop, whatevs, lols.
I think that he would lose such a case. Footballers usually have a clause allowing termination of contract for behaviour likely to bring the Club into disrepute. Being convicted of rape would probably be covered.
Nonetheless I would leave it up to the club. Other players have played after convictions, though this fellow seems not to have expressed remorse.
IIRC he's out of contract I believe. They would have to offer him a new one and he's not played competitively for over 2.5 years........
Whilst I think this is awful, if true, and though I'm definitely not trying to make any equivalence between the two parties, I'm tempted to ask.. Would anyone think it appalling if the same had happened to a BNP member? Or if BNP members had been prevented from adopting?
Personally, I think it would be justified for BNP members. But where do we draw the line?
If it were actually because the people are racists who happen to be UKIP members, would that make it ok?
I think it would be appalling if they were BNP members. If a political party is legal, it is legal. End of. And I'd say the same about Sinn Fein or the SWP or the Lib Dems.
I actually agree with SeanT. If we consider some views or behaviour to be unacceptable we should make them illegal, but it's not right to introduce random penalties as a penalty for belonging to legal organisations.
I've twice had occasion to work in non-political groups with people who I accidentally discovered to be BNP members. They hadn't expressed any political views in my hearing, and I felt it was actually none of my business what they privately thought, so I continued to work with them.
For school governors, the test should be if they treat children with equal fairness and don't attempt to indoctrinate them, not whether they have political views that we speculate MIGHT make them not do so.
Nonetheless I would leave it up to the club. Other players have played after convictions, though this fellow seems not to have expressed remorse.
He's continued to say that consent was given (I don't know the details of the case - I vaguely remember that the woman involved was as drunk as a skunk).
If he believes that (and I know the court disagrees) then he believes he is not guilty: why should he express remorse?
It is a little bit more complex. The lady went back to the hotel with another footballer (who was cleared of all charges) and was very drunk. She had sex with him, then at a later stage Mr Evans came back to the hotel, and sex took place.
The contention is did she know / consent to having sex with Mr Evans. He claims to this day she did and thus doesn't believe he should express remorse as he continues to appeal his conviction.
The press hated his strong stance over Leveson and the potential fairness agenda.
The Wongas and big 6 energy companies want freedom to continue taking the piss.
Same with the bankers.
Looks like Ed trying to get the voters to line up against the only people in society less popular than
Ed is crap
This is all true, but that's no excuse for Ed and the rest of Labour crumbling miserably whenever they start getting any criticism from them.
They need to look at the tactics of the Scottish independence campaign - say what you like about the "Yes" campaign, but they didn't just give in when supposedly "respectable" businesses and newspapers started sneering at them, they kept on fighting.
On the subject of difficult schooling choices, this story from an article on the BBC was an eye opener on difficult choices.
Abdus Samad, from the northern village of Gurzangi, has sent his 12-year-old daughter to the Red Mosque seminary[pro-Taliban school] - despite the fact that his brother was murdered by the Taliban, for refusing to join their ranks.
Other players have played after convictions, though this fellow seems not to have expressed remorse.
Tbf that is because he still maintains his innocence (which he is entitled to do even if others are entitled to presume his guilt given his conviction).
There have been a number of high profile recent cases of sports stars losing contracts / being fined etc. over quite outrageous behaviour in their personal lives (google Ray Rice if you havent heard of the case already).
The bottom line is that if you're an entertainer then you are subject to the whim of popular opinion. I dont expect Rolf Harris to be launching a comeback after he is released from prison.
EdinTokyo Hague and Ed Miliband are OK cabinet minister material but disastrous as party leaders, by any objective measure other than party ideology Clarke would have been chosen to take on Blair not Hague or IDS and David Miliband would have been chosen to take on Cameron, not Brown or Ed Miliband. A similar error was made by Labour in 1983 when Foot was chosen instead of Healey and arguably in 1964 when Home was chosen instead of Butler
EdinTokyo Hague and Ed Miliband are OK cabinet minister material but disastrous as party leaders, by any objective measure other than party ideology Clarke would have been chosen to take on Blair not Hague or IDS and David Miliband would have been chosen to take on Cameron, not Brown or Ed Miliband. A similar error was made by Labour in 1983 when Foot was chosen instead of Healey and arguably in 1964 when Home was chosen instead of Butler
Was RAB a real candidate in 64?
I thought it was Hailsham vs Home? But It's been a while since I've read Macleod's article on the subject
So you are on very dodgy legal and moral ground to ask someone to resign because of being part of a group, even one generally thought of as reprehensible. However, most of the BNP members I have been unfortunate enough to come into contact with have been unpleasant, violent and close-minded individuals, so I would think it would be very unlikely that one would make a suitable school governor, when judged as an individual.
Yes, that's a different point - judging people by their behaviour as individuals is absolutely appropriate.
Other players have played after convictions, though this fellow seems not to have expressed remorse.
Tbf that is because he still maintains his innocence (which he is entitled to do even if others are entitled to presume his guilt given his conviction).
There have been a number of high profile recent cases of sports stars losing contracts / being fined etc. over quite outrageous behaviour in their personal lives (google Ray Rice if you havent heard of the case already).
The bottom line is that if you're an entertainer then you are subject to the whim of popular opinion. I dont expect Rolf Harris to be launching a comeback after he is released from prison.
SPOT on.. its too easy to join the bandwagon assuming guilt.. there have been so many miscarriages of justice...
There is a good alternative history saga written by Eric Flint et al. about a small US town sent back in time and space to land in mid Germany in 1632 and the consequences around Europe. 1632.org is the website which has links to the books and the Grantville gazette, a fan fiction publication published and edited 6 times a year.
Other players have played after convictions, though this fellow seems not to have expressed remorse.
Tbf that is because he still maintains his innocence (which he is entitled to do even if others are entitled to presume his guilt given his conviction).
There have been a number of high profile recent cases of sports stars losing contracts / being fined etc. over quite outrageous behaviour in their personal lives (google Ray Rice if you havent heard of the case already).
The bottom line is that if you're an entertainer then you are subject to the whim of popular opinion. I dont expect Rolf Harris to be launching a comeback after he is released from prison.
SPOT on.. its too easy to join the bandwagon assuming guilt.. there have been so many miscarriages of justice...
Neil , Of course the obverse is true, you think Brown was innocent. of all crimes against the British nation....
Charles I would not be too cocky, Chuka had an 8 point lead over Cameron in a Survation poll
On what grounds (besides Cameron's obvious incompetence)? I look forward to seeing him in action in a Miliband government to see if he lives up to the promise seen in him.
If a £50,000 donation buys unparalleled access to the Tory leadership
Just found out I'm going to Cheltenham on Saturday with a man who I'm pretty sure has given much more than that to the Tories. I'll ask him if it's true.
Whilst I think this is awful, if true, and though I'm definitely not trying to make any equivalence between the two parties, I'm tempted to ask.. Would anyone think it appalling if the same had happened to a BNP member? Or if BNP members had been prevented from adopting?
Personally, I think it would be justified for BNP members. But where do we draw the line?
If it were actually because the people are racists who happen to be UKIP members, would that make it ok?
I think it would be appalling if they were BNP members. If a political party is legal, it is legal. End of. And I'd say the same about Sinn Fein or the SWP or the Lib Dems.
If my sister and my parents had a fatal accident, and I were completely unable to look after my nephew, and I were to find out he'd been adopted by BNP members, I'd be appalled.
And if I found out that he was at a school run by BNP members I'd feel similarly appalled.
I don't have any kids of my own but I know you do. How would you feel about your daughter in an equivalent scenario?
Just to add, in both cases imagine the relevant authorities knew that they were BNP members
At the risk, or should I say certainty, of being thought of as a bnp defender, I would say that's the chance you take... If the authorities think them good enough to become foster parents then their political views shouldn't matter.
A bnp supporter might equally flinch at his niece and nephew being brought up by swp supporting foster parents, should they be banned?
If a £50,000 donation buys unparalleled access to the Tory leadership
Just found out I'm going to Cheltenham on Saturday with a man who I'm pretty sure has given much more than that to the Tories. I'll ask him if it's true.
It's meant that my Dad and Mum have had to sit through many dinners with the Camerons.
He's met some interesting people there, but the politicians are really just going through the motions.
EdinTokyo Hague and Ed Miliband are OK cabinet minister material but disastrous as party leaders, by any objective measure other than party ideology Clarke would have been chosen to take on Blair not Hague or IDS and David Miliband would have been chosen to take on Cameron, not Brown or Ed Miliband. A similar error was made by Labour in 1983 when Foot was chosen instead of Healey and arguably in 1964 when Home was chosen instead of Butler
Miliband designed the insane energy policies this country has! He was a bloody disaster as a minister!
Charles Last time Labour picked a smarmy, public school educated London lawyer as their leader they won 3 elections, 2 by landslides
Blair was talented & appealing to Worcester Woman.
I disliked him since I first got to know him in the early 90s when he was still Shadow Home Secretary. He was false and disingenuous, to my mind, but he could be very convincing
@SeanT & @isam good points from both of you. I have had a few glasses of wine and am nearing bed so hope I can be forgiven for not thinking it through thoroughly, but.. I still recoil at the idea of my nephew being raised or educated by people whose declared political positions strongly indicate them to be racists.
I'd feel similarly about them being raised or educated by Islamists. I'd be still upset, but I imagine less so, if the adopters/school governors were SWP members.
Whilst I think this is awful, if true, and though I'm definitely not trying to make any equivalence between the two parties, I'm tempted to ask.. Would anyone think it appalling if the same had happened to a BNP member? Or if BNP members had been prevented from adopting?
Personally, I think it would be justified for BNP members. But where do we draw the line?
If it were actually because the people are racists who happen to be UKIP members, would that make it ok?
I think it would be appalling if they were BNP members. If a political party is legal, it is legal. End of. And I'd say the same about Sinn Fein or the SWP or the Lib Dems.
If my sister and my parents had a fatal accident, and I were completely unable to look after my nephew, and I were to find out he'd been adopted by BNP members, I'd be appalled.
And if I found out that he was at a school run by BNP members I'd feel similarly appalled.
I don't have any kids of my own but I know you do. How would you feel about your daughter in an equivalent scenario?
Well, perhaps you can understand my anger at the closure of the Catholic adoption agencies in England.
Please note that my grandfather was adopted through the Church back in the old country.
Manof Kent Brown was behind Cameron until his 'poll bounce' when he became PM. Umunna has many similar characteristics to Obama, did not stop Obama winning. The poll on Sunday included TV interviews with Umunna
Other players have played after convictions, though this fellow seems not to have expressed remorse.
Tbf that is because he still maintains his innocence (which he is entitled to do even if others are entitled to presume his guilt given his conviction).
There have been a number of high profile recent cases of sports stars losing contracts / being fined etc. over quite outrageous behaviour in their personal lives (google Ray Rice if you havent heard of the case already).
The bottom line is that if you're an entertainer then you are subject to the whim of popular opinion. I dont expect Rolf Harris to be launching a comeback after he is released from prison.
Charles Butler did not give a good conference speech, but Wilson is said to have confided that had he faced Butler in 1964 and not Home he would never have entered Downing Street
Whilst I think this is awful, if true, and though I'm definitely not trying to make any equivalence between the two parties, I'm tempted to ask.. Would anyone think it appalling if the same had happened to a BNP member? Or if BNP members had been prevented from adopting?
Personally, I think it would be justified for BNP members. But where do we draw the line?
If it were actually because the people are racists who happen to be UKIP members, would that make it ok?
I think it would be appalling if they were BNP members. If a political party is legal, it is legal. End of. And I'd say the same about Sinn Fein or the SWP or the Lib Dems.
If my sister and my parents had a fatal accident, and I were completely unable to look after my nephew, and I were to find out he'd been adopted by BNP members, I'd be appalled.
And if I found out that he was at a school run by BNP members I'd feel similarly appalled.
I don't have any kids of my own but I know you do. How would you feel about your daughter in an equivalent scenario?
Well, perhaps you can understand my anger at the closure of the Catholic adoption agencies in England.
It was a rather shocking abdication of responsibility on the part of the Catholic church, wasnt it? Sadly proving to be more interested in issues of private sexuality than the welfare of children yet again.
EdinTokyo Hague and Ed Miliband are OK cabinet minister material but disastrous as party leaders, by any objective measure other than party ideology Clarke would have been chosen to take on Blair not Hague or IDS and David Miliband would have been chosen to take on Cameron, not Brown or Ed Miliband. A similar error was made by Labour in 1983 when Foot was chosen instead of Healey and arguably in 1964 when Home was chosen instead of Butler
Miliband designed the insane energy policies this country has! He was a bloody disaster as a minister!
See the problem? This is the kind of thing first-time opposition leaders have to deal with.
BTW on the specifics I don't think it's right. The energy markets were designed by Prescott and Mandelson, and as energy minister Ed Miliband wasn't able to enact the reform that he's now proposing. (This reform is basically, undo what Prescott and Mandelson did and go back to the John Major design.)
Whilst I think this is awful, if true, and though I'm definitely not trying to make any equivalence between the two parties, I'm tempted to ask.. Would anyone think it appalling if the same had happened to a BNP member? Or if BNP members had been prevented from adopting?
Personally, I think it would be justified for BNP members. But where do we draw the line?
If it were actually because the people are racists who happen to be UKIP members, would that make it ok?
I think it would be appalling if they were BNP members. If a political party is legal, it is legal. End of. And I'd say the same about Sinn Fein or the SWP or the Lib Dems.
If my sister and my parents had a fatal accident, and I were completely unable to look after my nephew, and I were to find out he'd been adopted by BNP members, I'd be appalled.
And if I found out that he was at a school run by BNP members I'd feel similarly appalled.
I don't have any kids of my own but I know you do. How would you feel about your daughter in an equivalent scenario?
Well, perhaps you can understand my anger at the closure of the Catholic adoption agencies in England.
Please note that my grandfather was adopted through the Church back in the old country.
I'd guess that while they existed they did a far more efficient job of making sure that as many of the catholic children got adopted as possible.
That's clearly a good thing taken alone. If there were at least the same measures taken to ensure they went to good homes as there are now then banning it seems a perverse measure to me.
Manof Kent Brown was behind Cameron until his 'poll bounce' when he became PM. Umunna has many similar characteristics to Obama, did not stop Obama winning. The poll on Sunday included TV interviews with Umunna
Obama was a once in a lifetime phenomenon that has turned into a disaster. Claiming someone is the British Obama will not resonate widely. The British public has a very different outlook to the US public. Chuckie is too toff, too arrogant, too sneery and too easily made to look bad in interviews (and I don't care what tame bit of video they provided in the poll).
Comments
Remember, those foster parents were in Rotherham.
Interesting how this solution has evaded everyone else' attempts; it must be really innovative
"You can't be somebody that represents just a few people in society, which I believe that our prime minister, the current prime minister, is"
Whoever wins will be on a pretty low share of the vote, so depending on how you define 'few' it could be the case regardless.
people asking why they are on zero-hours contracts while those at the top get away with zero tax
People at the top get away with zero tax? Man, now I really am angry. Does he mean corporations, as that seems tonally true.
Still sounds like a lot 'acknowledging' this and 'understanding' that, and assurances in vague terms that Labour alone can fix things, while saying very little.
But it should see them over the line. and that's what is important. That I very much doubt he will be as bad as Tories proclaim is not much to write home about unless he has pulled a fast one and his skills will blossom once in office again.
The man was found guilty and served his sentence. If punishment is, for selected crimes, decided by publicists and mobs, extended beyond that deemed appropriate by the courts then we are living in a capricious and unjust society.
But, he should be entitled to earn his living within those constraints.
Off-field actions inevitably play a part in that value, if people feel that he is less entertaining because of his off-field actions then that means he is not as good at his job.
He's a smarmy lawyer!
Don't bash my kind for things we're not guilty of.
Personally, I think it would be justified for BNP members. But where do we draw the line?
If it were actually because the people are racists who happen to be UKIP members, would that make it ok?
Maybe first-term opposition leaders are just always going to be considered shit. It's a tough job in that if you thought Party X was rubbish on election day, you probably still think they're rubbish a year or two later. The best they can hope for is that you think they're less bad than the government.
I just have an issue with mob rule.
Does the Telegraph still employ journalists?
http://youtu.be/RfTrKT8Llew
The press hated his strong stance over Leveson and the potential fairness agenda.
The Wongas and big 6 energy companies want freedom to continue taking the piss.
Same with the bankers.
Looks like Ed trying to get the voters to line up against the only people in society less popular than
Ed is crap
This does worry me. The mob got Dapper Laughs guy yesterday, despite far more offensive comics out there. Today, they continue to push that Evans doesn't get to play, despite other players who committed equally serious crimes continue in the game, just because the mob either don't know about them or don't care.
My comments are a broader condemnation of the society that we live in.
Nonetheless I would leave it up to the club. Other players have played after convictions, though this fellow seems not to have expressed remorse.
"THE Ministry of Defence has admitted it is considering abandoning its promise to build the new type 26 frigates on the Clyde and instead seek an alternative from abroad, the head of Royal Navy has admitted. [...] If the Royal Navy goes abroad for warships it will be the first time it has done it in peace time and would break a key pledge made to Scottish voters by the UK government during the referendum that the new frigates would be built on the Clyde."
http://www.scotsman.com/news/uk/mod-considers-pulling-4bn-clyde-frigate-contract-1-3602708
http://wingsoverscotland.com/barely-worth-the-words/
Labour have called for the selection process for the 2022 World Cup to be re-run, following allegations that key FIFA officials were bribed into awarding the desert state the Games. The regime has criminalised homosexuality and the drinking of alcohol, and is accused of widespread human rights abuses.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/world-cup/11195176/Cameron-to-offer-British-help-for-Qatar-World-Cup.html
A FIFA report denying corruption in FIFA dealings is less credible than the dodgy Labour dossier
If he believes that (and I know the court disagrees) then he believes he is not guilty: why should he express remorse?
And if I found out that he was at a school run by BNP members I'd feel similarly appalled.
I don't have any kids of my own but I know you do. How would you feel about your daughter in an equivalent scenario?
So you are on very dodgy legal and moral ground to ask someone to resign because of being part of a group, even one generally thought of as reprehensible. However, most of the BNP members I have been unfortunate enough to come into contact with have been unpleasant, violent and close-minded individuals, so I would think it would be very unlikely that one would make a suitable school governor, when judged as an individual.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/30023525
I've twice had occasion to work in non-political groups with people who I accidentally discovered to be BNP members. They hadn't expressed any political views in my hearing, and I felt it was actually none of my business what they privately thought, so I continued to work with them.
For school governors, the test should be if they treat children with equal fairness and don't attempt to indoctrinate them, not whether they have political views that we speculate MIGHT make them not do so.
The contention is did she know / consent to having sex with Mr Evans. He claims to this day she did and thus doesn't believe he should express remorse as he continues to appeal his conviction.
They need to look at the tactics of the Scottish independence campaign - say what you like about the "Yes" campaign, but they didn't just give in when supposedly "respectable" businesses and newspapers started sneering at them, they kept on fighting.
Abdus Samad, from the northern village of Gurzangi, has sent his 12-year-old daughter to the Red Mosque seminary[pro-Taliban school] - despite the fact that his brother was murdered by the Taliban, for refusing to join their ranks.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-30005278
There have been a number of high profile recent cases of sports stars losing contracts / being fined etc. over quite outrageous behaviour in their personal lives (google Ray Rice if you havent heard of the case already).
The bottom line is that if you're an entertainer then you are subject to the whim of popular opinion. I dont expect Rolf Harris to be launching a comeback after he is released from prison.
I thought it was Hailsham vs Home? But It's been a while since I've read Macleod's article on the subject
There is a good alternative history saga written by Eric Flint et al. about a small US town sent back in time and space to land in mid Germany in 1632 and the consequences around Europe. 1632.org is the website which has links to the books and the Grantville gazette, a fan fiction publication published and edited 6 times a year.
A bnp supporter might equally flinch at his niece and nephew being brought up by swp supporting foster parents, should they be banned?
More likely they represent the interests of union activists rather than even just members
I dislike influence peddling whenever and wherever it occurs.
Chuckie is too sneery, too arrogant, too easily rattled and too easily ripped to shreds in interviews
He's met some interesting people there, but the politicians are really just going through the motions.
I disliked him since I first got to know him in the early 90s when he was still Shadow Home Secretary. He was false and disingenuous, to my mind, but he could be very convincing
Chuka is just an empty suit.
I'd feel similarly about them being raised or educated by Islamists. I'd be still upset, but I imagine less so, if the adopters/school governors were SWP members.
Please note that my grandfather was adopted through the Church back in the old country.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/nov/12/samantha-lewthwaite-white-widow-killed-by-russian-/
"I dislike influence peddling whenever and wherever it occurs."
I thought that was the essence of politics.
Can't imagine it will cost them much, I had £60@4/5 and it took about half hour to get on while they phoned head office
But nice all the same
BTW on the specifics I don't think it's right. The energy markets were designed by Prescott and Mandelson, and as energy minister Ed Miliband wasn't able to enact the reform that he's now proposing. (This reform is basically, undo what Prescott and Mandelson did and go back to the John Major design.)
That's clearly a good thing taken alone. If there were at least the same measures taken to ensure they went to good homes as there are now then banning it seems a perverse measure to me.