Catholics built a lot of very beautiful cathedrals in this country: Canterbury, Durham, York, for instance.
Unfortunately, the Protestants seized them.
**Having lit light blue touch paper, retires to safe distance**
I think of it more as a demerger.
Anyway, the Church of England is a Catholic Church.
You may think that. I'm not sure we do. A bit of a prodigal church, if so. We await your return!
(With fatted calves and feasting, of course.)
Well, we still have the Apostolic Succession and the same Creeds and Sacraments. We just don't recognise the authority of the Pope. So it's really just down to governance.
Of course, the Catholic Church was a split from the Orthodox Catholic Church of the Roman Empire anyway.
There something maybe you churchgoers can help me with. Why is it that Jesus was born on the same day every year (Dec 25th), but seems to die on a different day every year (apparently related to the first Sunday following the first full moon after the Vernal Equinox).
Because he wasn't born on December 25th - that's just when we celebrate. Any overlaps with Saturnalia and Yule are purely coincidental.
Can I ask a daft question about polling methodology.
I know that some companies use internet, others phones and/or in person. But do they use new randomised samples each time or a panel?
Is there any evidence which is the most effective?
I'm not sure anyone does in-person polling any more. Generally speaking the phone pollsters dial random numbers, while the internet pollsters use a panel.
IIUC phone pollsters have tended to have a better record in Britain, although it may get tougher as fewer and fewer people answer phone calls from unknown numbers, and the ones who do become increasingly untypical.
So the old "stratified random sample" of when I did stats 25 years ago is dead ? What happens now, they dial random numbers and then adjust the results post-hoc depending on what the demographics of the sample appear to be from the questioning ?
Mr. Socrates, I have no issue with an established church. Giving a coronation place to minority faiths unrelated to the monarch's position is an utter nonsense.
Also, is this an actual proposal, or is Mr. Pulpstar pulling our legs to see how credibly we take the idea of a Quran verse at the coronation?
Mr Dancer, surely you'd never accuse me of lighting the blue touch paper and then walking away *fucking pleb* **innocent face**
It was an actual proposal I heard on r4 on the way to work this morning.
"As for all the renegotiation bullshit, presumably he'll say it's bullshit."
It probably is, but the aim is to encourage a few waverers to say .. "Maybe we'll give it a chance and see what happens."
If Ed rules out any re-negotiation, a few of his waverers may waver a little more.
Bullshit will be recognised for what it is by about 95% of the voters, but the gullible 5% might be important.
Yup, I'm sure that's why he's doing it. It's probably the right move, but the downside is that it damages his brand, and that brand damage may extend to other areas where voters would otherwise trust him.
Also it enrages the part of the 95% who really care about the issue he's bullshitting about, which complicates the goal of getting tactical support from them.
Catholics built a lot of very beautiful cathedrals in this country: Canterbury, Durham, York, for instance.
Unfortunately, the Protestants seized them.
**Having lit light blue touch paper, retires to safe distance**
I think of it more as a demerger.
Anyway, the Church of England is a Catholic Church.
You may think that. I'm not sure we do. A bit of a prodigal church, if so. We await your return!
(With fatted calves and feasting, of course.)
Well, we still have the Apostolic Succession and the same Creeds and Sacraments. We just don't recognise the authority of the Pope. So it's really just down to governance.
Of course, the Catholic Church was a split from the Orthodox Catholic Church of the Roman Empire anyway.
There something maybe you churchgoers can help me with. Why is it that Jesus was born on the same day every year (Dec 25th), but seems to die on a different day every year (apparently related to the first Sunday following the first full moon after the Vernal Equinox).
What is needed to address the concerns of the working class in the UK is the following:-
"Second, let’s not be shy of taking measures which advantage local workers and local access to services, and discourage future migration. There’s much more that could be done, from using national monitoring in employment to granting protected access to affordable housing."
Who said it? Answer John Denham Labour MP in June 2014
Catholics built a lot of very beautiful cathedrals in this country: Canterbury, Durham, York, for instance.
Unfortunately, the Protestants seized them.
**Having lit light blue touch paper, retires to safe distance**
I think of it more as a demerger.
Anyway, the Church of England is a Catholic Church.
You may think that. I'm not sure we do. A bit of a prodigal church, if so. We await your return!
(With fatted calves and feasting, of course.)
Well, we still have the Apostolic Succession and the same Creeds and Sacraments. We just don't recognise the authority of the Pope. So it's really just down to governance.
Of course, the Catholic Church was a split from the Orthodox Catholic Church of the Roman Empire anyway.
There something maybe you churchgoers can help me with. Why is it that Jesus was born on the same day every year (Dec 25th), but seems to die on a different day every year (apparently related to the first Sunday following the first full moon after the Vernal Equinox).
Because he wasn't born on December 25th - that's just when we celebrate. Any overlaps with Saturnalia and Yule are purely coincidental.
Yes, and I cant quite put my finger on where I have heard something sounding like Ishtar or Eostre before ;-)
Another very disappointing poll for the Tories. With little more than five months to go before the GE, now was supposed to be crossover time, were it indeed ever to happen. I fear the sands of time are fast running out for the Blues. Now then, let's have a look at those Sporting seats spread prices.
Keep calm.
Populus seem to be an outlier from the other pollsters with their high Labour score.
But look at the polls in general, apart from ComRes and Survation giving similar leads, most of the other pollsters have it as a tie or the Tories ahead.
Ah, so that's just the three pollsters showing Labour as having a big lead ..... that's alright then.
Position with Sporting now opened.
You missed my point.
Those pollsters that are currently showing the largest Labour leads (Survation, Populus and ComRes online) are new pollsters or old pollsters with new methodologies that have never been tested at a general election.
The ones that have been tried and tested at a general election have it largely as a tie, or the Tories just ahead, or Lab just ahead.
Catholics built a lot of very beautiful cathedrals in this country: Canterbury, Durham, York, for instance.
Unfortunately, the Protestants seized them.
**Having lit light blue touch paper, retires to safe distance**
I think of it more as a demerger.
Anyway, the Church of England is a Catholic Church.
You may think that. I'm not sure we do. A bit of a prodigal church, if so. We await your return!
(With fatted calves and feasting, of course.)
Well, we still have the Apostolic Succession and the same Creeds and Sacraments. We just don't recognise the authority of the Pope. So it's really just down to governance.
Of course, the Catholic Church was a split from the Orthodox Catholic Church of the Roman Empire anyway.
There something maybe you churchgoers can help me with. Why is it that Jesus was born on the same day every year (Dec 25th), but seems to die on a different day every year (apparently related to the first Sunday following the first full moon after the Vernal Equinox).
Because he wasn't born on December 25th - that's just when we celebrate. Any overlaps with Saturnalia and Yule are purely coincidental.
Can you inform me where the name for the Christian festival celebrating Christ's resurrection comes from, Charles?
Mr. Socrates, I have no issue with an established church. Giving a coronation place to minority faiths unrelated to the monarch's position is an utter nonsense.
Also, is this an actual proposal, or is Mr. Pulpstar pulling our legs to see how credibly we take the idea of a Quran verse at the coronation?
Mr Dancer, surely you'd never accuse me of lighting the blue touch paper and then walking away *fucking pleb* **innocent face**
It was an actual proposal I heard on r4 on the way to work this morning.
Yes - by some daft Bishop who, like all too many Anglican bishops, seems to have only the haziest understanding of Christianity or indeed the religious aspect of the coronation ceremony.
(Monarchs don't represent us; they represent the state. We elect politicians to represent us.)
Another very disappointing poll for the Tories. With little more than five months to go before the GE, now was supposed to be crossover time, were it indeed ever to happen. I fear the sands of time are fast running out for the Blues. Now then, let's have a look at those Sporting seats spread prices.
Keep calm.
Populus seem to be an outlier from the other pollsters with their high Labour score.
But look at the polls in general, apart from ComRes and Survation giving similar leads, most of the other pollsters have it as a tie or the Tories ahead.
Ah, so that's just the three pollsters showing Labour as having a big lead ..... that's alright then.
Position with Sporting now opened.
You missed my point.
Those pollsters that are currently showing the largest Labour leads (Survation, Populus and ComRes online) are new pollsters or old pollsters with new methodologies that have never been tested at a general election.
The ones that have been tried and tested at a general election have it largely as a tie, or the Tories just ahead, or Lab just ahead.
Now that you mention it, I haven't seen an ICM for ages.
Catholics built a lot of very beautiful cathedrals in this country: Canterbury, Durham, York, for instance.
Unfortunately, the Protestants seized them.
**Having lit light blue touch paper, retires to safe distance**
I think of it more as a demerger.
Anyway, the Church of England is a Catholic Church.
You may think that. I'm not sure we do. A bit of a prodigal church, if so. We await your return!
(With fatted calves and feasting, of course.)
Well, we still have the Apostolic Succession and the same Creeds and Sacraments. We just don't recognise the authority of the Pope. So it's really just down to governance.
Of course, the Catholic Church was a split from the Orthodox Catholic Church of the Roman Empire anyway.
There something maybe you churchgoers can help me with. Why is it that Jesus was born on the same day every year (Dec 25th), but seems to die on a different day every year (apparently related to the first Sunday following the first full moon after the Vernal Equinox).
Because he wasn't born on December 25th - that's just when we celebrate. Any overlaps with Saturnalia and Yule are purely coincidental.
Can you inform me where the name for the Christian festival celebrating Christ's resurrection comes from, Charles?
Another very disappointing poll for the Tories. With little more than five months to go before the GE, now was supposed to be crossover time, were it indeed ever to happen. I fear the sands of time are fast running out for the Blues. Now then, let's have a look at those Sporting seats spread prices.
Keep calm.
Populus seem to be an outlier from the other pollsters with their high Labour score.
But look at the polls in general, apart from ComRes and Survation giving similar leads, most of the other pollsters have it as a tie or the Tories ahead.
Ah, so that's just the three pollsters showing Labour as having a big lead ..... that's alright then.
Position with Sporting now opened.
You missed my point.
Those pollsters that are currently showing the largest Labour leads (Survation, Populus and ComRes online) are new pollsters or old pollsters with new methodologies that have never been tested at a general election.
The ones that have been tried and tested at a general election have it largely as a tie, or the Tories just ahead, or Lab just ahead.
Now that you mention it, I haven't seen an ICM for ages.
When is the next one due?
We won't see the ICM phone poll for another ten days at least.
We should see the ComRes phone poll on Monday night though.
Mr. Socrates, I have no issue with an established church. Giving a coronation place to minority faiths unrelated to the monarch's position is an utter nonsense.
Also, is this an actual proposal, or is Mr. Pulpstar pulling our legs to see how credibly we take the idea of a Quran verse at the coronation?
Mr Dancer, surely you'd never accuse me of lighting the blue touch paper and then walking away *fucking pleb* **innocent face**
It was an actual proposal I heard on r4 on the way to work this morning.
Yes - by some daft Bishop who, like all too many Anglican bishops, seems to have only the haziest understanding of Christianity or indeed the religious aspect of the coronation ceremony.
(Monarchs don't represent us; they represent the state. We elect politicians to represent us.)
Anyway, that's enough teasing of you all.
Off to do some work.
A multi- or no-faith coronation is an awful idea, worthy of New Labour at its worst.
Either do the Coronation properly (which means an Anglican service) or not at all.
It would have been like having a civil ceremony for Prince William's and Kate Middleton's wedding.
Mr. Socrates, I have no issue with an established church. Giving a coronation place to minority faiths unrelated to the monarch's position is an utter nonsense.
Also, is this an actual proposal, or is Mr. Pulpstar pulling our legs to see how credibly we take the idea of a Quran verse at the coronation?
Mr Dancer, surely you'd never accuse me of lighting the blue touch paper and then walking away *fucking pleb* **innocent face**
It was an actual proposal I heard on r4 on the way to work this morning.
Yes - by some daft Bishop who, like all too many Anglican bishops, seems to have only the haziest understanding of Christianity or indeed the religious aspect of the coronation ceremony.
(Monarchs don't represent us; they represent the state. We elect politicians to represent us.)
Anyway, that's enough teasing of you all.
Off to do some work.
A multi- or no-faith coronation is an awful idea, worthy of New Labour at its worst.
Either do the Coronation properly (which means an Anglican service) or not at all.
It would have been like having a civil ceremony for Prince William's and Kate Middleton's wedding.
Isn't it Charles' idea?
He said a while back he wanted to Defender of Faith, rather than just merely the Defender of the Faith.
Mr. Socrates, I have no issue with an established church. Giving a coronation place to minority faiths unrelated to the monarch's position is an utter nonsense.
Also, is this an actual proposal, or is Mr. Pulpstar pulling our legs to see how credibly we take the idea of a Quran verse at the coronation?
Mr Dancer, surely you'd never accuse me of lighting the blue touch paper and then walking away *fucking pleb* **innocent face**
It was an actual proposal I heard on r4 on the way to work this morning.
Yes - by some daft Bishop who, like all too many Anglican bishops, seems to have only the haziest understanding of Christianity or indeed the religious aspect of the coronation ceremony.
(Monarchs don't represent us; they represent the state. We elect politicians to represent us.)
Anyway, that's enough teasing of you all.
Off to do some work.
A multi- or no-faith coronation is an awful idea, worthy of New Labour at its worst.
Either do the Coronation properly (which means an Anglican service) or not at all.
It would have been like having a civil ceremony for Prince William's and Kate Middleton's wedding.
Isn't it Charles' idea?
He said a while back he wanted to Defender of Faith, rather than just merely the Defender of the Faith.
Charles has some strange ideas. I don't want our next Coronation to be the kind of civic ceremony you'd see organised by Brent Council.
Mr. Eagles, I remember that. It was a bloody stupid idea then and remains a bloody stupid idea today. Daft sod.
First time I've heard this Quran nonsense, though. Someone should tell him he's not going to become a grand ayatollah, and to stop being such a daft sod.
This thread reminds us why Kippers are so chicken of Dave's referendum.
As with the Indyref, in the AV referendum Dave smashed his opponents.
The Kippers know Dave will defeat them and make it a hat trick, so that's why the Kippers are so keen to put Ed into Downing Street and thus no in/out referendum.
Wow! Governments win referenda.
Any more piercing insights, TSE?
BTW, since Hagia Sophia in Istanbul was turned from a church into a mosque, I'd shut up about Westminster Cathedral if I were you.
I have lots of piercing insights but they'd go over your head.
No I'll keep on talking about Westminster Cathedral, clearly it is a sore point, and rather depressing that Kippers don't know their country so well that they don't know about the magnificent construction that is that Cathedral.
Just to be clear, TSE, it is horrible and garish.
It's up there with Keble and Katz on my list.
I thought you were a cultured man Charles, but now this and the fact you read the Metro, I'm not so sure.
Catholics built a lot of very beautiful cathedrals in this country: Canterbury, Durham, York, for instance.
Unfortunately, the Protestants seized them.
**Having lit light blue touch paper, retires to safe distance**
The Anglicans aren't Protestants. They're fence-sitters.
They still seized them. And with quite a lot of force and violence, as well. Though Charles's "demerger" is a magnificent euphemism!
Force and violence used in seizing churches? I don't think so. A change of management at board level is more like it. In modern parlance it was more a management buy-out of the English subsidiary of a multi-national headquartered in Rome.
Granted after the buy-out there was some unpleasantness over the logos and marketing policies to be used by the new company but as I say that was after the change and it is unclear that the CEO and group board actually approved (though they were happy to accept the bonuses that came as a result of stripping out non-performing assets from the local branches).
Mr. Socrates, I have no issue with an established church. Giving a coronation place to minority faiths unrelated to the monarch's position is an utter nonsense.
Also, is this an actual proposal, or is Mr. Pulpstar pulling our legs to see how credibly we take the idea of a Quran verse at the coronation?
Mr Dancer, surely you'd never accuse me of lighting the blue touch paper and then walking away *fucking pleb* **innocent face**
It was an actual proposal I heard on r4 on the way to work this morning.
Yes - by some daft Bishop who, like all too many Anglican bishops, seems to have only the haziest understanding of Christianity or indeed the religious aspect of the coronation ceremony.
(Monarchs don't represent us; they represent the state. We elect politicians to represent us.)
Anyway, that's enough teasing of you all.
Off to do some work.
Time for some Bishop Bashing.
I'll get my coat.
*Always lowering the tone*
Gutted I didn't change trains at Baker Street last week on the way to Dirty Dicks.
Mr. Socrates, I have no issue with an established church. Giving a coronation place to minority faiths unrelated to the monarch's position is an utter nonsense.
Also, is this an actual proposal, or is Mr. Pulpstar pulling our legs to see how credibly we take the idea of a Quran verse at the coronation?
Mr Dancer, surely you'd never accuse me of lighting the blue touch paper and then walking away *fucking pleb* **innocent face**
It was an actual proposal I heard on r4 on the way to work this morning.
Yes - by some daft Bishop who, like all too many Anglican bishops, seems to have only the haziest understanding of Christianity or indeed the religious aspect of the coronation ceremony.
(Monarchs don't represent us; they represent the state. We elect politicians to represent us.)
Anyway, that's enough teasing of you all.
Off to do some work.
A multi- or no-faith coronation is an awful idea, worthy of New Labour at its worst.
Either do the Coronation properly (which means an Anglican service) or not at all.
It would have been like having a civil ceremony for Prince William's and Kate Middleton's wedding.
Isn't it Charles' idea?
He said a while back he wanted to Defender of Faith, rather than just merely the Defender of the Faith.
So taking sides on behalf of all religions against the irreligious, rather than just Anglicans against the rest?
Another very disappointing poll for the Tories. With little more than five months to go before the GE, now was supposed to be crossover time, were it indeed ever to happen. I fear the sands of time are fast running out for the Blues. Now then, let's have a look at those Sporting seats spread prices.
Keep calm.
Populus seem to be an outlier from the other pollsters with their high Labour score.
But look at the polls in general, apart from ComRes and Survation giving similar leads, most of the other pollsters have it as a tie or the Tories ahead.
Ah, so that's just the three pollsters showing Labour as having a big lead ..... that's alright then.
Position with Sporting now opened.
I notice looking through the Council by elections yesterday that there was a swing from Labour to Conservative in pretty much all of them.
Mr. Socrates, I have no issue with an established church. Giving a coronation place to minority faiths unrelated to the monarch's position is an utter nonsense.
Also, is this an actual proposal, or is Mr. Pulpstar pulling our legs to see how credibly we take the idea of a Quran verse at the coronation?
Mr Dancer, surely you'd never accuse me of lighting the blue touch paper and then walking away *fucking pleb* **innocent face**
It was an actual proposal I heard on r4 on the way to work this morning.
Yes - by some daft Bishop who, like all too many Anglican bishops, seems to have only the haziest understanding of Christianity or indeed the religious aspect of the coronation ceremony.
He was probably a "modernist"
James Hacker: Humphrey, what's a Modernist in the Church of England? Sir Humphrey Appleby: Ah, well, the word "Modernist" is code for non-believer. James Hacker: You mean an atheist? Sir Humphrey Appleby: No, Prime Minister. An atheist clergyman couldn't continue to draw his stipend. So, when they stop believing in God, they call themselves "Modernists".
Mr. Socrates, I have no issue with an established church. Giving a coronation place to minority faiths unrelated to the monarch's position is an utter nonsense.
Also, is this an actual proposal, or is Mr. Pulpstar pulling our legs to see how credibly we take the idea of a Quran verse at the coronation?
Mr Dancer, surely you'd never accuse me of lighting the blue touch paper and then walking away *fucking pleb* **innocent face**
It was an actual proposal I heard on r4 on the way to work this morning.
Yes - by some daft Bishop who, like all too many Anglican bishops, seems to have only the haziest understanding of Christianity or indeed the religious aspect of the coronation ceremony.
(Monarchs don't represent us; they represent the state. We elect politicians to represent us.)
Anyway, that's enough teasing of you all.
Off to do some work.
A multi- or no-faith coronation is an awful idea, worthy of New Labour at its worst.
Either do the Coronation properly (which means an Anglican service) or not at all.
It would have been like having a civil ceremony for Prince William's and Kate Middleton's wedding.
Isn't it Charles' idea?
He said a while back he wanted to Defender of Faith, rather than just merely the Defender of the Faith.
So taking sides on behalf of all religions against the irreligious, rather than just Anglicans against the rest?
I think in his view, you don't have to be religious to be a person of faith.
Personally we should abolish the churches and turn them into discos and nightclubs.
That's what half the Anglican clergy seem to think too.
Worse, a number of racecourses are following suit. :-(
Perhaps we could have the feasting and merger negotiations at a racecourse. Cheltenham, for instance. Plenty of Irish priests there to help matters along and they are usually (or those I knew) good racing tipsters as well. So all should go swimmingly!
Excellent idea.
I'll raise it with Ian Renton when I'm there next, probably in a fortnite's time.
Just caught up with this morning's Populus poll which shows an absurd Labour lead of 5%. Are they trying to match Survation and ComRes for being the least accurate pollster?
In the real world yesterday the Tories held all their council by-election seats and won one from Labour. I noted 5 Lab to Tory swings out of 5 seats.
In Scotland today the Aberdeenshire seat is likely to be recorded as an SNP gain if they win. The way our council seats are, unless it is the party which won the first preference in 2011, it is unlikely any other party will "hold" a seat because in reality they were runner-up or 2nd/3rd runner-up in 2011.
I see the "ban on benefits" has moved to "a ban on some benefits" to "a delay for a few years in some benefits" over night.
Cameron is just weak. The latest EU migration data shows a tougher approach is needed, but instead he moves to a less restrictive approach than his office suggested just a few months ago. And not just a bit less restrictive - a lot weaker than the weaker of the two previous options. And he's painting it as him being a tough guy. This is why people no longer trust politicians. Weak, weak, weak.
He just isn't very good at politics.
Cameron vs Milliband is like Alien vs Predator.
Whoever wins, we lose.
Does feel that way.
But in a forced choice I would have to whatever way kept Milliband away from power.
Mr. Socrates, I have no issue with an established church. Giving a coronation place to minority faiths unrelated to the monarch's position is an utter nonsense.
Also, is this an actual proposal, or is Mr. Pulpstar pulling our legs to see how credibly we take the idea of a Quran verse at the coronation?
Mr Dancer, surely you'd never accuse me of lighting the blue touch paper and then walking away *fucking pleb* **innocent face**
It was an actual proposal I heard on r4 on the way to work this morning.
Yes - by some daft Bishop who, like all too many Anglican bishops, seems to have only the haziest understanding of Christianity or indeed the religious aspect of the coronation ceremony.
(Monarchs don't represent us; they represent the state. We elect politicians to represent us.)
Anyway, that's enough teasing of you all.
Off to do some work.
A multi- or no-faith coronation is an awful idea, worthy of New Labour at its worst.
Either do the Coronation properly (which means an Anglican service) or not at all.
It would have been like having a civil ceremony for Prince William's and Kate Middleton's wedding.
Isn't it Charles' idea?
He said a while back he wanted to Defender of Faith, rather than just merely the Defender of the Faith.
So taking sides on behalf of all religions against the irreligious, rather than just Anglicans against the rest?
Has he asked these other faiths what they think about the idea, or is it more a unilateral decision ?
Personally we should abolish the churches and turn them into discos and nightclubs.
That's what half the Anglican clergy seem to think too.
Worse, a number of racecourses are following suit. :-(
Perhaps we could have the feasting and merger negotiations at a racecourse. Cheltenham, for instance. Plenty of Irish priests there to help matters along and they are usually (or those I knew) good racing tipsters as well. So all should go swimmingly!
Excellent idea.
I'll raise it with Ian Renton when I'm there next, probably in a fortnite's time.
Who for the champion hurdle ?
I backed The New One at 6-1 ages back because I knew he'd run but is Faugheen too short at 2-1 now ?
Mr. Eagles, and some atheists may share that view. Others won't. It's a bullshit change anyway: Charles will be tasked with being King of about 17 nations and head of the Anglican Church. He's not becoming chief rabbi, dalai lama, or grand ayatollah.
Another very disappointing poll for the Tories. With little more than five months to go before the GE, now was supposed to be crossover time, were it indeed ever to happen. I fear the sands of time are fast running out for the Blues. Now then, let's have a look at those Sporting seats spread prices.
Keep calm.
Populus seem to be an outlier from the other pollsters with their high Labour score.
But look at the polls in general, apart from ComRes and Survation giving similar leads, most of the other pollsters have it as a tie or the Tories ahead.
Ah, so that's just the three pollsters showing Labour as having a big lead ..... that's alright then.
Position with Sporting now opened.
I notice looking through the Council by elections yesterday that there was a swing from Labour to Conservative in pretty much all of them.
With the exception of Populus, pollsters seem to be agreed on putting Labour on 29-34%, 1-2% ahead of the Conservatives.
I have no problem with a few lines of the Quran being recited at Chas's coronation. If he wants them there to indicate his respect for his Moslem subjects that is fine by me. Or maybe he is just keeping his options open like those early Christian kings that hedged their bets by having a few pagan symbols included in their funeral rites. What if the ayatollahs have called it right and on the day of our demise we end up in front of Allah? He does not strike me as being that forgiving, so anything that you can do to keep him onside is probably a good idea.
Some posters on here have a vast capacity for outrage. I admire it in a way.
Snap verdict: What was remarkable about David Cameron’s speech was not in it. Over the last few weeks there have been speculation about Cameron demanding quotas for EU migrants, or perhaps the use of the emergency brake procedure to keep EU migrants out (an idea Sir John Major proposed), but, from what he said today, there was not the slightest hint that these ideas have even been on the agenda.
...
The Sun has reported on the speech relatively neutrally this morning, as if it has not yet decided whether to commend Cameron for adopting its policy (which he hasn’t), or lambast him for being feeble.
Mr. Socrates, I have no issue with an established church. Giving a coronation place to minority faiths unrelated to the monarch's position is an utter nonsense.
Also, is this an actual proposal, or is Mr. Pulpstar pulling our legs to see how credibly we take the idea of a Quran verse at the coronation?
Mr Dancer, surely you'd never accuse me of lighting the blue touch paper and then walking away *fucking pleb* **innocent face**
It was an actual proposal I heard on r4 on the way to work this morning.
Yes - by some daft Bishop who, like all too many Anglican bishops, seems to have only the haziest understanding of Christianity or indeed the religious aspect of the coronation ceremony.
(Monarchs don't represent us; they represent the state. We elect politicians to represent us.)
Anyway, that's enough teasing of you all.
Off to do some work.
A multi- or no-faith coronation is an awful idea, worthy of New Labour at its worst.
Either do the Coronation properly (which means an Anglican service) or not at all.
It would have been like having a civil ceremony for Prince William's and Kate Middleton's wedding.
Isn't it Charles' idea?
He said a while back he wanted to Defender of Faith, rather than just merely the Defender of the Faith.
Which just shows what a historical illiterate Charles is. Despite having studied it at Oxford. (What is it about Oxbridge graduates? They seem to be utter morons, most of them.)
(Anyway since I now seem to be channelling my inner "SeanT", I really had better be off.)
BTW Mr Llama - there was a lot of smashing up of religious art in your demerger. Arguably it destroyed the English visual imagination; one reason - maybe - why English art, with some few exceptions, is not where English creative genius is to be found.
I have no problem with a few lines of the Quran being recited at Chas's coronation. If he wants them there to indicate his respect for his Moslem subjects that is fine by me. Or maybe he is just keeping his options open like those early Christian kings that hedged their bets by having a few pagan symbols included in their funeral rites. What if the ayatollahs have called it right and on the day of our demise we end up in front of Allah? He does not strike me as being that forgiving, so anything that you can do to keep him onside is probably a good idea.
Some posters on here have a vast capacity for outrage. I admire it in a way.
Indeed.
I've said for amusement, Charles for his Regnal name, should choose the name that reflects the country, and is the most popular name in the country.
Mr. Observer, some of us have a sense of history, tradition and common sense too.
Charles will be head of the Church of England, if he wants to hedge his bets he should abdicate immediately upon HM's departure from the role and join Chris Martin as an alltheist.
Mr. Socrates, I have no issue with an established church. Giving a coronation place to minority faiths unrelated to the monarch's position is an utter nonsense.
Also, is this an actual proposal, or is Mr. Pulpstar pulling our legs to see how credibly we take the idea of a Quran verse at the coronation?
Mr Dancer, surely you'd never accuse me of lighting the blue touch paper and then walking away *fucking pleb* **innocent face**
It was an actual proposal I heard on r4 on the way to work this morning.
Yes - by some daft Bishop who, like all too many Anglican bishops, seems to have only the haziest understanding of Christianity or indeed the religious aspect of the coronation ceremony.
(Monarchs don't represent us; they represent the state. We elect politicians to represent us.)
Anyway, that's enough teasing of you all.
Off to do some work.
A multi- or no-faith coronation is an awful idea, worthy of New Labour at its worst.
Either do the Coronation properly (which means an Anglican service) or not at all.
It would have been like having a civil ceremony for Prince William's and Kate Middleton's wedding.
Isn't it Charles' idea?
He said a while back he wanted to Defender of Faith, rather than just merely the Defender of the Faith.
So taking sides on behalf of all religions against the irreligious, rather than just Anglicans against the rest?
Has he asked these other faiths what they think about the idea, or is it more a unilateral decision ?
I'm not an Anglican, but an Anglican Coronation Service is part of our tradition and history, and we should stick to it.
The Prince of Wales, who is 60 today, is planning a symbolic change when he becomes King by taking the title Defender of Faith to reflect Britain's multicultural society.
The move would mean the monarch, as Supreme Governor of the Church of England, would no longer be known as Defender of the Faith for the first time since the reign of Henry VIII.
The Prince caused controversy within the Anglican church when he floated the idea several years ago of becoming Defender of the Faiths in an attempt to embrace the other religions in Britain.
In a compromise he has now opted for Defender of Faith which he hopes will unite the different strands of society, and their beliefs, at his Coronation.
I'm not one for a nanny state, but obesity is becoming a national crisis. It's not just the strain on the NHS (which is far more expensive than any saving on pensions), it's the lost productivity at work.
Obesity saves the NHS an enormous anount of money over time. Life is like a box of chocolates for fat people - it doesn't last as long.
Mr. Socrates, I have no issue with an established church. Giving a coronation place to minority faiths unrelated to the monarch's position is an utter nonsense.
Also, is this an actual proposal, or is Mr. Pulpstar pulling our legs to see how credibly we take the idea of a Quran verse at the coronation?
Mr Dancer, surely you'd never accuse me of lighting the blue touch paper and then walking away *fucking pleb* **innocent face**
It was an actual proposal I heard on r4 on the way to work this morning.
Yes - by some daft Bishop who, like all too many Anglican bishops, seems to have only the haziest understanding of Christianity or indeed the religious aspect of the coronation ceremony.
(Monarchs don't represent us; they represent the state. We elect politicians to represent us.)
Anyway, that's enough teasing of you all.
Off to do some work.
A multi- or no-faith coronation is an awful idea, worthy of New Labour at its worst.
Either do the Coronation properly (which means an Anglican service) or not at all.
It would have been like having a civil ceremony for Prince William's and Kate Middleton's wedding.
Isn't it Charles' idea?
He said a while back he wanted to Defender of Faith, rather than just merely the Defender of the Faith.
So taking sides on behalf of all religions against the irreligious, rather than just Anglicans against the rest?
Has he asked these other faiths what they think about the idea, or is it more a unilateral decision ?
I'm not an Anglican, but an Anglican Coronation Service is part of our tradition and history, and we should stick to it.
'This is an English coronation for English people.'
I have no problem with a few lines of the Quran being recited at Chas's coronation. If he wants them there to indicate his respect for his Moslem subjects that is fine by me. Or maybe he is just keeping his options open like those early Christian kings that hedged their bets by having a few pagan symbols included in their funeral rites. What if the ayatollahs have called it right and on the day of our demise we end up in front of Allah? He does not strike me as being that forgiving, so anything that you can do to keep him onside is probably a good idea.
Some posters on here have a vast capacity for outrage. I admire it in a way.
Why doesn't he go to a mosque then and have some sort of service there if he wants to show respect. And he can turn up in a synagogue and a Hindu temple and Westminster Cathedral etc etc.
But he should understand where his kingship comes from. It's not some toy for him to play around with according to his own rather incoherent ramblings.
I though Charles W said he wanted to be Defender of Faiths. Plural
He said both, Defender of Faiths (plural of all religion) and Defender of those who had faith but weren't religious.
What the ?
I'm an atheist - how on earth can I have "faith" !
It's PC nonsense
For example you can be a humanist, you have faith in humanity.
That reminds me, ironically given the topic of conversation, of FU:
Urquhart: So hard to know who to trust in these suspicious days. Does passion engender trust? Not necessarily. And yet we all would wish to feed on certainties. To hear the word "always", and believe it true. She trusts me absolutely, I believe. I trust she does. And I? I trust her absolutely... to be absolutely human.
I'm not one for a nanny state, but obesity is becoming a national crisis. It's not just the strain on the NHS (which is far more expensive than any saving on pensions), it's the lost productivity at work.
Obesity saves the NHS an enormous anount of money over time. Life is like a box of chocolates for fat people - it doesn't last as long.
I believe the same argument is often advanced in favour of smoking. Smokers pay a lot of tax to support their habit, and then die early and save the country a lot of pension payments.
The death of Philip Hughes is so desperately sad. Cricket and cricketers have gone up hugely in my estimation in the way that they have responded. I am a Middlesex member and this email has just been sent to all of us from Angus Fraser. It brought a tear to my eye (3 parts) ...
Lord’s Cricket Ground was an extremely sombre place as the light lifted this morning. The greyness of the day was apt as the staff of Marylebone Cricket Club and Middlesex County Cricket Club arrived for work. We were all trying to come to terms with the tragic overnight news that Phillip Hughes had passed away. In respect to Phillip, his family and friends, flags at the ground had been set at half-mast and as the morning progressed floral tributes began to appear at the Grace Gates. Lord’s knows who the good guys in cricket are and Phillip Hughes was certainly one of them. Phillip was only with Middlesex CCC for a short period of time in 2009 but he made an impression that very few followers and staff of the club will ever forget. He was sensational both on and off the field, and the relationships he formed with many of us have made this tragedy even harder to absorb. The statistics of his time at Lord’s are there for all to see. In a remarkable 27 day period he scored the small matter of 882 runs for Middlesex CCC. Five hundred and seventy four of these runs were accumulated in three County Championship matches. In five first-class innings he struck three hundreds and two half-centuries, leaving the Club, only to return a short time later with Australia for an Ashes series, with the incredible batting average of 143.5. But it was his personality away from cricket that I remember more than the savage cuts he sent to the cover boundary. Phillip was the first player I signed for Middlesex, two months after taking up the position of Managing Director of Cricket. He was signed to play for the club whilst Murali Kartik, Middlesex’s designated overseas player, fulfilled his commitments at the Indian Premier League. Despite the decision being criticised at the time, it is a signing I am proud to have made.
Phillip had been recommended to me by Neil D’Costa, his early mentor and manager. D’Costa and I had played Grade Cricket together for Western Suburbs in Sydney in 1994/95 and we had kept in contact. He thought playing county cricket, even if it was only for a month, would help his development. The contract was actually signed before Phillip became the youngest player to score a hundred in each innings of a Test. He completed this remarkable achievement against a strong South African bowling attack in only his second Test. As I sit here writing this tribute I can still hear D’Costa informing me of what an exceptional young man he was, before telling me that we must look after him. Phillip was only 20 when I picked him up at Heathrow Airport on a cold April morning. As he confidently walked through customs with his green Australian kit bag dragging behind him he was smaller in stature than I imagined but, even then, you could see he had a presence about him. He was not in any way overawed by the prospect of coming to London on his own to take on the responsibility of playing at the ‘Home of Cricket’ for one of the most prestigious club’s in the country. And by scoring a hundred against Glamorgan in his first innings at Lord’s he highlighted his skill and confidence. Having spent much of his teenage life mixing with and playing against men in Macksville, a town 300 miles north of Sydney, he was immediately comfortable in my company and we chatted about life at Western Suburbs as we made our way along the M4 to Lord’s. The Middlesex squad were practicing at the time and, after meeting his new team-mates, I dropped him off at his new home, our club flat in West Hampstead. He quickly fitted into London life and became buddies with a few of our younger players. West Hampstead can be a lively spot and, in an attempt to support D’Costa’s request, I’d regularly ask Phillip how he was and what he’d been up to. With a glint in his eye and a smile on his face he’d always insist he was great, the flat was fine and that he had had a quiet night in. Like most Aussies he was ‘low maintenance’ and in the end we both just ended up laughing when I asked the question. Even at 20 his attitude to cricket was a lesson to many Middlesex players who had been professionals for several years. He possessed a lovely carefree simple attitude to life but his character was underpinned by a strong work ethic and a fierce desire to score runs and to be the best he could be.
Phillip may have been laid back and easy company off the pitch but on it he was a tremendous competitor. I will never forget him confronting the formidable former South African fast bowler Andre Nel during probably his best innings for Middlesex, the 195 he smashed against Surrey at The Oval. Nel had taken exception to the hiding he was receiving and bowled a beamer at Hughes. Even now I still have this wonderful vision of the diminutive Hughes following the bear like Nel down the pitch to inform the bowler he was: ‘weak, ******* weak, that is why you quit international cricket to play for Surrey.” Nel did not turn round to take him on. Judging by the amount of luggage Phillip placed in the back of my car on his return to Sydney I got the feeling he enjoyed his time in London. The clothes shops in Oxford Street definitely took a bit of a hiding and I think he ended up paying more than £1,500 in excess luggage. I am not a touchy feely sort of person but I hugged him when I dropped him off at Terminal 3. It seemed the natural thing to do. We have spent several enjoyable hours in each other’s company since and even though his international career at times stuttered he never once felt sorry for himself. We always hoped that he would one day return to play for Middlesex CCC again. That, tragically, with many other dreams ended last night.
I have no problem with a few lines of the Quran being recited at Chas's coronation. If he wants them there to indicate his respect for his Moslem subjects that is fine by me. Or maybe he is just keeping his options open like those early Christian kings that hedged their bets by having a few pagan symbols included in their funeral rites. What if the ayatollahs have called it right and on the day of our demise we end up in front of Allah? He does not strike me as being that forgiving, so anything that you can do to keep him onside is probably a good idea.
Some posters on here have a vast capacity for outrage. I admire it in a way.
Why doesn't he go to a mosque then and have some sort of service there if he wants to show respect. And he can turn up in a synagogue and a Hindu temple and Westminster Cathedral etc etc.
But he should understand where his kingship comes from. It's not some toy for him to play around with according to his own rather incoherent ramblings.
Quite. At this rate, Charles will be a worse king than Joffrey Baratheon.
Mr. Socrates, I have no issue with an established church. Giving a coronation place to minority faiths unrelated to the monarch's position is an utter nonsense.
Also, is this an actual proposal, or is Mr. Pulpstar pulling our legs to see how credibly we take the idea of a Quran verse at the coronation?
Mr Dancer, surely you'd never accuse me of lighting the blue touch paper and then walking away *fucking pleb* **innocent face**
It was an actual proposal I heard on r4 on the way to work this morning.
Yes - by some daft Bishop who, like all too many Anglican bishops, seems to have only the haziest understanding of Christianity or indeed the religious aspect of the coronation ceremony.
(Monarchs don't represent us; they represent the state. We elect politicians to represent us.)
Anyway, that's enough teasing of you all.
Off to do some work.
A multi- or no-faith coronation is an awful idea, worthy of New Labour at its worst.
Either do the Coronation properly (which means an Anglican service) or not at all.
It would have been like having a civil ceremony for Prince William's and Kate Middleton's wedding.
Isn't it Charles' idea?
He said a while back he wanted to Defender of Faith, rather than just merely the Defender of the Faith.
So taking sides on behalf of all religions against the irreligious, rather than just Anglicans against the rest?
Has he asked these other faiths what they think about the idea, or is it more a unilateral decision ?
I'm not an Anglican, but an Anglican Coronation Service is part of our tradition and history, and we should stick to it.
'This is an English coronation for English people.'
Exactly a load of bollocks, time they got real and tried to get into the 21st century , or at least out of 19th. Get rid of the parasites.
I'm not one for a nanny state, but obesity is becoming a national crisis. It's not just the strain on the NHS (which is far more expensive than any saving on pensions), it's the lost productivity at work.
Obesity saves the NHS an enormous anount of money over time. Life is like a box of chocolates for fat people - it doesn't last as long.
I believe the same argument is often advanced in favour of smoking. Smokers pay a lot of tax to support their habit, and then die early and save the country a lot of pension payments.
That's because it's true. Fuck nannyism. Let people gorge themselves, as free men, with whatever shite they like. And if the taxman sees they are addicted he can tax the shite as a steady earner. This 'everyone must eat goji berries' attitude is deeply, deeply illiberal.
It's quite an achievement to be even more old fogeyish than Prince Charles. Is this some variant on "plus royaliste que le roi" that I've previously been unaware of?
The Prince of Wales, who is 60 today, is planning a symbolic change when he becomes King by taking the title Defender of Faith to reflect Britain's multicultural society.
The move would mean the monarch, as Supreme Governor of the Church of England, would no longer be known as Defender of the Faith for the first time since the reign of Henry VIII.
The Prince caused controversy within the Anglican church when he floated the idea several years ago of becoming Defender of the Faiths in an attempt to embrace the other religions in Britain.
In a compromise he has now opted for Defender of Faith which he hopes will unite the different strands of society, and their beliefs, at his Coronation.
It isn't for him to muck around with, it really isn't. He will be the Head of the Church of England and his duty is to uphold that faith. Doing so does not mean - as he seems to think - that other faiths or atheists/agnostics are not valued or not part of Britain. Britain has been pretty good at accommodating different religious traditions and it is foolish sentimentality to mess around in this way in order to make himself "relevant". The monarch is a magnificent irrelevance sailing above day to day politics - that's the point of it. Charles will end up destroying it, if he carries on like this. He has to just be - not do.
I'm not one for a nanny state, but obesity is becoming a national crisis. It's not just the strain on the NHS (which is far more expensive than any saving on pensions), it's the lost productivity at work.
Obesity saves the NHS an enormous anount of money over time. Life is like a box of chocolates for fat people - it doesn't last as long.
This just isn't true. Healthier people not only live longer, they have fewer years of disability at the end of their lives and thus need less NHS treatment.
There's also a non-financial aspect to this. Having a healthy lifestyle and having more energy just means you can enjoy life more. We need to do more to make people realise this. Being healthy doesn't mean crucifying yourself on diets of only lentils. You can be very healthy eating good food and enjoying sport.
I'm not one for a nanny state, but obesity is becoming a national crisis. It's not just the strain on the NHS (which is far more expensive than any saving on pensions), it's the lost productivity at work.
Obesity saves the NHS an enormous anount of money over time. Life is like a box of chocolates for fat people - it doesn't last as long.
I believe the same argument is often advanced in favour of smoking. Smokers pay a lot of tax to support their habit, and then die early and save the country a lot of pension payments.
That's because it's true. Fuck nannyism. Let people gorge themselves, as free men, with whatever shite they like. And if the taxman sees they are addicted he can tax the shite as a steady earner. This 'everyone must eat goji berries' attitude is deeply, deeply illiberal.
I'm not one for a nanny state, but obesity is becoming a national crisis. It's not just the strain on the NHS (which is far more expensive than any saving on pensions), it's the lost productivity at work.
Obesity saves the NHS an enormous anount of money over time. Life is like a box of chocolates for fat people - it doesn't last as long.
This just isn't true. Healthier people not only live longer, they have fewer years of disability at the end of their lives and thus need less NHS treatment.
The matter of the number of years claiming benefits and pensions from the state makes a very large difference though.
There's also a non-financial aspect to this. Having a healthy lifestyle and having more energy just means you can enjoy life more. We need to do more to make people realise this. Being healthy doesn't mean crucifying yourself on diets of only lentils. You can be very healthy eating good food and enjoying sport.
I would agree, but in a liberal society, that should be the choice of the citizen.
I'm not one for a nanny state, but obesity is becoming a national crisis. It's not just the strain on the NHS (which is far more expensive than any saving on pensions), it's the lost productivity at work.
Obesity saves the NHS an enormous anount of money over time. Life is like a box of chocolates for fat people - it doesn't last as long.
This just isn't true. Healthier people not only live longer, they have fewer years of disability at the end of their lives and thus need less NHS treatment.
The matter of the number of years claiming benefits and pensions from the state makes a very large difference though.
Increasingly little. Healthcare costs are rising far quicker than pension costs.
Personally we should abolish the churches and turn them into discos and nightclubs.
That's what half the Anglican clergy seem to think too.
Worse, a number of racecourses are following suit. :-(
Perhaps we could have the feasting and merger negotiations at a racecourse. Cheltenham, for instance. Plenty of Irish priests there to help matters along and they are usually (or those I knew) good racing tipsters as well. So all should go swimmingly!
Excellent idea.
I'll raise it with Ian Renton when I'm there next, probably in a fortnite's time.
Who for the champion hurdle ?
I backed The New One at 6-1 ages back because I knew he'd run but is Faugheen too short at 2-1 now ?
He is some horse mind...
Far too early for that sort of speculation, young lady!
But do mark my words in due course. Jezki was my bet of the meeting last year and I'm not sure why it should be longer than TNO .
Will you be there? There's a couple of other PBers who generally make it and we usually meet up in the Centaur.
Mr. Socrates, I have no issue with an established church. Giving a coronation place to minority faiths unrelated to the monarch's position is an utter nonsense.
Also, is this an actual proposal, or is Mr. Pulpstar pulling our legs to see how credibly we take the idea of a Quran verse at the coronation?
Mr Dancer, surely you'd never accuse me of lighting the blue touch paper and then walking away *fucking pleb* **innocent face**
It was an actual proposal I heard on r4 on the way to work this morning.
Yes - by some daft Bishop who, like all too many Anglican bishops, seems to have only the haziest understanding of Christianity or indeed the religious aspect of the coronation ceremony.
(Monarchs don't represent us; they represent the state. We elect politicians to represent us.)
Anyway, that's enough teasing of you all.
Off to do some work.
A multi- or no-faith coronation is an awful idea, worthy of New Labour at its worst.
Either do the Coronation properly (which means an Anglican service) or not at all.
It would have been like having a civil ceremony for Prince William's and Kate Middleton's wedding.
Isn't it Charles' idea?
He said a while back he wanted to Defender of Faith, rather than just merely the Defender of the Faith.
So taking sides on behalf of all religions against the irreligious, rather than just Anglicans against the rest?
Has he asked these other faiths what they think about the idea, or is it more a unilateral decision ?
I'm not an Anglican, but an Anglican Coronation Service is part of our tradition and history, and we should stick to it.
'This is an English coronation for English people.'
What would the Church of Scotland know?
Prince Charles 'needs two coronations after Scottish independence' The Prince of Wales and his successors to the throne would need two coronations if Alex Salmond wins the Scottish independence referendum, according to a Church of Scotland report published today.
Mr. Socrates, I have no issue with an established church. Giving a coronation place to minority faiths unrelated to the monarch's position is an utter nonsense.
Also, is this an actual proposal, or is Mr. Pulpstar pulling our legs to see how credibly we take the idea of a Quran verse at the coronation?
Mr Dancer, surely you'd never accuse me of lighting the blue touch paper and then walking away *fucking pleb* **innocent face**
It was an actual proposal I heard on r4 on the way to work this morning.
Yes - by some daft Bishop who, like all too many Anglican bishops, seems to have only the haziest understanding of Christianity or indeed the religious aspect of the coronation ceremony.
(Monarchs don't represent us; they represent the state. We elect politicians to represent us.)
Anyway, that's enough teasing of you all.
Off to do some work.
A multi- or no-faith coronation is an awful idea, worthy of New Labour at its worst.
Either do the Coronation properly (which means an Anglican service) or not at all.
It would have been like having a civil ceremony for Prince William's and Kate Middleton's wedding.
Isn't it Charles' idea?
He said a while back he wanted to Defender of Faith, rather than just merely the Defender of the Faith.
So taking sides on behalf of all religions against the irreligious, rather than just Anglicans against the rest?
Has he asked these other faiths what they think about the idea, or is it more a unilateral decision ?
I'm not an Anglican, but an Anglican Coronation Service is part of our tradition and history, and we should stick to it.
'This is an English coronation for English people.'
Exactly a load of bollocks, time they got real and tried to get into the 21st century , or at least out of 19th. Get rid of the parasites.
With regards to getting rid of parasites. When you going make good on your promise to emigrate to Bavaria?
I've made a decision: I will not be voting Conservative next year. Instead, I will vote UKIP. Despite my concerns about them.
This has been a very difficult morning for me, but have reluctantly come to this conclusion for a variety of reasons.
(1) I simply don't trust or have any confidence in David Cameron. He doesn't believe in anything. That commands no real respect from me. He ditches those who achieve (Gove, and Patterson) and leaves other underperfomers in post, if politically expedient. He is an administrator, not a leader. He governs from behind, reacting to public opinion, but not responding to it, anticipating it or leading it. (2) Because of that, he is incapable of being sincere: I don't trust a word he says. He has totally failed to win the arguments on a Conservative case for the future of Britain over the last 5 years. Culturally and socially, within our governance, I feel very little has changed from the days of New Labour. He has no real vision he is prepared to argue for. (3) I think Cameron is in no way serious about EU renegotiation. He has repeatedly tried to take us for fools and pull the wool over our eyes. Today was the final straw. On the EU budget, the £1.7bn bill - and on immigration reform - he has over promised, and under delivered time and time again. He promised he would get what Britain needs and would change the face of the nation. These are just words. I have absolutely no confidence that a Conservative negotiating team will achieve any real concessions in a renegotiation next year, if re-elected. The EU is not serious and doesn't care. I am, therefore, now a full supporter of EU withdrawal. (4) Rather than engage with my concerns, his party leadership has repeatedly insulted, patronised and denigrated its natural supporters. He has failed to reform the image and reputation of the party, but has alienated many natural suporters like me. This has been enthusiastically replicated by loyalist Conservative supporters online and journalists in the media. The constant insults and prejudice thrown against UKIP supporters and sympathisers have been vitriolic, hysterical and incessant. I feel a stranger in my own party. I've had enough. (5) Related to (4) my concerns have been ignored. Despite writing to my MP over a month ago, and raising my concerns to Grant Shapps, I have had no response on a core issue for me: Defence. In fact, I have been ignored. Surveys don't mention it, and it is glossed over entirely. Instead, I get constant demands for money and donations instead. That's all they seem to care about.
I will now be reviewing my betting positions accordingly. I don't think I will be alone. I will not be actively campaigning for UKIP but I will vote for them. Not that it will make much difference as I live in a Tory safe seat.
I didn't want to do this, but feel I have no choice. I feel it's the only way we'll get real reform in British politics. But make no mistake, I am very upset about it.
I have no problem with a few lines of the Quran being recited at Chas's coronation. If he wants them there to indicate his respect for his Moslem subjects that is fine by me. Or maybe he is just keeping his options open like those early Christian kings that hedged their bets by having a few pagan symbols included in their funeral rites. What if the ayatollahs have called it right and on the day of our demise we end up in front of Allah? He does not strike me as being that forgiving, so anything that you can do to keep him onside is probably a good idea.
Some posters on here have a vast capacity for outrage. I admire it in a way.
Why doesn't he go to a mosque then and have some sort of service there if he wants to show respect. And he can turn up in a synagogue and a Hindu temple and Westminster Cathedral etc etc.
But he should understand where his kingship comes from. It's not some toy for him to play around with according to his own rather incoherent ramblings.
His kingship comes from God. That's why we have a coronation. Thus, Charles is not answerable to anyone but God and so Charles can basically do what he likes. As I understand it, the actual anointment will be done in the same way it has always been.
Farage right not to even try contesting that £20 billion "net benefit" of immigration figure being bandied around at the moment (frankly, who knows what the actual "net benefit" is?) and instead side-stepping onto "social terms", where, he argues, immigration has had a "detrimental effect". He's cottoned on to the fact his voters care about the social impact far more than the wider economic impact. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30225069
It's quite an achievement to be even more old fogeyish than Prince Charles. Is this some variant on "plus royaliste que le roi" that I've previously been unaware of?
No - I'm Catholic and come from an Irish republican family.
But maybe it takes an outsider to understand the value of English traditions.
And if putative King doesn't it may be better to get rid of the whole shebang.
It'll be interesting to see what the court's ruling will be on the publication of Charles's letters to ministers.
There's also a non-financial aspect to this. Having a healthy lifestyle and having more energy just means you can enjoy life more. We need to do more to make people realise this. Being healthy doesn't mean crucifying yourself on diets of only lentils. You can be very healthy eating good food and enjoying sport.
I would agree, but in a liberal society, that should be the choice of the citizen.
Of course, but individuals make choices in the context of cultural norms, and there's plenty the government can do to shift those cultural norms. At the very least, they could require restaurants and shops to provide easier information about what's healthy and what's not, and they could provide better guidance to parents about the importance of preventing your child getting overweight.
Just caught up with this morning's Populus poll which shows an absurd Labour lead of 5%.
PB rule: "an outlier is a poll I don't like".
I think the consensus view is that Labour is slightly ahead. Labour voters are currently showing up as having relatively high certainty of preference (i.e. mostly saying no" to "I might vote for another party"), unlike e.g. the LibDems and Greens, but I don't think they're fizzing with fervour, so municipal by-elections in December aren't high on their priority list. We've got one ourselves on Thursday week - I'll be surprised if turnout is vast.
I'm not one for a nanny state, but obesity is becoming a national crisis. It's not just the strain on the NHS (which is far more expensive than any saving on pensions), it's the lost productivity at work.
Obesity saves the NHS an enormous anount of money over time. Life is like a box of chocolates for fat people - it doesn't last as long.
I believe the same argument is often advanced in favour of smoking. Smokers pay a lot of tax to support their habit, and then die early and save the country a lot of pension payments.
That's because it's true. Fuck nannyism. Let people gorge themselves, as free men, with whatever shite they like. And if the taxman sees they are addicted he can tax the shite as a steady earner. This 'everyone must eat goji berries' attitude is deeply, deeply illiberal.
What's a Goji berry ?
Small red berries cultivated exclusively for the gullible. Same market as for edible polystyrene discs rice cakes.
I'm not one for a nanny state, but obesity is becoming a national crisis. It's not just the strain on the NHS (which is far more expensive than any saving on pensions), it's the lost productivity at work.
Obesity saves the NHS an enormous anount of money over time. Life is like a box of chocolates for fat people - it doesn't last as long.
This just isn't true. Healthier people not only live longer, they have fewer years of disability at the end of their lives and thus need less NHS treatment.
No it is absolutely true. Healthier people are still alive. And costing, at least something. Those with a BMI of a gazillion don't get that far and cost us annually precisely zero in old age - because they're long dead. Plus all the non-NHS welfare costs such as pension. Tim Worstall at the Adam Simth Institute blog did a series of excellent posts / graphs on this. Yes it's a bit heartless and I guess we should try to help people stop being 'disgusting fatbellies' (Private Pile quip) for their own quality of life issues. But the settled cold hard economic facts of gross obesity are that the state saves lots. Sue me if you don't like it. But hey I'm an evil kipper now right?
I have no problem with a few lines of the Quran being recited at Chas's coronation. If he wants them there to indicate his respect for his Moslem subjects that is fine by me. Or maybe he is just keeping his options open like those early Christian kings that hedged their bets by having a few pagan symbols included in their funeral rites. What if the ayatollahs have called it right and on the day of our demise we end up in front of Allah? He does not strike me as being that forgiving, so anything that you can do to keep him onside is probably a good idea.
Some posters on here have a vast capacity for outrage. I admire it in a way.
Why doesn't he go to a mosque then and have some sort of service there if he wants to show respect. And he can turn up in a synagogue and a Hindu temple and Westminster Cathedral etc etc.
But he should understand where his kingship comes from. It's not some toy for him to play around with according to his own rather incoherent ramblings.
His kingship comes from God. That's why we have a coronation. Thus, Charles is not answerable to anyone but God and so Charles can basically do what he likes. As I understand it, the actual anointment will be done in the same way it has always been.
There've been lots of English kings who thought they could do what they liked. They came a cropper, usually. One lost his head.
There's also a non-financial aspect to this. Having a healthy lifestyle and having more energy just means you can enjoy life more. We need to do more to make people realise this. Being healthy doesn't mean crucifying yourself on diets of only lentils. You can be very healthy eating good food and enjoying sport.
I would agree, but in a liberal society, that should be the choice of the citizen.
Of course, but individuals make choices in the context of cultural norms, and there's plenty the government can do to shift those cultural norms. At the very least, they could require restaurants and shops to provide easier information about what's healthy and what's not, and they could provide better guidance to parents about the importance of preventing your child getting overweight.
I wouldn't necessarily object to any of that, where it does go too far is current idiocy where schools are being encouraged to check what children have in their lunch boxes, as far as I am concerned, they can sod off, as a parent it is my right to decide what to feed my children (within obvious limits of toxicity etc). As for the recent nonsense about allowing your children to become obese is child abuse... words fail me!
A thoroughly disgusting speech from Cameron today. Almost as vile as the stuff we hear from UKIP - actually, forget "almost". Equally as vile is more the case. I feel ashamed that I ever voted Conservative. This certainly isn't what I expected when I cast my vote in 2005.
Thank goodness for the Green Party. The only hope this country now has.
I'm not one for a nanny state, but obesity is becoming a national crisis. It's not just the strain on the NHS (which is far more expensive than any saving on pensions), it's the lost productivity at work.
Obesity saves the NHS an enormous anount of money over time. Life is like a box of chocolates for fat people - it doesn't last as long.
This just isn't true. Healthier people not only live longer, they have fewer years of disability at the end of their lives and thus need less NHS treatment.
No it is absolutely true. Healthier people are still alive. And costing, at least something. Those with a BMI of a gazillion don't get that far and cost us annually precisely zero in old age - because they're long dead. Plus all the non-NHS welfare costs such as pension. Tim Worstall at the Adam Simth Institute blog did a series of excellent posts / graphs on this. Yes it's a bit heartless and I guess we should try to help people stop being 'disgusting fatbellies' (Private Pile quip) for their own quality of life issues. But the settled cold hard economic facts of gross obesity are that the state saves lots. Sue me if you don't like it. But hey I'm an evil kipper now right?
Of course, in the extra years that a healthy person has than an unhealthy person, they are costing the state more money. My point is that this is a SMALLER amount than the increased cost of an unhealthy person over a healthy person in the time period they are both alive. Healthy people, despite longer lives, have fewer years of morbodity, which is what really hemorrhages cost in a healthcare system.
And, of course, healthy people take less time off work, and are more likely to work past retirement age.
Comments
It was an actual proposal I heard on r4 on the way to work this morning.
Also it enrages the part of the 95% who really care about the issue he's bullshitting about, which complicates the goal of getting tactical support from them.
"Second, let’s not be shy of taking measures which advantage local workers and local access to services, and discourage future migration. There’s much more that could be done, from using national monitoring in employment to granting protected access to affordable housing."
Who said it?
Answer John Denham Labour MP in June 2014
http://labourlist.org/2014/06/home-truths-on-migration/
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/belief/2010/apr/03/easter-pagan-symbolism
Those pollsters that are currently showing the largest Labour leads (Survation, Populus and ComRes online) are new pollsters or old pollsters with new methodologies that have never been tested at a general election.
The ones that have been tried and tested at a general election have it largely as a tie, or the Tories just ahead, or Lab just ahead.
But lo, wait until anyone insults the God-King Farage, then you go purple in the face in anger.
As for my own religion, I was raised by people who people are faith, but despite all that, I'm more agnostic.
(Monarchs don't represent us; they represent the state. We elect politicians to represent us.)
Anyway, that's enough teasing of you all.
Off to do some work.
When is the next one due?
We should see the ComRes phone poll on Monday night though.
It has just been put into the field
Either do the Coronation properly (which means an Anglican service) or not at all.
It would have been like having a civil ceremony for Prince William's and Kate Middleton's wedding.
The whole concept is rather alien to the principle of popular sovereignty.
Miss Cyclefree, you *are* joking?
He said a while back he wanted to Defender of Faith, rather than just merely the Defender of the Faith.
First time I've heard this Quran nonsense, though. Someone should tell him he's not going to become a grand ayatollah, and to stop being such a daft sod.
Granted after the buy-out there was some unpleasantness over the logos and marketing policies to be used by the new company but as I say that was after the change and it is unclear that the CEO and group board actually approved (though they were happy to accept the bonuses that came as a result of stripping out non-performing assets from the local branches).
"Will Miliband make it to number 10 ?"
I uttered the immortal words :
"Ed Miliband Will Never Be Prime Minister"
Labour Worthy - "So you're JackW !!"
It felt like the Scarlett Pimpernel being exposed ...
“Anonymity crowned him as if t'were the halo of romantic glory.”
Titter ....
I'll get my coat.
*Always lowering the tone*
Gutted I didn't change trains at Baker Street last week on the way to Dirty Dicks.
The Queen is clearly a mage.
Crown + 20 intellect,
Necklace +5 intellect
Rod + 100 spellpower, +15 intellect
Orb (Offhand) +10 intellect
Robes +20 intellect
Cloak +10 intellect
The LDs managed to lose 11 deposits out of 19 mainland GB Westminster by-elections this Parliament, will a similar ratio be seen at GE 2015?
@TSE why is you using a pic of Kenneth Williams and not Benedict Lumberbatch, er Cumberbatch??
James Hacker: Humphrey, what's a Modernist in the Church of England?
Sir Humphrey Appleby: Ah, well, the word "Modernist" is code for non-believer.
James Hacker: You mean an atheist?
Sir Humphrey Appleby: No, Prime Minister. An atheist clergyman couldn't continue to draw his stipend. So, when they stop believing in God, they call themselves "Modernists".
"Christ, you sounded like Kenneth Williams then"
I'll raise it with Ian Renton when I'm there next, probably in a fortnite's time.
In the real world yesterday the Tories held all their council by-election seats and won one from Labour. I noted 5 Lab to Tory swings out of 5 seats.
In Scotland today the Aberdeenshire seat is likely to be recorded as an SNP gain if they win. The way our council seats are, unless it is the party which won the first preference in 2011, it is unlikely any other party will "hold" a seat because in reality they were runner-up or 2nd/3rd runner-up in 2011.
But in a forced choice I would have to whatever way kept Milliband away from power.
I backed The New One at 6-1 ages back because I knew he'd run but is Faugheen too short at 2-1 now ?
He is some horse mind...
*sighs*
Some posters on here have a vast capacity for outrage. I admire it in a way.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2014/nov/28/david-camerons-immigration-speech-politics-live-blog#block-5478559ee4b03f05591022be Laugh out loud at The execrable Sun though.
The Unionist alliance not kicking in quite yet.
(Anyway since I now seem to be channelling my inner "SeanT", I really had better be off.)
BTW Mr Llama - there was a lot of smashing up of religious art in your demerger. Arguably it destroyed the English visual imagination; one reason - maybe - why English art, with some few exceptions, is not where English creative genius is to be found.
I'm an atheist - how on earth can I have "faith" !
It's PC nonsense
I've said for amusement, Charles for his Regnal name, should choose the name that reflects the country, and is the most popular name in the country.
King Mohammed the First.
"Cutting benefits will impact migration more than an emergency brake".
Sure, Dave, sure.
Charles will be head of the Church of England, if he wants to hedge his bets he should abdicate immediately upon HM's departure from the role and join Chris Martin as an alltheist.
Prince Charles to be known as Defender of Faith
The Prince of Wales, who is 60 today, is planning a symbolic change when he becomes King by taking the title Defender of Faith to reflect Britain's multicultural society.
The move would mean the monarch, as Supreme Governor of the Church of England, would no longer be known as Defender of the Faith for the first time since the reign of Henry VIII.
The Prince caused controversy within the Anglican church when he floated the idea several years ago of becoming Defender of the Faiths in an attempt to embrace the other religions in Britain.
In a compromise he has now opted for Defender of Faith which he hopes will unite the different strands of society, and their beliefs, at his Coronation.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/theroyalfamily/3454271/Prince-Charles-to-be-known-as-Defender-of-Faith.html
But he should understand where his kingship comes from. It's not some toy for him to play around with according to his own rather incoherent ramblings.
Urquhart: So hard to know who to trust in these suspicious days. Does passion engender trust? Not necessarily. And yet we all would wish to feed on certainties. To hear the word "always", and believe it true. She trusts me absolutely, I believe. I trust she does. And I? I trust her absolutely... to be absolutely human.
Lord’s Cricket Ground was an extremely sombre place as the light lifted this morning. The greyness of the day was apt as the staff of Marylebone Cricket Club and Middlesex County Cricket Club arrived for work. We were all trying to come to terms with the tragic overnight news that Phillip Hughes had passed away. In respect to Phillip, his family and friends, flags at the ground had been set at half-mast and as the morning progressed floral tributes began to appear at the Grace Gates. Lord’s knows who the good guys in cricket are and Phillip Hughes was certainly one of them.
Phillip was only with Middlesex CCC for a short period of time in 2009 but he made an impression that very few followers and staff of the club will ever forget. He was sensational both on and off the field, and the relationships he formed with many of us have made this tragedy even harder to absorb.
The statistics of his time at Lord’s are there for all to see. In a remarkable 27 day period he scored the small matter of 882 runs for Middlesex CCC. Five hundred and seventy four of these runs were accumulated in three County Championship matches. In five first-class innings he struck three hundreds and two half-centuries, leaving the Club, only to return a short time later with Australia for an Ashes series, with the incredible batting average of 143.5.
But it was his personality away from cricket that I remember more than the savage cuts he sent to the cover boundary. Phillip was the first player I signed for Middlesex, two months after taking up the position of Managing Director of Cricket. He was signed to play for the club whilst Murali Kartik, Middlesex’s designated overseas player, fulfilled his commitments at the Indian Premier League. Despite the decision being criticised at the time, it is a signing I am proud to have made.
Phillip had been recommended to me by Neil D’Costa, his early mentor and manager. D’Costa and I had played Grade Cricket together for Western Suburbs in Sydney in 1994/95 and we had kept in contact. He thought playing county cricket, even if it was only for a month, would help his development. The contract was actually signed before Phillip became the youngest player to score a hundred in each innings of a Test. He completed this remarkable achievement against a strong South African bowling attack in only his second Test.
As I sit here writing this tribute I can still hear D’Costa informing me of what an exceptional young man he was, before telling me that we must look after him. Phillip was only 20 when I picked him up at Heathrow Airport on a cold April morning. As he confidently walked through customs with his green Australian kit bag dragging behind him he was smaller in stature than I imagined but, even then, you could see he had a presence about him.
He was not in any way overawed by the prospect of coming to London on his own to take on the responsibility of playing at the ‘Home of Cricket’ for one of the most prestigious club’s in the country. And by scoring a hundred against Glamorgan in his first innings at Lord’s he highlighted his skill and confidence.
Having spent much of his teenage life mixing with and playing against men in Macksville, a town 300 miles north of Sydney, he was immediately comfortable in my company and we chatted about life at Western Suburbs as we made our way along the M4 to Lord’s. The Middlesex squad were practicing at the time and, after meeting his new team-mates, I dropped him off at his new home, our club flat in West Hampstead.
He quickly fitted into London life and became buddies with a few of our younger players. West Hampstead can be a lively spot and, in an attempt to support D’Costa’s request, I’d regularly ask Phillip how he was and what he’d been up to. With a glint in his eye and a smile on his face he’d always insist he was great, the flat was fine and that he had had a quiet night in. Like most Aussies he was ‘low maintenance’ and in the end we both just ended up laughing when I asked the question.
Even at 20 his attitude to cricket was a lesson to many Middlesex players who had been professionals for several years. He possessed a lovely carefree simple attitude to life but his character was underpinned by a strong work ethic and a fierce desire to score runs and to be the best he could be.
Phillip may have been laid back and easy company off the pitch but on it he was a tremendous competitor. I will never forget him confronting the formidable former South African fast bowler Andre Nel during probably his best innings for Middlesex, the 195 he smashed against Surrey at The Oval.
Nel had taken exception to the hiding he was receiving and bowled a beamer at Hughes. Even now I still have this wonderful vision of the diminutive Hughes following the bear like Nel down the pitch to inform the bowler he was: ‘weak, ******* weak, that is why you quit international cricket to play for Surrey.” Nel did not turn round to take him on.
Judging by the amount of luggage Phillip placed in the back of my car on his return to Sydney I got the feeling he enjoyed his time in London. The clothes shops in Oxford Street definitely took a bit of a hiding and I think he ended up paying more than £1,500 in excess luggage.
I am not a touchy feely sort of person but I hugged him when I dropped him off at Terminal 3. It seemed the natural thing to do. We have spent several enjoyable hours in each other’s company since and even though his international career at times stuttered he never once felt sorry for himself. We always hoped that he would one day return to play for Middlesex CCC again. That, tragically, with many other dreams ended last night.
There's also a non-financial aspect to this. Having a healthy lifestyle and having more energy just means you can enjoy life more. We need to do more to make people realise this. Being healthy doesn't mean crucifying yourself on diets of only lentils. You can be very healthy eating good food and enjoying sport.
But do mark my words in due course. Jezki was my bet of the meeting last year and I'm not sure why it should be longer than TNO .
Will you be there? There's a couple of other PBers who generally make it and we usually meet up in the Centaur.
Lowest petrol price in my area is 118.7. Anyone seen it lower than this?
"After OPEC meeting, oil price slips below Nigeria’s new benchmark"
http://www.premiumtimesng.com/business/172020-opec-meeting-oil-price-slips-nigerias-new-benchmark.html
Prince Charles 'needs two coronations after Scottish independence'
The Prince of Wales and his successors to the throne would need two coronations if Alex Salmond wins the Scottish independence referendum, according to a Church of Scotland report published today.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/theroyalfamily/10016395/Prince-Charles-needs-two-coronations-after-Scottish-independence.html
This has been a very difficult morning for me, but have reluctantly come to this conclusion for a variety of reasons.
(1) I simply don't trust or have any confidence in David Cameron. He doesn't believe in anything. That commands no real respect from me. He ditches those who achieve (Gove, and Patterson) and leaves other underperfomers in post, if politically expedient. He is an administrator, not a leader. He governs from behind, reacting to public opinion, but not responding to it, anticipating it or leading it.
(2) Because of that, he is incapable of being sincere: I don't trust a word he says. He has totally failed to win the arguments on a Conservative case for the future of Britain over the last 5 years. Culturally and socially, within our governance, I feel very little has changed from the days of New Labour. He has no real vision he is prepared to argue for.
(3) I think Cameron is in no way serious about EU renegotiation. He has repeatedly tried to take us for fools and pull the wool over our eyes. Today was the final straw. On the EU budget, the £1.7bn bill - and on immigration reform - he has over promised, and under delivered time and time again. He promised he would get what Britain needs and would change the face of the nation. These are just words. I have absolutely no confidence that a Conservative negotiating team will achieve any real concessions in a renegotiation next year, if re-elected. The EU is not serious and doesn't care. I am, therefore, now a full supporter of EU withdrawal.
(4) Rather than engage with my concerns, his party leadership has repeatedly insulted, patronised and denigrated its natural supporters. He has failed to reform the image and reputation of the party, but has alienated many natural suporters like me. This has been enthusiastically replicated by loyalist Conservative supporters online and journalists in the media. The constant insults and prejudice thrown against UKIP supporters and sympathisers have been vitriolic, hysterical and incessant. I feel a stranger in my own party. I've had enough.
(5) Related to (4) my concerns have been ignored. Despite writing to my MP over a month ago, and raising my concerns to Grant Shapps, I have had no response on a core issue for me: Defence. In fact, I have been ignored. Surveys don't mention it, and it is glossed over entirely. Instead, I get constant demands for money and donations instead. That's all they seem to care about.
I will now be reviewing my betting positions accordingly. I don't think I will be alone. I will not be actively campaigning for UKIP but I will vote for them. Not that it will make much difference as I live in a Tory safe seat.
I didn't want to do this, but feel I have no choice. I feel it's the only way we'll get real reform in British politics. But make no mistake, I am very upset about it.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30225069
But maybe it takes an outsider to understand the value of English traditions.
And if putative King doesn't it may be better to get rid of the whole shebang.
It'll be interesting to see what the court's ruling will be on the publication of Charles's letters to ministers.
I think the consensus view is that Labour is slightly ahead. Labour voters are currently showing up as having relatively high certainty of preference (i.e. mostly saying no" to "I might vote for another party"), unlike e.g. the LibDems and Greens, but I don't think they're fizzing with fervour, so municipal by-elections in December aren't high on their priority list. We've got one ourselves on Thursday week - I'll be surprised if turnout is vast.
It's like walking into a badly written Disney fairytale.
Good grief.
Thank goodness for the Green Party. The only hope this country now has.
And, of course, healthy people take less time off work, and are more likely to work past retirement age.
http://www.betfair.com/exchange/politics/market?id=1.101416490
SNP 1159 Con 574 Indx2 434 LD 141 Lab 140 Green 68
2012 result SNP 1128 Con 593 Indx3 876 Lab 185 LD 56