If Miliband goes on the NHS, then as well as Cameron reiterating Labour promised to cut it in 2010, it's an invitation to refer to Scottish Labour's policy of taxing England to fund Scottish nurses and to ask whether Miliband agrees.
Of course, that's so obvious Miliband must have a rebuttal. It'd probably be that Scotland deserves it's fair share of the mansion tax, but if he agrees then the Conservatives could put up the Scottish Labour quote, and then one of Miliband agreeing.
David Miliband's return to UK politics would be welcomed by consistent questioning as to his involvement in torture.Once these are answered he would make an excellent candidate to take on the Tories for London Mayor.He has that international experience that someone like Tessa Jowell lacks.It would make for interesting relations for one Miliband to be PM and the other Lord Mayor of London.
The more Diane Abbott witters on in her typically bonkers way the more I might fancy her chances for London Mayor.
They like them a bit bonkers and suddenly seeing the free-market capitalist light in London, they do.
If Miliband goes on the NHS, then as well as Cameron reiterating Labour promised to cut it in 2010, it's an invitation to refer to Scottish Labour's policy of taxing England to fund Scottish nurses and to ask whether Miliband agrees.
Of course, that's so obvious Miliband must have a rebuttal. It'd probably be that Scotland deserves it's fair share of the mansion tax, but if he agrees then the Conservatives could put up the Scottish Labour quote, and then one of Miliband agreeing.
You've put in a consistently high level of ground effort week-in-week out across the whole parliament, in a seat in which you only narrowly lost last time, against a not uncontroversial Tory incumbent.
Indeed. I'd be quite happy for Anna Soubry to be turfed out. She seems quite happy to make up insults about male politicians' sexual habits, but I'm sure she'd be the first to use her female privilege to shriek if the tables had been turned. Can you imagine if a political opponent - particularly a UKIP one - had joked that she looked like the sort of woman that enjoyed riding a large vibrator? We wouldn't hear about anything else for weeks.
If Miliband goes on the NHS, then as well as Cameron reiterating Labour promised to cut it in 2010, it's an invitation to refer to Scottish Labour's policy of taxing England to fund Scottish nurses and to ask whether Miliband agrees.
Of course, that's so obvious Miliband must have a rebuttal. It'd probably be that Scotland deserves it's fair share of the mansion tax, but if he agrees then the Conservatives could put up the Scottish Labour quote, and then one of Miliband agreeing.
If Miliband goes on the NHS, then as well as Cameron reiterating Labour promised to cut it in 2010, it's an invitation to refer to Scottish Labour's policy of taxing England to fund Scottish nurses and to ask whether Miliband agrees.
Of course, that's so obvious Miliband must have a rebuttal. It'd probably be that Scotland deserves it's fair share of the mansion tax, but if he agrees then the Conservatives could put up the Scottish Labour quote, and then one of Miliband agreeing.
It's a question man has been asking ever since it discovered it was useful in certain situations for procreation thousands of years ago.
But now it has reached an absurd and mildly dystopian conclusion: 3D-printed d*ck pics.
The means? A handheld 3D scanner such as the Fuel3D above. The method? By pointing it at *any* object and capturing it three-dimensionally. The reason? Who can say.
@Jeremy_Hunt: Wrong @Ed_Miliband. More patients than ever being seen in <4 hours. Strong NHS needs strong economy so Labour's deficit denial risk to NHS.</p>
Wait. So more people are being seen in less than four hours, and more people are not being seen within four hours?
That almost sounds like a rapidly growing population is putting huge strain on the health service. What could be driving such a thing?!?
If Miliband goes on the NHS, then as well as Cameron reiterating Labour promised to cut it in 2010, it's an invitation to refer to Scottish Labour's policy of taxing England to fund Scottish nurses and to ask whether Miliband agrees.
Of course, that's so obvious Miliband must have a rebuttal. It'd probably be that Scotland deserves it's fair share of the mansion tax, but if he agrees then the Conservatives could put up the Scottish Labour quote, and then one of Miliband agreeing.
David Miliband's return to UK politics would be welcomed by consistent questioning as to his involvement in torture.Once these are answered he would make an excellent candidate to take on the Tories for London Mayor.He has that international experience that someone like Tessa Jowell lacks.It would make for interesting relations for one Miliband to be PM and the other Lord Mayor of London.
You realise that London Mayor and Lord Mayor of London are different positions, right?
If Miliband goes on the NHS, then as well as Cameron reiterating Labour promised to cut it in 2010, it's an invitation to refer to Scottish Labour's policy of taxing England to fund Scottish nurses and to ask whether Miliband agrees.
Of course, that's so obvious Miliband must have a rebuttal. It'd probably be that Scotland deserves it's fair share of the mansion tax, but if he agrees then the Conservatives could put up the Scottish Labour quote, and then one of Miliband agreeing.
Ed Miliband @Ed_Miliband 10m10 minutes ago Labour will make sure the NHS in England has the time to care. With Labour: 20,000 nurses 8,000 GPs 5,000 care workers 3,000 midwives
More tractor stats comrades.
Nurses paid for by mansion tax, what about the others?
8,000 GPs. When? It takes years and years to train a doctor. This is a promise that cannot be met by 2020 election.
Has Ed promised more places at Medical Schools?
He left out the bit about 1,000 free owls.
Isn't this already DH policy? I mean the GP expansion and not the owls bit.
"Despite the longstanding Department of Health policy to increase GP training numbers in England to 3,250 per annum, GP recruitment has remained stubbornly below this target, at around 2,700 per annum, for the last four years. This cumulative recruitment shortfall is being compounded by increasing numbers of trained GPs leaving the workforce, most significantly GPs approaching retirement, but perhaps more worryingly women in their 30s. GP recruitment and retention is a much bigger problem in some parts of the country and often in those areas which have the worst health outcomes."
I’m sure there’s a DoH policy to cap the numbers entering medical school, and has been for some years. There was a row about it in the pharmacy press recently because there’s over-production of pharmacists with consequent probable employment problems. The pharmacy leaders were very cross about it.
So, back to the subject, it takes about 7-8 years to train a GP, plus the time it takes to convince someone to apply while in the VIth form (or whatever it’s called now). So encouraging people to aim to be GP’s now will bear fruit just about in time for the 2025 election. Unless, and this could be done fairly easily, push a lot more “straightforward” stuff onto pharmacists, including them in medical practices and so on. There are quite a lot of them already with the “prescribing” post-grad “bolt on”! Trouble is that the big pharmacy chains are opposed.
If Miliband goes on the NHS, then as well as Cameron reiterating Labour promised to cut it in 2010, it's an invitation to refer to Scottish Labour's policy of taxing England to fund Scottish nurses and to ask whether Miliband agrees.
Of course, that's so obvious Miliband must have a rebuttal. It'd probably be that Scotland deserves it's fair share of the mansion tax, but if he agrees then the Conservatives could put up the Scottish Labour quote, and then one of Miliband agreeing.
"Mr. Roger, problem with that line is that Cameron's more popular in Scotland than Miliband."
I'm getting the impression that Labour are deliberately putting the Party in the shop window rather than Ed Milliband. It's quite a good ploy particularly as Cameron being the narcissist he is won't be able to resist leading with himself.
At 30 MPH no one will be able to tell the real from the Labour spoof.
@BenM - I suppose Labour are making worst of a good job in the circumstances, given that this winter's crop of NHS scare stories has been unusually thin.
If only you'd had a major 'flu epidemic, eh? How much happier you'd be. Oh well, I suppose you have to make do with what you can find by selective use of statistics.
Mr. Roger, yesterday we had Miliband for Labour and 5 ministers for the Conservatives. That might be a one-off, but, if anything, the reverse seems the case at this very early stage.
I'm getting the impression that Labour are deliberately putting the Party in the shop window rather than Ed Milliband. It's quite a good ploy particularly as Cameron being the narcissist he is won't be able to resist leading with himself.
Oh dear. How to explain this to an advertiser...
Cameron is more popular than the Tories. Putting him out front helps.
Miliband is drag on the "brand". Putting him out front results in 4 million individual Ratner moments
Arithmetic looks very fine for our government come 8th May. Very rough and ready numbers:
If Labour gain 38 seats from the Conservatives, 10 from the Lib Dems and only lose 12 to the SNP then they'll have around 294 MPs. The Conservatives (assuming they gain at least 7 seats from the Lib Dems and don't retake the UKIP seats, and lose South Thanet to Farage) would be on around 272 MPs. No way back for Cameron; Conservatives out of office. Lib Dems in low 30s. Prob Labour minority, perhaps with LD confidence and supply to give a bare majority.
If Labour only gain 22 seats from the Conservatives, pick up 9 from the Lib Dems but lose 25 seats to the SNP, then they'll have around 264 MPs. The Conservatives gain 11 seats from the Lib Dems and would be on around 295 seats. If the Lib Dems retain 30 seats that gives an effective HoC tie, or majority of 4 (sans Shinners), for a 2nd con-lib dem coalition. If not, then a Conservative Minority would prob work because the Lib Dem-Labour majority would barely match the Conservative total, yet alone command a HoC majority.
How long that's hold for is anyone's guess. I expect Cameron could hold it together for about 18 months.
@Jeremy_Hunt: Wrong @Ed_Miliband. More patients than ever being seen in <4 hours. Strong NHS needs strong economy so Labour's deficit denial risk to NHS.</p>
Wait. So more people are being seen in less than four hours, and more people are not being seen within four hours?
That almost sounds like a rapidly growing population is putting huge strain on the health service. What could be driving such a thing?!?
Except the strain on Emergency departments is mostly due to insufficient staff (often not enough immigrants!) and an increasingly frail elderly population (the frail elderly are not often immigrants).
It is also likely that the number of visits per-capita is increasing due to lifestyle changes. In many ways this is the Perfect Storm set by Labours bodged changes to medical and nursing training a decade or so ago.
While I appreciate that immigration is the hobby-horse of the moment, the issues in reality are far more complex.
Incidentally a year ago my Trust had some of the worst performance figures in the country for ED, now we are 24th out of 57. Quite some improvement! and Leicester is not short of immigrants, indeed the areas declaring Major incidents are not the major urban conurbations with high immigrant populations.
@Jeremy_Hunt: Wrong @Ed_Miliband. More patients than ever being seen in <4 hours. Strong NHS needs strong economy so Labour's deficit denial risk to NHS.</p>
Wait. So more people are being seen in less than four hours, and more people are not being seen within four hours?
That almost sounds like a rapidly growing population is putting huge strain on the health service. What could be driving such a thing?!?
Except the strain on Emergency departments is mostly due to insufficient staff (often not enough immigrants!) and an increasingly frail elderly population (the frail elderly are not often immigrants).
It is also likely that the number of visits per-capita is increasing due to lifestyle changes. In many ways this is the Perfect Storm set by Labours bodged changes to medical and nursing training a decade or so ago.
"Despite the longstanding Department of Health policy to increase GP training numbers in England to 3,250 per annum, GP recruitment has remained stubbornly below this target, at around 2,700 per annum, for the last four years. This cumulative recruitment shortfall is being compounded by increasing numbers of trained GPs leaving the workforce, most significantly GPs approaching retirement, but perhaps more worryingly women in their 30s. GP recruitment and retention is a much bigger problem in some parts of the country and often in those areas which have the worst health outcomes."
I’m sure there’s a DoH policy to cap the numbers entering medical school, and has been for some years. There was a row about it in the pharmacy press recently because there’s over-production of pharmacists with consequent probable employment problems. The pharmacy leaders were very cross about it.
So, back to the subject, it takes about 7-8 years to train a GP, plus the time it takes to convince someone to apply while in the VIth form (or whatever it’s called now). So encouraging people to aim to be GP’s now will bear fruit just about in time for the 2025 election. Unless, and this could be done fairly easily, push a lot more “straightforward” stuff onto pharmacists, including them in medical practices and so on. There are quite a lot of them already with the “prescribing” post-grad “bolt on”! Trouble is that the big pharmacy chains are opposed.
One of the comments made on the Today programme this morning was to the effect that doctors in the UK simply did not want to work in A&E as it was so horrible. So even when there are doctors and even if we had the money and nurses there would still be a problem in A&E.
Part of the solution, it seems to me, will involve having alternatives for patients to A&E - GPs, for instance - or other minor emergency walk-in centres - and giving doctors a proper career structure for A&E work rather than rely on short-term measures.
But maybe the docs on here might be able to comment.
I do find this campaign against him disturbing. He has served his time, what his he now supposed to do?
The veridct of the jury in his case was one of the oddest I can remember.
The rape case was bought as the victim was so drunk that she could not give consent to sexual intercourse, hence rape. The first chap who had intercourse with her whilst she was too drunk to give consent was found not guilty yet Ched Evans was found guilty, go figure.
I may be misremembering but didn't Labour fail to pledge to not cut the NHS during this parliament, whilst the Tories pledged to maintain the budget in real terms?
I'm not a fan of the NHS concept as a state funded healthcare provider anyway, but all other things being equal, it's hard to see how healthcare performance would have been better under Labour given that policy.
What Labour said was that we were willing to transfer money from the NHS to social care to reduce demand for hospital beds and thereby reduce the overall cost (care is usually cheaper.than hospital stays). In the combative manner of British politics, that was translated by the Tories as "Labour would cut NHS funding". (Thanks for your friendly comment upthread, by the way.)
Meanwhile, I see I've been asked to deny a tax on Morris dancing. So long as you agree to wear kilts and dance to the Marseillaise, you should be OK, Mr Dancer. It's one of those things not yet sufficiently multinational, y'know. Have you considered blending in some Cossack routines?
You've put in a consistently high level of ground effort week-in-week out across the whole parliament, in a seat in which you only narrowly lost last time, against a not uncontroversial Tory incumbent.
Indeed. I'd be quite happy for Anna Soubry to be turfed out. She seems quite happy to make up insults about male politicians' sexual habits, but I'm sure she'd be the first to use her female privilege to shriek if the tables had been turned. Can you imagine if a political opponent - particularly a UKIP one - had joked that she looked like the sort of woman that enjoyed riding a large vibrator? We wouldn't hear about anything else for weeks.
I would probably vote UKIP in Broxtowe. Nice guy though he is, I disagree too strongly with Nick's policies, not to mention his party, to vote for him and - as he's a Labour loyalist - I know what I'd be getting if I did.
Mr. Palmer, I must warn you that if Labour seeks to extort my modest wealth or lay their hands upon my wiffle stick I shall thrash you with it until you beg for mercy.
"Despite the longstanding Department of Health policy to increase GP training numbers in England to 3,250 per annum, GP recruitment has remained stubbornly below this target, at around 2,700 per annum, for the last four years. This cumulative recruitment shortfall is being compounded by increasing numbers of trained GPs leaving the workforce, most significantly GPs approaching retirement, but perhaps more worryingly women in their 30s. GP recruitment and retention is a much bigger problem in some parts of the country and often in those areas which have the worst health outcomes."
I’m sure there’s a DoH policy to cap the numbers entering medical
So, back to the subject, it takes about 7-8 years to train a GP, plus the time it takes to convince someone to apply while in the VIth form (or whatever it’s called now). So encouraging people to aim to be GP’s now will bear fruit just about in time for the 2025 election. Unless, and this could be done fairly easily, push a lot more “straightforward” stuff onto pharmacists, including them in medical practices and so on. There are quite a lot of them already with the “prescribing” post-grad “bolt on”! Trouble is that the big pharmacy chains are opposed.
One of the comments made on the Today programme this morning was to the effect that doctors in the UK simply did not want to work in A&E as it was so horrible. So even when there are doctors and even if we had the money and nurses there would still be a problem in A&E.
Part of the solution, it seems to me, will involve having alternatives for patients to A&E - GPs, for instance - or other minor emergency walk-in centres - and giving doctors a proper career structure for A&E work rather than rely on short-term measures.
But maybe the docs on here might be able to comment.
Lunch nearly over, so cannot stay long but start with the reasons that ED is not a pleasant workplace, then work backwards. Would you want to work there (at any price?)
@Jeremy_Hunt: Wrong @Ed_Miliband. More patients than ever being seen in <4 hours. Strong NHS needs strong economy so Labour's deficit denial risk to NHS.</p>
Wait. So more people are being seen in less than four hours, and more people are not being seen within four hours?
That almost sounds like a rapidly growing population is putting huge strain on the health service. What could be driving such a thing?!?
Except the strain on Emergency departments is mostly due to insufficient staff (often not enough immigrants!) and an increasingly frail elderly population (the frail elderly are not often immigrants).
It is also likely that the number of visits per-capita is increasing due to lifestyle changes. In many ways this is the Perfect Storm set by Labours bodged changes to medical and nursing training a decade or so ago.
While I appreciate that immigration is the hobby-horse of the moment, the issues in reality are far more complex.
Incidentally a year ago my Trust had some of the worst performance figures in the country for ED, now we are 24th out of 57. Quite some improvement! and Leicester is not short of immigrants, indeed the areas declaring Major incidents are not the major urban conurbations with high immigrant populations.
How was that achieved Dr F? Or has your Trust stood still and others deteriorated?. (I know, unkind!) I agree with the description of the changes to medical and nursing training. TBH I don’t think to DOH and or the DfE are covering themselves with glory in that area, either!
Excellent Scottish Labour poster as seen on the last thread. If anyone needs evidence that SLAB have now got their act together look at their advertising. Id be surprised if they don't do better than the 20 seats they're expecting
I agree -this is really very good. In my opinion there is a definite trend for voters sending the 'right party' to the right institution -eg voting UKIP in the euros, SNP to Holyrood etc. Good idea to try and convince Scottish lefties not to send SNP to Westminster.
I may be misremembering but didn't Labour fail to pledge to not cut the NHS during this parliament, whilst the Tories pledged to maintain the budget in real terms?
I'm not a fan of the NHS concept as a state funded healthcare provider anyway, but all other things being equal, it's hard to see how healthcare performance would have been better under Labour given that policy.
What Labour said was that we were willing to transfer money from the NHS to social care to reduce demand for hospital beds and thereby reduce the overall cost (care is usually cheaper.than hospital stays). In the combative manner of British politics, that was translated by the Tories as "Labour would cut NHS funding". (Thanks for your friendly comment upthread, by the way.)
Meanwhile, I see I've been asked to deny a tax on Morris dancing. So long as you agree to wear kilts and dance to the Marseillaise, you should be OK, Mr Dancer. It's one of those things not yet sufficiently multinational, y'know. Have you considered blending in some Cossack routines?
No problem Nick, I suspect we'd get on fine at a personal level.
Thanks for the explanation but it sounds like smoke & mirrors to me, literally speaking that would cut the NHS budget but it would do so in the hope it could achieve the same performance for less by delivering similar services elsewhere. Fair enough, I'm all for efficiency, but I don't recall Labour making that subtle efficiency argument.
I also note that'd have been a reshuffling of the existing NHS budget. I don't remember Labour making a pledge to match the year-on-year increases (amounting to a real-terms freeze) from the Tories accordingly, but if I missed it please do point me in the right direction.
Nurses paid for by mansion tax, what about the others?
8,000 GPs. When? It takes years and years to train a doctor. This is a promise that cannot be met by 2020 election.
Has Ed promised more places at Medical Schools?
He left out the bit about 1,000 free owls.
."
I’m sure there’s a DoH policy to cap the numbers entering medical
So, back to the subject, it takes about 7-8 years to train a GP, plus the time it takes to convince someone to apply while in the VIth form (or whatever it’s called now). So encouraging people to aim to be GP’s now will bear fruit just about in time for the 2025 election. Unless, and this could be done fairly easily, push a lot more “straightforward” stuff onto pharmacists, including them in medical practices and so on. There are quite a lot of them already with the “prescribing” post-grad “bolt on”! Trouble is that the big pharmacy chains are opposed.
One of the comments made on the Today programme this morning was to the effect that doctors in the UK simply did not want to work in A&E as it was so horrible. So even when there are doctors and even if we had the money and nurses there would still be a problem in A&E.
Part of the solution, it seems to me, will involve having alternatives for patients to A&E - GPs, for instance - or other minor emergency walk-in centres - and giving doctors a proper career structure for A&E work rather than rely on short-term measures.
But maybe the docs on here might be able to comment.
Lunch nearly over, so cannot stay long but start with the reasons that ED is not a pleasant workplace, then work backwards. Would you want to work there (at any price?)
I can well imagine how difficult it must be. My father was a doctor; and I have lived with doctors - both A&E and paediatricians - and I've been a patient rather too often for my liking.
But I work in a very stressful area (though nowhere near as diffcult as A&E, obviously) and my experience is that those who are attracted to such work have the temperament for it and thrive (or at least don't collapse) when all is chaos. Equally, it is hard to find sufficient people with the skills, temperament and commitment to survive - especially when there are more attractive alternatives and, particularly, when you start having family responsibilities.
I don't know what the answer is - other than to try and find better alternatives to A&E for those people who really don't need to be there.
It's like the coliseum. He shows up for a job and the baying crowd of the twitterati give him the thumbs down
As someone else posted earlier, have a look at https://www.crimeline.info/case/r-v-ched-evans-chedwyn-evans It’s quite illuminating. It would it appear that he “had it away” with the girl when she says she was too drunk to know what was being asked of her but he swore that she did. The scientific evidence was, unsurprisingly, unclear. She had though, effectively (in the view of jury anyway), propositioned the other defendent. Hence his acquittal. I agree he ought to be able to find another football-related job, but I feel it ought to be out of the public eye.
The US investment bank dismisses the rise of Ukip, predicting that supporters will revert to one of the major parties for the general election
Goldman Sachs is predicting that the Conservative Party will win the UK general election in May, but said that the outcome is "more uncertain than any in a hundred years".
The US investment bank dismisses the rise of Ukip, predicting that supporters will revert to one of the major parties for the general election
Goldman Sachs is predicting that the Conservative Party will win the UK general election in May, but said that the outcome is "more uncertain than any in a hundred years".
There's some very smart people at Goldman Sachs, but they're even more in the London bubble than Westminster politicians. I note they're not staking money on UKIP's prospects.
I often wonder, Ms Cyclefree, whether, if I hadn’t passed the 11+ all those years ago I might have ended up as a paramedic! Of course there are degrees in paramedicine now!
Inflation is currently at 0.2%. This means that investors are so bleak on the outlook for the Eurozone economy over the next five years, they would prefer to pay the German government to look after their money over investing it anywhere else.
It's like the coliseum. He shows up for a job and the baying crowd of the twitterati give him the thumbs down
As someone else posted earlier, have a look at https://www.crimeline.info/case/r-v-ched-evans-chedwyn-evans It’s quite illuminating. It would it appear that he “had it away” with the girl when she says she was too drunk to know what was being asked of her but he swore that she did. The scientific evidence was, unsurprisingly, unclear. She had though, effectively (in the view of jury anyway), propositioned the other defendent. Hence his acquittal. I agree he ought to be able to find another football-related job, but I feel it ought to be out of the public eye.
So the accuser's word and unclear scientific evidence are enough to convict someone beyond reasonable doubt now?
It's like the coliseum. He shows up for a job and the baying crowd of the twitterati give him the thumbs down
As someone else posted earlier, have a look at https://www.crimeline.info/case/r-v-ched-evans-chedwyn-evans It’s quite illuminating. It would it appear that he “had it away” with the girl when she says she was too drunk to know what was being asked of her but he swore that she did. The scientific evidence was, unsurprisingly, unclear. She had though, effectively (in the view of jury anyway), propositioned the other defendent. Hence his acquittal. I agree he ought to be able to find another football-related job, but I feel it ought to be out of the public eye.
So the accuser's word and unclear scientific evidence are enough to convict someone beyond reasonable doubt now?
It takes a trial and for the prosecution to reach the required burden of proof.
But, you know, outrage based on assertions someone who didnt attend the trial posted on the internet should count for something too.
With you on the first, but how can one not be 'obsessed' by an organisation that holds legal supremacy over Westminster? There are two ways: 1. Be genuinely ignorant (like the majority of the population) 2. Be deliberately evasive in order that the process of European integration can take place with the minimum of democratic fuss.
Neither of those apeals to me, hence I'm UKIP.
That said, I can well believe the high tide of defection fever is over for now.
So people who don't agree with you are ignorant?
I thought it was only LibLabCon that looked down on the voters?
The supremacy of EU law over domestic law has been tested in court. It is a matter of public record. People who don't know about this are by definition ignorant of it. You happen not to be ignorant of it, you're just taking the line of 'hey man don't get OBSESSED with it' to avoid the issue and make people who don't avoid it look bad. Your position is fundamentally dishonest and singularly lacking in spine. But that's ok, no worries, I'm not OBSESSED that we're losing the last remnants of our sovereignty and ancient liberties or anything.
If they were effective at the relevant times, Max Verstappen would be unable to join this year, and Kimi Raikkonen would've also been prevented from becoming an F1 driver quite so early.
It's like the coliseum. He shows up for a job and the baying crowd of the twitterati give him the thumbs down
As someone else posted earlier, have a look at https://www.crimeline.info/case/r-v-ched-evans-chedwyn-evans It’s quite illuminating. It would it appear that he “had it away” with the girl when she says she was too drunk to know what was being asked of her but he swore that she did. The scientific evidence was, unsurprisingly, unclear. She had though, effectively (in the view of jury anyway), propositioned the other defendent. Hence his acquittal. I agree he ought to be able to find another football-related job, but I feel it ought to be out of the public eye.
So the accuser's word and unclear scientific evidence are enough to convict someone beyond reasonable doubt now?
It takes a trial and for the prosecution to reach the required burden of proof.
But, you know, outrage based on assertions someone who didnt attend the trial posted on the internet should count for something too.
So you think OJ was innocent then? A court decided it, it must be true.
We have the reporting of the case: the evidence entirely consists of the alleged victim claiming she has memory loss, and unclear scientific evidence. Do you think that's enough to be beyond reasonable doubt? How about being enough for him to not work again.
I agree he ought to be able to find another football-related job, but I feel it ought to be out of the public eye.
You think he should play for Rangers?
Could argue he’s suffered enough!
On a more serious note reading what I was directed to by our collegue upthread left me a little concerned at the verdict, but I wasn’t on the jury, so didn’t have the benefit of seeing the demeanour of the witnesses or of hearing the the evidence presented.
The US investment bank dismisses the rise of Ukip, predicting that supporters will revert to one of the major parties for the general election
Goldman Sachs is predicting that the Conservative Party will win the UK general election in May, but said that the outcome is "more uncertain than any in a hundred years".
There's some very smart people at Goldman Sachs, but they're even more in the London bubble than Westminster politicians. I note they're not staking money on UKIP's prospects.
Goldman Sachs is a dreadful company, and Nigel has specifically and pointedly raised the fact that virtually every national banker (including ours, against expectations) is now a Goldman Sachs alumnus in the European Parliament. I was proud of him for doing so. So I don't expect them to sing his praises.
It's like the coliseum. He shows up for a job and the baying crowd of the twitterati give him the thumbs down
As someone else posted earlier, have a look at https://www.crimeline.info/case/r-v-ched-evans-chedwyn-evans It’s quite illuminating. It would it appear that he “had it away” with the girl when she says she was too drunk to know what was being asked of her but he swore that she did. The scientific evidence was, unsurprisingly, unclear. She had though, effectively (in the view of jury anyway), propositioned the other defendent. Hence his acquittal. I agree he ought to be able to find another football-related job, but I feel it ought to be out of the public eye.
So the accuser's word and unclear scientific evidence are enough to convict someone beyond reasonable doubt now?
It takes a trial and for the prosecution to reach the required burden of proof.
But, you know, outrage based on assertions someone who didnt attend the trial posted on the internet should count for something too.
So you think OJ was innocent then? A court decided it, it must be true.
We have the reporting of the case: the evidence entirely consists of the alleged victim claiming she has memory loss, and unclear scientific evidence. Do you think that's enough to be beyond reasonable doubt? How about being enough for him to not work again.
It wasn't overturned on appeal, nor was the sentence reduced. Hardly a rogue or unjust conviction under current legislation.
It's like the coliseum. He shows up for a job and the baying crowd of the twitterati give him the thumbs down
As someone else posted earlier, have a look at https://www.crimeline.info/case/r-v-ched-evans-chedwyn-evans It’s quite illuminating. It would it appear that he “had it away” with the girl when she says she was too drunk to know what was being asked of her but he swore that she did. The scientific evidence was, unsurprisingly, unclear. She had though, effectively (in the view of jury anyway), propositioned the other defendent. Hence his acquittal. I agree he ought to be able to find another football-related job, but I feel it ought to be out of the public eye.
So the accuser's word and unclear scientific evidence are enough to convict someone beyond reasonable doubt now?
It takes a trial and for the prosecution to reach the required burden of proof.
But, you know, outrage based on assertions someone who didnt attend the trial posted on the internet should count for something too.
So you think OJ was innocent then? A court decided it, it must be true.
(1) I have no idea how you managed that leap of logic. (2) He wasnt found to be innocent in either trial.
Ed very unhappy he is not meeting with Angela this week.
@SamCoatesTimes: FCO only hv to inform opposition ahead of State visits, not Guest of Government. HMG not to blame (phaps Douglas cd try reading newspapers?)
@SamCoatesTimes: If Labour wanted a meeting with Merkel, they could have asked the German embassy. But they didn't (as of last Friday).
Tennis: the Betfair tennis scores/states page appears defunct (I won't link it, as although I don't think there's anything dodgy going on better safe than sorry).
They're shifting technical stuff. Not sure if there'll be an equivalent page eventually, but I hope so.
left me a little concerned at the verdict, but I wasn’t on the jury, so didn’t have the benefit of seeing the demeanour of the witnesses or of hearing the the evidence presented.
Evidence? Pah, who needs evidence when we have outrage?
Inflation is currently at 0.2%. This means that investors are so bleak on the outlook for the Eurozone economy over the next five years, they would prefer to pay the German government to look after their money over investing it anywhere else.
Related to this, Swiss National Bank has announced negative interest rates for commercial bank deposits from 22nd Jan.
It wasn't overturned on appeal, nor was the sentence reduced. Hardly a rogue or unjust conviction under current legislation.
I'm not clear whether it was the jury or the legal system that's wrong. But from all the facts we have to hand, it seems like the traditional concept of "beyond reasonable doubt" isn't being enforced.
The alleged victim says she has no memory of events, and the only other witness (Macdonald) was excluded because he was also on trial, and she had no alcohol in her system by the time she was examined the next day (apparently around midday).
The alleged victim says she has no memory of events, and the only other witness (Macdonald) was excluded because he was also on trial, and she had no alcohol in her system by the time she was examined the next day (apparently around midday).
How you can have read that while still keeping to your earlier assertion is beyond me but whatever feeds the outrage.
It wasn't overturned on appeal, nor was the sentence reduced. Hardly a rogue or unjust conviction under current legislation.
I'm not clear whether it was the jury or the legal system that's wrong. But from all the facts we have to hand, it seems like the traditional concept of "beyond reasonable doubt" isn't being enforced.
The alleged victim says she has no memory of events, and the only other witness (Macdonald) was excluded because he was also on trial, and she had no alcohol in her system by the time she was examined the next day (apparently around midday).
Reading the crimeline site, it does seem a pity the only other witness couldn’t be called.
left me a little concerned at the verdict, but I wasn’t on the jury, so didn’t have the benefit of seeing the demeanour of the witnesses or of hearing the the evidence presented.
Evidence? Pah, who needs evidence when we have outrage?
I have been the one bringing up discussion of the evidence, and you have been the one dismissing it on the basis that a jury is always right.
Please, can you point me to the "outrage" I, or anyone else, have displayed about this case? You're throwing around these accusations because you can't deal with the actual merits of the case itself.
I often wonder, Ms Cyclefree, whether, if I hadn’t passed the 11+ all those years ago I might have ended up as a paramedic! Of course there are degrees in paramedicine now!
I think there are far too many careers requiring degrees now. Nursing, for instance. There will be plenty of people who could be very good nurses without needing academic training or the debts which go with that training. The same for lawyers and accountants.
Certainly in my area of legal specialisation, academic knowledge is the least important attribute of those who are good at it. But I doubt we'll reverse the decision to require degree qualifications, unfortunately.
It's like the coliseum. He shows up for a job and the baying crowd of the twitterati give him the thumbs down
Absolutely right. He has served his time and now he should be allowed to get on with his life. We should not make him pay for his crime twice over by also denying him a career.
Another Murphy/SLAB own goal which got lost yesterday, was his claim that 190,000 Scots voters have the power to decide who forms the next UK government. Seemingly SLAB's research shows they are older men living within 25 miles of Glasgow - not sure how this will go down with the many women ex-SLAB SNP supporters. Link to article below, as it is behind the Herald pay wall I've pasted in the relevant extract:
"In his speech today, Mr Murphy will reach out to 190,000 Scots he describes as "the most important voters in the UK".
The group voted Labour in the 2010 Westminster election but failed to turn out for the following year's Holyrood poll which the SNP won by a landslide.
They voted Yes in the referendum and most, according to Labour's research are older men living within 25 miles of Glasgow.
Addressing supporters at Edinburgh's Our Dynamic Earth museum, Mr Murphy will say: "They voted yes largely because they wanted rid of the Tories and wanted change.
"Now they can decide whether to vote Labour to get rid of the Tories or to vote SNP and keep the status quo.
"At the General Election these will be the most important voters in the UK.
"They will decide whether to hand David Cameron his P45."
The new Scottish Labour leader will devote a large section of his speech to discussing global insecurity and economic uncertainty, in a coded message that independence would not cure Scotland's ills.
The 190,000 target voters will each be sent personal letters during a "January offensive" to win them over."
It wasn't overturned on appeal, nor was the sentence reduced. Hardly a rogue or unjust conviction under current legislation.
I'm not clear whether it was the jury or the legal system that's wrong. But from all the facts we have to hand, it seems like the traditional concept of "beyond reasonable doubt" isn't being enforced.
The alleged victim says she has no memory of events, and the only other witness (Macdonald) was excluded because he was also on trial, and she had no alcohol in her system by the time she was examined the next day (apparently around midday).
The judge in his summing up will clearly have told the jury what the standard of proof is and how to approach it. If he hadn't, that alone would likely have resulted in the conviction being quashed.
I have done a number of criminal trials. In my view juries generally get it right and I think it is dangerous - on the basis of limited newspaper reports - and without having heard all the evidence and seen the witnesses and accused in court to second guess a jury's decision.
Still, once someone has served their sentence they are entitled to seek whatever work they can and if someone is willing to give them work we should be glad that someone is able to go back and rebuild their life and, one hopes, try and live a useful life. I'm most uneasy about bullying by uninformed third parties (not that, to be clear, I'm accusing you of that).
Also you can get an appeal on a point of law or an appeal against the length of sentence - to answer your latest post.
EDIT: Don;t know where the idea that SLab peple aren't mentioning Ed Milliband comes from, he's been mentioned several times by Murphy in that clip.
It all looks manufactured to me.Never before has Scotland had a Labour leader of its own with this much power.That's the message of separation that was asked for.No longer the "branch office",no longer "London Labour",Murphy has Salmond,a Murdoch man, in his sights,a bruiser.
I would also like to point out that Ched Evans has not condemned the people who outed his victim or the fact his victim has been forced to move house six times because of threats made against her.
EDIT: Don;t know where the idea that SLab peple aren't mentioning Ed Milliband comes from, he's been mentioned several times by Murphy in that clip.
It all looks manufactured to me.Never before has Scotland had a Labour leader of its own with this much power.That's the message of separation that was asked for.No longer the "branch office",no longer "London Labour",Murphy has Salmond,a Murdoch man, in his sights,a bruiser.
Salmond? Murdoch?? A little wee bittockie of an update needed there. But I agree, it does seem concocted, though at the risk of mixing messages. I'm not sure that Mr M has that much power, actually, because the logical consequence of his actions is to split off SLAB from London Labour or risk damaging both of them - at which point Mr Miliband & Co lose, and Mr Murphy might as well fight for a new referendum.
Comments
They like them a bit bonkers and suddenly seeing the free-market capitalist light in London, they do.
'What happens when Tories run the NHS.'
Budget increased.
Can you remind us what happens when Labour runs the NHS in Wales.
Oh dear.....
*NSFW*
"What would happen if I put my penis in it?"
It's a question man has been asking ever since it discovered it was useful in certain situations for procreation thousands of years ago.
But now it has reached an absurd and mildly dystopian conclusion: 3D-printed d*ck pics.
The means? A handheld 3D scanner such as the Fuel3D above. The method? By pointing it at *any* object and capturing it three-dimensionally. The reason? Who can say.
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/news/alas-men-have-begun-3dprinting-their-penises-9960773.html?Di
Hours and hours of fun.
An ex said "Gone in 60 Seconds in my pants" was more apt.
So, back to the subject, it takes about 7-8 years to train a GP, plus the time it takes to convince someone to apply while in the VIth form (or whatever it’s called now). So encouraging people to aim to be GP’s now will bear fruit just about in time for the 2025 election.
Unless, and this could be done fairly easily, push a lot more “straightforward” stuff onto pharmacists, including them in medical practices and so on. There are quite a lot of them already with the “prescribing” post-grad “bolt on”!
Trouble is that the big pharmacy chains are opposed.
http://www.heraldscotland.com/comment/bloggers/will-new-jim-succumb-to-murphy-s-law.1420547000
"Mr. Roger, problem with that line is that Cameron's more popular in Scotland than Miliband."
I'm getting the impression that Labour are deliberately putting the Party in the shop window rather than Ed Milliband. It's quite a good ploy particularly as Cameron being the narcissist he is won't be able to resist leading with himself.
At 30 MPH no one will be able to tell the real from the Labour spoof.
Cameron is more popular than the Tories. Putting him out front helps.
Miliband is drag on the "brand". Putting him out front results in 4 million individual Ratner moments
If Labour gain 38 seats from the Conservatives, 10 from the Lib Dems and only lose 12 to the SNP then they'll have around 294 MPs. The Conservatives (assuming they gain at least 7 seats from the Lib Dems and don't retake the UKIP seats, and lose South Thanet to Farage) would be on around 272 MPs. No way back for Cameron; Conservatives out of office. Lib Dems in low 30s. Prob Labour minority, perhaps with LD confidence and supply to give a bare majority.
If Labour only gain 22 seats from the Conservatives, pick up 9 from the Lib Dems but lose 25 seats to the SNP, then they'll have around 264 MPs. The Conservatives gain 11 seats from the Lib Dems and would be on around 295 seats. If the Lib Dems retain 30 seats that gives an effective HoC tie, or majority of 4 (sans Shinners), for a 2nd con-lib dem coalition. If not, then a Conservative Minority would prob work because the Lib Dem-Labour majority would barely match the Conservative total, yet alone command a HoC majority.
How long that's hold for is anyone's guess. I expect Cameron could hold it together for about 18 months.
As Good as It Gets in my pants
It is also likely that the number of visits per-capita is increasing due to lifestyle changes. In many ways this is the Perfect Storm set by Labours bodged changes to medical and nursing training a decade or so ago.
While I appreciate that immigration is the hobby-horse of the moment, the issues in reality are far more complex.
Incidentally a year ago my Trust had some of the worst performance figures in the country for ED, now we are 24th out of 57. Quite some improvement! and Leicester is not short of immigrants, indeed the areas declaring Major incidents are not the major urban conurbations with high immigrant populations.
For Thailand bound @SeanT - Exodus .... In My Pants
or preferably
Pretty Woman in my pants
but not
Carry On Up the Khyber in my pants
because that would lead to being
Thor in my pants
I will do a thread on AV/Electoral reform as penance.
Part of the solution, it seems to me, will involve having alternatives for patients to A&E - GPs, for instance - or other minor emergency walk-in centres - and giving doctors a proper career structure for A&E work rather than rely on short-term measures.
But maybe the docs on here might be able to comment.
A few to many of these really
I do find this campaign against him disturbing. He has served his time, what his he now supposed to do?
The veridct of the jury in his case was one of the oddest I can remember.
The rape case was bought as the victim was so drunk that she could not give consent to sexual intercourse, hence rape. The first chap who had intercourse with her whilst she was too drunk to give consent was found not guilty yet Ched Evans was found guilty, go figure.
Battle of the Bulge in my pants.
Meanwhile, I see I've been asked to deny a tax on Morris dancing. So long as you agree to wear kilts and dance to the Marseillaise, you should be OK, Mr Dancer. It's one of those things not yet sufficiently multinational, y'know. Have you considered blending in some Cossack routines?
Election in my pants
The American President in my pants
"I do find this campaign against him disturbing."
It's like the coliseum. He shows up for a job and the baying crowd of the twitterati give him the thumbs down
I agree with the description of the changes to medical and nursing training. TBH I don’t think to DOH and or the DfE are covering themselves with glory in that area, either!
http://www.bristolpost.co.uk/Bristol-man-sacked-joke-cyclist-hit-run/story-25812395-detail/story.html
Thanks for the explanation but it sounds like smoke & mirrors to me, literally speaking that would cut the NHS budget but it would do so in the hope it could achieve the same performance for less by delivering similar services elsewhere. Fair enough, I'm all for efficiency, but I don't recall Labour making that subtle efficiency argument.
I also note that'd have been a reshuffling of the existing NHS budget. I don't remember Labour making a pledge to match the year-on-year increases (amounting to a real-terms freeze) from the Tories accordingly, but if I missed it please do point me in the right direction.
But I work in a very stressful area (though nowhere near as diffcult as A&E, obviously) and my experience is that those who are attracted to such work have the temperament for it and thrive (or at least don't collapse) when all is chaos. Equally, it is hard to find sufficient people with the skills, temperament and commitment to survive - especially when there are more attractive alternatives and, particularly, when you start having family responsibilities.
I don't know what the answer is - other than to try and find better alternatives to A&E for those people who really don't need to be there.
It’s quite illuminating. It would it appear that he “had it away” with the girl when she says she was too drunk to know what was being asked of her but he swore that she did. The scientific evidence was, unsurprisingly, unclear.
She had though, effectively (in the view of jury anyway), propositioned the other defendent. Hence his acquittal.
I agree he ought to be able to find another football-related job, but I feel it ought to be out of the public eye.
The US investment bank dismisses the rise of Ukip, predicting that supporters will revert to one of the major parties for the general election
Goldman Sachs is predicting that the Conservative Party will win the UK general election in May, but said that the outcome is "more uncertain than any in a hundred years".
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/11327695/Goldman-Sachs-bets-on-Conservative-victory-in-most-uncertain-election-in-a-century.html
I often wonder, Ms Cyclefree, whether, if I hadn’t passed the 11+ all those years ago I might have ended up as a paramedic!
Of course there are degrees in paramedicine now!
http://www.bloomberg.com/markets/rates-bonds/government-bonds/germany/
Inflation is currently at 0.2%. This means that investors are so bleak on the outlook for the Eurozone economy over the next five years, they would prefer to pay the German government to look after their money over investing it anywhere else.
Jurassic Park in MY Pants.
But, you know, outrage based on assertions someone who didnt attend the trial posted on the internet should count for something too.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/30698153
If they were effective at the relevant times, Max Verstappen would be unable to join this year, and Kimi Raikkonen would've also been prevented from becoming an F1 driver quite so early.
We have the reporting of the case: the evidence entirely consists of the alleged victim claiming she has memory loss, and unclear scientific evidence. Do you think that's enough to be beyond reasonable doubt? How about being enough for him to not work again.
On a more serious note reading what I was directed to by our collegue upthread left me a little concerned at the verdict, but I wasn’t on the jury, so didn’t have the benefit of seeing the demeanour of the witnesses or of hearing the the evidence presented.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p02gd3wx
Hey may as well have said "It's our oil".
EDIT: Don;t know where the idea that SLab peple aren't mentioning Ed Milliband comes from, he's been mentioned several times by Murphy in that clip.
(2) He wasnt found to be innocent in either trial. I wasnt there either but I really doubt you've got that right.
Only now that it has blown up in his face has he been forced to mention Ed, but only to warn him to butt out. We'll see how long that lasts.
Ed very unhappy he is not meeting with Angela this week.
@SamCoatesTimes: FCO only hv to inform opposition ahead of State visits, not Guest of Government. HMG not to blame (phaps Douglas cd try reading newspapers?)
@SamCoatesTimes: If Labour wanted a meeting with Merkel, they could have asked the German embassy. But they didn't (as of last Friday).
They're shifting technical stuff. Not sure if there'll be an equivalent page eventually, but I hope so.
I used to work there.
And they made me redundant!!
Not sure which confirms the point mind you..... might be the latter.
https://www.crimeline.info/case/r-v-ched-evans-chedwyn-evans
This is entirely consistent with the claims on Ched Evans' website:
http://www.chedevans.com/key-and-undisputed-facts
The alleged victim says she has no memory of events, and the only other witness (Macdonald) was excluded because he was also on trial, and she had no alcohol in her system by the time she was examined the next day (apparently around midday).
Please, can you point me to the "outrage" I, or anyone else, have displayed about this case? You're throwing around these accusations because you can't deal with the actual merits of the case itself.
Certainly in my area of legal specialisation, academic knowledge is the least important attribute of those who are good at it. But I doubt we'll reverse the decision to require degree qualifications, unfortunately.
Oh, and the reason it was not overturned on appeal is because an appeal never happened. In the absence of fresh evidence, you don't get an appeal.
Something tells me that evidence wasn't good enough by a panel of three judges.
Now who am I going to trust? Some bloke off the Internet or three judges familiar with the case/evidence ?
http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/scottish-politics/gloves-come-off-in-the-battle-to-win-over-200000-scots-who-could-decide-t.115483291
"In his speech today, Mr Murphy will reach out to 190,000 Scots he describes as "the most important voters in the UK".
The group voted Labour in the 2010 Westminster election but failed to turn out for the following year's Holyrood poll which the SNP won by a landslide.
They voted Yes in the referendum and most, according to Labour's research are older men living within 25 miles of Glasgow.
Addressing supporters at Edinburgh's Our Dynamic Earth museum, Mr Murphy will say: "They voted yes largely because they wanted rid of the Tories and wanted change.
"Now they can decide whether to vote Labour to get rid of the Tories or to vote SNP and keep the status quo.
"At the General Election these will be the most important voters in the UK.
"They will decide whether to hand David Cameron his P45."
The new Scottish Labour leader will devote a large section of his speech to discussing global insecurity and economic uncertainty, in a coded message that independence would not cure Scotland's ills.
The 190,000 target voters will each be sent personal letters during a "January offensive" to win them over."
I have done a number of criminal trials. In my view juries generally get it right and I think it is dangerous - on the basis of limited newspaper reports - and without having heard all the evidence and seen the witnesses and accused in court to second guess a jury's decision.
Still, once someone has served their sentence they are entitled to seek whatever work they can and if someone is willing to give them work we should be glad that someone is able to go back and rebuild their life and, one hopes, try and live a useful life. I'm most uneasy about bullying by uninformed third parties (not that, to be clear, I'm accusing you of that).
Also you can get an appeal on a point of law or an appeal against the length of sentence - to answer your latest post.
@robertshrimsley: @faisalislam presume Merkel could have asked for a meeting if she cared
@nigelfletcher: @SamCoatesTimes That is indeed the precedent - though Obama asked to meet Cameron in 2009. I can bore at some length on this.
I guess she's just not that into him...
Mr. Eagles, do you mean 'condemned'?