That's a ridiculous conflation. One is looking into telephone traffic of suspected individuals, the other is a database state on everyone. It's the difference between putting a suspect's house under surveillance, and installing government watched CCTV on everyone's homes. I'm sure if they did that we could reduce crime and save lives, but it's not worth the cost. Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little security deserve neither.
What liberty has been given up?
In any case, it's not me who is arguing this. I think you'll find that, whenever there is a terrorist atrocity, the media and public want to know why the hell the intelligence services were caught unawares. Whether you like it or not, they have a very simple (and, for once, quite honest) answer: give us bigger computers and more data, and next time there's less chance of being caught unawares.
Basic privacy has been given up. Government agents should not be able to snoop on everyone's personal phone calls of every friendship, every family contact, every love affair. Private citizen's lives are their own domain, and they should only be poured over by the intelligence services if they have reason to believe you've done something wrong, after a judge has given them a precise warrant. Your argument of "there's an atrocity, we thus need to have more data on everyone" is an endless one, and a recipe for ending up in a Lives of Others type scenario.
We never needed to do this in the UK despite years of terrorist threat from the IRA.
Don't be silly. Do you seriously think that the intelligence services weren't monitoring telephone traffic in the 1970s looking for IRA-linked clues?
Of course the technology was very different, and they didn't have today's enormous computers to do the correlations for them, so it was rather hard. Maybe if they had had better tools, fewer innocent people would have died, although of course it does tend to be an arms race
That's a ridiculous conflation. One is looking into telephone traffic of suspected individuals, the other is a database state on everyone. It's the difference between putting a suspect's house under surveillance, and installing government watched CCTV on everyone's homes. I'm sure if they did that we could reduce crime and save lives, but it's not worth the cost. Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little security deserve neither.
Saving lives isn't worth the cost? Tell me that if you have lost a loved one.
If you have nothing to hide I don't see the problem.
We never needed to do this in the UK despite years of terrorist threat from the IRA.
Don't be silly. Do you seriously think that the intelligence services weren't monitoring telephone traffic in the 1970s looking for IRA-linked clues?
Of course the technology was very different, and they didn't have today's enormous computers to do the correlations for them, so it was rather hard. Maybe if they had had better tools, fewer innocent people would have died, although of course it does tend to be an arms race
That's a ridiculous conflation. One is looking into telephone traffic of suspected individuals, the other is a database state on everyone. It's the difference between putting a suspect's house under surveillance, and installing government watched CCTV on everyone's homes. I'm sure if they did that we could reduce crime and save lives, but it's not worth the cost. Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little security deserve neither.
Saving lives isn't worth the cost? Tell me that if you have lost a loved one.
If you have nothing to hide I don't see the problem.
I didn't think people still used that "if you have nothing to hide" line outside of satire.
@Socrates And where do you get the idea tha healthcare in Spain is far cheaper than the UK?
On the basis that buildings and salaries are far cheaper.
That's as serious an answer as your BUPA nonsense
I was just trying to do a first stab at quantifying the cost of something you seem to think is a reason not to quit the EU. Obviously it was a back of the envelope calculation, and I'm happy to listen to other's attempts to quantify it better. Do you have any evidence that it would be higher? How much do you think the cost would be?
Again if Tim had actually been interested in facts rather than his infantile scare stories he would have found out that Private Health care is much more widespread in Spain than in the UK (almost double the number of people have Private care in Spain compared to the UK) and that as a result premiums are usually significantly lower as there is far more competition in the market.
But since he wasn't actually interested in facts that will not matter to him.
The idea that competition brings down private healthcare costs is always amusing, works so well in the USA doesn't it.
We weren't talking about the US we were talking about Spain where premiums are significantly lower than the UK.
Now stop trying to squirm out of your utter failure and just admit you went off the deep end on something you know nothing about just to try and make a stupid political point and you got caught out.
All I did was ask how much a 70 year old Brit retiree would expect to pay for fully comp health insurance in Spain and I get 57 varieties of Kipper trying to claim its something or other.
So how much is it, add in a preexisting respiratory condition for a comparison
All you need to know is that it is less than it would be for comparable condition in the UK. And as I pointed out Spain provides state healthcare to all residents immaterial of where they are originally from. So your silly little 'point' is pointless.
But as I said before you were never interested in a real answer, just in spreading myths as you always do.
@Socrates And where do you get the idea tha healthcare in Spain is far cheaper than the UK?
On the basis that buildings and salaries are far cheaper.
That's as serious an answer as your BUPA nonsense
I was just trying to do a first stab at quantifying the cost of something you seem to think is a reason not to quit the EU. Obviously it was a back of the envelope calculation, and I'm happy to listen to other's attempts to quantify it better. Do you have any evidence that it would be higher? How much do you think the cost would be?
Again if Tim had actually been interested in facts rather than his infantile scare stories he would have found out that Private Health care is much more widespread in Spain than in the UK (almost double the number of people have Private care in Spain compared to the UK) and that as a result premiums are usually significantly lower as there is far more competition in the market.
But since he wasn't actually interested in facts that will not matter to him.
The idea that competition brings down private healthcare costs is always amusing, works so well in the USA doesn't it.
We weren't talking about the US we were talking about Spain where premiums are significantly lower than the UK.
Now stop trying to squirm out of your utter failure and just admit you went off the deep end on something you know nothing about just to try and make a stupid political point and you got caught out.
All I did was ask how much a 70 year old Brit retiree would expect to pay for fully comp health insurance in Spain and I get 57 varieties of Kipper trying to claim its something or other.
So how much is it, add in a preexisting respiratory condition for a comparison
I'm on your side with this Tim, despite me being a kipper. I can get quotes in the morning if you want me to, but for anyone doubting consider when you apply for travel insurance they offer you European cover, worldwide excluding USA and worldwide including USA. Try it, the premiums for worldwide including USA are far more expensive, so it's nothing to do with competition.
We never needed to do this in the UK despite years of terrorist threat from the IRA.
Don't be silly. Do you seriously think that the intelligence services weren't monitoring telephone traffic in the 1970s looking for IRA-linked clues?
Of course the technology was very different, and they didn't have today's enormous computers to do the correlations for them, so it was rather hard. Maybe if they had had better tools, fewer innocent people would have died, although of course it does tend to be an arms race
That's a ridiculous conflation. One is looking into telephone traffic of suspected individuals, the other is a database state on everyone. It's the difference between putting a suspect's house under surveillance, and installing government watched CCTV on everyone's homes. I'm sure if they did that we could reduce crime and save lives, but it's not worth the cost. Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little security deserve neither.
Saving lives isn't worth the cost? Tell me that if you have lost a loved one.
If you have nothing to hide I don't see the problem.
I didn't think people still used that "if you have nothing to hide" line outside of satire.
Why? I used to think that CCTV was an intrusion on private life. That was until the bastard that attacked my daughter was caught and prosecuted on CCTV evidence.
@Socrates And where do you get the idea tha healthcare in Spain is far cheaper than the UK?
On the basis that buildings and salaries are far cheaper.
That's as serious an answer as your BUPA nonsense
I was just trying to do a first stab at quantifying the cost of something you seem to think is a reason not to quit the EU. Obviously it was a back of the envelope calculation, and I'm happy to listen to other's attempts to quantify it better. Do you have any evidence that it would be higher? How much do you think the cost would be?
Again if Tim had actually been interested in facts rather than his infantile scare stories he would have found out that Private Health care is much more widespread in Spain than in the UK (almost double the number of people have Private care in Spain compared to the UK) and that as a result premiums are usually significantly lower as there is far more competition in the market.
But since he wasn't actually interested in facts that will not matter to him.
The idea that competition brings down private healthcare costs is always amusing, works so well in the USA doesn't it.
We weren't talking about the US we were talking about Spain where premiums are significantly lower than the UK.
Now stop trying to squirm out of your utter failure and just admit you went off the deep end on something you know nothing about just to try and make a stupid political point and you got caught out.
All I did was ask how much a 70 year old Brit retiree would expect to pay for fully comp health insurance in Spain and I get 57 varieties of Kipper trying to claim its something or other.
So how much is it, add in a preexisting respiratory condition for a comparison
All you need to know is that it is less than it would be for comparable condition in the UK. And as I pointed out Spain provides state healthcare to all residents immaterial of where they are originally from. So your silly little 'point' is pointless.
But as I said before you were never interested in a real answer, just in spreading myths as you always do.
Well it's free to a Brit retiree who stays in Britain so it isn't less than zero if you move abroad just because of comparative private healthcare premiums is it.
You were talking about private insurance not state care. Stop squirming Tim. As I already pointed out State care is also available in Spain so once again your point is pointless.
O/T Why has the Guardian decided to go ballistic today particularly on the monitoring of US phone records?
Because the Guardian is desperate, and dying, and they are trying - with a view to survival - to make themselves the online liberal "paper" of record for the Anglosphere as a whole, in particular America (but also Australia - see their new foray into the Antipodes).
Expect more of the same in months and years to come, until the Guardian goes bust - because the equally liberal NYT knows more about America, and has vastly bigger resources.
And the Guardian broke the Wikileaks stuff as well, although they subsequently lost credibility in that area by breaking key principles of information security, like when you get given the passphrase to a secret archive so that you can help redact it, don't write the passphrase down in a place where other people could read it, such as the subheading to a chapter of a book you're getting published by Public Affairs.
But why the F is it front page news (and 638 pages inside) in a supposedly British newspaper? I'm not arguing whether it's a big story - it is, if you are American. But we're not American. And, in relative and global terms, America is a fast-shrinking part of the world - economically, militarily, culturally, demographically. The American century is well and truly over, and will never return.
This obsession with America therefore looks odd, and rather jarring, unless you are a Guardian editor desperate to expand your dying paper into the largest English-speaking economy of all.
The fact that they broke the story must factor into their interest in bigging it up, but I'm sure you're right that they're trying to go after the global English-speaking market too, especially the US. One sign of that is that there are hardly any UK-related stories on their top page (it may be different from a UK IP) and of the ones there are, the highest-placed one is about the Royal Family.
@Socrates And where do you get the idea tha healthcare in Spain is far cheaper than the UK?
On the basis that buildings and salaries are far cheaper.
That's as serious an answer as your BUPA nonsense
I was just trying to do a first stab at quantifying the cost of something you seem to think is a reason not to quit the EU. Obviously it was a back of the envelope calculation, and I'm happy to listen to other's attempts to quantify it better. Do you have any evidence that it would be higher? How much do you think the cost would be?
Again if Tim had actually been interested in facts rather than his infantile scare stories he would have found out that Private Health care is much more widespread in Spain than in the UK (almost double the number of people have Private care in Spain compared to the UK) and that as a result premiums are usually significantly lower as there is far more competition in the market.
But since he wasn't actually interested in facts that will not matter to him.
The idea that competition brings down private healthcare costs is always amusing, works so well in the USA doesn't it.
We weren't talking about the US we were talking about Spain where premiums are significantly lower than the UK.
Now stop trying to squirm out of your utter failure and just admit you went off the deep end on something you know nothing about just to try and make a stupid political point and you got caught out.
All I did was ask how much a 70 year old Brit retiree would expect to pay for fully comp health insurance in Spain and I get 57 varieties of Kipper trying to claim its something or other.
So how much is it, add in a preexisting respiratory condition for a comparison
I'm on your side with this Tim, despite me being a kipper. I can get quotes in the morning if you want me to, but for anyone doubting consider when you apply for travel insurance they offer you European cover, worldwide excluding USA and worldwide including USA. Try it, the premiums for worldwide including USA are far more expensive, so it's nothing to do with competition.
Nigel, Tim isn't interested in finding out how much it costs. He is trying to prove that the UK leaving the EU would make health care more expensive for expats in Spain. It is a stupid argument as all the facts show that this is would not be the case. Anything else is just his normal smoke and mirrors act. Son't be fooled by him.
We never needed to do this in the UK despite years of terrorist threat from the IRA.
Don't be silly. Do you seriously think that the intelligence services weren't monitoring telephone traffic in the 1970s looking for IRA-linked clues?
Of course the technology was very different, and they didn't have today's enormous computers to do the correlations for them, so it was rather hard. Maybe if they had had better tools, fewer innocent people would have died, although of course it does tend to be an arms race
That's a ridiculous conflation. One is looking into telephone traffic of suspected individuals, the other is a database state on everyone. It's the difference between putting a suspect's house under surveillance, and installing government watched CCTV on everyone's homes. I'm sure if they did that we could reduce crime and save lives, but it's not worth the cost. Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little security deserve neither.
Saving lives isn't worth the cost? Tell me that if you have lost a loved one.
If you have nothing to hide I don't see the problem.
I didn't think people still used that "if you have nothing to hide" line outside of satire.
Why? I used to think that CCTV was an intrusion on private life. That was until the bastard that attacked my daughter was caught and prosecuted on CCTV evidence.
Public CCTV cannot be considered an intrusion into people's lives. After all, the camera can see what any other member of the public can see.
We never needed to do this in the UK despite years of terrorist threat from the IRA.
Don't be silly. Do you seriously think that the intelligence services weren't monitoring telephone traffic in the 1970s looking for IRA-linked clues?
Of course the technology was very different, and they didn't have today's enormous computers to do the correlations for them, so it was rather hard. Maybe if they had had better tools, fewer innocent people would have died, although of course it does tend to be an arms race
That's a ridiculous conflation. One is looking into telephone traffic of suspected individuals, the other is a database state on everyone. It's the difference between putting a suspect's house under surveillance, and installing government watched CCTV on everyone's homes. I'm sure if they did that we could reduce crime and save lives, but it's not worth the cost. Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little security deserve neither.
Saving lives isn't worth the cost? Tell me that if you have lost a loved one.
If you have nothing to hide I don't see the problem.
I didn't think people still used that "if you have nothing to hide" line outside of satire.
Why? I used to think that CCTV was an intrusion on private life. That was until the bastard that attacked my daughter was caught and prosecuted on CCTV evidence.
Because plenty of people very reasonably have private things they wish to keep from others. The young woman calling the abortion clinic. The disabled man calling the phone sex line. The teenage male from a devout Muslim family calling his boyfriend. The terminally ill mother who hasn't told others calling the hospital. The battered wife calling the women's shelter. The idea that decent people don't have things they reasonably want to keep private is ridiculous. I challenge anyone who thinks otherwise to post on here their full name and a list of their phone calls over the last week, stating the full names of the individuals they called.
@Socrates And where do you get the idea tha healthcare in Spain is far cheaper than the UK?
On the basis that buildings and salaries are far cheaper.
That's as serious an answer as your BUPA nonsense
I was just trying to do a first stab at quantifying the cost of something you seem to think is a reason not to quit the EU. Obviously it was a back of the envelope calculation, and I'm happy to listen to other's attempts to quantify it better. Do you have any evidence that it would be higher? How much do you think the cost would be?
Again if Tim had actually been interested in facts rather than his infantile scare stories he would have found out that Private Health care is much more widespread in Spain than in the UK (almost double the number of people have Private care in Spain compared to the UK) and that as a result premiums are usually significantly lower as there is far more competition in the market.
But since he wasn't actually interested in facts that will not matter to him.
The idea that competition brings down private healthcare costs is always amusing, works so well in the USA doesn't it.
We weren't talking about the US we were talking about Spain where premiums are significantly lower than the UK.
Now stop trying to squirm out of your utter failure and just admit you went off the deep end on something you know nothing about just to try and make a stupid political point and you got caught out.
All I did was ask how much a 70 year old Brit retiree would expect to pay for fully comp health insurance in Spain and I get 57 varieties of Kipper trying to claim its something or other.
So how much is it, add in a preexisting respiratory condition for a comparison
All you need to know is that it is less than it would be for comparable condition in the UK. And as I pointed out Spain provides state healthcare to all residents immaterial of where they are originally from. So your silly little 'point' is pointless.
But as I said before you were never interested in a real answer, just in spreading myths as you always do.
Well it's free to a Brit retiree who stays in Britain so it isn't less than zero if you move abroad just because of comparative private healthcare premiums is it.
My eldest brother lives in France, think I said on here he had an aortic rupture in January, and the French health authority did a fantastic job of saving his life. However, he was in hospital for three months and the French authorities charged him 18 Euros a night. Sounds minimal until you consider he was in there for three months.
I know Wollaton well (it borders the poshest bit of Broxtowe) and the formidable Labour operation in Nottingham was trying hard there - might have got close.
We never needed to do this in the UK despite years of terrorist threat from the IRA.
Don't be silly. Do you seriously think that the intelligence services weren't monitoring telephone traffic in the 1970s looking for IRA-linked clues?
Of course the technology was very different, and they didn't have today's enormous computers to do the correlations for them, so it was rather hard. Maybe if they had had better tools, fewer innocent people would have died, although of course it does tend to be an arms race
That's a ridiculous conflation. One is looking into telephone traffic of suspected individuals, the other is a database state on everyone. It's the difference between putting a suspect's house under surveillance, and installing government watched CCTV on everyone's homes. I'm sure if they did that we could reduce crime and save lives, but it's not worth the cost. Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little security deserve neither.
Saving lives isn't worth the cost? Tell me that if you have lost a loved one.
If you have nothing to hide I don't see the problem.
I didn't think people still used that "if you have nothing to hide" line outside of satire.
Why? I used to think that CCTV was an intrusion on private life. That was until the bastard that attacked my daughter was caught and prosecuted on CCTV evidence.
Public CCTV cannot be considered an intrusion into people's lives. After all, the camera can see what any other member of the public can see.
How many members of the public would have been around at 3 in the morning?
Compared to 2012 LD held well....but 2012 here was bad compared to 2010-11. I am not sure what were the local circumstances in either 2011 or 12 because 2011 LD result looks very good given the national picture but then they were halved in 2012.
Interesting. The Lib Dem vote has held up fairly well there considering their woes in the North. Tactical swing from CON to UKIP I would guess also.
Ahh hmm yes, only looked at the most recent figures. Definitely more in line with my Lib Dem (Awful) expectations when you trend it back through 2010 and 11. Thought they'd done ok in the Labour Urban North for a moment there xD !
I can answer Tim if he wants to come to Italy for his retirement
If he goes to the municipality to ask for the residency, they will ask him to produce an health insurance policy (as he's not working). He can subscribe one with a private company but he can also go to the NHS to ask for a voluntary registration. He must pay. How much? As he's not a student (149.77 euro) or a priest (387.34), he would pay 7.5% of his income (previous year) until €20.658.27 and 4% of his income between 20.658 and € 51.645.68
I know Wollaton well (it borders the poshest bit of Broxtowe) and the formidable Labour operation in Nottingham was trying hard there - might have got close.
It'll be UKIP wot won it for Labour there methinks. Lib Dems - 100 votes will be a sort of result I think for them !
We never needed to do this in the UK despite years of terrorist threat from the IRA.
Don't be silly. Do you seriously think that the intelligence services weren't monitoring telephone traffic in the 1970s looking for IRA-linked clues?
Of course the technology was very different, and they didn't have today's enormous computers to do the correlations for them, so it was rather hard. Maybe if they had had better tools, fewer innocent people would have died, although of course it does tend to be an arms race
That's a ridiculous conflation. One is looking into telephone traffic of suspected individuals, the other is a database state on everyone. It's the difference between putting a suspect's house under surveillance, and installing government watched CCTV on everyone's homes. I'm sure if they did that we could reduce crime and save lives, but it's not worth the cost. Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little security deserve neither.
Saving lives isn't worth the cost? Tell me that if you have lost a loved one.
If you have nothing to hide I don't see the problem.
I didn't think people still used that "if you have nothing to hide" line outside of satire.
Why? I used to think that CCTV was an intrusion on private life. That was until the bastard that attacked my daughter was caught and prosecuted on CCTV evidence.
Because plenty of people very reasonably have private things they wish to keep from others. The young woman calling the abortion clinic. The disabled man calling the phone sex line. The teenage male from a devout Muslim family calling his boyfriend. The terminally ill mother who hasn't told others calling the hospital. The battered wife calling the women's shelter. The idea that decent people don't have things they reasonably want to keep private is ridiculous. I challenge anyone who thinks otherwise to post on here their full name and a list of their phone calls over the last week, stating the full names of the individuals they called.
I've been on here loads of times bemoaning both Common Purpose and the Bilderberg group, I hate secret society stuff. However I really don't believe the authorities are remotely interested in whether you have been shagging your wife's sister or whatever.
It is quite possible that one day the so called snooping may save your life, so stop worrying whether they are listening to you having phone sex with your boss and just appreciate they are trying to save us from the nutters out there.
We never needed to do this in the UK despite years of terrorist threat from the IRA.
Don't be silly. Do you seriously think that the intelligence services weren't monitoring telephone traffic in the 1970s looking for IRA-linked clues?
Of course the technology was very different, and they didn't have today's enormous computers to do the correlations for them, so it was rather hard. Maybe if they had had better tools, fewer innocent people would have died, although of course it does tend to be an arms race
That's a ridiculous conflation. One is looking into telephone traffic of suspected individuals, the other is a database state on everyone. It's the difference between putting a suspect's house under surveillance, and installing government watched CCTV on everyone's homes. I'm sure if they did that we could reduce crime and save lives, but it's not worth the cost. Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little security deserve neither.
Saving lives isn't worth the cost? Tell me that if you have lost a loved one.
If you have nothing to hide I don't see the problem.
I didn't think people still used that "if you have nothing to hide" line outside of satire.
Why? I used to think that CCTV was an intrusion on private life. That was until the bastard that attacked my daughter was caught and prosecuted on CCTV evidence.
Public CCTV cannot be considered an intrusion into people's lives. After all, the camera can see what any other member of the public can see.
How many members of the public would have been around at 3 in the morning?
Doesn't matter. As long as the CCTV cameras only "see" public areas where any member of the public can go anytime, it's OK.
@Socrates And where do you get the idea tha healthcare in Spain is far cheaper than the UK?
On the basis that buildings and salaries are far cheaper.
That's as serious an answer as your BUPA nonsense
I was just trying to do a first stab at quantifying the cost of something you seem to think is a reason not to quit the EU. Obviously it was a back of the envelope calculation, and I'm happy to listen to other's attempts to quantify it better. Do you have any evidence that it would be higher? How much do you think the cost would be?
Again if Tim had actually been interested in facts rather than his infantile scare stories he would have found out that Private Health care is much more widespread in Spain than in the UK (almost double the number of people have Private care in Spain compared to the UK) and that as a result premiums are usually significantly lower as there is far more competition in the market.
But since he wasn't actually interested in facts that will not matter to him.
The idea that competition brings down private healthcare costs is always amusing, works so well in the USA doesn't it.
We weren't talking about the US we were talking about Spain where premiums are significantly lower than the UK.
Now stop trying to squirm out of your utter failure and just admit you went off the deep end on something you know nothing about just to try and make a stupid political point and you got caught out.
All I did was ask how much a 70 year old Brit retiree would expect to pay for fully comp health insurance in Spain and I get 57 varieties of Kipper trying to claim its something or other.
So how much is it, add in a preexisting respiratory condition for a comparison
All you need to know is that it is less than it would be for comparable condition in the UK. And as I pointed out Spain provides state healthcare to all residents immaterial of where they are originally from. So your silly little 'point' is pointless.
But as I said before you were never interested in a real answer, just in spreading myths as you always do.
Well it's free to a Brit retiree who stays in Britain so it isn't less than zero if you move abroad just because of comparative private healthcare premiums is it.
You were talking about private insurance not state care. Stop squirming Tim. As I already pointed out State care is also available in Spain so once again your point is pointless.
State care is available in Australia too, but it's unlikely you'll get residency at 70 with an underlying health condition unless you've go a massive wedge, so you're mixing up residency as well
I'm talking about the additional costs of emigrating to a country without reciprocal health agreements.
And yet again you show your ignorance Tim. Spain provides state health care to residents irrespective of whether their country of origin is EEA or non EEA.
So your original point was just another of your fantasies designed to try and sow confusion.
@edmundintokyo - Well, I knew they were doing in for everybody, and I have no special knowledge at all (though it is something I'm interested in because I was very peripherally involved in one aspect of it some years ago).
But, yes, it is a statistical data-mining exercise. Not looking for terrorists necessarily, but looking for links and patterns which might give a clue to where to look.
Obviously you can't say anything here that could get you into trouble with the OWG, but what kind of patterns are we talking about that aren't related to who you're calling?
We never needed to do this in the UK despite years of terrorist threat from the IRA.
Don't be silly. Do you seriously think that the intelligence services weren't monitoring telephone traffic in the 1970s looking for IRA-linked clues?
Of course the technology was very different, and they didn't have today's enormous computers to do the correlations for them, so it was rather hard. Maybe if they had had better tools, fewer innocent people would have died, although of course it does tend to be an arms race
That's a ridiculous conflation. One is looking into telephone traffic of suspected individuals, the other is a database state on everyone. It's the difference between putting a suspect's house under surveillance, and installing government watched CCTV on everyone's homes. I'm sure if they did that we could reduce crime and save lives, but it's not worth the cost. Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little security deserve neither.
Saving lives isn't worth the cost? Tell me that if you have lost a loved one.
If you have nothing to hide I don't see the problem.
I didn't think people still used that "if you have nothing to hide" line outside of satire.
Why? I used to think that CCTV was an intrusion on private life. That was until the bastard that attacked my daughter was caught and prosecuted on CCTV evidence.
Because plenty of people very reasonably have private things they wish to keep from others. The young woman calling the abortion clinic. The disabled man calling the phone sex line. The teenage male from a devout Muslim family calling his boyfriend. The terminally ill mother who hasn't told others calling the hospital. The battered wife calling the women's shelter. The idea that decent people don't have things they reasonably want to keep private is ridiculous. I challenge anyone who thinks otherwise to post on here their full name and a list of their phone calls over the last week, stating the full names of the individuals they called.
I've been on here loads of times bemoaning both Common Purpose and the Bilderberg group, I hate secret society stuff. However I really don't believe the authorities are remotely interested in whether you have been shagging your wife's sister or whatever.
It is quite possible that one day the so called snooping may save your life, so stop worrying whether they are listening to you having phone sex with your boss and just appreciate they are trying to save us from the nutters out there.
That depends who you consider 'the authorities' to be Nigel.
It might be worth going back and taking another look at that list of 'authorities' who have permission to access your communcations data.
Do you know anyone who works for any of these bodies?
Charity Commission Criminal Cases Review Commission Common Services Agency for the Scottish Health Service a county council or district council in England, a London borough council, the Common Council of the City of London in its capacity as a local authority, the Council of the Isles of Scilly, and any county council or county borough council in Wales Department for Transport, for the purposes of: Marine Accident Investigation Branch Rail Accident Investigation Branch Air Accidents Investigation Branch Maritime and Coastguard Agency a district council within the meaning of the Local Government Act (Northern Ireland) 1972 Department of Agriculture and Rural Development for Northern Ireland Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment for Northern Ireland (for the purposes of Trading Standards) Department of Health (for the purposes of the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency) Department of Trade and Industry Environment Agency Financial Services Authority a fire and rescue authority Fire Authority for Northern Ireland Food Standards Agency Gambling Commission Gangmasters Licensing Authority Government Communications Headquarters Health and Safety Executive HM Revenue and Customs Home Office (for the purposes of the UK Border Agency) Independent Police Complaints Commission Information Commissioner a Joint Board where it is a fire authority Ofcom Office of Fair Trading The Pensions Regulator Office of the Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland Port of Dover Police Port of Liverpool Police Post Office Investigation Branch Postal Services Commission NHS ambulance service Trust NHS Counter Fraud and Security Management Service Northern Ireland Ambulance Service Health and Social Services Trust Northern Ireland Health and Social Services Central Services Agency Royal Navy Regulating Branch Royal Military Police Royal Air Force Police Scottish Ambulance Service Board a Scottish council where it is a fire authority Scottish Environment Protection Agency Secret Intelligence Service Security Service Serious Fraud Office the special police forces (including the Scottish Drug Enforcement Agency) the territorial police forces Welsh Ambulance Services NHS Trust
All of them can access communications data under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act.
Obviously you can't say anything here that could get you into trouble with the OWG, but what kind of patterns are we talking about that aren't related to who you're calling?
probably they can count the number of times you mention "Zoroaster", for example
Obviously you can't say anything here that could get you into trouble with the OWG, but what kind of patterns are we talking about that aren't related to who you're calling?
probably they can count the number of times you mention "Zoroaster", for example
or i suppose they could guess at codewords by flagging over-represented words compared to a set of "normal " conversations
We never needed to do this in the UK despite years of terrorist threat from the IRA.
Don't be silly. Do you seriously think that the intelligence services weren't monitoring telephone traffic in the 1970s looking for IRA-linked clues?
Of course the technology was very different, and they didn't have today's enormous computers to do the correlations for them, so it was rather hard. Maybe if they had had better tools, fewer innocent people would have died, although of course it does tend to be an arms race
That's a ridiculous conflation. One is looking into telephone traffic of suspected individuals, the other is a database state on everyone. It's the difference between putting a suspect's house under surveillance, and installing government watched CCTV on everyone's homes. I'm sure if they did that we could reduce crime and save lives, but it's not worth the cost. Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little security deserve neither.
Saving lives isn't worth the cost? Tell me that if you have lost a loved one.
If you have nothing to hide I don't see the problem.
I didn't think people still used that "if you have nothing to hide" line outside of satire.
Why? I used to think that CCTV was an intrusion on private life. That was until the bastard that attacked my daughter was caught and prosecuted on CCTV evidence.
Because plenty of people very reasonably have private things they wish to keep from others. The young woman calling the abortion clinic. The disabled man calling the phone sex line. The teenage male from a devout Muslim family calling his boyfriend. The terminally ill mother who hasn't told others calling the hospital. The battered wife calling the women's shelter. The idea that decent people don't have things they reasonably want to keep private is ridiculous. I challenge anyone who thinks otherwise to post on here their full name and a list of their phone calls over the last week, stating the full names of the individuals they called.
I've been on here loads of times bemoaning both Common Purpose and the Bilderberg group, I hate secret society stuff. However I really don't believe the authorities are remotely interested in whether you have been shagging your wife's sister or whatever.
It is quite possible that one day the so called snooping may save your life, so stop worrying whether they are listening to you having phone sex with your boss and just appreciate they are trying to save us from the nutters out there.
That depends who you consider 'the authorities' to be Nigel.
It might be worth going back and taking another look at that list of 'authorities' who have permission to access your communcations data.
Do you know anyone who works for any of these bodies?
Charity Commission Criminal Cases Review Commission Common Services Agency for the Scottish Health Service a county council or district council in England, a London borough council, the Common Council of the City of London in its capacity as a local authority, the Council of the Isles of Scilly, and any county council or county borough council in Wales Department for Transport, for the purposes of: Marine Accident Investigation Branch Rail Accident Investigation Branch Air Accidents Investigation Branch Maritime and Coastguard Agency a district council within the meaning of the Local Government Act (Northern Ireland) 1972 Department of Agriculture and Rural Development for Northern Ireland Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment for Northern Ireland (for the purposes of Trading Standards) Department of Health (for the purposes of the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency) Department of Trade and Industry Environment Agency Financial Services Authority a fire and rescue authority Fire Authority for Northern Ireland Food Standards Agency Gambling Commission Gangmasters Licensing Authority Government Communications Headquarters Health and Safety Executive HM Revenue and Customs Home Office (for the purposes of the UK Border Agency) Independent Police Complaints Commission Information Commissioner a Joint Board where it is a fire authority Ofcom Office of Fair Trading The Pensions Regulator Office of the Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland Port of Dover Police Port of Liverpool Police Post Office Investigation Branch Postal Services Commission NHS ambulance service Trust NHS Counter Fraud and Security Management Service Northern Ireland Ambulance Service Health and Social Services Trust Northern Ireland Health and Social Services Central Services Agency Royal Navy Regulating Branch Royal Military Police Royal Air Force Police Scottish Ambulance Service Board a Scottish council where it is a fire authority Scottish Environment Protection Agency Secret Intelligence Service Security Service Serious Fraud Office the special police forces (including the Scottish Drug Enforcement Agency) the territorial police forces Welsh Ambulance Services NHS Trust
All of them can access communications data under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act.
Well the Gambling Commission might be an issue!
Can they listen it to your calls or just have a record of your calls?
We never needed to do this in the UK despite years of terrorist threat from the IRA.
Don't be silly. Do you seriously think that the intelligence services weren't monitoring telephone traffic in the 1970s looking for IRA-linked clues?
Of course the technology was very different, and they didn't have today's enormous computers to do the correlations for them, so it was rather hard. Maybe if they had had better tools, fewer innocent people would have died, although of course it does tend to be an arms race
That's a ridiculous conflation. One is looking into telephone traffic of suspected individuals, the other is a database state on everyone. It's the difference between putting a suspect's house under surveillance, and installing government watched CCTV on everyone's homes. I'm sure if they did that we could reduce crime and save lives, but it's not worth the cost. Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little security deserve neither.
Saving lives isn't worth the cost? Tell me that if you have lost a loved one.
If you have nothing to hide I don't see the problem.
I didn't think people still used that "if you have nothing to hide" line outside of satire.
Why? I used to think that CCTV was an intrusion on private life. That was until the bastard that attacked my daughter was caught and prosecuted on CCTV evidence.
Because plenty of people very reasonably have private things they wish to keep from others. The young woman calling the abortion clinic. The disabled man calling the phone sex line. The teenage male from a devout Muslim family calling his boyfriend. The terminally ill mother who hasn't told others calling the hospital. The battered wife calling the women's shelter. The idea that decent people don't have things they reasonably want to keep private is ridiculous. I challenge anyone who thinks otherwise to post on here their full name and a list of their phone calls over the last week, stating the full names of the individuals they called.
I've been on here loads of times bemoaning both Common Purpose and the Bilderberg group, I hate secret society stuff. However I really don't believe the authorities are remotely interested in whether you have been shagging your wife's sister or whatever.
It is quite possible that one day the so called snooping may save your life, so stop worrying whether they are listening to you having phone sex with your boss and just appreciate they are trying to save us from the nutters out there.
That depends who you consider 'the authorities' to be Nigel.
It might be worth going back and taking another look at that list of 'authorities' who have permission to access your communcations data.
Do you know anyone who works for any of these bodies?
Charity Commission Criminal Cases Review Commission Common Services Agency for the Scottish Health Service a county council or district council in England, a London borough council, the Common Council of the City of London in its capacity as a local authority, the Council of the Isles of Scilly, and any county council or county borough council in Wales Department for Transport, for the purposes of: Marine Accident Investigation Branch Rail Accident Investigation Branch Air Accidents Investigation Branch Maritime and Coastguard Agency a district council within the meaning of the Local Government Act (Northern Ireland) 1972 Department of Agriculture and Rural Development for Northern Ireland Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment for Northern Ireland (for the purposes of Trading Standards) Department of Health (for the purposes of the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency) Department of Trade and Industry Environment Agency Financial Services Authority a fire and rescue authority Fire Authority for Northern Ireland Food Standards Agency Gambling Commission Gangmasters Licensing Authority Government Communications Headquarters Health and Safety Executive HM Revenue and Customs Home Office (for the purposes of the UK Border Agency) Independent Police Complaints Commission Information Commissioner a Joint Board where it is a fire authority Ofcom Office of Fair Trading The Pensions Regulator Office of the Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland Port of Dover Police Port of Liverpool Police Post Office Investigation Branch Postal Services Commission NHS ambulance service Trust NHS Counter Fraud and Security Management Service Northern Ireland Ambulance Service Health and Social Services Trust Northern Ireland Health and Social Services Central Services Agency Royal Navy Regulating Branch Royal Military Police Royal Air Force Police Scottish Ambulance Service Board a Scottish council where it is a fire authority Scottish Environment Protection Agency Secret Intelligence Service Security Service Serious Fraud Office the special police forces (including the Scottish Drug Enforcement Agency) the territorial police forces Welsh Ambulance Services NHS Trust
All of them can access communications data under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act.
Well the Gambling Commission might be an issue!
Can they listen it to your calls or just have a record of your calls?
I believe that varies depending on which agency it is. But still the scope of the agencies that can get details about who you are in contact with is way too wide.
I saw that a Broxtowe Cllr is trying selection in Amber Valley. Clearly afraid of you :-)
He's an old friend and ally, and we're supporting each others' efforts. Broxtowe selection will probably be August 1, I think. At present I have three competitors, one from the city and two from Rushcliffe. My reselection website should go up in a day or two when we have the official word - 70 or so endorsers including nearly all the councillors in my first wave, so I'm reasonably hopeful: we have a pretty good campaign team and every member should be canvassed within a couple of days. But it's a tasty-looking seat so I'm sure there will be lots of competition from round the country.
We never needed to do this in the UK despite years of terrorist threat from the IRA.
Don't be silly. Do you seriously think that the intelligence services weren't monitoring telephone traffic in the 1970s looking for IRA-linked clues?
Of course the technology was very different, and they didn't have today's enormous computers to do the correlations for them, so it was rather hard. Maybe if they had had better tools, fewer innocent people would have died, although of course it does tend to be an arms race
That's a ridiculous conflation. One is looking into telephone traffic of suspected individuals, the other is a database state on everyone. It's the difference between putting a suspect's house under surveillance, and installing government watched CCTV on everyone's homes. I'm sure if they did that we could reduce crime and save lives, but it's not worth the cost. Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little security deserve neither.
Saving lives isn't worth the cost? Tell me that if you have lost a loved one.
If you have nothing to hide I don't see the problem.
I didn't think people still used that "if you have nothing to hide" line outside of satire.
Why? I used to think that CCTV was an intrusion on private life. That was until the bastard that attacked my daughter was caught and prosecuted on CCTV evidence.
Because plenty of people very reasonably have private things they wish to keep from others. The young woman calling the abortion clinic. The disabled man calling the phone sex line. The teenage male from a devout Muslim family calling his boyfriend. The terminally ill mother who hasn't told others calling the hospital. The battered wife calling the women's shelter. The idea that decent people don't have things they reasonably want to keep private is ridiculous. I challenge anyone who thinks otherwise to post on here their full name and a list of their phone calls over the last week, stating the full names of the individuals they called.
I've been on here loads of times bemoaning both Common Purpose and the Bilderberg group, I hate secret society stuff. However I really don't believe the authorities are remotely interested in whether you have been shagging your wife's sister or whatever.
It is quite possible that one day the so called snooping may save your life, so stop worrying whether they are listening to you having phone sex with your boss and just appreciate they are trying to save us from the nutters out there.
It's not just "the authorities" though, is it? You speak as if government is just some black box of benevolent perfect individuals. In reality they're staffed by individuals with all the same failings as the general public. I've known plenty of people who work for public bodies who have told me things they have discovered on the job that they really shouldn't have passed on. And that's before we even get to the issue of mass data leaks from the public sector due to civil servant incompetence.
And let's remember that this is over 57 deaths, tragic as they were, over the last ten years in the UK. More than ten times that many people are murdered each year in non-terrorist related crimes. Yet before the War on Terror we never needed to give all our personal information to the police to stop them, because nobody ever thought it was a trade off worth making. But an extra six deaths a year? Suddenly no liberty is sacred. Perhaps we could just microchip everyone in the country and the police could access our movements at all times. I'm sure that would stop crime. After all, "it may one day save your life".
Obviously you can't say anything here that could get you into trouble with the OWG, but what kind of patterns are we talking about that aren't related to who you're calling?
probably they can count the number of times you mention "Zoroaster", for example
They're not supposed to be able to get the content of the call, just who you called and when. So they'd only catch you if you spelled it out in morse code bt repeatedly calling and hanging up.
Thanks for the update. How many applications do you expect? Selections going on in neighbouring seats like Sherwood will probably "depress" the number of hopefuls as they will be more spread
Obviously you can't say anything here that could get you into trouble with the OWG, but what kind of patterns are we talking about that aren't related to who you're calling?
probably they can count the number of times you mention "Zoroaster", for example
They're not supposed to be able to get the content of the call, just who you called and when. So they'd only catch you if you spelled it out in morse code bt repeatedly calling and hanging up.
Lot easier and quicker to just find out who their cousins are.
On the snooping thing, what's the deal with the British supermarket loyalty card database? Do you need a specific court order to look at them, or does someone in the government have on-demand access with no questions asked?
Obviously you can't say anything here that could get you into trouble with the OWG, but what kind of patterns are we talking about that aren't related to who you're calling?
probably they can count the number of times you mention "Zoroaster", for example
They're not supposed to be able to get the content of the call, just who you called and when. So they'd only catch you if you spelled it out in morse code bt repeatedly calling and hanging up.
Obviously you can't say anything here that could get you into trouble with the OWG, but what kind of patterns are we talking about that aren't related to who you're calling?
probably they can count the number of times you mention "Zoroaster", for example
They're not supposed to be able to get the content of the call, just who you called and when. So they'd only catch you if you spelled it out in morse code bt repeatedly calling and hanging up.
ah ok, something more subtle then ...
I don't think I buy the data mining thing, at least not for terrorism.
There are hardly any terrorists and the ones there are are very diverse, so it seems very unlikely you'd find useful patterns just from seeing a bunch of numbers related to other numbers.
More likely it's just easier to say "give me everything" then look at the numbers you want when you want them than to follow the procedure as it was designed and ask the court for permission every time.
Thanks for the update. How many applications do you expect? Selections going on in neighbouring seats like Sherwood will probably "depress" the number of hopefuls as they will be more spread
Hard to predict - there will be 3 weeks for applications so we might get some candidates in Sherwood who feel it's not going as well there as they'd hoped. I'm told that some potential candidates have decided that I might be difficult to beat so are directing their attentions elsewhere (Amber Valley has no obvious front-runner, though Richard Robinson has the endorsement of the CLP chair, and already has lots of candidates for their parallel selection). Arguably that 1-2 on Labour winning Broxtowe which Pulpstar is on will shorten further soon, for various reasons.
Nottingham South is the sort of seat the Tories need to win (2.2% swing needed) if they were to get an overall majority. The Wollaton West result in one of their best wards isn't very promising for that. Nottingham Labour has one of the best GOTV operations I know outside London - we've been promised massive assistance from them next time as they do think they'll hold the city seats.
(OT) Quick question: The "5 on demand" website is not working for me today. I want to watch Neighbours from Wednesday 5th June (episode 6638). Is it working for you, or is there something wrong at my end?
Did Broxtowe Labour Party get a lot of help from Nottingham Labour Party in 1997 and 2001 when it was pretty obvious they wouldn't have any trouble holding the city seats?
(OT) Quick question: The "5 on demand" website is not working for me today. I want to watch Neighbours from Wednesday 5th June (episode 6638). Is it working for you, or is there something wrong at my end?
Yesterday afternoon I got one of those unsolicited phone calls from someone trying to sell something (or whatever they are). I pressed the "5" to get through to a human.
When the human answers, I usually waste their time by saying "globule" or "molecule" until they hang up. Normally they cut me off after just one "globule" and perhaps a "molecule" or a "vestibule".
This time, the human stayed on the line for a whole six minutes while I bamboozled him with a "globule", a "molecule", a "vestibule", about three random questions (e.g. "Are you hiding inside an igloo?"), several jokes, and I sang "The Star Spangled Banner", the Welsh national anthem, and the first two verses of "Pokarekare Ana". While I was doing so, he tried to put me off by saying that he had already fulfilled his quota/target for the day, and that I was going to get bored before he did. He also said that the call was "being recorded", as if he thought that would put me off.
But then, as I was in the middle of singing, he cut me off! The selfish inconsiderate booliak. After specifically saying he wasn't going to! Normally the human gets confused or annoyed very quickly, but it's always fun to waste their time. If I'm watching TV when the phone rings, I put the volume up as soon as I realise it's a spam call, and just hold the phone up to the TV for a minute or two.
Interesting fact: in Warminster, a town of 20,000 people, neither Labour, the LDs nor the Greens managed to put up any candidates in the Wiltshire local elections. The choice in the five divisions was Tory, UKIP or Ind. Or rather four divisions because the Tories were unopposed in one case.
Obviously you can't say anything here that could get you into trouble with the OWG, but what kind of patterns are we talking about that aren't related to who you're calling?
probably they can count the number of times you mention "Zoroaster", for example
They're not supposed to be able to get the content of the call, just who you called and when. So they'd only catch you if you spelled it out in morse code bt repeatedly calling and hanging up.
ah ok, something more subtle then ...
I don't think I buy the data mining thing, at least not for terrorism.
There are hardly any terrorists and the ones there are are very diverse, so it seems very unlikely you'd find useful patterns just from seeing a bunch of numbers related to other numbers.
More likely it's just easier to say "give me everything" then look at the numbers you want when you want them than to follow the procedure as it was designed and ask the court for permission every time.
I suppose you're probably right about the motivation. Though given the data, I suppose if I was a secret service guy, I would try to mine it as well. Avoiding insecure communications might be a recognizabel apttern too, i suppose?
Obviously you can't say anything here that could get you into trouble with the OWG, but what kind of patterns are we talking about that aren't related to who you're calling?
probably they can count the number of times you mention "Zoroaster", for example
They're not supposed to be able to get the content of the call, just who you called and when. So they'd only catch you if you spelled it out in morse code bt repeatedly calling and hanging up.
ah ok, something more subtle then ...
I don't think I buy the data mining thing, at least not for terrorism.
There are hardly any terrorists and the ones there are are very diverse, so it seems very unlikely you'd find useful patterns just from seeing a bunch of numbers related to other numbers.
More likely it's just easier to say "give me everything" then look at the numbers you want when you want them than to follow the procedure as it was designed and ask the court for permission every time.
I suppose you're probably right about the motivation. Though given the data, I suppose if I was a secret service guy, I would try to mine it as well. Avoiding insecure communications might be a recognizabel apttern too, i suppose?
Didn't the security services get some leads into the identity of the Omagh bombers through mobile phone records, tracking them as they made their way to the border? But IIRC it was not string enough to be used in court, and occurred after the event anyway.
The problem here is not necessarily the fact it is being done: the problem is that it is secret. Such capability should be discussed and passed by our elected representatives, then implemented with oversight. Any transgressions or misuse should be traceable and punished.
None of the above can be guaranteed to happen in a secret system.
The US government should put forward legislation so, at the very least, everyone knows it is happening. The legislation should also include hefty penalties for misuse (i.e. use outside the strictly-defined areas the legislation covers)
Interesting fact: in Warminster, a town of 20,000 people, neither Labour, the LDs nor the Greens managed to put up any candidates in the Wiltshire local elections. The choice in the five divisions was Tory, UKIP or Ind. Or rather four divisions because the Tories were unopposed in one case.
Why waste money on failed elections ?
The left understands the voting system and only spends time and money where it'll get a return.
Did Broxtowe Labour Party get a lot of help from Nottingham Labour Party in 1997 and 2001 when it was pretty obvious they wouldn't have any trouble holding the city seats?
Sadly no. In 1997 it was thought to be an impossible task. In 2001 I think we got a bit but I think it was still seen as too shaky - it's only clear in retrospect that Labour was going to win easily nationally. We did get help in between elections in canvass sessions from the "Tiger Squad" (Nottingham's team of elite canvassers who are basically willing to tackle anywhere). In 2005 we got some initial help but then it was decided to be hopeless again (very irritating that was, too). In 2010 we did get some help but I think Sherwood, Gedling and Nottingham South got more, partly because they're easier to reach logistically from the Labour strongholds. (It'll be easier next time as the tram is extending to Broxtowe in 2014.)
The bottom line is that it's always been seen as a constituency that it'd be nice to win but we'd probably lose and didn't need for a majority. The 2010 result has changed minds.
The Tories can’t afford to waste another six months
All in all, the first half of 2013 represents a time of stagnation that we could hardly afford. We have a good case to make on many of the policy areas on which we have lost ground, including crime, immigration, welfare reform and the economy. But people will only hear that case if we use the available air time to make it. The latest round of parliamentary scandal will make people all the more resistant to what we have to say, and the spending review later this month makes it all the more necessary to show we are doing what people expect of us. There is no more time to waste
Labour pledges to scrap planning reforms Communities should have the right to decide on building developments in their area, Hilary Benn has said, as Labour pledged to reverse the Coalition’s controversial planning reforms.
If the security services were to get all the call records as per the US, would they be able to catch all the scammers, spammers and other phone pests?
Considering that it seems that most calls today are spam, could this be the policy that will save the Tories?
They could do that using existing laws. If a crime has been committed, and it is seen as being serious enough, AIUI there are existing laws that allow the police to get access to the calling numbers and other data (e.g. addresses).
I a guessing that one of the problems wrt spammers / scammers is deciding if a crime has been committed.
"At Cabinet a few weeks ago, George Osborne presented some Treasury papers that further expose flaws in the SNP’s argument, and there were murmurs of self-congratulation. This worried Danny Alexander, the only Cabinet member to have fought the SNP. If anyone can win the referendum for Salmond, he said, it’s the people around the Cabinet table. Any loose language, inept policy or general gaffe would be taken as ammunition and used mercilessly. The less that is heard from Messrs Cameron, Clegg and Miliband, the better."
@tim - the other noteworthy shift I thought was Cameron (18, -2) now polling behind his party (22, +4) - albeit still comfortably ahead of Miliband (10,+1) who is a lot less popular than his party (38, -2).
Unfortunately, the powers that be have not recognised the problem.
I have a Truecall unit on my house phone and from the data collected, there are upto 5 calls a day from scammers . I even charged up an old PAYG mobile the other day (to get a phone number) and found a lot of spam calls (hint of the day : Google search the phone number, you could be surprised by the number of complaints about a lot of the known numbers ).
If the security services were to get all the call records as per the US, would they be able to catch all the scammers, spammers and other phone pests?
Considering that it seems that most calls today are spam, could this be the policy that will save the Tories?
They could do that using existing laws. If a crime has been committed, and it is seen as being serious enough, AIUI there are existing laws that allow the police to get access to the calling numbers and other data (e.g. addresses).
I a guessing that one of the problems wrt spammers / scammers is deciding if a crime has been committed.
I wonder if we couldn't do a powers vs transparency deal with the authoritarians on this one. If they reckon they need more powers to snoop, I want to know exactly which people who hold my data are helping them do it, and how. None of this vague weaselly stuff about how the government doesn't have "direct" access to my data. I want to know exactly what access they do have, and I want people who lie to me about it to go to prison.
Who could be against transparency? If the government has nothing to hide from the voters it has nothing to fear, right?
I doubt Mr Kelly will have much interest in an analysis from an author and newspaper he fairly regards as partisan.
By a wide margin I thought the most important comment was that the London politicians should stfu and leave it to the Edinburgh ones - which is why Cameron would be bonkers to debate with Salmond:
ALEX Salmond last night renewed his call for David Cameron to take him on in a debate over independence — as the Prime Minister heads to Scotland today to back the Union.
Data mining is not about content but looking for networks. So if a phone is recovered from a terrorist they can trace who he has been phoning and who has been phoning him. If this then triggers contacts with other suspicious numbers it gives somewhere to start looking.
I really don't see this as a civil liberty issue. I think it is a public safety issue. Content would be completely different and reading e-mails even looking for key words is more intrusive. We already knew about that didn't we?
In contrast the major restrictions brought in by the Coalition to RIPA in 2012 was a major step forward. In Scotland very few of these limitations apply because there was no equivalent Act and the Scottish government has said that they do not intend there to be one. So we still have bodies entitled to use the full range of investigatory powers authorised by the authoritarian new Labour zealots with no external oversight. New Labour= SNP. Same mindset, same authoritarian tendencies.
In contrast the major restrictions brought in by the Coalition to RIPA in 2012 was a major step forward.
RIPA changes in Freedoms Bill: negligible improvement in privacy protection
The “Protection of Freedoms Bill” has a wholly misleading title; the legislation simply does not do what it says on the tin. The CCTV provisions (see blog of 16/2/2011) have more to do with efficient surveillance rather than privacy protection, and in my last blog (3/3/2011), I reviewed the Information Commissioner’s concerns re the use of personal data in DNA profiling or in vetting.
For completeness, this blog addresses the additional privacy protection afforded by the proposed changes to the Regulation of Investigatory Powers (RIPA) Act. Although welcome, they are really very inconsequential.
Data mining is not about content but looking for networks. So if a phone is recovered from a terrorist they can trace who he has been phoning and who has been phoning him. If this then triggers contacts with other suspicious numbers it gives somewhere to start looking.
I really don't see this as a civil liberty issue. I think it is a public safety issue. Content would be completely different and reading e-mails even looking for key words is more intrusive. We already knew about that didn't we?
In contrast the major restrictions brought in by the Coalition to RIPA in 2012 was a major step forward. In Scotland very few of these limitations apply because there was no equivalent Act and the Scottish government has said that they do not intend there to be one. So we still have bodies entitled to use the full range of investigatory powers authorised by the authoritarian new Labour zealots with no external oversight. New Labour= SNP. Same mindset, same authoritarian tendencies.
If they were connecting calls to known numbers they could go to the court and ask for access to those. The issue here is that they're asking for everything.
Practice begins in Canada this afternoon. Today the teams are using the new tyres, which will be used at Silverstone but not in Montreal. So, take the times with a pinch of salt.
The New Statesman drills down into the YouGov Doctor Who poll:
"But by far the biggest gap comes when respondents are asked whether or not it is important that actor who plays the Doctor, a thousand-year-old time-travelling alien from the planet Gallifrey, be white. Just 5 per cent of Lib Dems thought it was; 50 per cent of members of the libertarian, non-racist party seeking Britain's withdrawal from the EU do."
So an overwhelming rejection of the status quo. Change is coming for all of us one way or another. Events in 2014, however they turn out, may well be the perfect catalyst for electoral reform: either as part of a new rUK constitution, or as part of the Devomax, UK-wide constitutional settlement. Constitutionally, this country will look very different in 2020.
One interesting side note: the Scots also seem to want the UK government to retain control of defence and foreign affairs. Among other things that means our nuclear deterrent (where and how it is deployed) and our membership of the EU. These are two big Yes calling cards, aren't they?
The flooding in central Europe is just astounding. As the water is working its way to the sea new records are being broken - Magdeburg will hit 7.2 meters water above normal river levels this weekend.
Bit of a problem for the No campaign since 'Vote no get nothing' is all they have to offer. It's that chunk who want Devomax that is really going to be up for grabs once it is hammered home just how little interest the westminster parties have in delivering that. Happily, they'll do most of that themselves.
One interesting side note: the Scots also seem to want the UK government to retain control of defence and foreign affairs. Among other things that means our nuclear deterrent (where and how it is deployed) and our membership of the EU. These are two big Yes calling cards, aren't they?
Two of them and Trident is going to be a big part of the campaign as will recent foreign policy 'triumphs' like Iraq and Afghanistan. Having Cammie locked in a perpetual posturing battle between himself, his own backbenchers and Farage over staying IN or OUT of Europe (intensively so as the EU elections get closer) is going to be doing a fair bit of persuading for the scottish public.
Any notion that the final decisive months and weeks of the campaign are going to be all about what the unionists want it to be about and exclusively feature all their talking points is amusing stuff, but it is nonsense.
The BBC R4 news running order is unfortunate: 1. Prince Philip in hospital for "exploratory operation." 2. MacMillan Cancer support say half will get cancer in their lifetimes...
When offered Regional Assemblies [Northern] England rejected them. When offered reform of the electoral-system England rejected the proposal.
People can project all they wish but outcomes suggest that England does not seek constitutional change. I think that some of our more challenged posters are conflating their wishes with the reality that is....
"In a half-hearted sort of way, the two Eds are promising to stick to the Coalition’s spending plans. Labour finally seems to be buying into the austerity agenda.
There is no doubt what has caused this supposed Damascene conversion. Far from being condemned as acts of characteristic Tory nastiness, the Government’s welfare reforms have proved widely popular. When it comes to working-age benefits, the public cannot get enough of the Coalition’s cuts."
"In promising a three-year cap on “structural welfare spending”, Mr Miliband hopes to shoot the Government’s fox, though quite what he means is anyone’s guess. As ever, he was long on rhetoric, but almost entirely devoid of substance."
"Until the Labour leadership accepts at least a degree of responsibility for what went wrong, its pledges for the future will be seen as just hollow, political posturing."
"But it is not just the Eds that have their heads buried in the sand. The Coalition partners have no real appetite for the actions necessary to get a grip on Britain’s debts, still less the courage for the supply-side reforms required to return the economy to sustainable, long-term growth."
"Once public debt gets to around 130 per cent of GDP, it basically becomes unsustainable.
The only way out is through inflation or default. Inability to face the truth about Britain’s predicament is unfortunately not just a Labour failing. Great swathes of the established political class are afflicted by it. A bigger crisis yet may be required before they wake up and smell the coffee."
Germany's central bank has cut its growth forecast for the country for 2013 and 2014.
The Bundesbank expects the economy to grow by 0.3% this year, down from an initial forecast of 0.4%.
In 2014, it expects 1.5% growth, down from a previous estimate of 1.9%.
The German economy has proved relatively resilient in spite of the eurozone crisis, but shrank late last year and only narrowly avoided a recession earlier this year.
"In the euro area the economy appears to be bottoming out. Nevertheless, the Bundesbank sees continuing structural problems as standing in the way of a rapid improvement," a statement said.
"This is likely to place a major strain on the German economy," it added.
But it said it expected a recovery later this year, supported by a relatively robust labour market, a sharp increase in wages and easing inflation.
The economy had escaped a recession in the first quarter of the year thanks to private consumption, which had offset a fall in exports.
According to YouGov 58% of people now think the CON Party is "sleazy and disreputable", up from 48% a year ago.
Every master strategy a winner.
And a lot of the scandals that caused this are invented bull. McAlpine. Mitchell. Now Cruddas.
The mud sticks, even when the story is untrue.
That damned librul meeja!! ;^ )
You need to reread the Cruddas judgement. The STimes dug their own grave there (not for the first time either) but the video was what was wall to wall and the public saw that and judged for themselves.
Mitchell was hardly the fops finest moment either (saved by the 'lefty' Crick) and McCalpine was twitter tw+ts.
A lot isn't all and if CCHQ think it's tough now they had better get their communications team in far better shape right quick.
When offered Regional Assemblies [Northern] England rejected them. When offered reform of the electoral-system England rejected the proposal.
People can project all they wish but outcomes suggest that England does not seek constitutional change. I think that some of our more challenged posters are conflating their wishes with the reality that is....
If Scotland becomes independent or gets Devomax - and it will be one or the other - that will have significant constitutional implications for all of us who live in the UK. Devomax will require an entirely new constitutional settlement. It's not too tricky a thing to understand.
Comments
If you have nothing to hide I don't see the problem.
So your silly little 'point' is pointless.
But as I said before you were never interested in a real answer, just in spreading myths as you always do.
Otherwise you need insurance at varying cost depending on your country of residence.
If he goes to the municipality to ask for the residency, they will ask him to produce an health insurance policy (as he's not working). He can subscribe one with a private company but he can also go to the NHS to ask for a voluntary registration. He must pay. How much? As he's not a student (149.77 euro) or a priest (387.34), he would pay 7.5% of his income (previous year) until €20.658.27 and 4% of his income between 20.658 and € 51.645.68
It is quite possible that one day the so called snooping may save your life, so stop worrying whether they are listening to you having phone sex with your boss and just appreciate they are trying to save us from the nutters out there.
So your original point was just another of your fantasies designed to try and sow confusion.
Con 1594
UKIP 565
LibDem 216
Green 106
Militant Elvis 28
Sounds fantastic, I'll put it on the menu for the next PB Tory party, god knows where @JohnO will end up afterwards this time.
PS. If Obama comes for you for saying what you already have we'll all chip in for a court stenographer: https://pressfreedomfoundation.org/
Lab: 46.8%
Con: 33.8%
UKIP: 12.0%
LD: 4.6%
Green: 2.2%
Militant Elvis: 0.6%
We would never have heard the end of it.
I saw that a Broxtowe Cllr is trying selection in Amber Valley. Clearly afraid of you :-)
It might be worth going back and taking another look at that list of 'authorities' who have permission to access your communcations data.
Do you know anyone who works for any of these bodies?
Charity Commission
Criminal Cases Review Commission
Common Services Agency for the Scottish Health Service
a county council or district council in England, a London borough council, the Common Council of the City of London in its capacity as a local authority, the Council of the Isles of Scilly, and any county council or county borough council in Wales
Department for Transport, for the purposes of:
Marine Accident Investigation Branch
Rail Accident Investigation Branch
Air Accidents Investigation Branch
Maritime and Coastguard Agency
a district council within the meaning of the Local Government Act (Northern Ireland) 1972
Department of Agriculture and Rural Development for Northern Ireland
Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment for Northern Ireland (for the purposes of Trading Standards)
Department of Health (for the purposes of the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency)
Department of Trade and Industry
Environment Agency
Financial Services Authority
a fire and rescue authority
Fire Authority for Northern Ireland
Food Standards Agency
Gambling Commission
Gangmasters Licensing Authority
Government Communications Headquarters
Health and Safety Executive
HM Revenue and Customs
Home Office (for the purposes of the UK Border Agency)
Independent Police Complaints Commission
Information Commissioner
a Joint Board where it is a fire authority
Ofcom
Office of Fair Trading
The Pensions Regulator
Office of the Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland
Port of Dover Police
Port of Liverpool Police
Post Office Investigation Branch
Postal Services Commission
NHS ambulance service Trust
NHS Counter Fraud and Security Management Service
Northern Ireland Ambulance Service Health and Social Services Trust
Northern Ireland Health and Social Services Central Services Agency
Royal Navy Regulating Branch
Royal Military Police
Royal Air Force Police
Scottish Ambulance Service Board
a Scottish council where it is a fire authority
Scottish Environment Protection Agency
Secret Intelligence Service
Security Service
Serious Fraud Office
the special police forces (including the Scottish Drug Enforcement Agency)
the territorial police forces
Welsh Ambulance Services NHS Trust
All of them can access communications data under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act.
Can they listen it to your calls or just have a record of your calls?
http://m.washingtonpost.com/investigations/us-intelligence-mining-data-from-nine-us-internet-companies-in-broad-secret-program/2013/06/06/3a0c0da8-cebf-11e2-8845-d970ccb04497_story.html
Twitter are awesome.
And let's remember that this is over 57 deaths, tragic as they were, over the last ten years in the UK. More than ten times that many people are murdered each year in non-terrorist related crimes. Yet before the War on Terror we never needed to give all our personal information to the police to stop them, because nobody ever thought it was a trade off worth making. But an extra six deaths a year? Suddenly no liberty is sacred. Perhaps we could just microchip everyone in the country and the police could access our movements at all times. I'm sure that would stop crime. After all, "it may one day save your life".
Thanks for the update. How many applications do you expect? Selections going on in neighbouring seats like Sherwood will probably "depress" the number of hopefuls as they will be more spread
...
Lab 37
Con 27
UKIP 15
LD 9
Most trusted on economy:
Cameron / Osborne 38
Miliband / Balls 33
Best PM:
Cameron lead over Miliband is up (no figures given)
% thinking Party is united:
Con - just under 30%
Lab - just under 50%
% thinking Con will win in 2015:
Now - 29%
Last Jan - 32%
Headline: "Rows over Europe and gay marriage have damaged Tories"
There are hardly any terrorists and the ones there are are very diverse, so it seems very unlikely you'd find useful patterns just from seeing a bunch of numbers related to other numbers.
More likely it's just easier to say "give me everything" then look at the numbers you want when you want them than to follow the procedure as it was designed and ask the court for permission every time.
Nottingham South is the sort of seat the Tories need to win (2.2% swing needed) if they were to get an overall majority. The Wollaton West result in one of their best wards isn't very promising for that. Nottingham Labour has one of the best GOTV operations I know outside London - we've been promised massive assistance from them next time as they do think they'll hold the city seats.
http://www.channel5.com/shows/neighbours/episodes/wednesday-5-june-3
That might be technically correct but the fact is the Tories won majorities in 1979 and 1992 without winning Nottingham South.
I think they did better than expected in 2010 because the previous Labour MP stood down.
When the human answers, I usually waste their time by saying "globule" or "molecule" until they hang up. Normally they cut me off after just one "globule" and perhaps a "molecule" or a "vestibule".
This time, the human stayed on the line for a whole six minutes while I bamboozled him with a "globule", a "molecule", a "vestibule", about three random questions (e.g. "Are you hiding inside an igloo?"), several jokes, and I sang "The Star Spangled Banner", the Welsh national anthem, and the first two verses of "Pokarekare Ana". While I was doing so, he tried to put me off by saying that he had already fulfilled his quota/target for the day, and that I was going to get bored before he did. He also said that the call was "being recorded", as if he thought that would put me off.
But then, as I was in the middle of singing, he cut me off! The selfish inconsiderate booliak. After specifically saying he wasn't going to! Normally the human gets confused or annoyed very quickly, but it's always fun to waste their time. If I'm watching TV when the phone rings, I put the volume up as soon as I realise it's a spam call, and just hold the phone up to the TV for a minute or two.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0At91c3wX1Wu5dDlabzlHYWRQLUNFdlJrRTRuMGpmT1E#gid=0
The problem here is not necessarily the fact it is being done: the problem is that it is secret. Such capability should be discussed and passed by our elected representatives, then implemented with oversight. Any transgressions or misuse should be traceable and punished.
None of the above can be guaranteed to happen in a secret system.
The US government should put forward legislation so, at the very least, everyone knows it is happening. The legislation should also include hefty penalties for misuse (i.e. use outside the strictly-defined areas the legislation covers)
As I said yesterday morning, Obama is no liberal.
The left understands the voting system and only spends time and money where it'll get a return.
The bottom line is that it's always been seen as a constituency that it'd be nice to win but we'd probably lose and didn't need for a majority. The 2010 result has changed minds.
http://lordashcroftpolls.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/State-of-the-Parties-Poll-Summary.pdf
Ashcroft's analysis:
http://lordashcroftpolls.com/2013/06/we-cant-afford-to-waste-another-six-months/
The Tories can’t afford to waste another six months
All in all, the first half of 2013 represents a time of stagnation that we could hardly afford. We have a good case to make on many of the policy areas on which we have lost ground, including crime, immigration, welfare reform and the economy. But people will only hear that case if we use the available air time to make it. The latest round of parliamentary scandal will make people all the more resistant to what we have to say, and the spending review later this month makes it all the more necessary to show we are doing what people expect of us. There is no more time to waste
YouGov: - CON 32%, LAB 39%, LD 10%, UKIP 13%; APP -34
http://cdn.yougov.com/cumulus_uploads/document/3fv5dcwmkk/YG-Archive-Pol-Sun-results-060613.pdf
Only major shift in the internals:
Seems old & tired:
Con: 35 (-1)
Lab: 30 (+7)
Great results from the "relaunch" week!
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0At91c3wX1Wu5dC14dFZrLWlSN2JBR1d2clpLamlEOGc#gid=0
Labour pledges to scrap planning reforms
Communities should have the right to decide on building developments in their area, Hilary Benn has said, as Labour pledged to reverse the Coalition’s controversial planning reforms.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/greenpolitics/planning/10104786/Labour-would-scrap-the-Coalitions-planning-reforms-minister-indicates.html
Lab: 10.1 (4)
UKIP: 14.7 (1)
UKIP 1,872
Con 1,692
LD 1,574
Ind 634
Lab 560
Others 80
If the security services were to get all the call records as per the US, would they be able to catch all the scammers, spammers and other phone pests?
Considering that it seems that most calls today are spam, could this be the policy that will save the Tories?
I a guessing that one of the problems wrt spammers / scammers is deciding if a crime has been committed.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/SNP/10103353/Alex-Salmonds-dream-of-a-separate-Scotland-is-rapidly-falling-apart.html
I have a Truecall unit on my house phone and from the data collected, there are upto 5 calls a day from scammers . I even charged up an old PAYG mobile the other day (to get a phone number) and found a lot of spam calls (hint of the day : Google search the phone number, you could be surprised by the number of complaints about a lot of the known numbers ).
Who could be against transparency? If the government has nothing to hide from the voters it has nothing to fear, right?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/10103347/If-the-Labour-Party-wont-spend-whats-the-point-of-it.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/SNP/10103353/Alex-Salmonds-dream-of-a-separate-Scotland-is-rapidly-falling-apart.html
By a wide margin I thought the most important comment was that the London politicians should stfu and leave it to the Edinburgh ones - which is why Cameron would be bonkers to debate with Salmond:
ALEX Salmond last night renewed his call for David Cameron to take him on in a debate over independence — as the Prime Minister heads to Scotland today to back the Union.
Read more: http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/feeds/smartphone/scotland/4958806/Alex-Salmond-makes-fresh-call-for-independence-debate-with-David-Cameron.html#ixzz2VVbBse3K
Another Labour gain !
Yep, UKIP hurts Labour more than Tories [ in PBToryland
]
Independence: 35 (-8)
DevoMax: 32 (+3)
Status Quo: 24 (+3)
No devolution: 6 (+1)
http://www.natcen.ac.uk/media/1111766/the option not on the table final.pdf
I really don't see this as a civil liberty issue. I think it is a public safety issue. Content would be completely different and reading e-mails even looking for key words is more intrusive. We already knew about that didn't we?
In contrast the major restrictions brought in by the Coalition to RIPA in 2012 was a major step forward. In Scotland very few of these limitations apply because there was no equivalent Act and the Scottish government has said that they do not intend there to be one. So we still have bodies entitled to use the full range of investigatory powers authorised by the authoritarian new Labour zealots with no external oversight. New Labour= SNP. Same mindset, same authoritarian tendencies.
LOL
The snoopers charter isn't new labour style authoritarian bulllsh*t, is it?
Pull the other one chum.
Practice begins in Canada this afternoon. Today the teams are using the new tyres, which will be used at Silverstone but not in Montreal. So, take the times with a pinch of salt.
"But by far the biggest gap comes when respondents are asked whether or not it is important that actor who plays the Doctor, a thousand-year-old time-travelling alien from the planet Gallifrey, be white. Just 5 per cent of Lib Dems thought it was; 50 per cent of members of the libertarian, non-racist party seeking Britain's withdrawal from the EU do."
http://www.newstatesman.com/broadcast/2013/06/lib-dems-jon-pertwee-and-ukip-wants-straight-doctor
One interesting side note: the Scots also seem to want the UK government to retain control of defence and foreign affairs. Among other things that means our nuclear deterrent (where and how it is deployed) and our membership of the EU. These are two big Yes calling cards, aren't they?
http://www.faz.net/aktuell/gesellschaft/ungluecke/hochwasser/flut-in-deutschland-rekordhochwasser-in-magdeburg-12213032.html
Bit of a problem for the No campaign since 'Vote no get nothing' is all they have to offer.
It's that chunk who want Devomax that is really going to be up for grabs once it is hammered home just how little interest the westminster parties have in delivering that. Happily, they'll do most of that themselves.
Two of them and Trident is going to be a big part of the campaign as will recent foreign policy 'triumphs' like Iraq and Afghanistan. Having Cammie locked in a perpetual posturing battle between himself, his own backbenchers and Farage over staying IN or OUT of Europe (intensively so as the EU elections get closer) is going to be doing a fair bit of persuading for the scottish public.
Any notion that the final decisive months and weeks of the campaign are going to be all about what the unionists want it to be about and exclusively feature all their talking points is amusing stuff, but it is nonsense.
1. Prince Philip in hospital for "exploratory operation."
2. MacMillan Cancer support say half will get cancer in their lifetimes...
People can project all they wish but outcomes suggest that England does not seek constitutional change. I think that some of our more challenged posters are conflating their wishes with the reality that is....
"In a half-hearted sort of way, the two Eds are promising to stick to the Coalition’s spending plans. Labour finally seems to be buying into the austerity agenda.
There is no doubt what has caused this supposed Damascene conversion. Far from being condemned as acts of characteristic Tory nastiness, the Government’s welfare reforms have proved widely popular. When it comes to working-age benefits, the public cannot get enough of the Coalition’s cuts."
"In promising a three-year cap on “structural welfare spending”, Mr Miliband hopes to shoot the Government’s fox, though quite what he means is anyone’s guess. As ever, he was long on rhetoric, but almost entirely devoid of substance."
"Until the Labour leadership accepts at least a degree of responsibility for what went wrong, its pledges for the future will be seen as just hollow, political posturing."
"But it is not just the Eds that have their heads buried in the sand. The Coalition partners have no real appetite for the actions necessary to get a grip on Britain’s debts, still less the courage for the supply-side reforms required to return the economy to sustainable, long-term growth."
"Once public debt gets to around 130 per cent of GDP, it basically becomes unsustainable.
The only way out is through inflation or default. Inability to face the truth about Britain’s predicament is unfortunately not just a Labour failing. Great swathes of the established political class are afflicted by it. A bigger crisis yet may be required before they wake up and smell the coffee."
And a lot of the scandals that caused this are invented bull. McAlpine. Mitchell. Now Cruddas.
The mud sticks, even when the story is untrue.
Men: Labour lead 19%
Women: Labour lead 7%
What is Miliband's problem with women...?
The Bundesbank expects the economy to grow by 0.3% this year, down from an initial forecast of 0.4%.
In 2014, it expects 1.5% growth, down from a previous estimate of 1.9%.
The German economy has proved relatively resilient in spite of the eurozone crisis, but shrank late last year and only narrowly avoided a recession earlier this year.
"In the euro area the economy appears to be bottoming out. Nevertheless, the Bundesbank sees continuing structural problems as standing in the way of a rapid improvement," a statement said.
"This is likely to place a major strain on the German economy," it added.
But it said it expected a recovery later this year, supported by a relatively robust labour market, a sharp increase in wages and easing inflation.
The economy had escaped a recession in the first quarter of the year thanks to private consumption, which had offset a fall in exports.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-22810772
The mud sticks, even when the story is untrue.
Hence IDS, Schapps and their dodgy welfare claims.
The mud sticks, even when the story is untrue.
That damned librul meeja!! ;^ )
You need to reread the Cruddas judgement. The STimes dug their own grave there (not for the first time either) but the video was what was wall to wall and the public saw that and judged for themselves.
Mitchell was hardly the fops finest moment either (saved by the 'lefty' Crick) and McCalpine was twitter tw+ts.
A lot isn't all and if CCHQ think it's tough now they had better get their communications team in far better shape right quick.