Compare and contrast, from about 10 years ago. This happened before she fought and election as leader by the way.
Mona Sahlin, the first woman leader of the Swedish Social Democrats was on the edge of resigning from parliament for financial irregularities. Her alleged indiscretion, she used a parliamentary credit card, (to be used for parliamentary expenses), to purchase her shopping on one occassion. She repaid the money when the error was pointed out. At the election she fought as leader, it was repeatedly brought up that she had bought bars of chocolate on that card. The Swedish public were not impressed and the Social Democrats slumped to defeat. It's accepted this missappropriation of funds contributed significantly to that loss.
Meanwhile back in Britain, the feckers are filling their bank accounts with gay abandon at taxpayers expense, when they are not prostituting and peddling influence to all and sundry.
The YouGov poll for The Sunday Times, conducted after the lobbying scandal that hit Westminster last week, found that 57% would back a ban on work outside an MP’s parliamentary duties.
A large majority — 73% — support the introduction of a register of all meetings between ministers and lobbyists, while 56% believe those carrying out lobbying have too much influence.
The public also largely welcome — although divided along party lines — David Cameron’s plans to include trade unions in moves to regulate lobbyists.
Overall, 45% agree that unions should be covered by lobbying rules, with 29% against. This rose to an overwhelming 81% of Tory voters, but just 23% of Labour supporters agreed with the move.
Be interesting if the Tim Yeo story is the beginning of the media turning a spotlight on to the financial side of "Climate Change" and the story eventually moves to how much scientists and agencies are making from it.
Given the money thats involved in it "Climate Change" has been threatening to blow up into a major scandal for a long time...
Attitudes towards the economy remain pessimistic, but less so than the last two years.
A majority of people now regard David Cameron and George Osborne being at least a fair amount to blame for the state of the economy. 25% think Osborne should take a lot of the blame, 28% a fair amount; 21% think Cameron should take a lot of the blame, 30% a fair amount. However Gordon Brown is still much more widely blamed for the state of the economy, with 37% blaming him a lot, 32% a fair amount.
The polling shows the two Eds welfare policies this week are popular with the voters
There is less confidence in whether Miliband really believes in what he is saying - only 23% think he is capping the cost of benefit because he thinks it is right, 60% think he doesn’t believe it but is only doing it for political reasons. This may well just reflect general cynicism towards politics though, rather than anything about Miliband in particular – we found almost identical figures in the past when we asked about David Cameron and gay marriage.
I was told that people are now entirely relaxed about Taiwan, but there is real anti-Japanese feeling, more intense than the government finds entirely comfortable and going down to routine vandalism of Japanese cars.
This is one of the flaws in Abe's attempt to do a Thatcher. The idea is that you whip up a load of nationalist feeling, get people scared of a foreign enemy and use that as cover for right-wing structural reforms thay will fix the economy. The problem is that whereas Thatcher had a fight with a smallish economic power on the other side of the world, Japan's enemies are right next door. There's no point in weakening the yen to make your exports cheaper if your two main customers are boycotting your products.
The different attitude to lie detectors in the UK and US is interesting IMO:
I was on a team of a Royal Navy study into lie detector technology about a decade ago. Doubtless the technology and technique has evolved a lot since. Back then though, by the end of our tests (and a lot of practice) a few of us were able to fool the system reasonably consistently.
I emphasise 'practice' though, and use of some tricks and techniques. If you're not coached you won't do it through luck or willpower. The skill of the interrogator is a big factor too.
My understanding is it works very well with naturally honest people and with stupid people, honest or not but at the other extreme any averagely intelligent sociopath can beat it so it can never be conclusive so i don't think it should be admissable in court.
However I think it might be very useful if it could be used in investigations but the results only used to help the investigation e.g. ask a bunch of witnesses to a stabbing who did it when they're scared of retaliation. Plod read out a list of the local gangstas, the witnesses say no to all of them but plod get the right name(s) anyway because of the detector spiking.
Be interesting if the Tim Yeo story is the beginning of the media turning a spotlight on to the financial side of "Climate Change" and the story eventually moves to how much scientists and agencies are making from it.
Given the money thats involved in it "Climate Change" has been threatening to blow up into a major scandal for a long time...
Compare and contrast, from about 10 years ago. This happened before she fought and election as leader by the way.
Mona Sahlin, the first woman leader of the Swedish Social Democrats was on the edge of resigning from parliament for financial irregularities. Her alleged indiscretion, she used a parliamentary credit card, (to be used for parliamentary expenses), to purchase her shopping on one occassion. She repaid the money when the error was pointed out. At the election she fought as leader, it was repeatedly brought up that she had bought bars of chocolate on that card. The Swedish public were not impressed and the Social Democrats slumped to defeat. It's accepted this missappropriation of funds contributed significantly to that loss.
Meanwhile back in Britain, the feckers are filling their bank accounts with gay abandon at taxpayers expense, when they are not prostituting and peddling influence to all and sundry.
Seriously. Coup d'etat time.
The reaction to this kind of stuff needs to be extreme or everything rots. It's not just the political class itself that gets rotten but other people treat behavior of people in the public eye as an example.
a) FPTP e) Directly Elected Dictator" What is the difference between a) and e)?
You don't like FPTP but you like the idea of a dictatorship, don't you? You said recently that no Opposition MPs are ever listened to. Ergo there is no point electing one. From what you said, only a dictatorship can address the chip on your shoulder.
"You don't like FPTP but you like the idea of a dictatorship, don't you?"
You're half right, old son. I dislike FPTP precisely because it results in elective dictatorship (frankly AV would have done as well but it's a marginally better system).
"You said recently that no Opposition MPs are ever listened to. Ergo there is no point electing one."
You seem to be mistaking me for Jeffrey Archer. He's the only person I've ever heard making an argument like that (you won't be surprised to hear it was a contrived explanation of why Scotland should vote for the Tories even though we don't like them).
Article in Sunday Times says row over arts cuts - Lib Dems insisting on 10% cuts but Osborne is resisting.
Why don't they reopen BBC Licence Fee settlement? Keep the agreed freeze but simply say DCMS will now only pay say 80% or 90% of value of free LFs for over 75s - ie BBC must swallow 10% or 20% cut on this.
Over 75s LFs cost DCMS over £600m so this would save £60m to £120m. And be very popular.
Privatise the BBC. Leave them to raise their own cash by subscription and/or advertising. Job jobbed.
I'm sure many would agree but realistically that isn't going to happen (and legally probably couldn't pre 2017 which is when the BBC Charter runs to).
But my suggestion is realistic. The Licence Fee settlement done in 2011 for 2012 to 2017 looked tough at the time but if other departments now face additional cuts then it is realistic to expect the same for the BBC.
Cameron should go for this - he followed my advice on the benefits cap - will he do so again?
Privatise the BBC. Leave them to raise their own cash by subscription and/or advertising. Job jobbed.
My fave option is take the money that goes to BBC news but make it more open source i.e. the money funds the studios, technicians etc but (for example) any paper that can sell x copies a year gets to make their version of the news bulletin and when the news comes on punters can select which one they want with their red button.
So you'd have a Guardian version of the news (same as now), Telegraph version, Mirror version, Mail version etc.
The 2010 UKIP candidate is a former UKIP MEP who has rejoined the Tories, so maybe the Tories would let him be their candidate if he was up for it.
I met David Campbell Bannerman last year - quite an impressive bloke. However he is still an MEP for East of England, so can't double-job as an MP. He was, apropos of nothing, born in Bombay.
Having read the article. Andrew Bridgen doesn't exactly come out of it looking very principled in his stance on Gay Marriage or on the issue of arming rebels in Syria, no matter how genuinely felt. The article doesn't come across as particular helpful to him. Both issues in this article leaving him looking like a rebel looking for a cause, any cause with which to hitch his bandwagon to in a sign of rebellion. His call for a no confidence vote on Cameron's Leadership also falls a bit flat when its also suggested that the numbers simple are not there to facilitate one. File under one of usual suspects who likes to make a lot of noise, doubt that he is going to be mentioned in dispatches in up coming reshuffle rumours.
There is a certainty irony in the Mail on Sunday front page as well as the current top story in the Mail on Line which further weakens his position. Both of which tend to undermine Mr Bridgen's case in their own way.
This spreadsheet shows how UKIP polled in each county/council area in contested divisions/wards. For example in Lincolnshire they polled 24.44% overall and 30.68% in the divisions they contested. It also includes the number of divisions/wards in each area contested by UKIP and the total number of divisions/wards.
Overall UKIP polled 24.30% in contested divisions/wards compared to 19.90% when you include areas they didn't contest:
I was at a conference on cosmetics regulation (animal tests etc.) .
Never really understood that, surely anything anyone would even vaguely consider as a cosmetic (Aloe vera and cold cream and such) is unlikely to eat through a laboratory animal's flesh and corrode its bones like concentrated acid? Whereas new anti-cancer chemotherapy chemicals might do exactly that. Is there any truth in the speculation that the war over cosmetics is a phony war being fought because the war over medicine testing is just too difficult?
Nick Palmer will know more than me on this, but my understanding with cosmetic testing is that the rub the products into the animals eyes to see whether it causes any damage.
Just think how much you enjoy getting shampoo in your eyes. And then do that day in day out.
We should just send Rod over there to sort them out.
I have been thinking about running a PB poll tomorrow
Q: What is your prefered electoral voting system
a) FPTP b) AV c) STV d) D'Hondt PR e) Directly Elected Dictator
We do need PRsquared as a choice, and perhaps unelected dictator and absolute monarchy.
I would suggest the poll should by by AV.
All these systems are corrupt relics of the feudal system, we need an option for Liquid Democraccy.
Is that when people sort out the world's problems over a pint or three in a pub?
That's a good solution too, but no, it's direct democracy with delegation. So if I want to I could vote on all parliamentary divisions myself (probably online) but in practice that's a lot of trouble, so I delegate my vote to someone else who can use it for me.
It gives you the advantages of representative democracy - things are decided by people who are paying attention, and some people control large enough blocks to be able to trade support on things they care about for things they don't - with the benefits of direct democracy: You can always make sure your votes are used the way you want on things you care about.
Backed Nadal to win 3-0 at 1.96 against Ferrer. Although he's dropped a set against him in the two most recent matches the majority of his wins have been without losing a set.
Charles, testing for the safety of drugs is an extremely well-regulated affair. But remember that you are looking for signs of toxicity, so you can estimate the potential for harm in any likely scenario. And everything in life is toxic to some extent, even water. As Paracelsus said, the dose makes the poison.
I've no direct knowledge of cosmetic-testing but I know of potentially life-saving drugs being junked because of side-effects at much higher doses than are ever likely to be used.
Animals used are treated well - it's in the companies' interest to do so. Every rat, for instance, must be scrutinised regularly for any sign of ill-health and at post-mortem, they are examined minutely. Microscopic lesions, even in control animals could doom or delay a drug. Hence the nonsense about stealing stray cats from off the local streets is so barmy. These are lab-bred, pedigree animals ... if they were human, they would not speak to you.
Animal alternatives can be useful on some occasions (and Nick is a principled supporter of these), but the whole animal remains the only alternative for the near future at least. Effects on hormone systems, generational effects, certain metabolic changes can only be established by these methods.
Now as for cosmetics, it depends on what residual risk you want to put up with. I don't use them, so I'd say get rid of them anyway. Or accept they may burn your eyes out - caveat emptor.
Comments
Mona Sahlin, the first woman leader of the Swedish Social Democrats was on the edge of resigning from parliament for financial irregularities. Her alleged indiscretion, she used a parliamentary credit card, (to be used for parliamentary expenses), to purchase her shopping on one occassion. She repaid the money when the error was pointed out. At the election she fought as leader, it was repeatedly brought up that she had bought bars of chocolate on that card. The Swedish public were not impressed and the Social Democrats slumped to defeat. It's accepted this missappropriation of funds contributed significantly to that loss.
Meanwhile back in Britain, the feckers are filling their bank accounts with gay abandon at taxpayers expense, when they are not prostituting and peddling influence to all and sundry.
Seriously. Coup d'etat time.
We should just send Rod over there to sort them out.
Q: What is your prefered electoral voting system
a) FPTP
b) AV
c) STV
d) D'Hondt PR
e) Directly Elected Dictator
Sending Rod anywhere that's debating electoral reform could be seen as an act of war.
I would suggest the poll should by by AV.
I think the next commissioner will be someone who is 100% loyal to the corrupt monster state and 0% loyal to Britain so it'll be bleep.
I feel that I've let you all down with this oversight, and wish to rectify that.
But could PB cope with 4 days of polls on electoral systems?
Labour 40
Con 30
UKIP 14
LD 10
The YouGov poll for The Sunday Times, conducted after the lobbying scandal that hit Westminster last week, found that 57% would back a ban on work outside an MP’s parliamentary duties.
A large majority — 73% — support the introduction of a register of all meetings between ministers and lobbyists, while 56% believe those carrying out lobbying have too much influence.
Overall, 45% agree that unions should be covered by lobbying rules, with 29% against. This rose to an overwhelming 81% of Tory voters, but just 23% of Labour supporters agreed with the move.
Given the money thats involved in it "Climate Change" has been threatening to blow up into a major scandal for a long time...
THE topline voting intention figures are CON 30%, LAB 40%, LDEM 9%, UKIP 14%.
A majority of people now regard David Cameron and George Osborne being at least a fair amount to blame for the state of the economy. 25% think Osborne should take a lot of the blame, 28% a fair amount; 21% think Cameron should take a lot of the blame, 30% a fair amount. However Gordon Brown is still much more widely blamed for the state of the economy, with 37% blaming him a lot, 32% a fair amount.
There is less confidence in whether Miliband really believes in what he is saying - only 23% think he is capping the cost of benefit because he thinks it is right, 60% think he doesn’t believe it but is only doing it for political reasons. This may well just reflect general cynicism towards politics though, rather than anything about Miliband in particular – we found almost identical figures in the past when we asked about David Cameron and gay marriage.
Cheers, every day's a school day.
However I think it might be very useful if it could be used in investigations but the results only used to help the investigation e.g. ask a bunch of witnesses to a stabbing who did it when they're scared of retaliation. Plod read out a list of the local gangstas, the witnesses say no to all of them but plod get the right name(s) anyway because of the detector spiking.
a) FPTP
b) AV
c) STV
d) D'Hondt PR
e) Directly Elected Dictator"
What is the difference between a) and e)?
You're half right, old son. I dislike FPTP precisely because it results in elective dictatorship (frankly AV would have done as well but it's a marginally better system).
"You said recently that no Opposition MPs are ever listened to. Ergo there is no point electing one."
You seem to be mistaking me for Jeffrey Archer. He's the only person I've ever heard making an argument like that (you won't be surprised to hear it was a contrived explanation of why Scotland should vote for the Tories even though we don't like them).
Why don't they reopen BBC Licence Fee settlement? Keep the agreed freeze but simply say DCMS will now only pay say 80% or 90% of value of free LFs for over 75s - ie BBC must swallow 10% or 20% cut on this.
Over 75s LFs cost DCMS over £600m so this would save £60m to £120m. And be very popular.
"How come we didn't get many Roma from Hungary when they joined?"
We did, one of Inspector Gadget's earliest posts was about them.
By-election in Suffolk South?
Lovely part of the country.
But my suggestion is realistic. The Licence Fee settlement done in 2011 for 2012 to 2017 looked tough at the time but if other departments now face additional cuts then it is realistic to expect the same for the BBC.
Cameron should go for this - he followed my advice on the benefits cap - will he do so again?
So you'd have a Guardian version of the news (same as now), Telegraph version, Mirror version, Mail version etc.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Suffolk_(UK_Parliament_constituency)
Conservative Tim Yeo 24,550 47.7 +5.7
Liberal Democrat Nigel Bennett 15,861 30.8 +2.4
Labour Emma Bishton 7,368 14.3 -10.1
UKIP David Campbell Bannerman 3,637 7.1 +2.0
The 2010 UKIP candidate is a former UKIP MEP who has rejoined the Tories, so maybe the Tories would let him be their candidate if he was up for it.
Here are the Suffolk county council election results again by division:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0At91c3wX1Wu5dHk1d0dtdW4zcFlnSlJpcklOUmFrS3c#gid=0
UKIP did very well in Forest Heath, not so well in Babergh.
{Question: how the hell do you pronounce Babergh?}
http://www.demochoice.org/
On voting systems, you could throw in MMP(AMS), parallel systems, Limited Vote (SNTV), Runoff, SMPR (Greece, San Marino and Italy).
There is a certainty irony in the Mail on Sunday front page as well as the current top story in the Mail on Line which further weakens his position. Both of which tend to undermine Mr Bridgen's case in their own way.
Overall UKIP polled 24.30% in contested divisions/wards compared to 19.90% when you include areas they didn't contest:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0At91c3wX1Wu5dDlES3BYejV2WVk1QTNldy11c2ZtSGc#gid=0
It is pronounced /ˈbeɪbər/
b = 'b' as in buy
eɪ = long 'a' as in base
b = 'b' as in buy
ər = 'er' as in finger
Not as interesting as I was hoping for; my apologies.
I never would have guessed that particular way of saying it.
Just think how much you enjoy getting shampoo in your eyes. And then do that day in day out.
It gives you the advantages of representative democracy - things are decided by people who are paying attention, and some people control large enough blocks to be able to trade support on things they care about for things they don't - with the benefits of direct democracy: You can always make sure your votes are used the way you want on things you care about.
Betting PostBacked Nadal to win 3-0 at 1.96 against Ferrer. Although he's dropped a set against him in the two most recent matches the majority of his wins have been without losing a set.
Charles, testing for the safety of drugs is an extremely well-regulated affair. But remember that you are looking for signs of toxicity, so you can estimate the potential for harm in any likely scenario. And everything in life is toxic to some extent, even water. As Paracelsus said, the dose makes the poison.
I've no direct knowledge of cosmetic-testing but I know of potentially life-saving drugs being junked because of side-effects at much higher doses than are ever likely to be used.
Animals used are treated well - it's in the companies' interest to do so. Every rat, for instance, must be scrutinised regularly for any sign of ill-health and at post-mortem, they are examined minutely. Microscopic lesions, even in control animals could doom or delay a drug. Hence the nonsense about stealing stray cats from off the local streets is so barmy. These are lab-bred, pedigree animals ... if they were human, they would not speak to you.
Animal alternatives can be useful on some occasions (and Nick is a principled supporter of these), but the whole animal remains the only alternative for the near future at least. Effects on hormone systems, generational effects, certain metabolic changes can only be established by these methods.
Now as for cosmetics, it depends on what residual risk you want to put up with. I don't use them, so I'd say get rid of them anyway. Or accept they may burn your eyes out - caveat emptor.
Betting PostBacked Webber for a podium at 2.64, hedged at 1.2: http://enormo-haddock.blogspot.co.uk/2013/06/canada-pre-race.html
http://www.crimaz.com/wwe-raw/648-watch-wwe-raw-june-10th-2013-6-10-2013-*replay-720p*-watch-online-download.html