Hospitals in the West Midlands are having to repay at least 10% of their annual turnover after taking out so-called “NHS mortgages” to build new facilities. A total of 10 new hospitals have been completed, or are currently being built, in the West Midlands under the private finance initiative (PFI). Figures obtained by the BBC claim that the NHS in England faces a total bill of £65 billion for 103 PFI hospital schemes, which involve private firms paying for and building new hospitals and mental health units, with the NHS paying the money back over a period of 30 or more years. Although the data shows that the value of the projects when they were built was only £11.3bn, this soars to £65.1bn over the lifetime of the deals once extra costs such as maintenance, cleaning and catering are taken into account.
There is an astounding payment schedule for an Ayshire schools PFI scheme.
PFI may have been one of the worst policy mistakes of the last Labour government in my opinion, but I think the current government are still signing new PFI deals.
It's one of the things that leads me to think that British politics has been essentially in stasis since Blair became leader of the Labour party. The Blairite consensus is still with us.
It is an astoundingly financially illiterate idea. Instead of the government borrowing the money directly at government rates we pay a private company to borrow the money at commercial rates. The myth is that we pass off the risk to the private company but the reality is that the public needs the infrastructure so cannot afford to allow the private company to fail. There is no risk.
Precisely, hospitals can't be allowed to fail. They just can't. If something is private it simply HAS to be allowed to fail... it is fundamental to capitalism. That a TV station is in public hands but hospitals are sort of on a halfway house is just ideologically bonkers.
Ms even worse IMO but that's why you're a labour candidate and I vote Ukip!
What do you do if you get a question from, say, "Sally Hughes".
Dear Mrs Hughes or Dear Miss Hughes? Some women feel it's an offensive intrusion to make an assumption about their married state. "Dear Sally"? - see discussion. "Dear Sally Hughes"? - just looks odd, as though you were a poorly-programmed computer.
Of course, if it's from "Evelyn Hughes" you don't even know their gender. And in one case the correspondent changed gender between the time she wrote to me about a housing issue and the time I called round to see him - I was chuffed to work out instantly what had happened and not blink.
'Tis not easy.
I'd either use 'Sally', or 'Ms', depending on the tone of the letter. Although I have come across a lady who objected to 'Ms'.
Mrs J did not take my surname when we got married (a decision I am fine with, it will make the divorce cheaper! ;-) ), and it's surprising how many people ask for a 'Mr ', using her surname.
It's a mess, and IMHO people should not get too upset by people getting it wrong with good intentions.
As an aside, a few years back we could not think of a male equivalent of a mistress. In the names of equality, we came up with 'mastress'.
Miliband is going more and more extreme Marxist as the campaign progresses.
As Venezuela already exists, its a know fact that if he, by some chance wins and enacts what he says, the economy will completely bomb. It must be getting time to start hoarding the toilet rolls to minimise the risk to personal hygiene after May 7th.
Hmmm. The problem with that logic is that you could equally say something like "Tories posturing more and more as the party that will serve business through deregulation, liberalised flows of capital and preserving tax incentives for globally mobile 'wealth creators' to base in the UK". As the 2007-8 financial crash happened, it's a known fact that another gigantic worldwide financial crisis will result if they are elected.
Hospitals in the West Midlands are having to repay at least 10% of their annual turnover after taking out so-called “NHS mortgages” to build new facilities. A total of 10 new hospitals have been completed, or are currently being built, in the West Midlands under the private finance initiative (PFI). Figures obtained by the BBC claim that the NHS in England faces a total bill of £65 billion for 103 PFI hospital schemes, which involve private firms paying for and building new hospitals and mental health units, with the NHS paying the money back over a period of 30 or more years. Although the data shows that the value of the projects when they were built was only £11.3bn, this soars to £65.1bn over the lifetime of the deals once extra costs such as maintenance, cleaning and catering are taken into account.
As I have said many times, the Tories have missed the target. It is PFI for which Gordon Brown should be condemned, but the Conservatives instead chose to blame him for the global financial crisis. As an aside, who on earth coined the dumbed down term "NHS mortgages" and why? Do they imagine ordinary people can't tie their own shoelaces?
'Ed really doesn't have a clue, does he understand that these evil shareholders of housebuilders, banks and utilities are yours and my pensions - but not his of course, we all pay taxes for that.'
Just like Ed saying he's going to force buy to let landlords to give 3 year leases only to find out that buy to let lenders forbid leases longer than 12 months.
You couldn't make it up.
Well, either lenders change their rules, or borrowers turf their tenants out onto the streets and sell up. What's it to be?
Slightly off topic... I've decided to sell any shares I have that are Scotland-related. That is, Aggreko and Weir. It strikes me that, whatever the outcome on 7th May, such multinationals will be wary of a domicile in Scotland with devomax, indyref and euroref factors swirling around. Equally, international investors will be pushing them to re-domicile in a more stable environment. But, of course, DYOR.
Aggreko and Weir make the majority of their income from outside the UK (in Aggreko's case its about 90%), which with a plummetting pound means that their profit margins will only get better.
'Did I miss the constitutional amendment pursuant to which buy-to-let lenders acquired a veto power over the Queen-in-Parliament?'
I think you missed the point that when this was pointed out there was a rapid u-turn and now it will only apply to new mortgages taken out after the legislation has become law & restrictive conditions changed after negotiations with lenders.
So it won't effect existing buy to let landlords,yet another of Ed's fantasy policies exposed.
Slightly off topic... I've decided to sell any shares I have that are Scotland-related. That is, Aggreko and Weir. It strikes me that, whatever the outcome on 7th May, such multinationals will be wary of a domicile in Scotland with devomax, indyref and euroref factors swirling around. Equally, international investors will be pushing them to re-domicile in a more stable environment. But, of course, DYOR.
Aggreko and Weir make the majority of their income from outside the UK (in Aggreko's case its about 90%), which with a plummetting pound means that their profit margins will only get better.
Hospitals in the West Midlands are having to repay at least 10% of their annual turnover after taking out so-called “NHS mortgages” to build new facilities. A total of 10 new hospitals have been completed, or are currently being built, in the West Midlands under the private finance initiative (PFI). Figures obtained by the BBC claim that the NHS in England faces a total bill of £65 billion for 103 PFI hospital schemes, which involve private firms paying for and building new hospitals and mental health units, with the NHS paying the money back over a period of 30 or more years. Although the data shows that the value of the projects when they were built was only £11.3bn, this soars to £65.1bn over the lifetime of the deals once extra costs such as maintenance, cleaning and catering are taken into account.
There is an astounding payment schedule for an Ayshire schools PFI scheme.
PFI may have been one of the worst policy mistakes of the last Labour government in my opinion, but I think the current government are still signing new PFI deals.
It's one of the things that leads me to think that British politics has been essentially in stasis since Blair became leader of the Labour party. The Blairite consensus is still with us.
There's nothing wrong with PFI deals in principle, it's just that under Labour they were spectacularly badly negotiated. It's not a surprise - Labour were (and remain) supremely uninterested in value for money, so of course they didn't get value for money.
Alistair gives a good summary of why I disagree with you a couple of posts below yours.
A good summary, but a wrong one. Of course there is risk passed to the private company, most notably on cost overruns. More importantly (if it's done right) there is an efficiency incentive on the private company.
It's not just about borrowing costs, any more than it is when private companies enter into turnkey construction contracts or long-term support contracts.
Hospitals in the West Midlands are having to repay at least 10% of their annual turnover after taking out so-called “NHS mortgages” to build new facilities. A total of 10 new hospitals have been completed, or are currently being built, in the West Midlands under the private finance initiative (PFI). Figures obtained by the BBC claim that the NHS in England faces a total bill of £65 billion for 103 PFI hospital schemes, which involve private firms paying for and building new hospitals and mental health units, with the NHS paying the money back over a period of 30 or more years. Although the data shows that the value of the projects when they were built was only £11.3bn, this soars to £65.1bn over the lifetime of the deals once extra costs such as maintenance, cleaning and catering are taken into account.
There is an astounding payment schedule for an Ayshire schools PFI scheme.
I think it would be fairer judging pollsters on their last three or four polls. Judging them just on their final one means they could be being judged on an outlier.
Miliband is going more and more extreme Marxist as the campaign progresses.
As Venezuela already exists, its a know fact that if he, by some chance wins and enacts what he says, the economy will completely bomb. It must be getting time to start hoarding the toilet rolls to minimise the risk to personal hygiene after May 7th.
Hmmm. The problem with that logic is that you could equally say something like "Tories posturing more and more as the party that will serve business through deregulation, liberalised flows of capital and preserving tax incentives for globally mobile 'wealth creators' to base in the UK". As the 2007-8 financial crash happened, it's a known fact that another gigantic worldwide financial crisis will result if they are elected.
The Tories are really saying "more of the same" with a few jazzy headline bits thrown on top to create media headlines.
If it wasn't for our election rules on 5 year terms, the UK doesn't actually need an election. If it was a plc, you wouldn't change the leadership & strategy when its really starting to work. And you certainly wouldn't want to hand over the boardroom to a workers collective & over grown student politicians.
PFI may have been one of the worst policy mistakes of the last Labour government in my opinion, but I think the current government are still signing new PFI deals.
It's one of the things that leads me to think that British politics has been essentially in stasis since Blair became leader of the Labour party. The Blairite consensus is still with us.
It is an astoundingly financially illiterate idea. Instead of the government borrowing the money directly at government rates we pay a private company to borrow the money at commercial rates. The myth is that we pass off the risk to the private company but the reality is that the public needs the infrastructure so cannot afford to allow the private company to fail. There is no risk.
PFI is Faki Laki on an industrial scale. It's a great example of how countries we think of as "corrupt" are amateurs compared to the level of institutional and massive corruption that exist in the UK. All the PFI companies are chock full of former Labour MPs as their advisers and directors.
PFI may have been one of the worst policy mistakes of the last Labour government in my opinion, but I think the current government are still signing new PFI deals.
It's one of the things that leads me to think that British politics has been essentially in stasis since Blair became leader of the Labour party. The Blairite consensus is still with us.
There's nothing wrong with PFI deals in principle, it's just that under Labour they were spectacularly badly negotiated. It's not a surprise - Labour were (and remain) supremely uninterested in value for money, so of course they didn't get value for money.
Alistair gives a good summary of why I disagree with you a couple of posts below yours.
Theoretically contracts could be written better but Edinburgh Trams show why it doesn't work in practice. Edinburgh council wrote a good, fixed price contract, The private contractor who took on the contract couldn't do it and went bust and Edinburgh was left with a useless half finished tram system and dug up roads.
Miliband is going more and more extreme Marxist as the campaign progresses.
As Venezuela already exists, its a know fact that if he, by some chance wins and enacts what he says, the economy will completely bomb. It must be getting time to start hoarding the toilet rolls to minimise the risk to personal hygiene after May 7th.
Hmmm. The problem with that logic is that you could equally say something like "Tories posturing more and more as the party that will serve business through deregulation, liberalised flows of capital and preserving tax incentives for globally mobile 'wealth creators' to base in the UK". As the 2007-8 financial crash happened, it's a known fact that another gigantic worldwide financial crisis will result if they are elected.
The Tories are really saying "more of the same" with a few jazzy headline bits thrown on top to create media headlines.
If it wasn't for our election rules on 5 year terms, the UK doesn't actually need an election. If it was a plc, you wouldn't change the leadership & strategy when its really starting to work. And you certainly wouldn't want to hand over the boardroom to a workers collective & over grown student politicians.
Tricky argument to make when the people now running it were saying before the crash that public spending should be protected and the only thing really needed was greater deregulation. In 2005 it was really starting to work, a process that went on pretty much continuously until it didn't work.
...unless of course the current plc leadership have abolished boom & bust...?
Hospitals in the West Midlands are having to repay at least 10% of their annual turnover after taking out so-called “NHS mortgages” to build new facilities. A total of 10 new hospitals have been completed, or are currently being built, in the West Midlands under the private finance initiative (PFI). Figures obtained by the BBC claim that the NHS in England faces a total bill of £65 billion for 103 PFI hospital schemes, which involve private firms paying for and building new hospitals and mental health units, with the NHS paying the money back over a period of 30 or more years. Although the data shows that the value of the projects when they were built was only £11.3bn, this soars to £65.1bn over the lifetime of the deals once extra costs such as maintenance, cleaning and catering are taken into account.
There is an astounding payment schedule for an Ayshire schools PFI scheme.
Was that a mistake, was about North Lanarkshire , not Ayrshire.
Aye, don't know why I wrote Ayrshire down there.
You were thinking of its great beauty Alistair.
One of the first times I went to Ayrshire as a boy we drove through (a crawl sue to the press of Orangemen) a town that was having the grand gathering of Orange lodges.
PFI may have been one of the worst policy mistakes of the last Labour government in my opinion, but I think the current government are still signing new PFI deals.
It's one of the things that leads me to think that British politics has been essentially in stasis since Blair became leader of the Labour party. The Blairite consensus is still with us.
It is an astoundingly financially illiterate idea. Instead of the government borrowing the money directly at government rates we pay a private company to borrow the money at commercial rates. The myth is that we pass off the risk to the private company but the reality is that the public needs the infrastructure so cannot afford to allow the private company to fail. There is no risk.
PFI is Faki Laki on an industrial scale. It's a great example of how countries we think of as "corrupt" are amateurs compared to the level of institutional and massive corruption that exist in the UK. All the PFI companies are chock full of former Labour MPs as their advisers and directors.
I'll make my usual comments that not all PFIs are equal: they became popular for road projects in the 1980s as DBFO, and IMHO they work well for them.
The problem comes with the 'O' OF DBFO: operating a road is relatively simple. A school is probably an order of magnitude more complex, and a hospital two orders.
Miliband is going more and more extreme Marxist as the campaign progresses.
As Venezuela already exists, its a know fact that if he, by some chance wins and enacts what he says, the economy will completely bomb. It must be getting time to start hoarding the toilet rolls to minimise the risk to personal hygiene after May 7th.
Hmmm. The problem with that logic is that you could equally say something like "Tories posturing more and more as the party that will serve business through deregulation, liberalised flows of capital and preserving tax incentives for globally mobile 'wealth creators' to base in the UK". As the 2007-8 financial crash happened, it's a known fact that another gigantic worldwide financial crisis will result if they are elected.
If it wasn't for our election rules on 5 year terms, the UK doesn't actually need an election. If it was a plc, you wouldn't change the leadership & strategy when its really starting to work. And you certainly wouldn't want to hand over the boardroom to a workers collective & over grown student politicians.
PLCs are run like China. Leadership changes and strategy are agreed by the leadership. Democracy doesn't come into. It is a defendable effective model.
Slightly off topic... I've decided to sell any shares I have that are Scotland-related. That is, Aggreko and Weir. It strikes me that, whatever the outcome on 7th May, such multinationals will be wary of a domicile in Scotland with devomax, indyref and euroref factors swirling around. Equally, international investors will be pushing them to re-domicile in a more stable environment. But, of course, DYOR.
Aggreko and Weir make the majority of their income from outside the UK (in Aggreko's case its about 90%), which with a plummetting pound means that their profit margins will only get better.
He will be back in class by now
Patronising and smug. Only to be expected from you two.
£/$ rates are already built into the prices, or don't you think professional investors notice what you notice?
It's my money, and I think other investors will, like me, look at Scotland and say "Nah, not the place to be for the next 15 years."
Let's see where Aggreko and Weir share prices are in 6 months, shall we?
PFI may have been one of the worst policy mistakes of the last Labour government in my opinion, but I think the current government are still signing new PFI deals.
It's one of the things that leads me to think that British politics has been essentially in stasis since Blair became leader of the Labour party. The Blairite consensus is still with us.
There's nothing wrong with PFI deals in principle, it's just that under Labour they were spectacularly badly negotiated. It's not a surprise - Labour were (and remain) supremely uninterested in value for money, so of course they didn't get value for money.
Alistair gives a good summary of why I disagree with you a couple of posts below yours.
Theoretically contracts could be written better but Edinburgh Trams show why it doesn't work in practice. Edinburgh council wrote a good, fixed price contract, The private contractor who took on the contract couldn't do it and went bust and Edinburgh was left with a useless half finished tram system and dug up roads.
Wasn't a major problem ground conditions (i.e. utilities not being where they were supposed to be)?
Miliband is going more and more extreme Marxist as the campaign progresses.
As Venezuela already exists, its a know fact that if he, by some chance wins and enacts what he says, the economy will completely bomb. It must be getting time to start hoarding the toilet rolls to minimise the risk to personal hygiene after May 7th.
I suggest you better get used to having a "Marxist" PM. Your understanding of the word "Marxist".
Ms even worse IMO but that's why you're a labour candidate and I vote Ukip!
What do you do if you get a question from, say, "Sally Hughes".
Dear Mrs Hughes or Dear Miss Hughes? Some women feel it's an offensive intrusion to make an assumption about their married state. "Dear Sally"? - see discussion. "Dear Sally Hughes"? - just looks odd, as though you were a poorly-programmed computer.
Of course, if it's from "Evelyn Hughes" you don't even know their gender. And in one case the correspondent changed gender between the time she wrote to me about a housing issue and the time I called round to see him - I was chuffed to work out instantly what had happened and not blink.
'Tis not easy.
I'd either use 'Sally', or 'Ms', depending on the tone of the letter. Although I have come across a lady who objected to 'Ms'.
Mrs J did not take my surname when we got married (a decision I am fine with, it will make the divorce cheaper! ;-) ), and it's surprising how many people ask for a 'Mr ', using her surname.
It's a mess, and IMHO people should not get too upset by people getting it wrong with good intentions.
As an aside, a few years back we could not think of a male equivalent of a mistress. In the names of equality, we came up with 'mastress'.
"Oh, that's Mike. He's Sally's mastress".
Which eighteenth century (-ish?) writer was it who observed that "mistress" is that which lies twixt "mister" and "mattress"?
PFI may have been one of the worst policy mistakes of the last Labour government in my opinion, but I think the current government are still signing new PFI deals.
It's one of the things that leads me to think that British politics has been essentially in stasis since Blair became leader of the Labour party. The Blairite consensus is still with us.
There's nothing wrong with PFI deals in principle, it's just that under Labour they were spectacularly badly negotiated. It's not a surprise - Labour were (and remain) supremely uninterested in value for money, so of course they didn't get value for money.
Alistair gives a good summary of why I disagree with you a couple of posts below yours.
Theoretically contracts could be written better but Edinburgh Trams show why it doesn't work in practice. Edinburgh council wrote a good, fixed price contract, The private contractor who took on the contract couldn't do it and went bust and Edinburgh was left with a useless half finished tram system and dug up roads.
Wasn't a major problem ground conditions (i.e. utilities not being where they were supposed to be)?
Basically yes, ground cnditions messed everything up. But there was other enormous cock-ups as well, for instance the track had to be relaid down Princess Street as it wasn't up to spec
Incidentally, I have a friend who used to work for a company that does maintenance on the domestic Gas network.
It might well scare you pantless to know the depth of ignorance about exactly where all our gas pipes are. Maps aren't just off by a meter or two, they are often completely missing or entirely notional
Ms even worse IMO but that's why you're a labour candidate and I vote Ukip!
What do you do if you get a question from, say, "Sally Hughes".
Dear Mrs Hughes or Dear Miss Hughes? Some women feel it's an offensive intrusion to make an assumption about their married state. "Dear Sally"? - see discussion. "Dear Sally Hughes"? - just looks odd, as though you were a poorly-programmed computer.
Of course, if it's from "Evelyn Hughes" you don't even know their gender. And in one case the correspondent changed gender between the time she wrote to me about a housing issue and the time I called round to see him - I was chuffed to work out instantly what had happened and not blink.
'Tis not easy.
I'd either use 'Sally', or 'Ms', depending on the tone of the letter. Although I have come across a lady who objected to 'Ms'.
Mrs J did not take my surname when we got married (a decision I am fine with, it will make the divorce cheaper! ;-) ), and it's surprising how many people ask for a 'Mr ', using her surname.
It's a mess, and IMHO people should not get too upset by people getting it wrong with good intentions.
As an aside, a few years back we could not think of a male equivalent of a mistress. In the names of equality, we came up with 'mastress'.
"Oh, that's Mike. He's Sally's mastress".
Which eighteenth century (-ish?) writer was it who observed that "mistress" is that which lies twixt "mister" and "mattress"?
I vaguely remember the quote: Who was it? If I had to guess I'd say Samuel Johnson, but only because it sounds like his sort of thing. I'd also say Pepys, but he was probably too early.
PFI may have been one of the worst policy mistakes of the last Labour government in my opinion, but I think the current government are still signing new PFI deals.
It's one of the things that leads me to think that British politics has been essentially in stasis since Blair became leader of the Labour party. The Blairite consensus is still with us.
There's nothing wrong with PFI deals in principle, it's just that under Labour they were spectacularly badly negotiated. It's not a surprise - Labour were (and remain) supremely uninterested in value for money, so of course they didn't get value for money.
Alistair gives a good summary of why I disagree with you a couple of posts below yours.
A good summary, but a wrong one. Of course there is risk passed to the private company, most notably on cost overruns. More importantly (if it's done right) there is an efficiency incentive on the private company.
It's not just about borrowing costs, any more than it is when private companies enter into turnkey construction contracts or long-term support contracts.
Was the problem that the govt were thinking only of the construction costs when negotiating, whereas the providers were thinking much more about the ongoing revenue streams from maintenance and services as much as the building itself?
I seem to recall some rather good (for the providers) annual inflation clauses on these services too - a contract signed in 2000 with an annual uplift of "RPI or 5%, whichever is higher" probably looked innocuous at the time but is now generating significantly more real terms income than the govt negotiators would have thought possible 15 years ago.
Edit: Point also made downthread by @JossiasJessop - Schools and especially hospitals are orders of magnitude more complex to run than the roads and bridges where PFI originated.
PFI may have been one of the worst policy mistakes of the last Labour government in my opinion, but I think the current government are still signing new PFI deals.
It's one of the things that leads me to think that British politics has been essentially in stasis since Blair became leader of the Labour party. The Blairite consensus is still with us.
There's nothing wrong with PFI deals in principle, it's just that under Labour they were spectacularly badly negotiated. It's not a surprise - Labour were (and remain) supremely uninterested in value for money, so of course they didn't get value for money.
Alistair gives a good summary of why I disagree with you a couple of posts below yours.
Theoretically contracts could be written better but Edinburgh Trams show why it doesn't work in practice. Edinburgh council wrote a good, fixed price contract, The private contractor who took on the contract couldn't do it and went bust and Edinburgh was left with a useless half finished tram system and dug up roads.
Wasn't a major problem ground conditions (i.e. utilities not being where they were supposed to be)?
The major problem is that it was a ridiculously stupid idea in the first place especially when it parallels the existing railway for 99% of it's route. An extension stub to Edinburgh Airport would have cost less than £20m including the station costs.
Almost made it to a regional TV audience 10 minutes ago, met a BBC camera team outside supermarket. Asked if I was voting, yes I said. Mentioned who for, but then interview ended, they wanted people from the Bristol NW seat...
Miliband is going more and more extreme Marxist as the campaign progresses.
As Venezuela already exists, its a know fact that if he, by some chance wins and enacts what he says, the economy will completely bomb. It must be getting time to start hoarding the toilet rolls to minimise the risk to personal hygiene after May 7th.
Hmmm. The problem with that logic is that you could equally say something like "Tories posturing more and more as the party that will serve business through deregulation, liberalised flows of capital and preserving tax incentives for globally mobile 'wealth creators' to base in the UK". As the 2007-8 financial crash happened, it's a known fact that another gigantic worldwide financial crisis will result if they are elected.
If it wasn't for our election rules on 5 year terms, the UK doesn't actually need an election. If it was a plc, you wouldn't change the leadership & strategy when its really starting to work. And you certainly wouldn't want to hand over the boardroom to a workers collective & over grown student politicians.
PLCs are run like China. Leadership changes and strategy are agreed by the leadership. Democracy doesn't come into. It is a defendable effective model.
Is that what you are proposing for the UK?
Nope
When things need changing for poor performance, the shareholders do chuck out the old management and bring a new lot in. If things are going well or the changes made by the new management are starting to work, you carry on.
Take supermarkets as a comparison:
Tesco & Morrisons - old CEO out, new ones in place = election change
Waitrose - doing fine, plan working = no need for election
Sainsbury's under Justin King after 5 years = the plans working, no need for change
Among the unusual feedback from election emails I got this one today from someone I'd written to as Ms ... rather than "Sally":
"I also really appreciate your use of formal address, given that we've never met. I know that's quite trivial, but it does make me feel that you respect me as an equal. Thank you."
I'm conscious that many younger people don't even know the last names of their friends, but it still irritates me a bit when parties and NGOs send me computer-generated stuff saying "Nick, you can help change the future of..." The unsolicited chumminess strikes an entirely false note to my ears. Is that a common view, or just a fusty anachronism? Presumably it's all market-researched...
Among the unusual feedback from election emails I got this one today from someone I'd written to as Ms ... rather than "Sally":
"I also really appreciate your use of formal address, given that we've never met. I know that's quite trivial, but it does make me feel that you respect me as an equal. Thank you."
I'm conscious that many younger people don't even know the last names of their friends, but it still irritates me a bit when parties and NGOs send me computer-generated stuff saying "Nick, you can help change the future of..." The unsolicited chumminess strikes an entirely false note to my ears. Is that a common view, or just a fusty anachronism? Presumably it's all market-researched...
PFI may have been one of the worst policy mistakes of the last Labour government in my opinion, but I think the current government are still signing new PFI deals.
It's one of the things that leads me to think that British politics has been essentially in stasis since Blair became leader of the Labour party. The Blairite consensus is still with us.
There's nothing wrong with PFI deals in principle, it's just that under Labour they were spectacularly badly negotiated. It's not a surprise - Labour were (and remain) supremely uninterested in value for money, so of course they didn't get value for money.
Alistair gives a good summary of why I disagree with you a couple of posts below yours.
Theoretically contracts could be written better but Edinburgh Trams show why it doesn't work in practice. Edinburgh council wrote a good, fixed price contract, The private contractor who took on the contract couldn't do it and went bust and Edinburgh was left with a useless half finished tram system and dug up roads.
Wasn't a major problem ground conditions (i.e. utilities not being where they were supposed to be)?
The major problem is that it was a ridiculously stupid idea in the first place especially when it parallels the existing railway for 99% of it's route. An extension stub to Edinburgh Airport would have cost less than £20m including the station costs.
Well, I agree with that, at least for what Edinburgh ended up with. The initially-proposed phase 1 (e.g. including the Leith arm) made more sense, at least to me.
Miliband is going more and more extreme Marxist as the campaign progresses.
As Venezuela already exists, its a know fact that if he, by some chance wins and enacts what he says, the economy will completely bomb. It must be getting time to start hoarding the toilet rolls to minimise the risk to personal hygiene after May 7th.
Hmmm. The problem with that logic is that you could equally say something like "Tories posturing more and more as the party that will serve business through deregulation, liberalised flows of capital and preserving tax incentives for globally mobile 'wealth creators' to base in the UK". As the 2007-8 financial crash happened, it's a known fact that another gigantic worldwide financial crisis will result if they are elected.
If it wasn't for our election rules on 5 year terms, the UK doesn't actually need an election. If it was a plc, you wouldn't change the leadership & strategy when its really starting to work. And you certainly wouldn't want to hand over the boardroom to a workers collective & over grown student politicians.
PLCs are run like China. Leadership changes and strategy are agreed by the leadership. Democracy doesn't come into. It is a defendable effective model.
Is that what you are proposing for the UK?
Nope
When things need changing for poor performance, the shareholders do chuck out the old management and bring a new lot in. If things are going well or the changes made by the new management are starting to work, you carry on.
Take supermarkets as a comparison:
Tesco & Morrisons - old CEO out, new ones in place = election change
Waitrose - doing fine, plan working = no need for election
Sainsbury's under Justin King after 5 years = the plans working, no need for change
The UK's like Sainsbury's was a while ago.
Shareholders have an Annual General Meeting. Sounds like you support the Chartists call for annual Parliaments. How else do you decide whether things are going well and you want the current management to continue but by having a vote?
Hospitals in the West Midlands are having to repay at least 10% of their annual turnover after taking out so-called “NHS mortgages” to build new facilities. A total of 10 new hospitals have been completed, or are currently being built, in the West Midlands under the private finance initiative (PFI). Figures obtained by the BBC claim that the NHS in England faces a total bill of £65 billion for 103 PFI hospital schemes, which involve private firms paying for and building new hospitals and mental health units, with the NHS paying the money back over a period of 30 or more years. Although the data shows that the value of the projects when they were built was only £11.3bn, this soars to £65.1bn over the lifetime of the deals once extra costs such as maintenance, cleaning and catering are taken into account.
There is an astounding payment schedule for an Ayshire schools PFI scheme.
Was that a mistake, was about North Lanarkshire , not Ayrshire.
Aye, don't know why I wrote Ayrshire down there.
You were thinking of its great beauty Alistair.
One of the first times I went to Ayrshire as a boy we drove through (a crawl sue to the press of Orangemen) a town that was having the grand gathering of Orange lodges.
Scared the f'ing crap out of me.
Luckily not as bad as it used to be but far from cured. I was born in Kilwinning in Ayrshire which was staunch to say the least. Seems unbelievable nowadays , first question you asked was always , what school do you go to. Sadly West of Scotland has not got rid of it yet, I live in hope but doubt I will see it totally eradicated.
Among the unusual feedback from election emails I got this one today from someone I'd written to as Ms ... rather than "Sally":
"I also really appreciate your use of formal address, given that we've never met. I know that's quite trivial, but it does make me feel that you respect me as an equal. Thank you."
I'm conscious that many younger people don't even know the last names of their friends, but it still irritates me a bit when parties and NGOs send me computer-generated stuff saying "Nick, you can help change the future of..." The unsolicited chumminess strikes an entirely false note to my ears. Is that a common view, or just a fusty anachronism? Presumably it's all market-researched...
Among the unusual feedback from election emails I got this one today from someone I'd written to as Ms ... rather than "Sally":
"I also really appreciate your use of formal address, given that we've never met. I know that's quite trivial, but it does make me feel that you respect me as an equal. Thank you."
I'm conscious that many younger people don't even know the last names of their friends, but it still irritates me a bit when parties and NGOs send me computer-generated stuff saying "Nick, you can help change the future of..." The unsolicited chumminess strikes an entirely false note to my ears. Is that a common view, or just a fusty anachronism? Presumably it's all market-researched...
It's not fusty. It's just good manners.
I think it *was* good manners.
Manners have changed, and will continue to change.
PFI may have been one of the worst policy mistakes of the last Labour government in my opinion, but I think the current government are still signing new PFI deals.
It's one of the things that leads me to think that British politics has been essentially in stasis since Blair became leader of the Labour party. The Blairite consensus is still with us.
There's nothing wrong with PFI deals in principle, it's just that under Labour they were spectacularly badly negotiated. It's not a surprise - Labour were (and remain) supremely uninterested in value for money, so of course they didn't get value for money.
Alistair gives a good summary of why I disagree with you a couple of posts below yours.
Theoretically contracts could be written better but Edinburgh Trams show why it doesn't work in practice. Edinburgh council wrote a good, fixed price contract, The private contractor who took on the contract couldn't do it and went bust and Edinburgh was left with a useless half finished tram system and dug up roads.
Wasn't a major problem ground conditions (i.e. utilities not being where they were supposed to be)?
The major problem is that it was a ridiculously stupid idea in the first place especially when it parallels the existing railway for 99% of it's route. An extension stub to Edinburgh Airport would have cost less than £20m including the station costs.
Well, I agree with that, at least for what Edinburgh ended up with. The initially-proposed phase 1 (e.g. including the Leith arm) made more sense, at least to me.
There is a good argument that the £10bn Crossrail project should have been built in Edinburgh (using the same UK Wide Infrastructure funding).
Miliband is going more and more extreme Marxist as the campaign progresses.
As Venezuela already exists, its a know fact that if he, by some chance wins and enacts what he says, the economy will completely bomb. It must be getting time to start hoarding the toilet rolls to minimise the risk to personal hygiene after May 7th.
Hmmm. The problem with that logic is that you could equally say something like "Tories posturing more and more as the party that will serve business through deregulation, liberalised flows of capital and preserving tax incentives for globally mobile 'wealth creators' to base in the UK". As the 2007-8 financial crash happened, it's a known fact that another gigantic worldwide financial crisis will result if they are elected.
If it wasn't for our election rules on 5 year terms, the UK doesn't actually need an election. If it was a plc, you wouldn't change the leadership & strategy when its really starting to work. And you certainly wouldn't want to hand over the boardroom to a workers collective & over grown student politicians.
PLCs are run like China. Leadership changes and strategy are agreed by the leadership. Democracy doesn't come into. It is a defendable effective model.
Is that what you are proposing for the UK?
Nope
When things need changing for poor performance, the shareholders do chuck out the old management and bring a new lot in. If things are going well or the changes made by the new management are starting to work, you carry on.
Take supermarkets as a comparison:
Tesco & Morrisons - old CEO out, new ones in place = election change
Waitrose - doing fine, plan working = no need for election
Sainsbury's under Justin King after 5 years = the plans working, no need for change
The UK's like Sainsbury's was a while ago.
Shareholders have an Annual General Meeting. Sounds like you support the Chartists call for annual Parliaments. How else do you decide whether things are going well and you want the current management to continue but by having a vote?
The point is we don't actually need an election now. Changing anything beyond slight touches on the tiller is too risky
PFI may have been one of the worst policy mistakes of the last Labour government in my opinion, but I think the current government are still signing new PFI deals.
It's one of the things that leads me to think that British politics has been essentially in stasis since Blair became leader of the Labour party. The Blairite consensus is still with us.
There's nothing wrong with PFI deals in principle, it's just that under Labour they were spectacularly badly negotiated. It's not a surprise - Labour were (and remain) supremely uninterested in value for money, so of course they didn't get value for money.
Alistair gives a good summary of why I disagree with you a couple of posts below yours.
Theoretically contracts could be written better but Edinburgh Trams show why it doesn't work in practice. Edinburgh council wrote a good, fixed price contract, The private contractor who took on the contract couldn't do it and went bust and Edinburgh was left with a useless half finished tram system and dug up roads.
Wasn't a major problem ground conditions (i.e. utilities not being where they were supposed to be)?
Basically yes, ground cnditions messed everything up. But there was other enormous cock-ups as well, for instance the track had to be relaid down Princess Street as it wasn't up to spec
Incidentally, I have a friend who used to work for a company that does maintenance on the domestic Gas network.
It might well scare you pantless to know the depth of ignorance about exactly where all our gas pipes are. Maps aren't just off by a meter or two, they are often completely missing or entirely notional
I know from personal experience. ;-)
But gas pipes are nothing. A couple of years ago a piling rig hit a tube line in London because the tube was not on the maps the contractor or council were using ...
I generally feel sorry for contractors who run into trouble with groundworks, especially with unexpected ground conditions and misplaced utilities. It doesn't matter how many test bores you've drilled, or how good your utility maps are, the ground can always surprise you.
I still can't believe people mocked my guess of SNP 52 seats as ludicrously high.
The Scotland only polls (54-22) are moving in the exact opposite direction of YG and Populus Scotland subsamples.
SNP 47 Lab 36
Sub samples are not weighted. Only the total is weighted.
Not entirely correct , they are weighted for turnout for example but not by party ID or past vote or other weightings specific to a poll .
How does that work ? For example, if the turnout in the NE was 55% and SE 70%, will they up the SE weighting and lower the NE weighting and then do all the other weightings ?
PFI may have been one of the worst policy mistakes of the last Labour government in my opinion, but I think the current government are still signing new PFI deals.
It's one of the things that leads me to think that British politics has been essentially in stasis since Blair became leader of the Labour party. The Blairite consensus is still with us.
There's nothing wrong with PFI deals in principle, it's just that under Labour they were spectacularly badly negotiated. It's not a surprise - Labour were (and remain) supremely uninterested in value for money, so of course they didn't get value for money.
Alistair gives a good summary of why I disagree with you a couple of posts below yours.
Theoretically contracts could be written better but Edinburgh Trams show why it doesn't work in practice. Edinburgh council wrote a good, fixed price contract, The private contractor who took on the contract couldn't do it and went bust and Edinburgh was left with a useless half finished tram system and dug up roads.
Wasn't a major problem ground conditions (i.e. utilities not being where they were supposed to be)?
The major problem is that it was a ridiculously stupid idea in the first place especially when it parallels the existing railway for 99% of it's route. An extension stub to Edinburgh Airport would have cost less than £20m including the station costs.
Well, I agree with that, at least for what Edinburgh ended up with. The initially-proposed phase 1 (e.g. including the Leith arm) made more sense, at least to me.
There is a good argument that the £10bn Crossrail project should have been built in Edinburgh (using the same UK Wide Infrastructure funding).
I'm not sure there's a good argument, especially as much of Crossrail's funding is coming from a business rate supplement on London businesses. Somewhat controversially, I might add. And about half is coming from the GLA/TfL, which is debt that passengers will (allegedly?) have to pay off.
Miliband is going more and more extreme Marxist as the campaign progresses.
As Venezuela already exists, its a know fact that if he, by some chance wins and enacts what he says, the economy will completely bomb. It must be getting time to start hoarding the toilet rolls to minimise the risk to personal hygiene after May 7th.
Hmmm. The problem with that logic is that you could equally say something like "Tories posturing more and more as the party that will serve business through deregulation, liberalised flows of capital and preserving tax incentives for globally mobile 'wealth creators' to base in the UK". As the 2007-8 financial crash happened, it's a known fact that another gigantic worldwide financial crisis will result if they are elected.
If it wasn't for our election rules on 5 year terms, the UK doesn't actually need an election. If it was a plc, you wouldn't change the leadership & strategy when its really starting to work. And you certainly wouldn't want to hand over the boardroom to a workers collective & over grown student politicians.
PLCs are run like China. Leadership changes and strategy are agreed by the leadership. Democracy doesn't come into. It is a defendable effective model.
Is that what you are proposing for the UK?
Nope
When things need changing for poor performance, the shareholders do chuck out the old management and bring a new lot in. If things are going well or the changes made by the new management are starting to work, you carry on.
Take supermarkets as a comparison:
Tesco & Morrisons - old CEO out, new ones in place = election change
Waitrose - doing fine, plan working = no need for election
Sainsbury's under Justin King after 5 years = the plans working, no need for change
The UK's like Sainsbury's was a while ago.
Shareholders have an Annual General Meeting. Sounds like you support the Chartists call for annual Parliaments. How else do you decide whether things are going well and you want the current management to continue but by having a vote?
The point is we don't actually need an election now. Changing anything beyond slight touches on the tiller is too risky
I guess that the great thing about democracy is that if the electorate agree with that we should have a landslide for the incumbent. And if they don't it's probably a good thing we had an election. Unless you're saying it's too risky to change things even if it's the will of the population of the country, that is.
If Labour are ahead, I'll drown my sorrows with something of exceptionally high quality.
John, the Sunday Times are predicting your boy, Dominic Raab as a leadership contender, what do you think?
If ICM is giving the Tories a 5% lead, then there will be no vacancy. Right ?
Cameron would likely still go mid-parliament. He has been leader for a long time, and might be conscious of the physical and mental health risks of staying too long.
It really looks as if the Tories have lost the GE in terms of forming the next Government - they really needed to be making significant headway by now and they are simply not doing so. I'm expecting the betting markets to move towards a dead heat this week in terms of total Con and Lab seats.
Miliband is going more and more extreme Marxist as the campaign progresses.
As Venezuela already exists, its a know fact that if he, by some chance wins and enacts what he says, the economy will completely bomb. It must be getting time to start hoarding the toilet rolls to minimise the risk to personal hygiene after May 7th.
Hmmm. The problem with that logic is that you could equally say something like "Tories posturing more and more as the party that will serve business through deregulation, liberalised flows of capital and preserving tax incentives for globally mobile 'wealth creators' to base in the UK". As the 2007-8 financial crash happened, it's a known fact that another gigantic worldwide financial crisis will result if they are elected.
If it wasn't for our election rules on 5 year terms, the UK doesn't actually need an election. If it was a plc, you wouldn't change the leadership & strategy when its really starting to work. And you certainly wouldn't want to hand over the boardroom to a workers collective & over grown student politicians.
PLCs are run like China. Leadership changes and strategy are agreed by the leadership. Democracy doesn't come into. It is a defendable effective model.
Is that what you are proposing for the UK?
Nope
When things need changing for poor performance, the shareholders do chuck out the old management and bring a new lot in. If things are going well or the changes made by the new management are starting to work, you carry on.
Take supermarkets as a comparison:
Tesco & Morrisons - old CEO out, new ones in place = election change
Waitrose - doing fine, plan working = no need for election
Sainsbury's under Justin King after 5 years = the plans working, no need for change
The UK's like Sainsbury's was a while ago.
Shareholders have an Annual General Meeting. Sounds like you support the Chartists call for annual Parliaments. How else do you decide whether things are going well and you want the current management to continue but by having a vote?
The point is we don't actually need an election now. Changing anything beyond slight touches on the tiller is too risky
You must be a big fan of China. I think you can get a very decent economic situation with a benevolent(ish) dictatorship, but the social price is very high.
I still can't believe people mocked my guess of SNP 52 seats as ludicrously high.
The Scotland only polls (54-22) are moving in the exact opposite direction of YG and Populus Scotland subsamples.
SNP 47 Lab 36
Sub samples are not weighted. Only the total is weighted.
Not entirely correct , they are weighted for turnout for example but not by party ID or past vote or other weightings specific to a poll .
How does that work ? For example, if the turnout in the NE was 55% and SE 70%, will they up the SE weighting and lower the NE weighting and then do all the other weightings ?
Look at the different figures for individual parties in Tables 2 and 3 . For example after weighting , Conservatives in Scotland went down from 12 voters to 10 and Lib Dems from 13 voters to 10 . The change is down to slightly more certainty to vote by Conservatives .
How the Conservatives orchestrated the letter from business leaders - and got it wrong
Karen Brady has spearheaded efforts to persuade small business-owners to sign a letter claiming that a Labour government would be too risky for Britain.
If Labour are ahead, I'll drown my sorrows with something of exceptionally high quality.
John, the Sunday Times are predicting your boy, Dominic Raab as a leadership contender, what do you think?
If ICM is giving the Tories a 5% lead, then there will be no vacancy. Right ?
Righter than Right.
My own prediction for May 7th, having been involved in far too many elections (first became a Councillor in 1979 and it only seems like a day ago...what happens when you get old) in my time is that the Blue Lovelies will be ahead by between 4 and 5% and that Dave will still be PM, probably in a renewed coalition with the Orange ones.
(Means I lose one of my bets with tim..sobs...but should win the rest).
Among the unusual feedback from election emails I got this one today from someone I'd written to as Ms ... rather than "Sally":
"I also really appreciate your use of formal address, given that we've never met. I know that's quite trivial, but it does make me feel that you respect me as an equal. Thank you."
I'm conscious that many younger people don't even know the last names of their friends, but it still irritates me a bit when parties and NGOs send me computer-generated stuff saying "Nick, you can help change the future of..." The unsolicited chumminess strikes an entirely false note to my ears. Is that a common view, or just a fusty anachronism? Presumably it's all market-researched...
Among the unusual feedback from election emails I got this one today from someone I'd written to as Ms ... rather than "Sally":
"I also really appreciate your use of formal address, given that we've never met. I know that's quite trivial, but it does make me feel that you respect me as an equal. Thank you."
I'm conscious that many younger people don't even know the last names of their friends, but it still irritates me a bit when parties and NGOs send me computer-generated stuff saying "Nick, you can help change the future of..." The unsolicited chumminess strikes an entirely false note to my ears. Is that a common view, or just a fusty anachronism? Presumably it's all market-researched...
It's not fusty. It's just good manners.
I think it *was* good manners.
Manners have changed, and will continue to change.
Good manners never change. I think it good manners to ask someone you don't know how they want to be addressed, rather than assume intimacy, which might be seen by some as aggressive or a bit forward, a bit like someone standing very close to you in a public place.
It doesn't cost anything and doesn't take any time either. And it makes every day social interactions much pleasanter, rather than a lot of enforced and patronising chumminess, which often seems to me to be the antithesis of real politeness.
PFI may have been one of the worst policy mistakes of the last Labour government in my opinion, but I think the current government are still signing new PFI deals.
It's one of the things that leads me to think that British politics has been essentially in stasis since Blair became leader of the Labour party. The Blairite consensus is still with us.
There's nothing wrong with PFI deals in principle, it's just that under Labour they were spectacularly badly negotiated. It's not a surprise - Labour were (and remain) supremely uninterested in value for money, so of course they didn't get value for money.
Alistair gives a good summary of why I disagree with you a couple of posts below yours.
Theoretically contracts could be written better but Edinburgh Trams show why it doesn't work in practice. Edinburgh council wrote a good, fixed price contract, The private contractor who took on the contract couldn't do it and went bust and Edinburgh was left with a useless half finished tram system and dug up roads.
Wasn't a major problem ground conditions (i.e. utilities not being where they were supposed to be)?
Basically yes, ground cnditions messed everything up. But there was other enormous cock-ups as well, for instance the track had to be relaid down Princess Street as it wasn't up to spec
Incidentally, I have a friend who used to work for a company that does maintenance on the domestic Gas network.
It might well scare you pantless to know the depth of ignorance about exactly where all our gas pipes are. Maps aren't just off by a meter or two, they are often completely missing or entirely notional
Wasn't just the track below spec., there was the problem of the previous tracks laid for the horse drawn, cable and electric trams laid down between 1871 to 1956, the cellars extending far under Princes Street (I've been in some of them), the cabling and pipes from many different services (a lot by companies and businesses many years out of existence and memory).
Then there were sites where old and ancient grave yards were discovered.
I agree that the maps of gas pipes are inaccurate. When I worked for Scottish Gas, I discovered a 5 year old housing estate of 2000 or so houses that hadn't received a bill. Transco had forgotten it.
Wasn't a major problem ground conditions (i.e. utilities not being where they were supposed to be)?
Basically yes, ground cnditions messed everything up. But there was other enormous cock-ups as well, for instance the track had to be relaid down Princess Street as it wasn't up to spec
Incidentally, I have a friend who used to work for a company that does maintenance on the domestic Gas network.
It might well scare you pantless to know the depth of ignorance about exactly where all our gas pipes are. Maps aren't just off by a meter or two, they are often completely missing or entirely notional
I know from personal experience. ;-)
But gas pipes are nothing. A couple of years ago a piling rig hit a tube line in London because the tube was not on the maps the contractor or council were using ...
I generally feel sorry for contractors who run into trouble with groundworks, especially with unexpected ground conditions and misplaced utilities. It doesn't matter how many test bores you've drilled, or how good your utility maps are, the ground can always surprise you.
Quite, I'm really not a fan of Essex CC, but I feel rather sorry them in one instance. They've got it in the neck because they closed a road to replace a bridge for a few months, and it then took over a year to replace.
It turns out that this was partly due to floods (not a factor they can really control) and an electricity cable no one (including the utilities) knew was there. They then had to wait a couple of months for UKPN to sort it out. There were various other factors, including the fact that the ground conditions turned out to be different from those they'd found when testing before starting construction.
Every time they had to have a rethink or had another delay, the specialist sub-contractors had to rearrange their schedule, pushing completion even further back.
Of course, the council got the blame (in fairness, they didn't really tell anyone what was going on - I eventually found the reasons on the website of a local residents' association).
Comments
What are the implications for populus and Yougov if they are totally wrong?
Mrs J did not take my surname when we got married (a decision I am fine with, it will make the divorce cheaper! ;-) ), and it's surprising how many people ask for a 'Mr ', using her surname.
It's a mess, and IMHO people should not get too upset by people getting it wrong with good intentions.
As an aside, a few years back we could not think of a male equivalent of a mistress. In the names of equality, we came up with 'mastress'.
"Oh, that's Mike. He's Sally's mastress".
Con 33 (+1) Lab 36 (+1) UKIP 14 (nc) LD 8 (nc) Greens 5 (nc)
Almost certainly I would have thought.
'Did I miss the constitutional amendment pursuant to which buy-to-let lenders acquired a veto power over the Queen-in-Parliament?'
I think you missed the point that when this was pointed out there was a rapid u-turn and now it will only apply to new mortgages taken out after the legislation has become law & restrictive conditions changed after negotiations with lenders.
So it won't effect existing buy to let landlords,yet another of Ed's fantasy policies exposed.
It's not just about borrowing costs, any more than it is when private companies enter into turnkey construction contracts or long-term support contracts.
I'd say the stakes are higher for ICM than they are for Tory / labour this time.
What are the implications for populus and Yougov if they are totally wrong?
It's easier to be part of the crowd than far outside it. IF ICM's 6 lead is correct they better start recruiting more staff
If it wasn't for our election rules on 5 year terms, the UK doesn't actually need an election. If it was a plc, you wouldn't change the leadership & strategy when its really starting to work.
And you certainly wouldn't want to hand over the boardroom to a workers collective & over grown student politicians.
...unless of course the current plc leadership have abolished boom & bust...?
http://www.theguardian.com/business/2006/may/10/highereducation.businessofresearch
http://www.building.co.uk/amec’s-losses-on-a13-road-contract-put-at-£9m/3073660.article
http://www.constructionenquirer.com/2015/03/03/costain-profits-dented-by-losses-on-manchester-waste-pfi/
Scared the f'ing crap out of me.
10 more Populuses to polling day.
The problem comes with the 'O' OF DBFO: operating a road is relatively simple. A school is probably an order of magnitude more complex, and a hospital two orders.
Is that what you are proposing for the UK?
SNP 47 Lab 36
£/$ rates are already built into the prices, or don't you think professional investors notice what you notice?
It's my money, and I think other investors will, like me, look at Scotland and say "Nah, not the place to be for the next 15 years."
Let's see where Aggreko and Weir share prices are in 6 months, shall we?
ROFL....
If Labour are ahead, I'll drown my sorrows with something of exceptionally high quality.
SNP 62 Lab 12 Con 9 Green 7 UKIP 4 LD 4
"Polls of horny Scottish gays have never let us down before"
NSFW
Incidentally, I have a friend who used to work for a company that does maintenance on the domestic Gas network.
It might well scare you pantless to know the depth of ignorance about exactly where all our gas pipes are. Maps aren't just off by a meter or two, they are often completely missing or entirely notional
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/11565391/Lord-Mandelsons-firm-suggests-Labour-will-do-a-deal-with-SNP.html
whereas the providers were thinking much more about the ongoing revenue streams from maintenance and services as much as the building itself?
I seem to recall some rather good (for the providers) annual inflation clauses on these services too - a contract signed in 2000 with an annual uplift of "RPI or 5%, whichever is higher" probably looked innocuous at the time but is now generating significantly more real terms income than the govt negotiators would have thought possible 15 years ago.
Edit: Point also made downthread by @JossiasJessop - Schools and especially hospitals are orders of magnitude more complex to run than the roads and bridges where PFI originated.
When things need changing for poor performance, the shareholders do chuck out the old management and bring a new lot in. If things are going well or the changes made by the new management are starting to work, you carry on.
Take supermarkets as a comparison:
Tesco & Morrisons - old CEO out, new ones in place = election change
Waitrose - doing fine, plan working = no need for election
Sainsbury's under Justin King after 5 years = the plans working, no need for change
The UK's like Sainsbury's was a while ago.
Sadly West of Scotland has not got rid of it yet, I live in hope but doubt I will see it totally eradicated.
Con 420 (England and Wales)
Labour 425 (England and Wales)
Wales and SW lumped in together unfortunately, but the Populus indicates a Tory lead in England.
Manners have changed, and will continue to change.
http://blog.whatscotlandthinks.org/2015/04/panelbase-confirms-the-snp-lead-has-grown/
Apologies if I'm repeating something previously seen.
But gas pipes are nothing. A couple of years ago a piling rig hit a tube line in London because the tube was not on the maps the contractor or council were using ...
http://www.constructionenquirer.com/2013/03/12/piling-firm-all-foundations-pierced-london-rail-tunnel/
https://assets.digital.cabinet-office.gov.uk/media/547c8fb940f0b60241000157/140213_R032014_Old_Street.pdf
Ooops.
I generally feel sorry for contractors who run into trouble with groundworks, especially with unexpected ground conditions and misplaced utilities. It doesn't matter how many test bores you've drilled, or how good your utility maps are, the ground can always surprise you.
https://www.london.gov.uk/priorities/business-economy/vision-and-strategy/focus-areas/crossrail-business-rate-supplement
http://www.crossrail.co.uk/about-us/funding
I'm expecting the betting markets to move towards a dead heat this week in terms of total Con and Lab seats.
How the Conservatives orchestrated the letter from business leaders - and got it wrong
Karen Brady has spearheaded efforts to persuade small business-owners to sign a letter claiming that a Labour government would be too risky for Britain.
No wonder Cameron supports West Ham now !
My own prediction for May 7th, having been involved in far too many elections (first became a Councillor in 1979 and it only seems like a day ago...what happens when you get old) in my time is that the Blue Lovelies will be ahead by between 4 and 5% and that Dave will still be PM, probably in a renewed coalition with the Orange ones.
(Means I lose one of my bets with tim..sobs...but should win the rest).
It doesn't cost anything and doesn't take any time either. And it makes every day social interactions much pleasanter, rather than a lot of enforced and patronising chumminess, which often seems to me to be the antithesis of real politeness.
Chestnut's poll deconstructions are one of the great things about PB.
Then there were sites where old and ancient grave yards were discovered.
I agree that the maps of gas pipes are inaccurate. When I worked for Scottish Gas, I discovered a 5 year old housing estate of 2000 or so houses that hadn't received a bill. Transco had forgotten it.
It turns out that this was partly due to floods (not a factor they can really control) and an electricity cable no one (including the utilities) knew was there. They then had to wait a couple of months for UKPN to sort it out. There were various other factors, including the fact that the ground conditions turned out to be different from those they'd found when testing before starting construction.
Every time they had to have a rethink or had another delay, the specialist sub-contractors had to rearrange their schedule, pushing completion even further back.
Of course, the council got the blame (in fairness, they didn't really tell anyone what was going on - I eventually found the reasons on the website of a local residents' association).