Can't read the article due to the paywall, but in general the strike was a disaster for all sides IMHO.
The NUM leadership was more interested in revolutionary change than protecting the interests of its own workers. But in the end they were right about the closure programme.
Equally the NCB had totally incompetent leadership in the 80s. Even their investment programmes were a joke. They sunk a hugely expensive new pit in Leicestershire without properly looking at the terrible geological conditions. It closed after a couple of years in production.
The real death knell for the industry was when electricity was privatised. They should have sold the Notts pits with the power stations as one package, instead the Notts miners got no reward for standing up to Scargill and their pits were shut too.
Now would be a good time to start looking at reforming in-work benefits.
Yep. Not easy but needs doing and the economic fundamentals are better now than ever. I would raise the min wage so everyone benefits, offset by reducing employer NI - the Jobs Tax. Also in the too difficult pile that really need sorting out : Steps in income tax - 40% rate is at too low an income, huge steps at 50k and 100k need ironing out. Planning reform - we need new towns with services not just a few houses here and there. There's plenty of brownfield and ex-MoD land lying around or really bite the bullet and build another Milton Keynes somewhere with equally good road and rail links. Housing - especially in London. Councils should sell their most valuable properties and invest in more affordable social housing. Health - Provide Employer NI breaks for small and medium sized firms that provide heath insurance to staff - If BUPA see a million new members overnight they will take care of the investment required themselves as well as relieving pressure on the NHS.
I wonder which white rabbit Mr Osborne will pull out of his hat on 8th July?
Steps in income tax - 40% rate is at too low an income, huge steps at 50k and 100k need ironing out.
I disagree 40% starts particularly low, and that's really just a political choice - mainly an assertion either way. It certainly doesn't produce any significant behavioural changes. The steps at 50k and 100k might need looking at, but the latter is poltiically difficult since any chanegs would inevitably make some six-figure earners better off.
Planning reform - we need new towns with services not just a few houses here and there. There's plenty of brownfield and ex-MoD land lying around or really bite the bullet and build another Milton Keynes somewhere with equally good road and rail links.
Health - Provide Employer NI breaks for small and medium sized firms that provide heath insurance to staff - If BUPA see a million new members overnight they will take care of the investment required themselves as well as relieving pressure on the NHS.
An intriguing one. But a bit like tax-breaks to private schools all over again, and wouldn't help A&E and acute intakes which are the most strained part of the NHS. Difficult to see the money coming from the NHS for this, sine that would invite a comparison with the cost of keeping certain services running, and expensive from anywhere else with unclear results.
Dangerous to assume rise in private insurance will reduce pressure on NHS in short term. Where do you think they will get staff from? What effect do you think this would have on pay pressure for retention of existing staff? And yet it would have no effect reducing demand for key services like Emergency or Intensive Care where private providers don't operate.
I suspect in long run a greater proportion of public paying for private providers will reduce strain on NHS to some extent (though much of that money will be spent on care that would otherwise have been rationed as insufficient value for money) but in short term I don't think that's true at all.
In the shorter term presumably there are much bigger gains to be made from sorting out the interface between social care and health care and this has been one of the areas where austerity has actually happened and where it turned out not just fat had to be cut.
Have been thinking about who would be a decent figurehead for the NO EU campaign. How about Michael Portillo? I'm sure he said a few weeks ago on This Week he's going to vote No. Articulate, popular but with a front line political background.
Can you imagine Portillo working with Farage?
Until Farage agrees to be locked in an underground bunker with a few dozen DVD boxed sets for the duration of the campaign, who else is going to step forward?
Well this was on the assumption that Farage gets sidelined for the campaign. If he's anywhere near the leadership of the No campaign then its all over IMHO.
Owen Jones, learning nothing and passing through the looking glass on CIF except you can't comment on his lunacy. You can though sit back and relax in the comfortable thought that people like these are Labours future and will prevent Labour governments.
You can indeed comment on his lunacy. You can even respond with more. An example:
Any increase in the minimum wage will see a corresponding increase in consumption (look up marginal propensity to spend). This increase in consumption drives demand up, resulting in job creation! The rise in the cost of production results in producers raising prices ie inflation, but it will be proportionally smaller than the wage increase. 10% increase in the minimum wage could result in inflation of 3% meaning in real terms it is a 7% increase. Also the inflationary pressure dissipates quickly. Wage growth induced unemployment is a story oligarchs use to scare little kids before bed.
So, bunging up the minimum wage increases employment and makes us all more wealthy. Might as well triple the minimum wage leading to 100% employment and everyone with cash to spare (hell, quadruple it and we can all have 72" TVs and holidays in the Seychelles). Surely irrefutable and Osborne must act now!
Diane Abbott has nominated Stella Creasy, rumoured that Madeleine Moon will too. Five more needed in the next hour.
Labour is going to look pretty daft if it just has two candidates on the ballot and a whole host of contenders splitting the nominations at 20-something.
Diane Abbott has nominated Stella Creasy, rumoured that Madeleine Moon will too. Five more needed in the next hour.
Labour is going to look pretty daft if it just has two candidates on the ballot and a whole host of contenders splitting the nominations at 20-something.
Source? Just so I can follow it, I don't doubt that's correct.
Unemployment down again except in SNP run Scotland where it is UP again !
That's only because Scotland is crushed beneath Westminster's booted heel. Didn't you get the memo?
Don't diss the Nats. They are the Rosa Parks of British politics.
Fighting over where they can sit.
The long struggle for freedom goes on
My original comment was offered in the spirit of complete sincerity. I can't be a BOOer and not support Scottish independence, can I? That would be inconsistent.
I agree with that. I do believe it is illogical to support BOO but oppose Scottish Independence.
It is very difficult to see how Labour address this problem of being perceived to be careless about spending public money. It is so deep in their DNA that more spending is good and they have so little focus on value for money.
I wonder if it even undermined their attack on tory cuts. As Keiran says people believed that there was so much slack in public spending that the cuts were not a problem.
We had a Parliament where nearly 1m people came off the public pay roll. Some of this was reallocation of numbers but that is still an incredible number of people. Did anyone notice? What services that the general public had contact with actually reduced?
It may be that the cuts in this Parliament will be more into the muscle and be more obvious but the exasperation of the public that so much money was wasted will remain. I think this is their biggest brand weakness and Keiran has a warning that it needs to be addressed early in this Parliament, not just in the campaign. That is largely what he is talking about when he says "you've got to show that in your guts you hate wasting money". Its a real challenge and I don't see any of the candidates talking about it.
Agree with all that. Labour needs a clause 4 moment on public spending. They need to start by acknowledging that they have been lying for 70 years about the Tories wanting to privatise or dissolve the NHS, that none of it was ever true, and that the Tories have in fact done a better job than Labour. By not fecking the economy as we always do, Labour must admit, the Tories have ensured there is money for it.
They must then acknowledge that the main lesson they have learnt from 1997 to 2015 is that firehosing money at the public sector does not equal better services, noting that a million people off the public payroll has had no discernible impact on service delivery.
They must then accept that the settled view of the electorate is that the goal of government must be the smallest possible tax take consistent with adequate delivery of services that are deliverable in no better way. The logical corollary of this is to declare Labour to be a low tax party dedicated to getting public spending down to 35% of GDP or less. From this will flow the kind of economic growth that we need, rather the tax, borrow and piss away bubble that led Brown to mistake himself for an economic genius.
The thing is, I don't think Labour is ready for that and won't be for perhaps another 20 to 30 years. There is a cancerous strain of leftism that honestly and genuinely thinks that, if you can't use power to feck the economy and settle scores with people you envy and hate, there is no point in being in power at all.
Agree about the interface between health and social care. There's a number of complex interlocking issues and services involved, probably needs the sort of approach that IDS took with regard to welfare, being well thought through first then implemented carefully.
Having said that the Manchester trial of giving the council the NHS budget might prove to be a concept that can be rolled out to more urban areas.
Also on the too difficult list are energy and transport - both of which are related to planning, a process that needs to be streamlined in the case of major infrastructure projects. My proposal there would be to pay a big premium to aquire land for runways and railways, rather than see the process bogged down in planning appeals which only benefit lawyers.
We will need Heathrow's 4th runway before the 3rd one is ever completed unless we sort this out. Or let's be really innovative and use Northolt or Gatwick as a new runway with adequate transport links - a Shanghai-style Maglev between Heathrow and Gatwick would probably work, let's not be afraid of thinking outside the box!
Astonishingly calm and collected interview from a teenager who had his arm bitten off by a shark just three days ago. I doubt I'd be as level-headed. Why are young americans always more eloquent than their British counterparts.
"Failure to reach an agreement would... mark the beginning of a painful course that would lead initially to a Greek default and ultimately to the country's exit from the euro area and, most likely, from the European Union," the Bank of Greece said in a report.
I believe the EU is inherently wrong, broken and getting worse. I do not think the same is necessarily true of the UK.
Mr. Betting, huzzah! Hope you enjoy it. There's an off-chance the second story [same world/characters but stand-alone rather than a sequel] will be out this year.
"But that gap of just seven names is bigger than it looks – just 30 MPs remain who could nominate. In reality, just 22 can. The four candidates for the leadership can’t be seen to take sides in the race for their number two. Neither can Ed Miliband, the departed leader, nor Harriet Harman, his replacement pro tem. Jon Cryer, the chair of the parliamentary Labour party, and Rosie Winterton, the Chief Whip, both have to work with whichever candidates come out on top and will stay out of both races.
The 22 includes MPs like Roger Godsiff, who has never used his nomination in any Labour leadership contest. The ten nominations needed by Ben Bradshaw and Angela Eagle, while mathematically plausible, are practically impossible. Rushanara Ali, who is even further back, with 24, is effectively out of the race."
It looks like a two or possibly three horse race. My betting career - and anyone else who took the header recommendations - would prefer two!
Burnham wasn't on the list of people I saw earlier though. Has he nominated?!
Just turned on BBC News and we have another improvement in unemployment. We then have Labour attacking the figures as "worrying" and "young people figures not as good as the rest". Now I understand that they think their best bet is to dive straight into attacking the new govt but they really should STFU and spend their time sorting themselves out. But why should I point out and "interrupt the enemy while it is making mistakes" said Napoleon.
Unemployment down again except in SNP run Scotland where it is UP again !
That's only because Scotland is crushed beneath Westminster's booted heel. Didn't you get the memo?
Don't diss the Nats. They are the Rosa Parks of British politics.
Fighting over where they can sit.
The long struggle for freedom goes on
My original comment was offered in the spirit of complete sincerity. I can't be a BOOer and not support Scottish independence, can I? That would be inconsistent.
I agree with that. I do believe it is illogical to support BOO but oppose Scottish Independence.
Perhaps I'm guilty of the wrong sort of nationalism - cultural not civic, I await the boos - but I'm not sure it is all about logic and identity matters too.
If Scotland desires independence then good luck to them (though who "Scotland" is and what "they" desire is clearly multifaceted). But it is not illogical for someone who feels British to decline independence even if they have little truck with the "London government".
Similarly if I had a strong European identity and felt a personal commitment to the European Project I'd want in, regardless of incompetence or corruption. Reform is easier from the inside and all that.
But it is also perfectly arguable that the EU makes us better off but we should still leave as the ever closer union, the political destiny of Europe, does not match our own national image or desires.
The key problem with this is that through the Unions Labour is closely tied to the producer interest.
If you are a worker in the Public sector then your interest is to have higher wages and more headcount (opportunities for promotion). Greater efficiency often = redundancies and pay freezes
If you are a consumer of Public services then efficiency is very much in your interest as it leads to same service/lower price (tax) or same price/better service.
Comments
Ist Labour Leadership Hustings
The NUM leadership was more interested in revolutionary change than protecting the interests of its own workers. But in the end they were right about the closure programme.
Equally the NCB had totally incompetent leadership in the 80s. Even their investment programmes were a joke. They sunk a hugely expensive new pit in Leicestershire without properly looking at the terrible geological conditions. It closed after a couple of years in production.
The real death knell for the industry was when electricity was privatised. They should have sold the Notts pits with the power stations as one package, instead the Notts miners got no reward for standing up to Scargill and their pits were shut too.
I would raise the min wage so everyone benefits, offset by reducing employer NI - the Jobs Tax.
Also in the too difficult pile that really need sorting out :
Steps in income tax - 40% rate is at too low an income, huge steps at 50k and 100k need ironing out.
Planning reform - we need new towns with services not just a few houses here and there. There's plenty of brownfield and ex-MoD land lying around or really bite the bullet and build another Milton Keynes somewhere with equally good road and rail links.
Housing - especially in London. Councils should sell their most valuable properties and invest in more affordable social housing.
Health - Provide Employer NI breaks for small and medium sized firms that provide heath insurance to staff - If BUPA see a million new members overnight they will take care of the investment required themselves as well as relieving pressure on the NHS.
I wonder which white rabbit Mr Osborne will pull out of his hat on 8th July?
Wrong headed about so many things so long, at least he is consistent.
I suspect in long run a greater proportion of public paying for private providers will reduce strain on NHS to some extent (though much of that money will be spent on care that would otherwise have been rationed as insufficient value for money) but in short term I don't think that's true at all.
In the shorter term presumably there are much bigger gains to be made from sorting out the interface between social care and health care and this has been one of the areas where austerity has actually happened and where it turned out not just fat had to be cut.
Serves you right for spending time beating me to it when you could have prioritised getting your gag in first
Even in the long term I'd worry the government would be paying for places that didn't get used by people.
I think there were 30 left to nominate when I went to bed last night.
On basic observation Cooper (Y) and Kendall are leadership contenders.
Reeves is on maternity leave, and there would be issues with Harriet and Ed nominating.
Healey dropped out of this race saying he wanted to get others on the ballot, so he's in, but Creagh might be out.
Lammy and Abbott are mayoral contenders, but nominated leaders, so they might be in, but it's a more complex equation.
http://www.libdemvoice.org/video-watch-farron-and-lamb-in-action-at-leadership-hustings-46453.html#utm_source=tweet&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=twitter
Any increase in the minimum wage will see a corresponding increase in consumption (look up marginal propensity to spend). This increase in consumption drives demand up, resulting in job creation! The rise in the cost of production results in producers raising prices ie inflation, but it will be proportionally smaller than the wage increase. 10% increase in the minimum wage could result in inflation of 3% meaning in real terms it is a 7% increase. Also the inflationary pressure dissipates quickly. Wage growth induced unemployment is a story oligarchs use to scare little kids before bed.
So, bunging up the minimum wage increases employment and makes us all more wealthy. Might as well triple the minimum wage leading to 100% employment and everyone with cash to spare (hell, quadruple it and we can all have 72" TVs and holidays in the Seychelles). Surely irrefutable and Osborne must act now!
Labour is going to look pretty daft if it just has two candidates on the ballot and a whole host of contenders splitting the nominations at 20-something.
They must then acknowledge that the main lesson they have learnt from 1997 to 2015 is that firehosing money at the public sector does not equal better services, noting that a million people off the public payroll has had no discernible impact on service delivery.
They must then accept that the settled view of the electorate is that the goal of government must be the smallest possible tax take consistent with adequate delivery of services that are deliverable in no better way. The logical corollary of this is to declare Labour to be a low tax party dedicated to getting public spending down to 35% of GDP or less. From this will flow the kind of economic growth that we need, rather the tax, borrow and piss away bubble that led Brown to mistake himself for an economic genius.
The thing is, I don't think Labour is ready for that and won't be for perhaps another 20 to 30 years. There is a cancerous strain of leftism that honestly and genuinely thinks that, if you can't use power to feck the economy and settle scores with people you envy and hate, there is no point in being in power at all.
Having said that the Manchester trial of giving the council the NHS budget might prove to be a concept that can be rolled out to more urban areas.
Also on the too difficult list are energy and transport - both of which are related to planning, a process that needs to be streamlined in the case of major infrastructure projects. My proposal there would be to pay a big premium to aquire land for runways and railways, rather than see the process bogged down in planning appeals which only benefit lawyers.
We will need Heathrow's 4th runway before the 3rd one is ever completed unless we sort this out. Or let's be really innovative and use Northolt or Gatwick as a new runway with adequate transport links - a Shanghai-style Maglev between Heathrow and Gatwick would probably work, let's not be afraid of thinking outside the box!
The next thread is scheduled to go up at 11:45.
And it is a humdinger (no it ain't about AV)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-33161088
"Failure to reach an agreement would... mark the beginning of a painful course that would lead initially to a Greek default and ultimately to the country's exit from the euro area and, most likely, from the European Union," the Bank of Greece said in a report.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-33164924
I believe the EU is inherently wrong, broken and getting worse. I do not think the same is necessarily true of the UK.
Mr. Betting, huzzah! Hope you enjoy it. There's an off-chance the second story [same world/characters but stand-alone rather than a sequel] will be out this year.
The 22 includes MPs like Roger Godsiff, who has never used his nomination in any Labour leadership contest. The ten nominations needed by Ben Bradshaw and Angela Eagle, while mathematically plausible, are practically impossible. Rushanara Ali, who is even further back, with 24, is effectively out of the race."
It looks like a two or possibly three horse race. My betting career - and anyone else who took the header recommendations - would prefer two!
Burnham wasn't on the list of people I saw earlier though. Has he nominated?!
We then have Labour attacking the figures as "worrying" and "young people figures not as good as the rest".
Now I understand that they think their best bet is to dive straight into attacking the new govt but they really should STFU and spend their time sorting themselves out. But why should I point out and "interrupt the enemy while it is making mistakes" said Napoleon.
If Scotland desires independence then good luck to them (though who "Scotland" is and what "they" desire is clearly multifaceted). But it is not illogical for someone who feels British to decline independence even if they have little truck with the "London government".
Similarly if I had a strong European identity and felt a personal commitment to the European Project I'd want in, regardless of incompetence or corruption. Reform is easier from the inside and all that.
But it is also perfectly arguable that the EU makes us better off but we should still leave as the ever closer union, the political destiny of Europe, does not match our own national image or desires.
Eh?
https://account.betfair.com/regpay-myaccount/premiumcharge/summary.html
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/33162513
They want to switch from 13" to 18" rims, though. Boo hiss to that.
New Thread
The key problem with this is that through the Unions Labour is closely tied to the producer interest.
If you are a worker in the Public sector then your interest is to have higher wages and more headcount (opportunities for promotion). Greater efficiency often = redundancies and pay freezes
If you are a consumer of Public services then efficiency is very much in your interest as it leads to same service/lower price (tax) or same price/better service.