Because most of the EU countries are in Schengen and so there is nothing to stop them simply moving around Europe.
You miss the point. Why are they treated as EU citizens? They aren't. They are Syrians, or Malians or whatever the hell a citizen of the Democratic Republic of Congo is called. Just because they get hauled out the sea in international waters and taken to Italy should not give them any rights to wider citizenship of the EU.
They are being given temporary sanctuary, nothing more.
@Peston 17m17 minutes ago Everyone I chat with in Athens thinks Greece will vote "no" today. Not scientific. Momentous if true #greecereferendum #Greece
Oxipalyptic.
You know that they have an Oxi Day in Greece (October 28) to mark the day that they refused entry to the German tanks in 1940.
Perhaps "Oxi" has a resonance to voters that "No" doesn't...
Peston may be confused by the way they shake their heads.
The last 7 words are superfluous.
It will be a yes although it is very far from clear what they are saying yes to, whether it is still available and who would then negotiate on the part of Greece.
Peston may be confused by the way they shake their heads.
The last 7 words are superfluous.
It will be a yes although it is very far from clear what they are saying yes to, whether it is still available and who would then negotiate on the part of Greece.
The difference is striking. The FT this weekend - along with many, if not most, UK commentators - equate a No vote to an exit from the Euro. Yet whilst they are split on the referendum, Greeks want to be in the Euro 3:1. Which means almost half No voters believe they can stay in the Euro as Tsipras says.
I think we need to return them to their point of origin as I have said. Nothing else works. The flaw in Farron's well meaning Liberalism, much though I respect it, is will we take another 60K next month, the month after and the month after that?
Africa has improved in some respects but is still spinning off hundreds of thousands of people who believe that there has to be a better life somewhere else. They are right. They will have a better life if they make the promised land. It is a difficult issue.
I agree with that, although we will no doubt have to contend with pictures on our screens of dead bodies on Libyan beaches (quite possibly killed by the very people smugglers who sent them on their way in the first place - their very lucrative business stops if we in the West fight them.)
I have a solution. Each EU country mans a station within Africa to process asylum seekers. Those whose cases they accept get to live in the country that processed that claim (and ONLY that country - no general right to travel across the EU). I suspect qualifying for asylum would suddenly become quite tricky.
Anybody else travelling into Europe on a rickety craft will be deported back to the nearest African landfall. Alternatively, they can be treated as the criminals they are for trying to get round our entirely valid immigration control. (As someone who has travelled extensively on the continent, try getting INTO Africa without a valid entry visa, and see how well you are treated....)
Unbelievably I agree with you
People smugglers would happily kill their clients or leave them to die as soon as they have got hold of their money.
IF you leave British consulates/embassies to sift potential immigrants then often this is beyond their capability and capacity. If this is done by each EU country, then there will be very little agreement as to how an acceptable immigrant will be defined (even if the EU produces guidelines). Once an immigrant has an EU visa/passport then that individual has freedom to go to any country.
Why should someone granted access to a particular EU member be given access to the wider EU? They don't get a passport. They get a refuge. The passport is still that of the country they are currently not safe in.
And how do you monitor that without border controls?
I think we need to return them to their point of origin as I have said. Nothing else works. The flaw in Farron's well meaning Liberalism, much though I respect it, is will we take another 60K next month, the month after and the month after that?
Africa has improved in some respects but is still spinning off hundreds of thousands of people who believe that there has to be a better life somewhere else. They are right. They will have a better life if they make the promised land. It is a difficult issue.
I agree with that, although we will no doubt have to contend with pictures on our screens of dead bodies on Libyan beaches (quite possibly killed by the very people smugglers who sent them on their way in the first place - their very lucrative business stops if we in the West fight them.)
I have a solution. Each EU country mans a station within Africa to process asylum seekers. Those whose cases they accept get to live in the country that processed that claim (and ONLY that country - no general right to travel across the EU). I suspect qualifying for asylum would suddenly become quite tricky.
Anybody else travelling into Europe on a rickety craft will be deported back to the nearest African landfall. Alternatively, they can be treated as the criminals they are for trying to get round our entirely valid immigration control. (As someone who has travelled extensively on the continent, try getting INTO Africa without a valid entry visa, and see how well you are treated....)
Unbelievably I agree with you
Dear diary,
Today, the impossible happened....
Is it really Malcom ? Has the sun got to him ?
The sun? In Scotland??
Two days ago. For the whole morning. Rained in the afternoon of course.
Twas a joke. I have been viciously sunburnt in Scotland. In April!
OT - The Times is reporting that the BBC is to be made to pay for free TV licences for over 75's. Saving £650 million. But for problem for Generation Internet is it will be allowed to charge for iPlayer. This has got to be good news since 'video recorders still exist (if you can programme them) and in any event there is nothing worth watching on the BBC anyway.
Because most of the EU countries are in Schengen and so there is nothing to stop them simply moving around Europe.
You miss the point. Why are they treated as EU citizens? They aren't. They are Syrians, or Malians or whatever the hell a citizen of the Democratic Republic of Congo is called. Just because they get hauled out the sea in international waters and taken to Italy should not give them any rights to wider citizenship of the EU.
They are being given temporary sanctuary, nothing more.
Which only means something if you have systems in place - like border controls - to actually make the distinction. Otherwise there is nothing beyond occasional sweeps that can be done to stop them moving anywhere they like within Schengen.
''Hm, Kids Company CEO never looked underweight - paid herself circa £90K p.a.''
That's actually quite modest for a major charity CEO, isn;t it?
It is typical of these chancers and in real terms put her among the very top earners in the country. Sounds like she could not run a bath but manged to do ok for herself, pity about the kids.
Mr. Charles, did a bit about sunscreen at university (campaigns and the like). Scandinavian sunburn can happen a lot, where it's not super hot but direct sunlight is reflected from the snow/ice and can cause burning.
Because most of the EU countries are in Schengen and so there is nothing to stop them simply moving around Europe.
You miss the point. Why are they treated as EU citizens? They aren't. They are Syrians, or Malians or whatever the hell a citizen of the Democratic Republic of Congo is called. Just because they get hauled out the sea in international waters and taken to Italy should not give them any rights to wider citizenship of the EU.
They are being given temporary sanctuary, nothing more.
Are they treated as EU citizens? As opposed to refugees? In what way?
If you read the article, he claims the second vote was on behalf of his stepson who couldn't make it. Essentially he was acting as a proxy voter - and (presumably) faithfully executing his instructions - without going through the proper procedure.
In my view, a suspended sentence would be the appropriate punishment in this case. There doesn't appear to have been an intend to commit electoral fraud.
Mr. Charles, did a bit about sunscreen at university (campaigns and the like). Scandinavian sunburn can happen a lot, where it's not super hot but direct sunlight is reflected from the snow/ice and can cause burning.
MD, not rocket science, if you can get sunburnt in Scotland, then it is possible anywhere.
Peston may be confused by the way they shake their heads.
The last 7 words are superfluous.
It will be a yes although it is very far from clear what they are saying yes to, whether it is still available and who would then negotiate on the part of Greece.
The difference is striking. The FT this weekend - along with many, if not most, UK commentators - equate a No vote to an exit from the Euro. Yet whilst they are split on the referendum, Greeks want to be in the Euro 3:1. Which means almost half No voters believe they can stay in the Euro as Tsipras says.
After the Scottish referendum you still find this surprising?
Interesting .......which leads me to wonder how many people will cry foul in the Greek referendum.
The Independence referendum some 12 months in the planning . Greek referendum 12 days 1/3 of which were weekends.
Whatever the result cries of fraud and undercover tactics may well undermine any result and the present government if it receives a yes vote will be hunting high and low for any examples.
OT - The Times is reporting that the BBC is to be made to pay for free TV licences for over 75's. Saving £650 million. But for problem for Generation Internet is it will be allowed to charge for iPlayer. This has got to be good news since 'video recorders still exist (if you can programme them) and in any event there is nothing worth watching on the BBC anyway.
The BBC and government have made various noises about how the licence fee renewal, and the iPlayer (increasingly) anomaly is bound to be a part of that. Interesting though that some of it paving the way is being done now.
Edit: I guess the cuts the BBC announced are part of a similar process of preparation.
MalcG It is a well above average wage but you need about £160,000 to be in the top 1%
Yes, but in the top 5% or so which for a very small charity makes it obscene, as do the even larger salaries being taken by others in larger charities. These are quasi lobbying businesses nowadays and many enrich themselves "running" them.
If you read the article, he claims the second vote was on behalf of his stepson who couldn't make it. Essentially he was acting as a proxy voter - and (presumably) faithfully executing his instructions - without going through the proper procedure.
In my view, a suspended sentence would be the appropriate punishment in this case. There doesn't appear to have been an intend to commit electoral fraud.
Exactly , especially as he voted against his own viewpoint. Hardly fraudulent voting, at worst a bit silly.
@Peston 17m17 minutes ago Everyone I chat with in Athens thinks Greece will vote "no" today. Not scientific. Momentous if true #greecereferendum #Greece
Oxipalyptic.
You know that they have an Oxi Day in Greece (October 28) to mark the day that they refused entry to the German tanks in 1940.
Perhaps "Oxi" has a resonance to voters that "No" doesn't...
The Oxi day (Oct 28th) was a refusal of Greece to allow Italian troops into Greece, not German. It led to the ill fated invasion of Greece by Italian forces in Albania.
These were defeated and thrown back in confusion. The shambolic defeat of the Italians led to the Spring 1941 invasion by the Germans through Yugoslavia. This was unwanted by Hitler and put back the invasion of the Soviet Union by six weeks, quite possible a critical delay.
MalcG It is a well above average wage but you need about £160,000 to be in the top 1%
Yes, but in the top 5% or so which for a very small charity makes it obscene, as do the even larger salaries being taken by others in larger charities. These are quasi lobbying businesses nowadays and many enrich themselves "running" them.
I don't disagree with your general point, charities need some paid workers but charity work should not be a lucrative profession
Because most of the EU countries are in Schengen and so there is nothing to stop them simply moving around Europe.
You miss the point. Why are they treated as EU citizens? They aren't. They are Syrians, or Malians or whatever the hell a citizen of the Democratic Republic of Congo is called. Just because they get hauled out the sea in international waters and taken to Italy should not give them any rights to wider citizenship of the EU.
They are being given temporary sanctuary, nothing more.
Mr. Charles, did a bit about sunscreen at university (campaigns and the like). Scandinavian sunburn can happen a lot, where it's not super hot but direct sunlight is reflected from the snow/ice and can cause burning.
Which is why you wear suncream while skiing.
In this case I had been riding across Estonia for a couple of weeks and bumped into Nilla von Stenbock, who invited me to spend what proved to be a rather fun weekend with her in Finland*
Peston may be confused by the way they shake their heads.
The last 7 words are superfluous.
It will be a yes although it is very far from clear what they are saying yes to, whether it is still available and who would then negotiate on the part of Greece.
The difference is striking. The FT this weekend - along with many, if not most, UK commentators - equate a No vote to an exit from the Euro. Yet whilst they are split on the referendum, Greeks want to be in the Euro 3:1. Which means almost half No voters believe they can stay in the Euro as Tsipras says.
After the Scottish referendum you still find this surprising?
Not surprising, but striking. Not an argument between two different visions for Greece (details of bailout aside) but differences in the underlying assumptions. So yes like NATO/Queen/Pound for Scotland.
MalcG It is a well above average wage but you need about £160,000 to be in the top 1%
Yes, but in the top 5% or so which for a very small charity makes it obscene, as do the even larger salaries being taken by others in larger charities. These are quasi lobbying businesses nowadays and many enrich themselves "running" them.
I don't disagree with your general point, charities need some paid workers but charity work should not be a lucrative profession
Agree, obviously they need people and they will need a wage , but nowadays it is a gravy train.
OT - The Times is reporting that the BBC is to be made to pay for free TV licences for over 75's. Saving £650 million. But for problem for Generation Internet is it will be allowed to charge for iPlayer. This has got to be good news since 'video recorders still exist (if you can programme them) and in any event there is nothing worth watching on the BBC anyway.
The BBC and government have made various noises about how the licence fee renewal, and the iPlayer (increasingly) anomaly is bound to be a part of that. Interesting though that some of it paving the way is being done now.
Edit: I guess the cuts the BBC announced are part of a similar process of preparation.
Where the BBC could raise a fortune is in selling iPlayer subscriptions to those living abroad. A huge number of UK expats and regular travellers already pay money to VPN and proxy server providers for access to UK TV online, the BBC could turn this into a revenue raising exercise for themselves. A couple of million subs at $10 a month would be serious money.
Yes they'd have licencing issues to overcome with programmes such as Top Gear which are sold abroad, but most expats just want to watch Eastenders!
Ahead of making his unsuccessful bid in a Commons debate last week to win Government aid for a doomed coalmine in his Doncaster constituency, Ed Miliband had a private meeting with Anna Soubry, the no-nonsense Tory Business Minister.
It did not go well. Sources whisper that Soubry, not exactly known for suffering fools gladly, emerged to say afterwards: ‘It was pitiful – like being lectured by a sixth-former on work experience. How did he ever get to be Opposition Leader?’ Ouch."
@Peston 17m17 minutes ago Everyone I chat with in Athens thinks Greece will vote "no" today. Not scientific. Momentous if true #greecereferendum #Greece
Oxipalyptic.
You know that they have an Oxi Day in Greece (October 28) to mark the day that they refused entry to the German tanks in 1940.
Perhaps "Oxi" has a resonance to voters that "No" doesn't...
The Oxi day (Oct 28th) was a refusal of Greece to allow Italian troops into Greece, not German. It led to the ill fated invasion of Greece by Italian forces in Albania.
These were defeated and thrown back in confusion. The shambolic defeat of the Italians led to the Spring 1941 invasion by the Germans through Yugoslavia. This was unwanted by Hitler and put back the invasion of the Soviet Union by six weeks, quite possible a critical delay.
You're right - the article I saw referred to Axis forces, and I interpreted that as Germans
Because most of the EU countries are in Schengen and so there is nothing to stop them simply moving around Europe.
You miss the point. Why are they treated as EU citizens? They aren't. They are Syrians, or Malians or whatever the hell a citizen of the Democratic Republic of Congo is called. Just because they get hauled out the sea in international waters and taken to Italy should not give them any rights to wider citizenship of the EU.
They are being given temporary sanctuary, nothing more.
Which only means something if you have systems in place - like border controls - to actually make the distinction. Otherwise there is nothing beyond occasional sweeps that can be done to stop them moving anywhere they like within Schengen.
Well, if the EU was serious, it could impose laws limiting their access to one member state, and movement out of that state render them either criminals, or at least subject to expulsion to their country of origin. If they did that, then the idea of spreading 60,000 around the EU might be less onerous than the notion that all 60,000 can turn up in say Luxembourg (which you can be sure as all hell would result in a change in the laws if they did!).
But it still wouldn't address the underlying problem behind Farron's position, which is that for every one you let into the EU, 100 more are inspired to follow them....
Because most of the EU countries are in Schengen and so there is nothing to stop them simply moving around Europe.
You miss the point. Why are they treated as EU citizens? They aren't. They are Syrians, or Malians or whatever the hell a citizen of the Democratic Republic of Congo is called. Just because they get hauled out the sea in international waters and taken to Italy should not give them any rights to wider citizenship of the EU.
They are being given temporary sanctuary, nothing more.
Congolese.
But that lumps them with the Congolese over the river in the Republic of Congo....
I've changed my mind on Greece - I think "yes" will win. I believe the undecideds will swing toward "yes" based on fear. In many ways, I think this election is about pride and defiance versus fear and the latter will win. But I think it was a smart move by Tsipras - he may temporarily give up power, let the opposition sign an agreement and then triumphantly return in the very near future to disassociate himself from a bad deal. Unless the deal includes major debt relief it will be more of the same for Greece.
Yes, £50K puts you at the 90% mark and even £30K has you at 70%. After 90% the steps start to widen significantly.
Hard to get from 97% onwards
When I remind myself of figures like this the pay offs given to those leaving on a "package" from the public sector such as that referred to down thread become even more obscene. Who needs to waste money on lottery tickets?
This is a classic case of 'virtue signalling', where someone demonstrates their moral superiority by hectoring others. As someone else said, it is an easy substitute for actually doing good.
Personally, before forming a view on this, I would just like to hear some detail. If Farron wants to make this a credible proposal, rather than just a moral show:
1) Does he propose we do this on a one off basis, or take 60,000 every year? 2) Would he reduce other immigration to make room for the extra 60k, or just increase immigration? 3) If he would reduce immigration elsewhere, where? 4) If he would increase immigration, how would he deal with the extra strains on housing, transport and public services? 5) Given most of these migrants are from Islamic nations, how would he avoid a substantial number being or becoming Islamic fundamentalists, as has happenned with previous generations? 6) How would he make sure the most vulnerable are the ones that get in, rather than the mainly young adult men that dominate the boats? 7) Given that taking these migrants would incentivise the crossing for others, would he increase the quota if more came in future? If so, how high would he go?
I'd be grateful if those supporting the plan, particularly those most disdaining any that disagree, give me their own answers.
As usual, this discussion is being muddied by the confusion of refugees (as legally defined in international law) and economic migrants. Morally and legally, there should be no limit on refugees a country takes (and this is what Mrs B is talking about in the cases she cites) if the UK is the first country of refuge for the refugee. But refugee status is a fairly high bar, so I do not think that that is what is really causing concern in the UK (although the process to make decisions have to be more streamlined).
For economic migrants, we have zero legal obligation outside our EU obligations. We have an economic incentive to attract economically useful migrants, and a disincentive vis a vis those who would be a drain on our resources and infrastructure. My own view is that we have to be pretty mercenary to attract as many of the useful, and deter as many of the leeches as possible. For the most skilled and educated, that is relatively easy. It becomes harder the lower down the education levels one goes.
I feel the BBC are so behind the curve here. Charging for iPlayer is going to be like the leftovers no other network/Netflix et al want to buy the rights to by then.
And charging for iPlayer will I presume be linked to a TV licence in another form like giving the blind £5 off theirs. Which is the most insulting discount I've ever come across.
OT - The Times is reporting that the BBC is to be made to pay for free TV licences for over 75's. Saving £650 million. But for problem for Generation Internet is it will be allowed to charge for iPlayer. This has got to be good news since 'video recorders still exist (if you can programme them) and in any event there is nothing worth watching on the BBC anyway.
Farron would get my vote,simply because he was less embroiled in the coalition.British people are generous in nature and there's plenty of spare bedrooms available in the various palaces and both urban and rural mansions over £2 million.London is full of expensive empty properties which may or may not have been purchased for money laundering purposes. The existing housing problem would be greatly helped by the policy suggested by Jeremy Corbyn to ensure there is equity amongst housing tenures,private tenants should be given the right to buy.
MalcG It is a well above average wage but you need about £160,000 to be in the top 1%
Yes, but in the top 5% or so which for a very small charity makes it obscene, as do the even larger salaries being taken by others in larger charities. These are quasi lobbying businesses nowadays and many enrich themselves "running" them.
I don't disagree with your general point, charities need some paid workers but charity work should not be a lucrative profession
Agree, obviously they need people and they will need a wage , but nowadays it is a gravy train.
The existing housing problem would be greatly helped by the policy suggested by Jeremy Corbyn to ensure there is equity amongst housing tenures,private tenants should be given the right to buy.
Surely one of the most ill thought out and ridiculous policies ever dreamt up by a politician.
Perhaps you think that someone staying at the local Travelodge should have the right to buy their room as well.
Of course some of our contributors will have had a larger than that tax free gain on their London pad last year. Not that I am jealous or anything but taxable income only shows a small part of the picture.
Mr. G, I've only been to Scotland the once (Loch Lomond). I'd like to see Edinburgh Castle, and perhaps the Antonine Wall, at some point.
MD, Edinburgh is well worth a visit, but west is best.
Glencoe is best of all. One of my favourite places.
Glencoe is beautiful bur overrated. If you want the best of Scotland, some places further up the west coast give the best scenery, best beaches and the hungriest midges.
(And that is saying something, given the number of bites campers at the Kingshouse in Glencoe get).
I might be getting a little off from the little 'un soon, and when I do I intend to go to the very northwest of Scotland. A fantastic place.
Edit: I'd also put in honourable mentions to Dumfies & Galloway, and the superb fishing villages along the north coast of Aberdeenshire. There is so much more to Scotland than mountains and lochs.
''Hm, Kids Company CEO never looked underweight - paid herself circa £90K p.a.''
That's actually quite modest for a major charity CEO, isn;t it?
It still double what the average person would think reasonable to pay anyone working for a charity.
I wonder how much could be done by Mr Osborne to address senior people and charities being paid what seem to us plebs like extraordinary amounts of money from the public purse.
I understand that this lady was forced out of the kids' charity as the minster responsible for a govt grant refused to have anything to do with the charity while she remained in charge. An audit of charities and NGOs receiving public funds would be a good start.
Would one of our legal eagles wish to proffer an opinion about these council payoffs, could for example an employment contract be over-ridden by primary legislation?
It would be good if cutting benefits to also make an example of those at the higher end of the public pay scale - but don't want to see any more Sharon Shoesmiths with huge payouts after procedural cockups when firing them.
OK kids: the Antonine Wall was obviously commissioned by Antoninus Pius, but who was the last emperor [assuming I'm not mistaken...] to invade Caledonia?
This made me smile: "Ed gets another caning Ahead of making his unsuccessful bid in a Commons debate last week to win Government aid for a doomed coalmine in his Doncaster constituency, Ed Miliband had a private meeting with Anna Soubry, the no-nonsense Tory Business Minister. It did not go well. Sources whisper that Soubry, not exactly known for suffering fools gladly, emerged to say afterwards: ‘It was pitiful – like being lectured by a sixth-former on work experience. How did he ever get to be Opposition Leader?’ Ouch." http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-3149795/
Greece represents a total failure of Europe's political, financial and economic elites of every shade. All have shown just how utterly useless they are - left, right and centre. They talk to no-one but themselves, experience nothing beyond their cosseted, taxpayer-funded, tax-free, expenses-heavy bubble. They are not capable of dealing with this crisis. They have no stake in it.
I feel the BBC are so behind the curve here. Charging for iPlayer is going to be like the leftovers no other network/Netflix et al want to buy the rights to by then.
And charging for iPlayer will I presume be linked to a TV licence in another form like giving the blind £5 off theirs. Which is the most insulting discount I've ever come across.
OT - The Times is reporting that the BBC is to be made to pay for free TV licences for over 75's. Saving £650 million. But for problem for Generation Internet is it will be allowed to charge for iPlayer. This has got to be good news since 'video recorders still exist (if you can programme them) and in any event there is nothing worth watching on the BBC anyway.
This seems an easy thing to fix initially. Just allow licence fee payers free access after they register. Then the internet people and worldwide folk can pay an access fee or subscription. (Like Nowtv and Netflix). Could even raise more money than the current arrangements.
Of course some of our contributors will have had a larger than that tax free gain on their London pad last year. Not that I am jealous or anything but taxable income only shows a small part of the picture.
Indeed, but to be able to buy the most expensive properties in London and the South East you will normally need a high income anyway (unless you inherit). Goes to the increasing gap between capital and income looked at by the likes of Pilketty
Mr. G, I've only been to Scotland the once (Loch Lomond). I'd like to see Edinburgh Castle, and perhaps the Antonine Wall, at some point.
MD, Edinburgh is well worth a visit, but west is best.
Glencoe is best of all. One of my favourite places.
Glencoe in the sheeting late October rain, with snow on the peaks and a warm fire to go home to may be the most hauntingly beautiful, wondrously bleak place on earth.
Of course some of our contributors will have had a larger than that tax free gain on their London pad last year. Not that I am jealous or anything but taxable income only shows a small part of the picture.
London prices were up 0.9% in the last 12 months (latest Knight Frank numbers).
So it would need to be a pretty big pad to be a gain of above £160k...
@Peston 17m17 minutes ago Everyone I chat with in Athens thinks Greece will vote "no" today. Not scientific. Momentous if true #greecereferendum #Greece
Oxipalyptic.
You know that they have an Oxi Day in Greece (October 28) to mark the day that they refused entry to the German tanks in 1940.
Perhaps "Oxi" has a resonance to voters that "No" doesn't...
The Oxi day (Oct 28th) was a refusal of Greece to allow Italian troops into Greece, not German. It led to the ill fated invasion of Greece by Italian forces in Albania.
These were defeated and thrown back in confusion. The shambolic defeat of the Italians led to the Spring 1941 invasion by the Germans through Yugoslavia. This was unwanted by Hitler and put back the invasion of the Soviet Union by six weeks, quite possible a critical delay.
Actually Barbarossa, the invasion of Russia, wasn't significantly delayed by Yugolsavia/Greece. What cost Hitler was dicking about in Ukraine, rather than marching directly through to Moscow before the Autumn mud/rain ("Rasputitsa") set in.
Ahead of making his unsuccessful bid in a Commons debate last week to win Government aid for a doomed coalmine in his Doncaster constituency, Ed Miliband had a private meeting with Anna Soubry, the no-nonsense Tory Business Minister.
It did not go well. Sources whisper that Soubry, not exactly known for suffering fools gladly, emerged to say afterwards: ‘It was pitiful – like being lectured by a sixth-former on work experience. How did he ever get to be Opposition Leader?’ Ouch."
It's particularly funny as few people did more to harm the use of coal in this country than Miliband when he was at DECC. His decision that any new coal-fired power station had to use carbon capture - a technology almost totally untried at that scale - helped to destroy an industry. The Large Combustion Plant Directive did not help much either.
The BBC will be forced to pick up the £650million cost of providing free TV licenses for pensioners under radical plans set to be included in George Osborne's budget this week.
Mr Osborne this morning confirmed the corporation would 'make a contribution' towards £12billion in benefit cuts needed under Tory plans to eliminate the deficit.
The Chancellor claimed the BBC had become too 'imperial' in its size and could make savings without scrapping popular shows like Strictly Come Dancing.
Ah, Josias, you're the resident GWR man - did the Cotswold Line between Worcester and Oxford via Evesham on the way back to London on Friday (having already done the Cheltenham/Gloucester/Stroud/Swindon route a few weeks ago).
Mr. Financier, but are there plenty of ancient ruins?
If you are interested in ancient(ish) history and ruins, then it may be worth trying to find one of the few semi-complete brochs in Scotland. They are magnificent drystone walled enclosures. http://www.scottishbrochs.com/maps/duntelve.html
Although I've sadly never been, Orkney is jam-packed with ruins, e.g. Skara Brae. Although it's a long journey from John O'Groats, which is a long way from Edinburgh, which itself is a long way from civilisation. http://www.orkneyjar.com/history/skarabrae/
Mr. Jessop, I'm sure I've seen similar things somewhere or other.
Anyway, as I'm off now, the last emperor, I think, to invade Caledonia was Septimius Severus. He didn't really succeed due to the disparate nature of the Caledonians (they were more akin to Scythians than Romans, in political terms).
Ah, Josias, you're the resident GWR man - did the Cotswold Line between Worcester and Oxford via Evesham on the way back to London on Friday (having already done the Cheltenham/Gloucester/Stroud/Swindon route a few weeks ago).
Ahem. I (jokingly) hate the GWR: I call Great Western fans 'coppertops'.
I did the Cotswold Line many moons ago. If you want some beautiful rail journeys and are (as I think is correct) based in Birmingham, some of the lines towards Wales are superb. The ones through Craven Arms is an example. For a longer journey, the Heart of Wales line.
According to the figures linked to by malcolmg below, £23 000 would be on about the 60th centile for after tax income in the UK. Can we really afford a more generous welfare system than that?
@Peston 17m17 minutes ago Everyone I chat with in Athens thinks Greece will vote "no" today. Not scientific. Momentous if true #greecereferendum #Greece
Well, if it is no and, somehow, Syrizia's confused histrionics and insistence the other side would give in in that event proves true, it will have been one hell of a bluff from them.
Athens will vote No, but the conservative countryside won't. How the overall balance works out, who knows?
On topic, I think that Farron's stance will help him in the leadership election, though it'll be problematic when he's won, because of the questions of details that arise. There is I think a genuine majority in favour of Britain helping "genuine" refugees (though some finesse the issue by saying vaguely that there are too many fake refugees so we can't risk it). Enoch Powell was amiong those favouring the Ugandan Asian influx, mainly because we promised and our promise should be our bond. There's also a majority for taking in people who are genuinely expert at system we lack. It's good that someone prominent is putting the positive side of the argument.
Underlying all this is the fact that I remember pointing out 20 years ago when I first got into serious elective politics. We can't globalise the world economy without recognising that it imposes impossible strains to have people in Asia earning 5% of what people in the West do for much the same job. I didn't mean "shouldn't", I mean "can't". Either the jobs emigrate to the people, or the people emigrate to the jobs, or the gap narrows by fast wage growth in Asia and near-zero growth for low-skilled work in the West, all of which have happened.. All we can do is manage the flows.
Ah, Josias, you're the resident GWR man - did the Cotswold Line between Worcester and Oxford via Evesham on the way back to London on Friday (having already done the Cheltenham/Gloucester/Stroud/Swindon route a few weeks ago).
Ahem. I (jokingly) hate the GWR: I call Great Western fans 'coppertops'.
I did the Cotswold Line many moons ago. If you want some beautiful rail journeys and are (as I think is correct) based in Birmingham, some of the lines towards Wales are superb. The ones through Craven Arms is an example. For a longer journey, the Heart of Wales line.
You're a Midland man, aren't you? Big Ooops!
Well, I've done all routes on the following map, EXCEPT for Gobowen to Crewe, Shrewsbury to Hereford, Shrewsbury to Crewe, Derby to Stoke, and the branches to Matlock and Nottingham.
Funny! Was tempted on the last thread to pedant (nice verb) MBE for saying "these private colleges actually let in a serious amount of students into the London market". The better private colleges may teach the difference between "number" and "amount"...
Yes, quite a few move in and out of it. My grandfather was in it I think, I doubt I ever will be
It was quite low a few years ago. Now it seems that the top 1% have dramatically pulled away from the rest. For London based salaries, the top 5% level is unexceptional.
Ah, Josias, you're the resident GWR man - did the Cotswold Line between Worcester and Oxford via Evesham on the way back to London on Friday (having already done the Cheltenham/Gloucester/Stroud/Swindon route a few weeks ago).
Ahem. I (jokingly) hate the GWR: I call Great Western fans 'coppertops'.
I did the Cotswold Line many moons ago. If you want some beautiful rail journeys and are (as I think is correct) based in Birmingham, some of the lines towards Wales are superb. The ones through Craven Arms is an example. For a longer journey, the Heart of Wales line.
The Shrewsbury to Aberystwyth line takes you past some marvellous landscapes as well as the Osprey nest (on top of a pole) near the Dovey Junction station. Whilst at Aberyswtyth take the steam train to Devils Bridge for great vistas or any of the other steam trains on the Welsh west coast.
According to the figures linked to by malcolmg below, £23 000 would be on about the 60th centile for after tax income in the UK. Can we really afford a more generous welfare system than that?
I bet the London skew is bigger than the £3000 difference mooted.
The vast majority of those caught by the cap receive a very substantial amount in housing benefit (and I believe practically speaking, it is this that is cut - until UC comes in).
Clearly there are a bunch of rightwingers/UKIP tendency on this site who believe immigrants are all either criminals, scroungers or a drain on society. Sir Nicholas Winton died this week. If he had tried to bring in 669 children these days, you would have all been lined up with the rightwing press, demanding they be refused entry. And then there are the Ugandan Asians. And the whites who fled Rhodesia. Ashamed of the callousness, selfishness and inhumanity exhibited by a large number of people who seem to lack the ability to think "there but for the grace of God go I".
Perhaps you are not aware that when the government in Zimbabwe kicked their farm seizure policy into high gear, the then New Labour Government instructed the immigration system to stop white farmers from Zimbabwe coming to the UK. They were quite successful.
It was a cunning manipulation of admin rules, rather than legal changes.
You may remember the incident with the Ghurka VC winner being told that he didn't have any connection with the UK, and couldn't come here? That was caused by the rule changes designed to block whites from Zimbabwe. A common theme with many of them is service in the British army - so the rules were changed so that such service was not deemed to show any connection to the UK.
A deliberately racist immigration policy was enacted and successfully enforced, entirely based on the belief that anyone of a certain skin colour from a certain country would hold unacceptable views.
I feel the BBC are so behind the curve here. Charging for iPlayer is going to be like the leftovers no other network/Netflix et al want to buy the rights to by then.
And charging for iPlayer will I presume be linked to a TV licence in another form like giving the blind £5 off theirs. Which is the most insulting discount I've ever come across.
OT - The Times is reporting that the BBC is to be made to pay for free TV licences for over 75's. Saving £650 million. But for problem for Generation Internet is it will be allowed to charge for iPlayer. This has got to be good news since 'video recorders still exist (if you can programme them) and in any event there is nothing worth watching on the BBC anyway.
This seems an easy thing to fix initially. Just allow licence fee payers free access after they register. Then the internet people and worldwide folk can pay an access fee or subscription. (Like Nowtv and Netflix). Could even raise more money than the current arrangements.
Depending on the charge for iPlayer, I think the worry might be that fewer people bother with the licence fee, if the iPlayer fee includes live broadcasting. Perhaps it wouldn't, there might be a shift anyway.
Mr. Jessop, I'm sure I've seen similar things somewhere or other.
Anyway, as I'm off now, the last emperor, I think, to invade Caledonia was Septimius Severus. He didn't really succeed due to the disparate nature of the Caledonians (they were more akin to Scythians than Romans, in political terms).
Hmm. Not an invasion as such but I understand that Constans campaigned north of Hadrians Wall in the winter of 342/343. He is of particular interest to me as I am finding large numbers of Constans coins in an excavation I am directing at Ancaster at the moment.
@Peston 17m17 minutes ago Everyone I chat with in Athens thinks Greece will vote "no" today. Not scientific. Momentous if true #greecereferendum #Greece
Well, if it is no and, somehow, Syrizia's confused histrionics and insistence the other side would give in in that event proves true, it will have been one hell of a bluff from them.
Athens will vote No, but the conservative countryside won't. How the overall balance works out, who knows?
On topic, I think that Farron's stance will help him in the leadership election, though it'll be problematic when he's won, because of the questions of details that arise. There is I think a genuine majority in favour of Britain helping "genuine" refugees (though some finesse the issue by saying vaguely that there are too many fake refugees so we can't risk it). Enoch Powell was amiong those favouring the Ugandan Asian influx, mainly because we promised and our promise should be our bond. There's also a majority for taking in people who are genuinely expert at system we lack. It's good that someone prominent is putting the positive side of the argument.
Underlying all this is the fact that I remember pointing out 20 years ago when I first got into serious elective politics. We can't globalise the world economy without recognising that it imposes impossible strains to have people in Asia earning 5% of what people in the West do for much the same job. I didn't mean "shouldn't", I mean "can't". Either the jobs emigrate to the people, or the people emigrate to the jobs, or the gap narrows by fast wage growth in Asia and near-zero growth for low-skilled work in the West, all of which have happened.. All we can do is manage the flows.
Nick, the problem is that we have not yet felt the worst of 'impossible strains' as it would appear you did not factor in educational excellence and aspiration in Asia against UK/Europe educational decline and lack of aspiration. Also UK/Europe has large demotivating benefits in general for the unemployed, whilst such things are much more scarce in Asia.
Seemingly there is not much enthusiasm for people "to emirate to jobs" in the UK and to devour the low-skilled low pay jobs but they leave them for the immigrants to do, and just stay at home.
Given most SmartTVs have an iPlayer link logo now - and the market is moving to timeshifting in a big way, what % will pay the full TVLF just for the sake of having it on in the corner unwatched?
There's so much choice - there's no reason to pay for live BBC - I want to see BBC News as true PSB and free - Iike the other networks. Maybe then they won't send 250 bods to the LD Conf or hundreds to Glasto or the Olympics et al.
I feel the BBC are so behind the curve here. Charging for iPlayer is going to be like the leftovers no other network/Netflix et al want to buy the rights to by then.
And charging for iPlayer will I presume be linked to a TV licence in another form like giving the blind £5 off theirs. Which is the most insulting discount I've ever come across.
OT - The Times is reporting that the BBC is to be made to pay for free TV licences for over 75's. Saving £650 million. But for problem for Generation Internet is it will be allowed to charge for iPlayer. This has got to be good news since 'video recorders still exist (if you can programme them) and in any event there is nothing worth watching on the BBC anyway.
This seems an easy thing to fix initially. Just allow licence fee payers free access after they register. Then the internet people and worldwide folk can pay an access fee or subscription. (Like Nowtv and Netflix). Could even raise more money than the current arrangements.
Depending on the charge for iPlayer, I think the worry might be that fewer people bother with the licence fee, if the iPlayer fee includes live broadcasting. Perhaps it wouldn't, there might be a shift anyway.
Funny! Was tempted on the last thread to pedant (nice verb) MBE for saying "these private colleges actually let in a serious amount of students into the London market". The better private colleges may teach the difference between "number" and "amount"...
Unless he was making a sly point about the tonnage of pupils, rather than admitted on ability?
Given most SmartTVs have an iPlayer link logo now - and the market is moving to timeshifting in a big way, what % will pay the full TVLF just for the sake of having it on in the corner unwatched?
There's so much choice - there's no reason to pay for live BBC - I want to see BBC News as true PSB and free - Iike the other networks. Maybe then they won't send 250 bods to the LD Conf or hundreds to Glasto or the Olympics et al.
I feel the BBC are so behind the curve here. Charging for iPlayer is going to be like the leftovers no other network/Netflix et al want to buy the rights to by then.
And charging for iPlayer will I presume be linked to a TV licence in another form like giving the blind £5 off theirs. Which is the most insulting discount I've ever come across.
OT - The Times is reporting that the BBC is to be made to pay for free TV licences for over 75's. Saving £650 million. But for problem for Generation Internet is it will be allowed to charge for iPlayer. This has got to be good news since 'video recorders still exist (if you can programme them) and in any event there is nothing worth watching on the BBC anyway.
This seems an easy thing to fix initially. Just allow licence fee payers free access after they register. Then the internet people and worldwide folk can pay an access fee or subscription. (Like Nowtv and Netflix). Could even raise more money than the current arrangements.
Depending on the charge for iPlayer, I think the worry might be that fewer people bother with the licence fee, if the iPlayer fee includes live broadcasting. Perhaps it wouldn't, there might be a shift anyway.
Got to be a bit careful when you talk of timeshifting, but yes. I have posted at some length before about how the licence fee is coming unstuck! By the time of the following licence fee review it will be all too late - this has to happen by 2016-7.
We pay for live TV for sports, mainly, plus the budget, election night (not that I preferred the BBC) and potentially other news stories. Even though I watch hours and hours of TV, mostly legally, online.
According to the figures linked to by malcolmg below, £23 000 would be on about the 60th centile for after tax income in the UK. Can we really afford a more generous welfare system than that?
don't forget that the £23,000 should be compared to net income - on a gross basis it's the equivalent of a £29,000 salary
According to the figures linked to by malcolmg below, £23 000 would be on about the 60th centile for after tax income in the UK. Can we really afford a more generous welfare system than that?
don't forget that the £23,000 should be compared to net income - on a gross basis it's the equivalent of a £29,000 salary
Funny! Was tempted on the last thread to pedant (nice verb) MBE for saying "these private colleges actually let in a serious amount of students into the London market". The better private colleges may teach the difference between "number" and "amount"...
only if (as you should) you distinguish immigrants as individuals rather than an amorphous mass...
Comments
They are being given temporary sanctuary, nothing more.
That's actually quite modest for a major charity CEO, isn;t it?
Perhaps "Oxi" has a resonance to voters that "No" doesn't...
But for problem for Generation Internet is it will be allowed to charge for iPlayer.
This has got to be good news since 'video recorders still exist (if you can programme them) and in any event there is nothing worth watching on the BBC anyway.
Not sure that is true. This is a vote with your feet issue for me. Don't contribute to charities that pay people large sums.
Its also a transparency issue. Charities should be forced to publish who gets what (if they aren't already...??)
In my view, a suspended sentence would be the appropriate punishment in this case. There doesn't appear to have been an intend to commit electoral fraud.
Interesting .......which leads me to wonder how many people will cry foul in the Greek referendum.
The Independence referendum some 12 months in the planning . Greek referendum 12 days 1/3 of which were weekends.
Whatever the result cries of fraud and undercover tactics may well undermine any result and the present government if it receives a yes vote will be hunting high and low for any examples.
Edit: I guess the cuts the BBC announced are part of a similar process of preparation.
These were defeated and thrown back in confusion. The shambolic defeat of the Italians led to the Spring 1941 invasion by the Germans through Yugoslavia. This was unwanted by Hitler and put back the invasion of the Soviet Union by six weeks, quite possible a critical delay.
In this case I had been riding across Estonia for a couple of weeks and bumped into Nilla von Stenbock, who invited me to spend what proved to be a rather fun weekend with her in Finland*
* This was, of course, before I was married
https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/percentile-points-from-1-to-99-for-total-income-before-and-after-tax
£90K before tax in the 97th percentile.
Yes they'd have licencing issues to overcome with programmes such as Top Gear which are sold abroad, but most expats just want to watch Eastenders!
"Ed gets another caning
Ahead of making his unsuccessful bid in a Commons debate last week to win Government aid for a doomed coalmine in his Doncaster constituency, Ed Miliband had a private meeting with Anna Soubry, the no-nonsense Tory Business Minister.
It did not go well. Sources whisper that Soubry, not exactly known for suffering fools gladly, emerged to say afterwards: ‘It was pitiful – like being lectured by a sixth-former on work experience. How did he ever get to be Opposition Leader?’ Ouch."
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-3149795/
But it still wouldn't address the underlying problem behind Farron's position, which is that for every one you let into the EU, 100 more are inspired to follow them....
Hard to get from 97% onwards
Anyway, the next leader must surely be better.
Was so much easier when they were Zaireans!
"We are considerably holier than thou."
For economic migrants, we have zero legal obligation outside our EU obligations. We have an economic incentive to attract economically useful migrants, and a disincentive vis a vis those who would be a drain on our resources and infrastructure. My own view is that we have to be pretty mercenary to attract as many of the useful, and deter as many of the leeches as possible. For the most skilled and educated, that is relatively easy. It becomes harder the lower down the education levels one goes.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/tax/10368203/Top-earners-to-pay-third-of-all-income-tax-despite-rate-cut.html
And charging for iPlayer will I presume be linked to a TV licence in another form like giving the blind £5 off theirs. Which is the most insulting discount I've ever come across.
The existing housing problem would be greatly helped by the policy suggested by Jeremy Corbyn to ensure there is equity amongst housing tenures,private tenants should be given the right to buy.
Perhaps you think that someone staying at the local Travelodge should have the right to buy their room as well.
I got Sunburn there one day, and nearly washed away on the next.
(And that is saying something, given the number of bites campers at the Kingshouse in Glencoe get).
I might be getting a little off from the little 'un soon, and when I do I intend to go to the very northwest of Scotland. A fantastic place.
Edit: I'd also put in honourable mentions to Dumfies & Galloway, and the superb fishing villages along the north coast of Aberdeenshire. There is so much more to Scotland than mountains and lochs.
I understand that this lady was forced out of the kids' charity as the minster responsible for a govt grant refused to have anything to do with the charity while she remained in charge. An audit of charities and NGOs receiving public funds would be a good start.
Would one of our legal eagles wish to proffer an opinion about these council payoffs, could for example an employment contract be over-ridden by primary legislation?
It would be good if cutting benefits to also make an example of those at the higher end of the public pay scale - but don't want to see any more Sharon Shoesmiths with huge payouts after procedural cockups when firing them.
So it would need to be a pretty big pad to be a gain of above £160k...
Ah, Josias, you're the resident GWR man - did the Cotswold Line between Worcester and Oxford via Evesham on the way back to London on Friday (having already done the Cheltenham/Gloucester/Stroud/Swindon route a few weeks ago).
http://www.scottishbrochs.com/maps/duntelve.html
Although I've sadly never been, Orkney is jam-packed with ruins, e.g. Skara Brae. Although it's a long journey from John O'Groats, which is a long way from Edinburgh, which itself is a long way from civilisation.
http://www.orkneyjar.com/history/skarabrae/
Anyway, as I'm off now, the last emperor, I think, to invade Caledonia was Septimius Severus. He didn't really succeed due to the disparate nature of the Caledonians (they were more akin to Scythians than Romans, in political terms).
I did the Cotswold Line many moons ago. If you want some beautiful rail journeys and are (as I think is correct) based in Birmingham, some of the lines towards Wales are superb. The ones through Craven Arms is an example. For a longer journey, the Heart of Wales line.
On topic, I think that Farron's stance will help him in the leadership election, though it'll be problematic when he's won, because of the questions of details that arise. There is I think a genuine majority in favour of Britain helping "genuine" refugees (though some finesse the issue by saying vaguely that there are too many fake refugees so we can't risk it). Enoch Powell was amiong those favouring the Ugandan Asian influx, mainly because we promised and our promise should be our bond. There's also a majority for taking in people who are genuinely expert at system we lack. It's good that someone prominent is putting the positive side of the argument.
Underlying all this is the fact that I remember pointing out 20 years ago when I first got into serious elective politics. We can't globalise the world economy without recognising that it imposes impossible strains to have people in Asia earning 5% of what people in the West do for much the same job. I didn't mean "shouldn't", I mean "can't". Either the jobs emigrate to the people, or the people emigrate to the jobs, or the gap narrows by fast wage growth in Asia and near-zero growth for low-skilled work in the West, all of which have happened.. All we can do is manage the flows.
Well, I've done all routes on the following map, EXCEPT for Gobowen to Crewe, Shrewsbury to Hereford, Shrewsbury to Crewe, Derby to Stoke, and the branches to Matlock and Nottingham.
http://www.londonmidland.com/uploads/images/large/754.jpg
I bet the London skew is bigger than the £3000 difference mooted.
The vast majority of those caught by the cap receive a very substantial amount in housing benefit (and I believe practically speaking, it is this that is cut - until UC comes in).
It was a cunning manipulation of admin rules, rather than legal changes.
You may remember the incident with the Ghurka VC winner being told that he didn't have any connection with the UK, and couldn't come here? That was caused by the rule changes designed to block whites from Zimbabwe. A common theme with many of them is service in the British army - so the rules were changed so that such service was not deemed to show any connection to the UK.
A deliberately racist immigration policy was enacted and successfully enforced, entirely based on the belief that anyone of a certain skin colour from a certain country would hold unacceptable views.
Seemingly there is not much enthusiasm for people "to emirate to jobs" in the UK and to devour the low-skilled low pay jobs but they leave them for the immigrants to do, and just stay at home.
There's so much choice - there's no reason to pay for live BBC - I want to see BBC News as true PSB and free - Iike the other networks. Maybe then they won't send 250 bods to the LD Conf or hundreds to Glasto or the Olympics et al.
We pay for live TV for sports, mainly, plus the budget, election night (not that I preferred the BBC) and potentially other news stories. Even though I watch hours and hours of TV, mostly legally, online.
don't forget that the £23,000 should be compared to net income - on a gross basis it's the equivalent of a £29,000 salary