I don't think aspiration has declined at all - benefits as a lifestyle choice is something that is very rare, and represents a minority. In any case, it goes back to the issue of structural, long-term unemployment, occurring in deprived areas. What has declined, is social mobility - the ability of people from working class backgrounds to do well for themselves, over the last couple of decades. That is a problem both related to the education system, and the way our economy works.
Did anyone see the mum on Sky news last night
"this might make people wanting bigger families think about whether they could afford them." (I paraphrase).
Suggests job done ?
Absolutely! Best possible change that could have been made. My wife and I had our daughter last year and have discussed when we'd like to have our second and can we afford it. Don't claim a penny in "tax credits" etc but rather pay to the system. I fail to see why we should think about if we can afford more children but those who aren't working shouldn't make the same considerations. That is totally unfair.
Not sure why Osbo gave people until April 2017, unless he is trying to engineer some sort of baby boom.
I don't think aspiration has declined at all - benefits as a lifestyle choice is something that is very rare, and represents a minority. In any case, it goes back to the issue of structural, long-term unemployment, occurring in deprived areas. What has declined, is social mobility - the ability of people from working class backgrounds to do well for themselves, over the last couple of decades. That is a problem both related to the education system, and the way our economy works.
Did anyone see the mum on Sky news last night
"this might make people wanting bigger families think about whether they could afford them." (I paraphrase).
Suggests job done ?
Absolutely! Best possible change that could have been made. My wife and I had our daughter last year and have discussed when we'd like to have our second and can we afford it. Don't claim a penny in "tax credits" etc but rather pay to the system. I fail to see why we should think about if we can afford more children but those who aren't working shouldn't make the same considerations. That is totally unfair.
Not sure why Osbo gave people until April 2017, unless he is trying to engineer some sort of baby boom.
A man accused of attacking and robbing a 93-year-old woman in her home has been charged under an ancient law which formerly carried the death penalty.
Graeme Bryden 27, of Stevenston, North Ayrshire, has appeared in court on an allegation of hamesucken.
The centuries-old charge would previously lead to death by hanging for those found guilty of committing the crime. It relates to the act of pursuing someone into their home with the intention of assaulting them.
I have failed to make it into work today after over three hours of waiting and hanging around at Shepherds Bush.
Time for the Reagan solution. Sack the lot of them. I'm sure there are plenty of people out there who would jump at the chance to work for TfL at between £30-35k plus benefits.
Everyone is different, but as someone who hasn't got the tube more than a dozen times n the last fifteen years (& even then only the district line) despite working in London for a lot of that time, I think the ease of travel on the tube leads people to think they can't possibly do without it
I'd say not getting the tube has shown me a lot of London ID never have seen otherwise and been a net benefit
Yeah, there are a couple of ways to get there without the tube, but every single overground train that arrives is packed to the extent that no one can get on and the buses were horrendously packed as well. Just called up and told them I'll work from home in the end. My manager didn't seem bothered given that he was also at home.
When I lived in Kentish Town and worked in Southwark it didn't occur to me to bike it, but I think I would now if I was in the same situation. I did walk it a few times though!
I don't think aspiration has declined at all - benefits as a lifestyle choice is something that is very rare, and represents a minority. In any case, it goes back to the issue of structural, long-term unemployment, occurring in deprived areas. What has declined, is social mobility - the ability of people from working class backgrounds to do well for themselves, over the last couple of decades. That is a problem both related to the education system, and the way our economy works.
Did anyone see the mum on Sky news last night
"this might make people wanting bigger families think about whether they could afford them." (I paraphrase).
Suggests job done ?
Absolutely! Best possible change that could have been made. My wife and I had our daughter last year and have discussed when we'd like to have our second and can we afford it. Don't claim a penny in "tax credits" etc but rather pay to the system. I fail to see why we should think about if we can afford more children but those who aren't working shouldn't make the same considerations. That is totally unfair.
Not sure why Osbo gave people until April 2017, unless he is trying to engineer some sort of baby boom.
That sounds like the 1st Rule of Project Management: "It takes a woman 9 months to have a baby. It cannot be done in 1 month with 9 women"
I have failed to make it into work today after over three hours of waiting and hanging around at Shepherds Bush.
Time for the Reagan solution. Sack the lot of them. I'm sure there are plenty of people out there who would jump at the chance to work for TfL at between £30-35k plus benefits.
Commiserations. Would it be far to walk? If I recall aright (but I may be a-wrong), Reagan had the military guys to fall back on.
A fair distance. I tend to baulk at more than about 40 or 50 minutes each way, say six miles round trip. Having flexi-hours is a big help.
I have failed to make it into work today after over three hours of waiting and hanging around at Shepherds Bush.
Time for the Reagan solution. Sack the lot of them. I'm sure there are plenty of people out there who would jump at the chance to work for TfL at between £30-35k plus benefits.
Everyone is different, but as someone who hasn't got the tube more than a dozen times n the last fifteen years (& even then only the district line) despite working in London for a lot of that time, I think the ease of travel on the tube leads people to think they can't possibly do without it
I'd say not getting the tube has shown me a lot of London ID never have seen otherwise and been a net benefit
Yeah, there are a couple of ways to get there without the tube, but every single overground train that arrives is packed to the extent that no one can get on and the buses were horrendously packed as well. Just called up and told them I'll work from home in the end. My manager didn't seem bothered given that he was also at home.
I noticed today talking to my colleagues that even left-leaning Londoners are having their views hardened against the unions. We've had so many strikes in recent years, and this one is so bad it's really been the final straw for a lot of people. I think we're getting to the point where the Mayoralty would have support for breaking their power even if it meant a lot of disruption in the mean time. We can't go on like this.
Burnham was not even Health Secretary when Mid Staffs occurred. At present he polls as the most electable candidate so of course he is a runner and did Blair and Cameron ever show much original thought and were they not also opportunists? Unlike Ed Miliband Burnham has not won the unions backing actually, the GMB, Unite and the RMT have backed Corbyn.
Labour was accused of insulting the victims of the Mid Staffs hospital scandal last night after its health spokesman suggested it would have been better if the report into their deaths had never been published.
Andy Burnham said events had borne out his view that the benefits of a public inquiry had not outweighed the reputational damage to the hospital.
I have failed to make it into work today after over three hours of waiting and hanging around at Shepherds Bush.
Time for the Reagan solution. Sack the lot of them. I'm sure there are plenty of people out there who would jump at the chance to work for TfL at between £30-35k plus benefits.
Commiserations. Would it be far to walk? If I recall aright (but I may be a-wrong), Reagan had the military guys to fall back on.
A fair distance. I tend to baulk at more than about 40 or 50 minutes each way, say six miles round trip. Having flexi-hours is a big help.
... but you hung around for three hours. You'd have been there and back by now. On a nice sunny morning as a one-off I would definitely have walked three miles.
Just en route to Bristol - very pleased that we have a privatised rail service so that I can use SWT in the absence of FGW service. Just a shame that our trade fair is being held next to BTM and opens on the second day of the strike.
Little public sympathy for striking unions anymore - have to wonder why they bother anymore, should stick to providing legal/advisory representation and behind the scenes. No public desire for mass action in consumer led economy.
Would our resident Andy Burnham fan like to comment on whether he'll be tough on strikes, and tough on the causes of strikes? It would poll well...
Corbyn is now the unions' man
So will Burnham condemn the strikes and the cost to the economy that they cause?
Well as the big Unions have backed Corbyn he has no reason to be beholden to them
Dodging the question much? How about this one, do you think he should condemn them?
He can put distance between them but it is not sensible to condemn much of your base, Blair never specifically condemned the unions and Cameron never specifically condemned the most hardline anti Europeans and social conservatives in his party either
I don't think aspiration has declined at all - benefits as a lifestyle choice is something that is very rare, and represents a minority. In any case, it goes back to the issue of structural, long-term unemployment, occurring in deprived areas. What has declined, is social mobility - the ability of people from working class backgrounds to do well for themselves, over the last couple of decades. That is a problem both related to the education system, and the way our economy works.
Did anyone see the mum on Sky news last night
"this might make people wanting bigger families think about whether they could afford them." (I paraphrase).
Suggests job done ?
Absolutely! Best possible change that could have been made. My wife and I had our daughter last year and have discussed when we'd like to have our second and can we afford it. Don't claim a penny in "tax credits" etc but rather pay to the system. I fail to see why we should think about if we can afford more children but those who aren't working shouldn't make the same considerations. That is totally unfair.
Not sure why Osbo gave people until April 2017, unless he is trying to engineer some sort of baby boom.
I have failed to make it into work today after over three hours of waiting and hanging around at Shepherds Bush.
Time for the Reagan solution. Sack the lot of them. I'm sure there are plenty of people out there who would jump at the chance to work for TfL at between £30-35k plus benefits.
Everyone is different, but as someone who hasn't got the tube more than a dozen times n the last fifteen years (& even then only the district line) despite working in London for a lot of that time, I think the ease of travel on the tube leads people to think they can't possibly do without it
I'd say not getting the tube has shown me a lot of London ID never have seen otherwise and been a net benefit
Yeah, there are a couple of ways to get there without the tube, but every single overground train that arrives is packed to the extent that no one can get on and the buses were horrendously packed as well. Just called up and told them I'll work from home in the end. My manager didn't seem bothered given that he was also at home.
I noticed today talking to my colleagues that even left-leaning Londoners are having their views hardened against the unions. We've had so many strikes in recent years, and this one is so bad it's really been the final straw for a lot of people. I think we're getting to the point where the Mayoralty would have support for breaking their power even if it meant a lot of disruption in the mean time. We can't go on like this.
You have to wonder who at TfL or the Gherkin managed to get so close to the start of 24-hour running and only then notice they'd forgotten to sign up the unions. Cynics might also wonder if it was deliberate. Because as we know, industrial disputes are always caused by workers and never by management.
Commons leader Chris Grayling says the government is rewriting its plans to give England's MPs a veto over English laws, with a vote delayed to September.
A redrafted version of the plan will be published on Monday and debated for two days next week, Mr Grayling said.
He would then "publish and table a final set of standing orders" which MPs would debate after the summer recess.
I have failed to make it into work today after over three hours of waiting and hanging around at Shepherds Bush.
Time for the Reagan solution. Sack the lot of them. I'm sure there are plenty of people out there who would jump at the chance to work for TfL at between £30-35k plus benefits.
Commiserations. Would it be far to walk? If I recall aright (but I may be a-wrong), Reagan had the military guys to fall back on.
A fair distance. I tend to baulk at more than about 40 or 50 minutes each way, say six miles round trip. Having flexi-hours is a big help.
... but you hung around for three hours. You'd have been there and back by now. On a nice sunny morning as a one-off I would definitely have walked three miles.
The walking to/from the little cross country train requires the six miler, which can be truly therapeutic---no headphones & no mobile. Otherwise I cycle the full whack which is longer of course, but takes the same sort of time and is less therapeutic owing to the bl**dy cars.
Just en route to Bristol - very pleased that we have a privatised rail service so that I can use SWT in the absence of FGW service. Just a shame that our trade fair is being held next to BTM and opens on the second day of the strike.
Little public sympathy for striking unions anymore - have to wonder why they bother anymore, should stick to providing legal/advisory representation and behind the scenes. No public desire for mass action in consumer led economy.
Would our resident Andy Burnham fan like to comment on whether he'll be tough on strikes, and tough on the causes of strikes? It would poll well...
Corbyn is now the unions' man
So will Burnham condemn the strikes and the cost to the economy that they cause?
Well as the big Unions have backed Corbyn he has no reason to be beholden to them
Dodging the question much? How about this one, do you think he should condemn them?
He can put distance between them but it is not sensible to condemn much of your base, Blair never specifically condemned the unions and Cameron never specifically condemned the most hardline anti Europeans and social conservatives in his party either
That's right, party comes first eh?
It is true that you need the party on board first and then you can appeal to floating voters, as Thatcher, Major, Blair and Cameron all did. Had the Tories elected Heseltine or Clarke and perhaps if Labour elect Kendall they may be able to do the latter but that could be/have been offset by the splits and defections to minor parties due to their inability to do the former
I have failed to make it into work today after over three hours of waiting and hanging around at Shepherds Bush.
Time for the Reagan solution. Sack the lot of them. I'm sure there are plenty of people out there who would jump at the chance to work for TfL at between £30-35k plus benefits.
Everyone is different, but as someone who hasn't got the tube more than a dozen times n the last fifteen years (& even then only the district line) despite working in London for a lot of that time, I think the ease of travel on the tube leads people to think they can't possibly do without it
I'd say not getting the tube has shown me a lot of London ID never have seen otherwise and been a net benefit
Yeah, there are a couple of ways to get there without the tube, but every single overground train that arrives is packed to the extent that no one can get on and the buses were horrendously packed as well. Just called up and told them I'll work from home in the end. My manager didn't seem bothered given that he was also at home.
I noticed today talking to my colleagues that even left-leaning Londoners are having their views hardened against the unions. We've had so many strikes in recent years, and this one is so bad it's really been the final straw for a lot of people. I think we're getting to the point where the Mayoralty would have support for breaking their power even if it meant a lot of disruption in the mean time. We can't go on like this.
I wonder how many qualified drivers they have in management roles, or people with similar experience from other rail systems that could have accelerated training if required? What is the training period for new recruits from day 1 to driving unsupervised?
Reagan managed to get most ATC systems working quite quickly with managers and military controllers, relied on a lot of goodwill from airlines and customers for a couple of years as the new recruits were trained up and qualified.
Really hope that TfL and the Mayor take this seriously now. It's happening too often and for trivial reasons, billions of pounds are lost from businesses large and small every time it happens.
Long term of course the plan needs to be to move to automated trains, a program which needs to be accelerated dramatically.
Burnham was not even Health Secretary when Mid Staffs occurred. At present he polls as the most electable candidate so of course he is a runner and did Blair and Cameron ever show much original thought and were they not also opportunists? Unlike Ed Miliband Burnham has not won the unions backing actually, the GMB, Unite and the RMT have backed Corbyn.
Labour was accused of insulting the victims of the Mid Staffs hospital scandal last night after its health spokesman suggested it would have been better if the report into their deaths had never been published.
Andy Burnham said events had borne out his view that the benefits of a public inquiry had not outweighed the reputational damage to the hospital.
"Mr Burnham appointed QC Robert Francis to investigate Mid Staffs in 2009. Mr Burnham said: 'I did not oppose a public inquiry when it was proposed by Andrew Lansley. But I always worried that a lengthy public inquiry might have implications for the hospital and said the Government should provide it with more public support, which I don't think it did.' "
"Yes that emotional intelligence defined in his attitude to the people of Liverpool and Staffordshire and the slight contrast. That will define him for ever, he really should be a non-runner in this race, he will be loyal to anyone if it helps him from Blair to McClusky but as Mike said quite rightly has shown no original thought, like Miliband Burnham would jump from one opportunist band-waggon to another with no long term vision, also like Miliband he is very much Lenny's man and the Conservatives would be all over him just the same.
Most important of all to the middle income, Midlands swing voter Burnham would be a big no that is a certainty. For Labour that should be the main concern."
Burnham was not even Health Secretary when Mid Staffs occurred. At present he polls as the most electable candidate so of course he is a runner and did Blair and Cameron ever show much original thought and were they not also opportunists? Unlike Ed Miliband Burnham has not won the unions backing actually, the GMB, Unite and the RMT have backed Corbyn.
You are also wrong on swing voters, after all in the poll I have just posted Burnham has the highest net favourables of all the Labour candidates amongst the public as a whole, the fact Corbyn came last means it cannot be dismissed
I will guarantee you now, Burnham will not fare well in the Midlands with the usual middle earning swing voters, I know the mentality like I tried to tell the ex Labour MP in May, I was right then and if you elect Burnham it will be the same again.
His pretend scouse will be a net loss as well outside Merseyside, not the most popular place is Liverpool.
I have failed to make it into work today after over three hours of waiting and hanging around at Shepherds Bush.
Time for the Reagan solution. Sack the lot of them. I'm sure there are plenty of people out there who would jump at the chance to work for TfL at between £30-35k plus benefits.
Everyone is different, but as someone who hasn't got the tube more than a dozen times n the last fifteen years (& even then only the district line) despite working in London for a lot of that time, I think the ease of travel on the tube leads people to think they can't possibly do without it
I'd say not getting the tube has shown me a lot of London ID never have seen otherwise and been a net benefit
Yeah, there are a couple of ways to get there without the tube, but every single overground train that arrives is packed to the extent that no one can get on and the buses were horrendously packed as well. Just called up and told them I'll work from home in the end. My manager didn't seem bothered given that he was also at home.
I noticed today talking to my colleagues that even left-leaning Londoners are having their views hardened against the unions. We've had so many strikes in recent years, and this one is so bad it's really been the final straw for a lot of people. I think we're getting to the point where the Mayoralty would have support for breaking their power even if it meant a lot of disruption in the mean time. We can't go on like this.
You have to wonder who at TfL or the Gherkin managed to get so close to the start of 24-hour running and only then notice they'd forgotten to sign up the unions. Cynics might also wonder if it was deliberate. Because as we know, industrial disputes are always caused by workers and never by management.
Industrial disputes are usually caused by employees not wanting to do what is in the best interest of the company and frequently the consumer. Outdated, nineteenth century mode of protest.
I have failed to make it into work today after over three hours of waiting and hanging around at Shepherds Bush.
Time for the Reagan solution. Sack the lot of them. I'm sure there are plenty of people out there who would jump at the chance to work for TfL at between £30-35k plus benefits.
Commiserations. Would it be far to walk? If I recall aright (but I may be a-wrong), Reagan had the military guys to fall back on.
A fair distance. I tend to baulk at more than about 40 or 50 minutes each way, say six miles round trip. Having flexi-hours is a big help.
... but you hung around for three hours. You'd have been there and back by now. On a nice sunny morning as a one-off I would definitely have walked three miles.
The walking to/from the little cross country train requires the six miler, which can be truly therapeutic---no headphones & no mobile. Otherwise I cycle the full whack which is longer of course, but takes the same sort of time and is less therapeutic owing to the bl**dy cars.
I think I misread that as being a six mile round trip. I used to walk from Waterloo to Piccadilly (and back) every day, but it's only a mile and a half. Got good exercise, saved money and avoided the hell that is the Jubilee Line. And a good use of time - I got an hour's exercise for the net loss of half that.
That's makes having another child before April 2016 a bit of a push
It is a bit tight, I think I was miscounting the months. But as it's just an eligibility issue, it could have been implemented mid-year.
The deadline is 2017, not 2016. It gives families with two children plenty of time to plan for a third, if they so desire.
( I do seem to see a lot of three child families these days, most usually where the first two children are the same sex - maybe the third was an attempt to get the missing boy/girl in the family)
That's makes having another child before April 2016 a bit of a push
It is a bit tight, I think I was miscounting the months. But as it's just an eligibility issue, it could have been implemented mid-year.
The deadline is 2017, not 2016. It gives families with two children plenty of time to plan for a third, if they so desire.
( I do seem to see a lot of three child families these days, most usually where the first two children are the same sex - maybe the third was an attempt to get the missing boy/girl in the family)
I'd like to have three children but my wife is happy to have two (we currently just have one). Three I think is a good limit as its how many you can fit in a regular car.
I have failed to make it into work today after over three hours of waiting and hanging around at Shepherds Bush.
Time for the Reagan solution. Sack the lot of them. I'm sure there are plenty of people out there who would jump at the chance to work for TfL at between £30-35k plus benefits.
Commiserations. Would it be far to walk? If I recall aright (but I may be a-wrong), Reagan had the military guys to fall back on.
A fair distance. I tend to baulk at more than about 40 or 50 minutes each way, say six miles round trip. Having flexi-hours is a big help.
... but you hung around for three hours. You'd have been there and back by now. On a nice sunny morning as a one-off I would definitely have walked three miles.
The walking to/from the little cross country train requires the six miler, which can be truly therapeutic---no headphones & no mobile. Otherwise I cycle the full whack which is longer of course, but takes the same sort of time and is less therapeutic owing to the bl**dy cars.
I think I misread that as being a six mile round trip. I used to walk from Waterloo to Piccadilly (and back) every day, but it's only a mile and a half. Got good exercise, saved money and avoided the hell that is the Jubilee Line. And a good use of time - I got an hour's exercise for the net loss of half that.
Yes, six mile round trip to & from the train stns. Otherwise cycle the whole lot w/o using the train. That's enough commuting (ed)
That's makes having another child before April 2016 a bit of a push
It is a bit tight, I think I was miscounting the months. But as it's just an eligibility issue, it could have been implemented mid-year.
The deadline is 2017, not 2016. It gives families with two children plenty of time to plan for a third, if they so desire.
( I do seem to see a lot of three child families these days, most usually where the first two children are the same sex - maybe the third was an attempt to get the missing boy/girl in the family)
I'd like to have three children but my wife is happy to have two (we currently just have one). Three I think is a good limit as its how many you can fit in a regular car.
"Yes that emotional intelligence defined in his attitude to the people of Liverpool and Staffordshire and the slight contrast. That will define him for ever, he really should be a non-runner in this race, he will be loyal to anyone if it helps him from Blair to McClusky but as Mike said quite rightly has shown no original thought, like Miliband Burnham would jump from one opportunist band-waggon to another with no long term vision, also like Miliband he is very much Lenny's man and the Conservatives would be all over him just the same.
Most important of all to the middle income, Midlands swing voter Burnham would be a big no that is a certainty. For Labour that should be the main concern."
Burnham was not even Health Secretary when Mid Staffs occurred. At present he polls as the most electable candidate so of course he is a runner and did Blair and Cameron ever show much original thought and were they not also opportunists? Unlike Ed Miliband Burnham has not won the unions backing actually, the GMB, Unite and the RMT have backed Corbyn.
You are also wrong on swing voters, after all in the poll I have just posted Burnham has the highest net favourables of all the Labour candidates amongst the public as a whole, the fact Corbyn came last means it cannot be dismissed
I will guarantee you now, Burnham will not fare well in the Midlands with the usual middle earning swing voters, I know the mentality like I tried to tell the ex Labour MP in May, I was right then and if you elect Burnham it will be the same again.
His pretend scouse will be a net loss as well outside Merseyside, not the most popular place is Liverpool.
From Yougov's last ST Labour leadership poll 3 weeks ago giving the popularity of the candidates, it shows Burnham does best in the North, true, but also the South. He does worst relatively in London
All London South Midlands/Wales North Scotland Burnham 10 6 10 7 17 9 Cooper 7 8 5 8 6 10 Kendall 4 4 4 5 3 4 Corbyn 4 5 4 3 2 8
I have failed to make it into work today after over three hours of waiting and hanging around at Shepherds Bush.
Time for the Reagan solution. Sack the lot of them. I'm sure there are plenty of people out there who would jump at the chance to work for TfL at between £30-35k plus benefits.
Everyone is different, but as someone who hasn't got the tube more than a dozen times n the last fifteen years (& even then only the district line) despite working in London for a lot of that time, I think the ease of travel on the tube leads people to think they can't possibly do without it
I'd say not getting the tube has shown me a lot of London ID never have seen otherwise and been a net benefit
Yeah, there are a couple of ways to get there without the tube, but every single overground train that arrives is packed to the extent that no one can get on and the buses were horrendously packed as well. Just called up and told them I'll work from home in the end. My manager didn't seem bothered given that he was also at home.
I noticed today talking to my colleagues that even left-leaning Londoners are having their views hardened against the unions. We've had so many strikes in recent years, and this one is so bad it's really been the final straw for a lot of people. I think we're getting to the point where the Mayoralty would have support for breaking their power even if it meant a lot of disruption in the mean time. We can't go on like this.
You have to wonder who at TfL or the Gherkin managed to get so close to the start of 24-hour running and only then notice they'd forgotten to sign up the unions. Cynics might also wonder if it was deliberate. Because as we know, industrial disputes are always caused by workers and never by management.
What has the Gherkin got to do with anything?
It is the unions that have called this strike, and the 24-hour tube has been known about for a long time. The union workers signed up for the contracts they signed up to. People don't exactly have much sympathy for them, when they have more than eight weeks holiday a year, complain about having to have a 45 minute commute, needed a bonus just to do their normal jobs during the Olympics, and are paid £50-65k after just five years.
"Yes that emotional intelligence defined in his attitude to the people of Liverpool and Staffordshire and the slight contrast. That will define him for ever, he really should be a non-runner in this race, he will be loyal to anyone if it helps him from Blair to McClusky but as Mike said quite rightly has shown no original thought, like Miliband Burnham would jump from one opportunist band-waggon to another with no long term vision, also like Miliband he is very much Lenny's man and the Conservatives would be all over him just the same.
Most important of all to the middle income, Midlands swing voter Burnham would be a big no that is a certainty. For Labour that should be the main concern."
Burnham was not even Health Secretary when Mid Staffs occurred. At present he polls as the most electable candidate so of course he is a runner and did Blair and Cameron ever show much original thought and were they not also opportunists? Unlike Ed Miliband Burnham has not won the unions backing actually, the GMB, Unite and the RMT have backed Corbyn.
You are also wrong on swing voters, after all in the poll I have just posted Burnham has the highest net favourables of all the Labour candidates amongst the public as a whole, the fact Corbyn came last means it cannot be dismissed
I will guarantee you now, Burnham will not fare well in the Midlands with the usual middle earning swing voters, I know the mentality like I tried to tell the ex Labour MP in May, I was right then and if you elect Burnham it will be the same again.
His pretend scouse will be a net loss as well outside Merseyside, not the most popular place is Liverpool.
From Yougov's last ST Labour leadership poll 3 weeks ago giving the popularity of the candidates, it shows Burnham does best in the North, true, but also the South. He does worst relatively in London
All London South Midlands/Wales North Scotland Burnham 10 6 10 7 17 9 Cooper 7 8 5 8 6 10 Kendall 4 4 4 5 3 4 Corbyn 4 5 4 3 2 8
After the General Election I take Yougov polls with a pinch of salt, Burnham will carry little respect among middle ground Midlanders that comment requires no polling.
I have failed to make it into work today after over three hours of waiting and hanging around at Shepherds Bush.
Time for the Reagan solution. Sack the lot of them. I'm sure there are plenty of people out there who would jump at the chance to work for TfL at between £30-35k plus benefits.
Everyone is different, but as someone who hasn't got the tube more than a dozen times n the last fifteen years (& even then only the district line) despite working in London for a lot of that time, I think the ease of travel on the tube leads people to think they can't possibly do without it
I'd say not getting the tube has shown me a lot of London ID never have seen otherwise and been a net benefit
Yeah, there are a couple of ways to get there without the tube, but every single overground train that arrives is packed to the extent that no one can get on and the buses were horrendously packed as well. Just called up and told them I'll work from home in the end. My manager didn't seem bothered given that he was also at home.
I noticed today talking to my colleagues that even left-leaning Londoners are having their views hardened against the unions. We've had so many strikes in recent years, and this one is so bad it's really been the final straw for a lot of people. I think we're getting to the point where the Mayoralty would have support for breaking their power even if it meant a lot of disruption in the mean time. We can't go on like this.
You have to wonder who at TfL or the Gherkin managed to get so close to the start of 24-hour running and only then notice they'd forgotten to sign up the unions. Cynics might also wonder if it was deliberate. Because as we know, industrial disputes are always caused by workers and never by management.
What has the Gherkin got to do with anything?
It is the unions that have called this strike, and the 24-hour tube has been known about for a long time. The union workers signed up for the contracts they signed up to. People don't exactly have much sympathy for them, when they have more than eight weeks holiday a year, complain about having to have a 45 minute commute, needed a bonus just to do their normal jobs during the Olympics, and are paid £50-65k after just five years.
Exactly. If they're so hard done by I suggest they quit and find a better job. Good luck with that!
Burnham was not even Health Secretary when Mid Staffs occurred. At present he polls as the most electable candidate so of course he is a runner and did Blair and Cameron ever show much original thought and were they not also opportunists? Unlike Ed Miliband Burnham has not won the unions backing actually, the GMB, Unite and the RMT have backed Corbyn.
You are also wrong on swing voters, after all in the poll I have just posted Burnham has the highest net favourables of all the Labour candidates amongst the public as a whole, the fact Corbyn came last means it cannot be dismissed
I will guarantee you now, Burnham will not fare well in the Midlands with the usual middle earning swing voters, I know the mentality like I tried to tell the ex Labour MP in May, I was right then and if you elect Burnham it will be the same again.
His pretend scouse will be a net loss as well outside Merseyside, not the most popular place is Liverpool.
From Yougov's last ST Labour leadership poll 3 weeks ago giving the popularity of the candidates, it shows Burnham does best in the North, true, but also the South. He does worst relatively in London
All London South Midlands/Wales North Scotland Burnham 10 6 10 7 17 9 Cooper 7 8 5 8 6 10 Kendall 4 4 4 5 3 4 Corbyn 4 5 4 3 2 8
After the General Election I take Yougov polls with a pinch of salt, Burnham will carry little respect among middle ground Midlanders that comment requires no polling.
Even allowing for the margin of error in that final tied Yougov poll (and Yougov still had Cameron as preferred PM) I prefer to go on factual polling evidence than whatever I may personally feel on matters like this. What is clear is that Burnham does as well, or slightly above his total in the nation as a whole in the North and the South, he actually does worse in London than the Midlands. Kendall does better than her average total in the Midlands, worse in the North, Corbyn gets well above his average score in Scotland and also does worst in the North. Cooper does best in Scotland, worst in the South
The narrative is totally irrelevant, one way or another. Nobody will remember any of this in 5 years. I doubt 1 single vote was altered by the omnishambles budget.
It is clear that the direction of travel is to try and vastly scale back pernicious tax credits and reduce the current ridiculous merry go round.
It is no shock at all that this budget was a tax rising one. If you look back in history pretty much every single budget after a GE is, and I said this would be the case no matter who wins only a few months ago.
Err....no. This was a huge budget. It set in stone the objective of balanced budgets. It limited welfare. It started to wind up Gordo's fuckwitted tax credits wheeze. It changed the political narrative. It was one to remember.
As for Yvette Cooper,her appeal goes further than just Labour party leader,she is recognisable as a future PM on the world stage alongside Hillary and Nicola.Anyone who can stand up to Ed Balls ought to find Putin pretty feeble.Labour could be persuaded to elect its first woman leader.Certainly comments from a key Andy Burnham ally,Rachel Reeves,on social security policy,will have persuaded some Corbynites to switch to YC on second choices.My guess is that Liz Kendall supporters will largely migrate to YC on 2nd choices as well as the sisterhood operation cranks into top gear.She may be seen as the least worst candidate for others in choosing 2nd preferences. More and more CLPs are going through nominations.The numbers so far still indicate that Andy Burnham is in a good lead but will need to keep it to avoid losing on 2nd preferences.
The Budget has revealed Osborne to be essentially dishonourable and slippery.We had already seen a very big change in his projections between he Autumn Statement and the March Budget. Now in barely three months he plans to spend an additional £83billion over the course of this Parliament. Where did the need for this suddenly come from? From what he said in March and last Autumn this man can very reasonably now be described as a bare-faced liar. Not the kind of human being we need to be responsible for our affairs at all
Err....no. This was a huge budget. It set in stone the objective of balanced budgets. It limited welfare. It started to wind up Gordo's fuckwitted tax credits wheeze. It changed the political narrative. It was one to remember.
You will remember this, I will remember this, the general public won't. It is changing the direction of flow, but 95% of people won't remember well the tax credits didn't go up, so that means I'm worse off on that front, but then factoring in.....
It is why fiscal drag was so successfully employed by Gordon Brown, because even if the IFS etc pointed out OIIIII HE IS SNEAKING THROUGH A TAX RISE....nobody remembers it in 6 months.
'Andy Burnham said events had borne out his view that the benefits of a public inquiry had not outweighed the reputational damage to the hospital.'
The only concern Burnham had was the potential reputational damage to Labour and himself.
"the reputational damage to the hospital" vs the deaths and mess encrusted misery, pain and horror inflicted on the patients. Still we know which side Burnham is on. The side of producer interests.
The Budget has revealed Osborne to be essentially dishonourable and slippery.We had already seen a very big change in his projections between he Autumn Statement and the March Budget. Now in barely three months he plans to spend an additional £83billion over the course of this Parliament. Where did the need for this suddenly come from? From what he said in March and last Autumn this man can very reasonably now be described as a bare-faced liar. Not the kind of human being we need to be responsible for our affairs at all
He did the same last parly - made him look good when he improved on the figures near the GE.
As for Yvette Cooper,her appeal goes further than just Labour party leader,she is recognisable as a future PM on the world stage alongside Hillary and Nicola.
A man accused of attacking and robbing a 93-year-old woman in her home has been charged under an ancient law which formerly carried the death penalty.
Graeme Bryden 27, of Stevenston, North Ayrshire, has appeared in court on an allegation of hamesucken.
The centuries-old charge would previously lead to death by hanging for those found guilty of committing the crime. It relates to the act of pursuing someone into their home with the intention of assaulting them.
The Budget has revealed Osborne to be essentially dishonourable and slippery.We had already seen a very big change in his projections between he Autumn Statement and the March Budget. Now in barely three months he plans to spend an additional £83billion over the course of this Parliament. Where did the need for this suddenly come from? From what he said in March and last Autumn this man can very reasonably now be described as a bare-faced liar. Not the kind of human being we need to be responsible for our affairs at all
He did the same last parly - made him look good when he improved on the figures near the GE.
Yes, he will probably find that his numbers are better than expected in 2018 which will give him scope for tax cuts.
Expectations management and political expediency, it has ever been thus.
williamglenn said: The BBC doing their best to change the narrative on the budget: Breaking News: Benefits freeze 'to hit 13m families' http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-33463864
Yes they are. Osborne may be regretting all the extras he agreed with the BBC.
williamglenn said: The BBC doing their best to change the narrative on the budget: Breaking News: Benefits freeze 'to hit 13m families' http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-33463864
Yes they are. Osborne may be regretting all the extras he agreed with the BBC.
The charter is coming up for renewal next year, if this has been done on a gentleman's agreement so that they Licence Fee doesn't drop and the BBC take on this burden then the BBC are playing with fire. Once the legislation is through in September the government can do what it wants if the BBC are still taking the hostile route. I know I would be looking to force a sale of BBC1 and Radio 1.
The Budget has revealed Osborne to be essentially dishonourable and slippery.We had already seen a very big change in his projections between he Autumn Statement and the March Budget. Now in barely three months he plans to spend an additional £83billion over the course of this Parliament. Where did the need for this suddenly come from? From what he said in March and last Autumn this man can very reasonably now be described as a bare-faced liar. Not the kind of human being we need to be responsible for our affairs at all
He did the same last parly - made him look good when he improved on the figures near the GE.
Yes, he will probably find that his numbers are better than expected in 2018 which will give him scope for tax cuts.
Expectations management and political expediency, it has ever been thus.
More likely he is going to undershoot and announce the surplus a year early, thus entrenching sound money as a Tory value.
The Budget has revealed Osborne to be essentially dishonourable and slippery.We had already seen a very big change in his projections between he Autumn Statement and the March Budget. Now in barely three months he plans to spend an additional £83billion over the course of this Parliament. Where did the need for this suddenly come from? From what he said in March and last Autumn this man can very reasonably now be described as a bare-faced liar. Not the kind of human being we need to be responsible for our affairs at all
He did the same last parly - made him look good when he improved on the figures near the GE.
Yes, he will probably find that his numbers are better than expected in 2018 which will give him scope for tax cuts.
Expectations management and political expediency, it has ever been thus.
More likely he is going to undershoot and announce the surplus a year early, thus entrenching sound money as a Tory value.
The Budget has revealed Osborne to be essentially dishonourable and slippery.We had already seen a very big change in his projections between he Autumn Statement and the March Budget. Now in barely three months he plans to spend an additional £83billion over the course of this Parliament. Where did the need for this suddenly come from? From what he said in March and last Autumn this man can very reasonably now be described as a bare-faced liar. Not the kind of human being we need to be responsible for our affairs at all
He did the same last parly - made him look good when he improved on the figures near the GE.
Yes, he will probably find that his numbers are better than expected in 2018 which will give him scope for tax cuts.
Expectations management and political expediency, it has ever been thus.
More likely he is going to undershoot and announce the surplus a year early, thus entrenching sound money as a Tory value.
Or he wants to stimulate the economy during 2017 to improve the economic climate for the Brexit referendum.
Burnham was not even Health Secretary when Mid Staffs occurred. At present he polls as the most electable candidate so of course he is a runner and did Blair and Cameron ever show much original thought and were they not also opportunists? Unlike Ed Miliband Burnham has not won the unions backing actually, the GMB, Unite and the RMT have backed Corbyn.
Labour was accused of insulting the victims of the Mid Staffs hospital scandal last night after its health spokesman suggested it would have been better if the report into their deaths had never been published.
Andy Burnham said events had borne out his view that the benefits of a public inquiry had not outweighed the reputational damage to the hospital.
"Mr Burnham appointed QC Robert Francis to investigate Mid Staffs in 2009. Mr Burnham said: 'I did not oppose a public inquiry when it was proposed by Andrew Lansley. But I always worried that a lengthy public inquiry might have implications for the hospital and said the Government should provide it with more public support, which I don't think it did.' "
Francis himself criticised that inquiry's remit as being too narrow, which led to the coalition appointing him as chair of the public inquiry.
As an example: Burnham's independent, but narrow, inquiry came up with 18 local and national recommendations. The wider public inquiry made 290 recommendations.
On another point: whilst Burnham was not Health Secretary when Mid Staffs occurred, he was in the health department in 2006-7 as Minister of State (Department of Health) (Delivery and Quality)
Angela Merkel has ruled out slashing the face value of Greece’s government debt.
“In 2012 we dealt with the issue of debt sustainability. We stretched out the maturities, we pushed back the repayment requirement for EFSF loans out to 2020. So we are not dealing with debt sustainability for the first time,” Merkel said when asked about differences with the IMF over a debt writedown for Greece.
“I have said that a classic haircut is out of the question for me and that hasn’t changed between yesterday and today.”
Appears the lady has finally put her foot down. The weekend summit looks like being lots of fun, - if Tsipras can get his debt proposals written in time.
The Budget has revealed Osborne to be essentially dishonourable and slippery.We had already seen a very big change in his projections between he Autumn Statement and the March Budget. Now in barely three months he plans to spend an additional £83billion over the course of this Parliament. Where did the need for this suddenly come from? From what he said in March and last Autumn this man can very reasonably now be described as a bare-faced liar. Not the kind of human being we need to be responsible for our affairs at all
Osborne has put back the projected surplus by 12 months and that surplus will be £10bn bigger. He has announced £37bn of 'fiscal consolidation' by the end of this parliament. That is like for like £37bn less each year thereafter by the end of the parliament.
Needs? He has guaranteed increases in NHS and defence spending. Over 5 years the govt will supposedly spend an extra £83bn, this is out of a total spend of some £3.7 trillion. This extra spend over 5 years is half of one years deficit inherited in 2010. And at least half of that extra spend is to sustain the NHS and that was clearly promised by the tories before the election.
williamglenn said: The BBC doing their best to change the narrative on the budget: Breaking News: Benefits freeze 'to hit 13m families' http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-33463864
Yes they are. Osborne may be regretting all the extras he agreed with the BBC.
The charter is coming up for renewal next year, if this has been done on a gentleman's agreement so that they Licence Fee doesn't drop and the BBC take on this burden then the BBC are playing with fire. Once the legislation is through in September the government can do what it wants if the BBC are still taking the hostile route. I know I would be looking to force a sale of BBC1 and Radio 1.
The "hostile route" being reporting an IFS study as happens after every budget. Sky News also has it. Has Rupert defected too?
Angela Merkel has ruled out slashing the face value of Greece’s government debt.
“In 2012 we dealt with the issue of debt sustainability. We stretched out the maturities, we pushed back the repayment requirement for EFSF loans out to 2020. So we are not dealing with debt sustainability for the first time,” Merkel said when asked about differences with the IMF over a debt writedown for Greece.
“I have said that a classic haircut is out of the question for me and that hasn’t changed between yesterday and today.”
Appears the lady has finally put her foot down. The weekend summit looks like being lots of fun, - if Tsipras can get his debt proposals written in time.
Angela Merkel has ruled out slashing the face value of Greece’s government debt. .
Will the dog eat Tsipras' homework again ?
Not this time, the French have sent in minders to make sure he brings it to class on time.
Can’t believe they didn’t even bother putting pen to paper for a Plan A, much less a Plan B. – Meanwhile the banks remain closed for another week. Personally I’d me rather miffed if I was living in Athens…!
Angela Merkel has ruled out slashing the face value of Greece’s government debt.
“In 2012 we dealt with the issue of debt sustainability. We stretched out the maturities, we pushed back the repayment requirement for EFSF loans out to 2020. So we are not dealing with debt sustainability for the first time,” Merkel said when asked about differences with the IMF over a debt writedown for Greece.
“I have said that a classic haircut is out of the question for me and that hasn’t changed between yesterday and today.”
Appears the lady has finally put her foot down. The weekend summit looks like being lots of fun, - if Tsipras can get his debt proposals written in time.
Should Angela Merkel in particular find herself in the dog house come Sunday, especially with the likes of France and other Socialist Greek - supporting EU states, she is likely to turn to Britain for support.
Merkel says a 'classic haircut' is out of the question. Smiplistic, but I presme then a haircut of some stripe is on the horizon then? Perhaps one wrapped in european fudge to make it look less classic?
Burnham was not even Health Secretary when Mid Staffs occurred. At present he polls as the most electable candidate so of course he is a runner and did Blair and Cameron ever show much original thought and were they not also opportunists? Unlike Ed Miliband Burnham has not won the unions backing actually, the GMB, Unite and the RMT have backed Corbyn.
Labour was accused of insulting the victims of the Mid Staffs hospital scandal last night after its health spokesman suggested it would have been better if the report into their deaths had never been published.
Andy Burnham said events had borne out his view that the benefits of a public inquiry had not outweighed the reputational damage to the hospital.
"Mr Burnham appointed QC Robert Francis to investigate Mid Staffs in 2009. Mr Burnham said: 'I did not oppose a public inquiry when it was proposed by Andrew Lansley. But I always worried that a lengthy public inquiry might have implications for the hospital and said the Government should provide it with more public support, which I don't think it did.' "
Francis himself criticised that inquiry's remit as being too narrow, which led to the coalition appointing him as chair of the public inquiry.
As an example: Burnham's independent, but narrow, inquiry came up with 18 local and national recommendations. The wider public inquiry made 290 recommendations.
On another point: whilst Burnham was not Health Secretary when Mid Staffs occurred, he was in the health department in 2006-7 as Minister of State (Department of Health) (Delivery and Quality)
The public really are not going to be engaged about whose enquiry was better and as you say Alan Johnson was Health Secretary at the time
Comments
August
Sept
Oct
Nov
Dec
Jan
Feb
March
That's makes having another child before April 2016 a bit of a push!
"It takes a woman 9 months to have a baby. It cannot be done in 1 month with 9 women"
A redrafted version of the plan will be published on Monday and debated for two days next week, Mr Grayling said.
He would then "publish and table a final set of standing orders" which MPs would debate after the summer recess.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-33462204
Reagan managed to get most ATC systems working quite quickly with managers and military controllers, relied on a lot of goodwill from airlines and customers for a couple of years as the new recruits were trained up and qualified.
Really hope that TfL and the Mayor take this seriously now. It's happening too often and for trivial reasons, billions of pounds are lost from businesses large and small every time it happens.
Long term of course the plan needs to be to move to automated trains, a program which needs to be accelerated dramatically.
"Mr Burnham appointed QC Robert Francis to investigate Mid Staffs in 2009.
Mr Burnham said: 'I did not oppose a public inquiry when it was proposed by Andrew Lansley. But I always worried that a lengthy public inquiry might have implications for the hospital and said the Government should provide it with more public support, which I don't think it did.' "
Most important of all to the middle income, Midlands swing voter Burnham would be a big no that is a certainty. For Labour that should be the main concern."
Burnham was not even Health Secretary when Mid Staffs occurred. At present he polls as the most electable candidate so of course he is a runner and did Blair and Cameron ever show much original thought and were they not also opportunists? Unlike Ed Miliband Burnham has not won the unions backing actually, the GMB, Unite and the RMT have backed Corbyn.
You are also wrong on swing voters, after all in the poll I have just posted Burnham has the highest net favourables of all the Labour candidates amongst the public as a whole, the fact Corbyn came last means it cannot be dismissed
I will guarantee you now, Burnham will not fare well in the Midlands with the usual middle earning swing voters, I know the mentality like I tried to tell the ex Labour MP in May, I was right then and if you elect Burnham it will be the same again.
His pretend scouse will be a net loss as well outside Merseyside, not the most popular place is Liverpool.
'Andy Burnham said events had borne out his view that the benefits of a public inquiry had not outweighed the reputational damage to the hospital.'
The only concern Burnham had was the potential reputational damage to Labour and himself.
It gives families with two children plenty of time to plan for a third, if they so desire.
( I do seem to see a lot of three child families these days, most usually where the first two children are the same sex - maybe the third was an attempt to get the missing boy/girl in the family)
http://oneyeartimetrial.org.uk/
You are also wrong on swing voters, after all in the poll I have just posted Burnham has the highest net favourables of all the Labour candidates amongst the public as a whole, the fact Corbyn came last means it cannot be dismissed
I will guarantee you now, Burnham will not fare well in the Midlands with the usual middle earning swing voters, I know the mentality like I tried to tell the ex Labour MP in May, I was right then and if you elect Burnham it will be the same again.
His pretend scouse will be a net loss as well outside Merseyside, not the most popular place is Liverpool.
From Yougov's last ST Labour leadership poll 3 weeks ago giving the popularity of the candidates, it shows Burnham does best in the North, true, but also the South. He does worst relatively in London
All London South Midlands/Wales North Scotland
Burnham 10 6 10 7 17 9
Cooper 7 8 5 8 6 10
Kendall 4 4 4 5 3 4
Corbyn 4 5 4 3 2 8
https://yougov.co.uk/publicopinion/archive/?page=6
It is the unions that have called this strike, and the 24-hour tube has been known about for a long time. The union workers signed up for the contracts they signed up to. People don't exactly have much sympathy for them, when they have more than eight weeks holiday a year, complain about having to have a 45 minute commute, needed a bonus just to do their normal jobs during the Olympics, and are paid £50-65k after just five years.
His pretend scouse will be a net loss as well outside Merseyside, not the most popular place is Liverpool.
From Yougov's last ST Labour leadership poll 3 weeks ago giving the popularity of the candidates, it shows Burnham does best in the North, true, but also the South. He does worst relatively in London
All London South Midlands/Wales North Scotland
Burnham 10 6 10 7 17 9
Cooper 7 8 5 8 6 10
Kendall 4 4 4 5 3 4
Corbyn 4 5 4 3 2 8
https://yougov.co.uk/publicopinion/archive/?page=6
After the General Election I take Yougov polls with a pinch of salt, Burnham will carry little respect among middle ground Midlanders that comment requires no polling.
Burnham was not even Health Secretary when Mid Staffs occurred. At present he polls as the most electable candidate so of course he is a runner and did Blair and Cameron ever show much original thought and were they not also opportunists? Unlike Ed Miliband Burnham has not won the unions backing actually, the GMB, Unite and the RMT have backed Corbyn.
You are also wrong on swing voters, after all in the poll I have just posted Burnham has the highest net favourables of all the Labour candidates amongst the public as a whole, the fact Corbyn came last means it cannot be dismissed
I will guarantee you now, Burnham will not fare well in the Midlands with the usual middle earning swing voters, I know the mentality like I tried to tell the ex Labour MP in May, I was right then and if you elect Burnham it will be the same again.
His pretend scouse will be a net loss as well outside Merseyside, not the most popular place is Liverpool.
From Yougov's last ST Labour leadership poll 3 weeks ago giving the popularity of the candidates, it shows Burnham does best in the North, true, but also the South. He does worst relatively in London
All London South Midlands/Wales North Scotland
Burnham 10 6 10 7 17 9
Cooper 7 8 5 8 6 10
Kendall 4 4 4 5 3 4
Corbyn 4 5 4 3 2 8
https://yougov.co.uk/publicopinion/archive/?page=6
After the General Election I take Yougov polls with a pinch of salt, Burnham will carry little respect among middle ground Midlanders that comment requires no polling.
Even allowing for the margin of error in that final tied Yougov poll (and Yougov still had Cameron as preferred PM) I prefer to go on factual polling evidence than whatever I may personally feel on matters like this. What is clear is that Burnham does as well, or slightly above his total in the nation as a whole in the North and the South, he actually does worse in London than the Midlands. Kendall does better than her average total in the Midlands, worse in the North, Corbyn gets well above his average score in Scotland and also does worst in the North. Cooper does best in Scotland, worst in the South
Breaking News: Benefits freeze 'to hit 13m families'
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-33463864
It is clear that the direction of travel is to try and vastly scale back pernicious tax credits and reduce the current ridiculous merry go round.
It is no shock at all that this budget was a tax rising one. If you look back in history pretty much every single budget after a GE is, and I said this would be the case no matter who wins only a few months ago.
More and more CLPs are going through nominations.The numbers so far still indicate that Andy Burnham is in a good lead but will need to keep it to avoid losing on 2nd preferences.
It is why fiscal drag was so successfully employed by Gordon Brown, because even if the IFS etc pointed out OIIIII HE IS SNEAKING THROUGH A TAX RISE....nobody remembers it in 6 months.
Still we know which side Burnham is on. The side of producer interests.
Expectations management and political expediency, it has ever been thus.
Breaking News: Benefits freeze 'to hit 13m families'
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-33463864
Yes they are. Osborne may be regretting all the extras he agreed with the BBC.
Mr Burnham said: 'I did not oppose a public inquiry when it was proposed by Andrew Lansley. But I always worried that a lengthy public inquiry might have implications for the hospital and said the Government should provide it with more public support, which I don't think it did.' "
Francis himself criticised that inquiry's remit as being too narrow, which led to the coalition appointing him as chair of the public inquiry.
As an example: Burnham's independent, but narrow, inquiry came up with 18 local and national recommendations. The wider public inquiry made 290 recommendations.
On another point: whilst Burnham was not Health Secretary when Mid Staffs occurred, he was in the health department in 2006-7 as Minister of State (Department of Health) (Delivery and Quality)
“In 2012 we dealt with the issue of debt sustainability. We stretched out the maturities, we pushed back the repayment requirement for EFSF loans out to 2020. So we are not dealing with debt sustainability for the first time,” Merkel said when asked about differences with the IMF over a debt writedown for Greece.
“I have said that a classic haircut is out of the question for me and that hasn’t changed between yesterday and today.”
Appears the lady has finally put her foot down. The weekend summit looks like being lots of fun, - if Tsipras can get his debt proposals written in time.
He has announced £37bn of 'fiscal consolidation' by the end of this parliament. That is like for like £37bn less each year thereafter by the end of the parliament.
Needs? He has guaranteed increases in NHS and defence spending.
Over 5 years the govt will supposedly spend an extra £83bn, this is out of a total spend of some £3.7 trillion.
This extra spend over 5 years is half of one years deficit inherited in 2010. And at least half of that extra spend is to sustain the NHS and that was clearly promised by the tories before the election.
Can’t believe they didn’t even bother putting pen to paper for a Plan A, much less a Plan B. – Meanwhile the banks remain closed for another week. Personally I’d me rather miffed if I was living in Athens…!
new thread
As an example: Burnham's independent, but narrow, inquiry came up with 18 local and national recommendations. The wider public inquiry made 290 recommendations.
On another point: whilst Burnham was not Health Secretary when Mid Staffs occurred, he was in the health department in 2006-7 as Minister of State (Department of Health) (Delivery and Quality)
The public really are not going to be engaged about whose enquiry was better and as you say Alan Johnson was Health Secretary at the time