I noticed that the Conservative briefers in the media this morning apart from Cameron were Francis Maude, Matt Hancock and Heseltine. Not top drawer these days. Close to Osborne. Maybe Osborne thinks denying space to rivals is best?
Incidentally, is there a way to filter out the tedious repetitive ramblings of two or three individuals in the comments? I Google and it appears that Vanilla does have an Ignore function but it looks like it needs to be implemented by the site administrator.
If you don't like what people write on here you can always collect your refund on the way out
I think Mr Rawnsley is saving that for his next piece. That so many of us think it's blindingly obvious what the strategy is - and Andrew is very plugged into Labour...
I look forward to reading his next book It Really Is The End Of The Party, perhaps?
One impressively sparky member of the 2015 intake remarked: “When I was elected I was worried that I would be labelled hard left. Now I seem to be centre-right.” Although sponsored by one of the most leftwing of the trade unions, this MP reported that she was already getting some trouble from activists in her constituency party for displaying insufficient levels of dedication to Corbynism
Andrew Rawnsley is halfway there. But he doesn't seem to appreciate that Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell are following a clear strategy which makes all of their behaviour fall into place.
Once you realise that their primary goal is not to win the next election, everything falls into place.
One impressively sparky member of the 2015 intake remarked: “When I was elected I was worried that I would be labelled hard left. Now I seem to be centre-right.” Although sponsored by one of the most leftwing of the trade unions, this MP reported that she was already getting some trouble from activists in her constituency party for displaying insufficient levels of dedication to Corbynism
Andrew Rawnsley is halfway there. But he doesn't seem to appreciate that Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell are following a clear strategy which makes all of their behaviour fall into place.
Once you realise that their primary goal is not to win the next election, everything falls into place.
Perhaps, although their initial goal wasn't to win the labour leadership contest either but they still did. A GE is a different beast, if they even get that far, but a troubling thought nonetheless that the same lack of care could win again. Low probability though I'd hope.
Mr. 86, Le Mans doesn't get much coverage either. Excepting F1, no form of motorsport does.
Why does BTCC not get coverage any more? It used to be the best and most thrilling form of motor racing.
ITV4 show each race live; in fact they show virtually the entire day including support races. They can be great fun, and well worht a watch. There is also a highlights package of the races.
This might just be an impression, but the BBC used to mention BTCC a little, whereas now it's on ITV it's like the sport no longer exists.
And now, as I said on the last thread, I have to go back to school and carry on working. Have a nice weekend everyone.
My sympathies. I saw your rant. Another public service being hollowed out by excessive inspection regimes (that are not even effective - having been part of 2 CQC visits).
There is something wrong with the system if a single teacher is spending a single minute preparing for an Ofsted inspection.
The only soluton to that is sudden unannounced inspections. Why would that be a bad thing?
It seems incredible that they are not already unannounced. If they were unannounced for every school, then it would still be fair on all.
As a side issue, it used to be the case that headteachers could only spend three hours a year observing teachers who worked in the school give lessons, and these sessions had to be pre-announced and negotiated with the teacher concerned. This requirement was removed in 2012.
It was a hideous barrier that could only prevent a head from realising when things are going wrong inside a class. I cannot think why this was seen to be of advantage to the teacher or pupils.
I noticed that the Conservative briefers in the media this morning apart from Cameron were Francis Maude and Matt Hancock. Not top drawer. Close to Osborne. Maybe Osborne thinks denying space to rivals is best?
I hated Grandstand acres of football or racing - now WoS was really rather fun, lots of different things all in chunks for just long enough to enjoy or bear. I loved the novelty international coverage of cliff diving et al. And of course the wrestling.
I don't recall Grandstand ever covering wrestling.
World of Sport with Dickie Davies iirc
Yes I "misremembered" that one to coin a phrase. The point I was trying to make was the lesser known sports got an airing in front of joe public which resulted in additional interest and hopefully some cash for the sport.
I think that the wrestling was a separate programme but it's a long time ago.
Incidentally, is there a way to filter out the tedious repetitive ramblings of two or three individuals in the comments? I Google and it appears that Vanilla does have an Ignore function but it looks like it needs to be implemented by the site administrator.
If you don't like what people write on here you can always collect your refund on the way out
99% of what is written is top drawer. It's worth putting up with the 1% though it would be better to not have to.
@ThreeQuidder - if you use Firefox, download Greasemonkey then install the widget from Edmund's website - it's the one that he created for the Vanilla issue where posts wouldn't nest.
Incidentally, is there a way to filter out the tedious repetitive ramblings of two or three individuals in the comments? I Google and it appears that Vanilla does have an Ignore function but it looks like it needs to be implemented by the site administrator.
If you don't like what people write on here you can always collect your refund on the way out
Mr. 86, Le Mans doesn't get much coverage either. Excepting F1, no form of motorsport does.
Why does BTCC not get coverage any more? It used to be the best and most thrilling form of motor racing.
ITV4 show each race live; in fact they show virtually the entire day including support races. They can be great fun, and well worht a watch. There is also a highlights package of the races.
This might just be an impression, but the BBC used to mention BTCC a little, whereas now it's on ITV it's like the sport no longer exists.
And now, as I said on the last thread, I have to go back to school and carry on working. Have a nice weekend everyone.
My sympathies. I saw your rant. Another public service being hollowed out by excessive inspection regimes (that are not even effective - having been part of 2 CQC visits).
There is something wrong with the system if a single teacher is spending a single minute preparing for an Ofsted inspection.
My wife worked admin in a junior school for 10 years. She said OFSTED it was the stuff of nightmares and the outcomes rarely matched realities. for example She and teachers had to use other children to translate to the children that could not speak English of which there were many. Much of the schools resources were then directed at this issue amongst many other similar situations.
Junior school as in ages 7 to 11? Why are there "many" children who can't speak English? Is it a Welsh school?
An English school in the shires. The issue is partly immigration but the costs of teaching English first drains resources from other areas and reduces the standards overall as teachers try to help them catch up. It slows the entire teaching process and one to one is used but at great cost. Nothing else that can be done it just has to be addressed. It's very very difficult.
This school was not alone by far. Then OFSTED turn up on the doorstep and place the school in special measures and the parents are on the phone screaming blue murder.
That Sunday Times article above also indicates that there is a long queue of people lining up to fight Osborne. Will Osborne be able to get enough votes to be in the final 2?
Probably yes, the Stop Osborne candidates will be fighting each other more than him to get the second spot.
EDIT: Assuming (a) he goes for it rather than backs another person and (b) the economy and thus his reputation isn't derailed by events.
I noticed that the Conservative briefers in the media this morning apart from Cameron were Francis Maude and Matt Hancock. Not top drawer. Close to Osborne. Maybe Osborne thinks denying space to rivals is best?
Thanks, I missed that, was she less pre-programmed than recently?
I think Mr Rawnsley is saving that for his next piece. That so many of us think it's blindingly obvious what the strategy is - and Andrew is very plugged into Labour...
I look forward to reading his next book It Really Is The End Of The Party, perhaps?
One impressively sparky member of the 2015 intake remarked: “When I was elected I was worried that I would be labelled hard left. Now I seem to be centre-right.” Although sponsored by one of the most leftwing of the trade unions, this MP reported that she was already getting some trouble from activists in her constituency party for displaying insufficient levels of dedication to Corbynism
Andrew Rawnsley is halfway there. But he doesn't seem to appreciate that Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell are following a clear strategy which makes all of their behaviour fall into place.
Once you realise that their primary goal is not to win the next election, everything falls into place.
The 90% of Labour MPs that are not supporters of Corbyn are either praying for a miracle or putting support of the Leader before the survival of the party.
That Sunday Times article above also indicates that there is a long queue of people lining up to fight Osborne. Will Osborne be able to get enough votes to be in the final 2?
Probably yes, the Stop Osborne candidates will be fighting each other more than him to get the second spot.
EDIT: Assuming (a) he goes for it rather than backs another person and (b) the economy and thus his reputation isn't derailed by events.
He would not be the first deputy to Cameron or go to China or lead the EC re-negotiations if that wa not his aim. Osborne is backing Osborne.
Mr. 86, Le Mans doesn't get much coverage either. Excepting F1, no form of motorsport does.
Why does BTCC not get coverage any more? It used to be the best and most thrilling form of motor racing.
ITV4 show each race live; in fact they show virtually the entire day including support races. They can be great fun, and well worht a watch. There is also a highlights package of the races.
This might just be an impression, but the BBC used to mention BTCC a little, whereas now it's on ITV it's like the sport no longer exists.
And now, as I said on the last thread, I have to go back to school and carry on working. Have a nice weekend everyone.
My sympathies. I saw your rant. Another public service being hollowed out by excessive inspection regimes (that are not even effective - having been part of 2 CQC visits).
There is something wrong with the system if a single teacher is spending a single minute preparing for an Ofsted inspection.
My wife worked admin in a junior school for 10 years. She said OFSTED it was the stuff of nightmares and the outcomes rarely matched realities. for example She and teachers had to use other children to translate to the children that could not speak English of which there were many. Much of the schools resources were then directed at this issue amongst many other similar situations.
Junior school as in ages 7 to 11? Why are there "many" children who can't speak English? Is it a Welsh school?
An English school in the shires. The issue is partly immigration but the costs of teaching English first drains resources from other areas and reduces the standards overall as teachers try to help them catch up. It slows the entire teaching process and one to one is used but at great cost. Nothing else that can be done it just has to be addressed. It's very very difficult.
This school was not alone by far. Then OFSTED turn up on the doorstep and place the school in special measures and the parents are on the phone screaming blue murder.
Good for OSTED to expose the failings. Otherwise the future poor exam results will come as a surprise. The question for the Governors is what are they doing about it?
Classic few words from Dave He really is good at his job.
If you think his job is coming over well in an interview. Which rather seems to be the issue.
No mate. He is the master of the put down. Calm down dear was a classic as enraged the ghastly woman.
Pity the joke's on the British people as the national debt has doubled and the balance of trade is through the floor. Perhaps Dave could aim some put downs at looming economic disaster, see if that works.
I noticed that the Conservative briefers in the media this morning apart from Cameron were Francis Maude and Matt Hancock. Not top drawer. Close to Osborne. Maybe Osborne thinks denying space to rivals is best?
Thanks, I missed that, was she less pre-programmed than recently?
Cameron on Marr making it pretty clear he'd campaign for Leave if he doesn't get what he wants in terms of negotiations. Good stuff - just what I wanted to hear.
I wonder what the odds on Cameron campaigning for leave are?
Whatever they are, they're too short.
Yes!
Nothing wrong with wanting to stay in EU if that's your thing, but honestly 'just what I wanted to hear'... His spinners must be patting themselves on the back when they read that
Classic few words from Dave He really is good at his job.
If you think his job is coming over well in an interview. Which rather seems to be the issue.
No mate. He is the master of the put down. Calm down dear was a classic as enraged the ghastly woman.
Pity the joke's on the British people as the national debt has doubled and the balance of trade is through the floor. Perhaps Dave could aim some put downs at looming economic disaster, see if that works.
You are far too one eyed to accept that your party is responsible for the.mess the Tories are having to clear up. No austerity Corbyyn and his loons would make it infinitely worse than it is... as would have EICAWNBPM .
< Haha, his insane rantings do cover more than just the SNP you know. But the core of his fantasy is an inveterate hate of Scotland. He even admits that he's just making it all up in his latest "article".
A confession: the more astute among you may be asking why these graphs start in 2008 and why I've used indexed data in two cases. The answer is simple - it serves my argument best to present the data that way.
I understand why you are embarrassed by the routine demolition of SNP policy - but admitting to selectivity in data presentation is hardly "making it all up"
If he wants to do that I'm sure he'll know where to look!
Now you're just embarrassing yourself.
Arguments should be derived from data not the other way around. Hague freely admits he manipulates the data to back up his argument. That is the definition of making it up. The guy is a self-admitted liar and a charlatan.
It's the core problem with Loyalists. Anyone looking at the data with fresh eyes and no ideological bias sees very clearly that Scotland has been harmed from the Union. That's how I went from a staunch (albeit Republican) Unionist, card carrying member of the Conservative and Unionist Party to backing Scottish Independence and voting for the SNP (but not a member, I don't care the vehicle).
The Loyalists can't win an argument because they don't have the numbers, the amount of money drained out of Scotland over the last 50 years is VAST, around £500bn. Even worse, you can see not 200 miles away over the North Sea what retaining that wealth within the country would actually do to an economy and a nation.
But Loyalism is not pragmatic or rational or realist. It is an ideologically driven desire to justify and maintain a Union which is harmful to Scotland. And the only way to justify this is by lying about the numbers - as Hague freely admits he does.
I'm prepared to look at your data with fresh eyes - I won't necessarily think the best solution to the issue today lies with separation, but if the facts on past financial transactions are clear, I will acknowledge them as such. Can you point me to them?
That's 30 permanently stripped of their passports using a Royal Prerogative re Enemies of the State [anyone know about this?] And 20 temporarily basis.
It's not hubris, I genuinely believe anyone on that list could beat Jeremy Corbyn. The question is, if events become events, can they beat Jeremy Corbyn's successor?
Classic few words from Dave He really is good at his job.
If you think his job is coming over well in an interview. Which rather seems to be the issue.
No mate. He is the master of the put down. Calm down dear was a classic as enraged the ghastly woman.
Pity the joke's on the British people as the national debt has doubled and the balance of trade is through the floor. Perhaps Dave could aim some put downs at looming economic disaster, see if that works.
You are far too one eyed to accept that your party is responsible for the.mess the Tories are having to clear up. No austerity Corbyyn and his loons would make it infinitely worse than it is... as would have EICAWNBPM .
My party? I'm a former Tory now nominally UKIP supporter. I utterly and completely believe that Labour (I assume that's who you mean) destroyed our economy, I'm just devastated that Dave and Co. have totally failed to even attempt to put it back together again. But never mind, he does make a very good speech and is excellent at looking solemn on State occasions.
Classic few words from Dave He really is good at his job.
If you think his job is coming over well in an interview. Which rather seems to be the issue.
No mate. He is the master of the put down. Calm down dear was a classic as enraged the ghastly woman.
Pity the joke's on the British people as the national debt has doubled and the balance of trade is through the floor. Perhaps Dave could aim some put downs at looming economic disaster, see if that works.
You are far too one eyed to accept that your party is responsible for the.mess the Tories are having to clear up. No austerity Corbyyn and his loons would make it infinitely worse than it is... as would have EICAWNBPM .
My party? I'm a former Tory now nominally UKIP supporter. I utterly and completely believe that Labour (I assume that's who you mean) destroyed our economy, I'm just devastated that Dave and Co. have totally failed to even attempt to put it back together again. But never mind, he does make a very good speech and is excellent at looking solemn on State occasions.
Whatever your party.now .. you are far too one eyed especially now you are amongst the closet racists fruitcakes and loonies. So how would you have do n e things differently..
Classic few words from Dave He really is good at his job.
If you think his job is coming over well in an interview. Which rather seems to be the issue.
No mate. He is the master of the put down. Calm down dear was a classic as enraged the ghastly woman.
Pity the joke's on the British people as the national debt has doubled and the balance of trade is through the floor. Perhaps Dave could aim some put downs at looming economic disaster, see if that works.
You are far too one eyed to accept that your party is responsible for the.mess the Tories are having to clear up. No austerity Corbyyn and his loons would make it infinitely worse than it is... as would have EICAWNBPM .
My party? I'm a former Tory now nominally UKIP supporter. I utterly and completely believe that Labour (I assume that's who you mean) destroyed our economy, I'm just devastated that Dave and Co. have totally failed to even attempt to put it back together again. But never mind, he does make a very good speech and is excellent at looking solemn on State occasions.
Whatever your party.now .. you are far too one eyed especially now you are amongst the closet racists fruitcakes and loonies. So how would you have do n e things differently..
Funny. When your claims about someones party affiliation turn out to be utterly wrong, don't bother apologising, just throw some more insults out to cover your foolishness.
That's 30 permanently stripped of their passports using a Royal Prerogative re Enemies of the State [anyone know about this?] And 20 temporarily basis.
They've been doing it for football hooligans for years now. Or is that a different law? IANAL
Now, let me tell you a story. The other day, I was walking in a public place when I met an ordinary person. That ordinary person’s name was NAME OF ORDINARY PERSON. And do you know what NAME OF ORDINARY PERSON said to me? NAME OF ORDINARY PERSON said, “I wish there was a party whose policies were whatever policies your party is about to unveil at your party’s conference.”
One impressively sparky member of the 2015 intake remarked: “When I was elected I was worried that I would be labelled hard left. Now I seem to be centre-right.” Although sponsored by one of the most leftwing of the trade unions, this MP reported that she was already getting some trouble from activists in her constituency party for displaying insufficient levels of dedication to Corbynism
Andrew Rawnsley is halfway there. But he doesn't seem to appreciate that Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell are following a clear strategy which makes all of their behaviour fall into place.
Once you realise that their primary goal is not to win the next election, everything falls into place.
You think their plan is to adhere to ideological purity rather winning elections? You might have a good point there...hmm...
Classic few words from Dave He really is good at his job.
If you think his job is coming over well in an interview. Which rather seems to be the issue.
No mate. He is the master of the put down. Calm down dear was a classic as enraged the ghastly woman.
Pity the joke's on the British people as the national debt has doubled and the balance of trade is through the floor. Perhaps Dave could aim some put downs at looming economic disaster, see if that works.
I have never seen anybody make a convincing case for how Osborne could have stopped the national debt from doubling, given the economy and the trajectory of the national debt he inherited. Please, be the one that enlightens us.
Classic few words from Dave He really is good at his job.
If you think his job is coming over well in an interview. Which rather seems to be the issue.
No mate. He is the master of the put down. Calm down dear was a classic as enraged the ghastly woman.
Pity the joke's on the British people as the national debt has doubled and the balance of trade is through the floor. Perhaps Dave could aim some put downs at looming economic disaster, see if that works.
I have never seen anybody make a convincing case for how Osborne could have stopped the national debt from doubling, given the economy and the trajectory of the national debt he inherited. Please, be the one that enlightens us.
Classic few words from Dave He really is good at his job.
If you think his job is coming over well in an interview. Which rather seems to be the issue.
No mate. He is the master of the put down. Calm down dear was a classic as enraged the ghastly woman.
Pity the joke's on the British people as the national debt has doubled
That's a strange complaint. What more should the coalition have cut?
What shouldn't they have cut is the question. We're not making any money. Until Dad gets a job, the kids can't have a pony. Whole departments should have gone, the least painful first. I can't see how it's a strange complaint?
Classic few words from Dave He really is good at his job.
If you think his job is coming over well in an interview. Which rather seems to be the issue.
No mate. He is the master of the put down. Calm down dear was a classic as enraged the ghastly woman.
Pity the joke's on the British people as the national debt has doubled
That's a strange complaint. What more should the coalition have cut?
What shouldn't they have cut is the question. We're not making any money. Until Dad gets a job, the kids can't have a pony. Whole departments should have gone, the least painful first. I can't see how it's a strange complaint?
It's a strange complaint because approximately nobody during the term of the coalition was arguing that the cuts weren't deep enough.
Classic few words from Dave He really is good at his job.
If you think his job is coming over well in an interview. Which rather seems to be the issue.
No mate. He is the master of the put down. Calm down dear was a classic as enraged the ghastly woman.
Pity the joke's on the British people as the national debt has doubled and the balance of trade is through the floor. Perhaps Dave could aim some put downs at looming economic disaster, see if that works.
I have never seen anybody make a convincing case for how Osborne could have stopped the national debt from doubling, given the economy and the trajectory of the national debt he inherited. Please, be the one that enlightens us.
That has always been a stumbling block for me - Labour initially talked about cutting too and too fast, but then Osborne cut less, less quickly, and for a time the argument continued and talk of the debt cropped up (although he gets that from the Right too of course - but they want more cutting, unlike the Left) as a key point, but that's presumably what they wanted to happen. I assumed the argument was supposed to shift to that the amount he was cutting was not as bad as before, but it was the wrong things, but that never seemed to pick up as a strategy, even though that prevented, I would have thought, criticisms of the debt rising from people making that argument.
Mr. 1983, because the main opponents to the Conservatives were arguing the deficit reduction was excessively aggressive. And now complain the debt's too high.
I agree that deficit reduction should be stepped up, but it's worth noting the last Parliament did suffer from the impact of the eurozone sovereign debt crisis.
Classic few words from Dave He really is good at his job.
If you think his job is coming over well in an interview. Which rather seems to be the issue.
No mate. He is the master of the put down. Calm down dear was a classic as enraged the ghastly woman.
Pity the joke's on the British people as the national debt has doubled and the balance of trade is through the floor. Perhaps Dave could aim some put downs at looming economic disaster, see if that works.
You are far too one eyed to accept that your party is responsible for the.mess the Tories are having to clear up. No austerity Corbyyn and his loons would make it infinitely worse than it is... as would have EICAWNBPM .
My party? I'm a former Tory now nominally UKIP supporter. I utterly and completely believe that Labour (I assume that's who you mean) destroyed our economy, I'm just devastated that Dave and Co. have totally failed to even attempt to put it back together again. But never mind, he does make a very good speech and is excellent at looking solemn on State occasions.
The economy has improved greatly after just five years, with the best growth among developed economies. Simultaneously, we have almost reached full employment, cut the deficit from 11% to 6% of GDP, substantially reduced corporate and household debt, liberated our education system from the dead hand of socialism and removed the incentives of a life on benefits. And all this while being hamstrung by the Liberal Democrats in coalition - just think what we can achieve with a majority!
One impressively sparky member of the 2015 intake remarked: “When I was elected I was worried that I would be labelled hard left. Now I seem to be centre-right.” Although sponsored by one of the most leftwing of the trade unions, this MP reported that she was already getting some trouble from activists in her constituency party for displaying insufficient levels of dedication to Corbynism
Andrew Rawnsley is halfway there. But he doesn't seem to appreciate that Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell are following a clear strategy which makes all of their behaviour fall into place.
Once you realise that their primary goal is not to win the next election, everything falls into place.
It is just a pragmatic acceptance that Labour cannot put forward an offer to the voters that will win an election.
Classic few words from Dave He really is good at his job.
If you think his job is coming over well in an interview. Which rather seems to be the issue.
No mate. He is the master of the put down. Calm down dear was a classic as enraged the ghastly woman.
Pity the joke's on the British people as the national debt has doubled and the balance of trade is through the floor. Perhaps Dave could aim some put downs at looming economic disaster, see if that works.
You are far too one eyed to accept that your party is responsible for the.mess the Tories are having to clear up. No austerity Corbyyn and his loons would make it infinitely worse than it is... as would have EICAWNBPM .
My party? I'm a former Tory now nominally UKIP supporter. I utterly and completely believe that Labour (I assume that's who you mean) destroyed our economy, I'm just devastated that Dave and Co. have totally failed to even attempt to put it back together again. But never mind, he does make a very good speech and is excellent at looking solemn on State occasions.
Whatever your party.now .. you are far too one eyed especially now you are amongst the closet racists fruitcakes and loonies. So how would you have do n e things differently..
Funny. When your claims about someones party affiliation turn out to be utterly wrong, don't bother apologising, just throw some more insults out to cover your foolishness.
Come on now..enlighten us all we are dying to hear this plan that would have stopped the debt doubling and needed no austerity nor hyperinflation and no jobs lost and so on and so forth.
Classic few words from Dave He really is good at his job.
If you think his job is coming over well in an interview. Which rather seems to be the issue.
No mate. He is the master of the put down. Calm down dear was a classic as enraged the ghastly woman.
Pity the joke's on the British people as the national debt has doubled
That's a strange complaint. What more should the coalition have cut?
What shouldn't they have cut is the question. We're not making any money. Until Dad gets a job, the kids can't have a pony. Whole departments should have gone, the least painful first. I can't see how it's a strange complaint?
Economic growth? Presumably that's dad getting a job in your analogy. Then there are tax cuts if you think Keynesian stimuli will work; tax rises if you think austerity is the key.
Classic few words from Dave He really is good at his job.
If you think his job is coming over well in an interview. Which rather seems to be the issue.
No mate. He is the master of the put down. Calm down dear was a classic as enraged the ghastly woman.
Pity the joke's on the British people as the national debt has doubled and the balance of trade is through the floor. Perhaps Dave could aim some put downs at looming economic disaster, see if that works.
I have never seen anybody make a convincing case for how Osborne could have stopped the national debt from doubling, given the economy and the trajectory of the national debt he inherited. Please, be the one that enlightens us.
We have been given command of a damaged. demoralised ship sailing at speed towards an iceberg, marshalled the crew, repaired the hull, turned the sails, and set us on a course where we're now going to miss the iceberg and start sailing in the opposite direction. But the usual malcontents point out that during the time we moved closer to the iceberg in that time, as if we could have stopped the ship dead in its tracks from the moment we took over.
Classic few words from Dave He really is good at his job.
If you think his job is coming over well in an interview. Which rather seems to be the issue.
No mate. He is the master of the put down. Calm down dear was a classic as enraged the ghastly woman.
Pity the joke's on the British people as the national debt has doubled and the balance of trade is through the floor. Perhaps Dave could aim some put downs at looming economic disaster, see if that works.
I have never seen anybody make a convincing case for how Osborne could have stopped the national debt from doubling, given the economy and the trajectory of the national debt he inherited. Please, be the one that enlightens us.
We have been given command of a damaged. demoralised ship sailing at speed towards an iceberg, marshalled the crew, repaired the hull, turned the sails, and set us on a course where we're now going to miss the iceberg and start sailing in the opposite direction. But the usual malcontents point out that during the time we moved closer to the iceberg in that time, as if we could have stopped the ship dead in its tracks from the moment we took over.
The economy was already recovering when Labour left office, and you did stop the ship dead in its tracks (where's Bernard Wooley?).
Classic few words from Dave He really is good at his job.
If you think his job is coming over well in an interview. Which rather seems to be the issue.
No mate. He is the master of the put down. Calm down dear was a classic as enraged the ghastly woman.
Pity the joke's on the British people as the national debt has doubled and the balance of trade is through the floor. Perhaps Dave could aim some put downs at looming economic disaster, see if that works.
I have never seen anybody make a convincing case for how Osborne could have stopped the national debt from doubling, given the economy and the trajectory of the national debt he inherited. Please, be the one that enlightens us.
Tory Debt OK Labour Debt Time Bomb
"Tory Debt" is debt that would inevitably have been there anyway if Gordon Brown had, by some quirk of the Universe, got re-elected.
Or do Labour think you can convince anyone that the National Debt would have fallen on their watch?
LOL Billy Bragg on Sky claiming that Tories didn't really win, and that it was the fault of stupid Lib Dems who didn't really know better, and the country didn't really make a choice... and he's rejoined Labour...
< Haha, his insane rantings do cover more than just the SNP you know. But the core of his fantasy is an inveterate hate of Scotland. He even admits that he's just making it all up in his latest "article".
A confession: the more astute among you may be asking why these graphs start in 2008 and why I've used indexed data in two cases. The answer is simple - it serves my argument best to present the data that way.
I understand why you are embarrassed by the routine demolition of SNP policy - but admitting to selectivity in data presentation is hardly "making it all up"
If he wants to do that I'm sure he'll know where to look!
Now you're just embarrassing yourself.
Arguments should be derived from data not the other way around. Hague freely admits he manipulates the data to back up his argument. That is the definition of making it up. The guy is a self-admitted liar and a charlatan.
It's the core problem with Loyalists. Anyone looking at the data with fresh eyes and no ideological bias sees very clearly that Scotland has been harmed from the Union. That's how I went from a staunch (albeit Republican) Unionist, card carrying member of the Conservative and Unionist Party to backing Scottish Independence and voting for the SNP (but not a member, I don't care the vehicle).
The Loyalists can't win an argument because they don't have the numbers, the amount of money drained out of Scotland over the last 50 years is VAST, around £500bn. Even worse, you can see not 200 miles away over the North Sea what retaining that wealth within the country would actually do to an economy and a nation.
But Loyalism is not pragmatic or rational or realist. It is an ideologically driven desire to justify and maintain a Union which is harmful to Scotland. And the only way to justify this is by lying about the numbers - as Hague freely admits he does.
Classic few words from Dave He really is good at his job.
If you think his job is coming over well in an interview. Which rather seems to be the issue.
No mate. He is the master of the put down. Calm down dear was a classic as enraged the ghastly woman.
Pity the joke's on the British people as the national debt has doubled and the balance of trade is through the floor. Perhaps Dave could aim some put downs at looming economic disaster, see if that works.
I have never seen anybody make a convincing case for how Osborne could have stopped the national debt from doubling, given the economy and the trajectory of the national debt he inherited. Please, be the one that enlightens us.
On the debt/deficit issue, very possibly you are correct, at least in political terms. Obviously he could have done more (see measures taken in Ireland for examples), but that would have meant putting the chances of re-election in less than first place.
However, as for the issue of trade and industry, Osborne and indeed the government in general could have done an awful lot. Mr. AlanBrooke, gent of this parish, is the man to speak to for details on this, but from where I sit all Osborne has mostly done is to reflate the consumption/finance bubble that got us in the sh!t in the first place, plus invite foreign asset strippers in and pretend that its inward investment and therefore a good thing. After more than five years of Osborne at the economic helm the UK's biggest export remains its wealth.
The longer the Cameron/Osborne partnership goes on the more it seems to me to resemble the Blair/Brown axis (without the hatred). Osborne is an over mighty chancellor who has too many of his fingers in too many pies and seeks to control too much.
Ah, I'm afraid your epic knowledge of classical history squishes mine. I'm quite tempted to read more Egyptian history - I find myself glued to docus about it and loved my trip there pre-Arab Spring.
Classic few words from Dave He really is good at his job.
If you think his job is coming over well in an interview. Which rather seems to be the issue.
No mate. He is the master of the put down. Calm down dear was a classic as enraged the ghastly woman.
Pity the joke's on the British people as the national debt has doubled and the balance of trade is through the floor. Perhaps Dave could aim some put downs at looming economic disaster, see if that works.
I have never seen anybody make a convincing case for how Osborne could have stopped the national debt from doubling, given the economy and the trajectory of the national debt he inherited. Please, be the one that enlightens us.
We have been given command of a damaged. demoralised ship sailing at speed towards an iceberg, marshalled the crew, repaired the hull, turned the sails, and set us on a course where we're now going to miss the iceberg and start sailing in the opposite direction. But the usual malcontents point out that during the time we moved closer to the iceberg in that time, as if we could have stopped the ship dead in its tracks from the moment we took over.
The economy was already recovering when Labour left office, and you did stop the ship dead in its tracks (where's Bernard Wooley?).
With that level of deficit to support it, not a recovery really. Just a short term shot in the arm before the election, like shocking a corpse to make it dance. Not that I consider Osborne some economic guru, but what he inherited was an absolute mess.
Mr. Llama, worth noting the closeness of Corbyn and McDonnell[sp] as well. I wonder if,f ar from a presidential system, we've been in an informal diarchy since 1997 [with a brief break when Brown became Supreme Leader].
Classic few words from Dave He really is good at his job.
If you think his job is coming over well in an interview. Which rather seems to be the issue.
No mate. He is the master of the put down. Calm down dear was a classic as enraged the ghastly woman.
Pity the joke's on the British people as the national debt has doubled and the balance of trade is through the floor. Perhaps Dave could aim some put downs at looming economic disaster, see if that works.
You are far too one eyed to accept that your party is responsible for the.mess the Tories are having to clear up. No austerity Corbyyn and his loons would make it infinitely worse than it is... as would have EICAWNBPM .
My party? I'm a former Tory now nominally UKIP supporter. I utterly and completely believe that Labour (I assume that's who you mean) destroyed our economy, I'm just devastated that Dave and Co. have totally failed to even attempt to put it back together again. But never mind, he does make a very good speech and is excellent at looking solemn on State occasions.
Whatever your party.now .. you are far too one eyed especially now you are amongst the closet racists fruitcakes and loonies. So how would you have do n e things differently..
Funny. When your claims about someones party affiliation turn out to be utterly wrong, don't bother apologising, just throw some more insults out to cover your foolishness.
Come on now..enlighten us all we are dying to hear this plan that would have stopped the debt doubling and needed no austerity nor hyperinflation and no jobs lost and so on and so forth.
Asking the wrong person. I wasn't the one commenting on austerity or otherwise, just on your use of insults to cover your own mistakes.
But for the record I would ask what austerity? The Tories went no where near far enough with dealing with the deficit and should have slashed public spending by far more than they did. Even if one accepts that they were limited by the Lib Dems, that does not apply now so we should be seeing massive cuts in public spending - not least removing every benefit bar the basic pension given to wealthier pensioners. Instead we have the idiocy of maternity leave for grandparents and other such sops to the pensioners. We need real cuts to sort out the deficit and start making some headway on the debt, not the tinkering round the edges we have had for the last 5 years or more.
Classic few words from Dave He really is good at his job.
If you think his job is coming over well in an interview. Which rather seems to be the issue.
No mate. He is the master of the put down. Calm down dear was a classic as enraged the ghastly woman.
Pity the joke's on the British people as the national debt has doubled and the balance of trade is through the floor. Perhaps Dave could aim some put downs at looming economic disaster, see if that works.
I have never seen anybody make a convincing case for how Osborne could have stopped the national debt from doubling, given the economy and the trajectory of the national debt he inherited. Please, be the one that enlightens us.
On the debt/deficit issue, very possibly you are correct, at least in political terms. Obviously he could have done more (see measures taken in Ireland for examples), but that would have meant putting the chances of re-election in less than first place.
However, as for the issue of trade and industry, Osborne and indeed the government in general could have done an awful lot. Mr. AlanBrooke, gent of this parish, is the man to speak to for details on this, but from where I sit all Osborne has mostly done is to reflate the consumption/finance bubble that got us in the sh!t in the first place, plus invite foreign asset strippers in and pretend that its inward investment and therefore a good thing. After more than five years of Osborne at the economic helm the UK's biggest export remains its wealth.
The longer the Cameron/Osborne partnership goes on the more it seems to me to resemble the Blair/Brown axis (without the hatred). Osborne is an over mighty chancellor who has too many of his fingers in too many pies and seeks to control too much.
Corporate debt and household debt have both dropped since Osborne came in. That's the opposite of inflating a bubble.
Classic few words from Dave He really is good at his job.
If you think his job is coming over well in an interview. Which rather seems to be the issue.
No mate. He is the master of the put down. Calm down dear was a classic as enraged the ghastly woman.
Pity the joke's on the British people as the national debt has doubled and the balance of trade is through the floor. Perhaps Dave could aim some put downs at looming economic disaster, see if that works.
I have never seen anybody make a convincing case for how Osborne could have stopped the national debt from doubling, given the economy and the trajectory of the national debt he inherited. Please, be the one that enlightens us.
Tory Debt OK Labour Debt Time Bomb
"Tory Debt" is debt that would inevitably have been there anyway if Gordon Brown had, by some quirk of the Universe, got re-elected.
Or do Labour think you can convince anyone that the National Debt would have fallen on their watch?
The national debt was falling on Labour's watch -- remember Gordon Brown talking about paying off Tory debt? Until the global financial crisis hit, the national debt was lower under Labour than under the previous Conservative government.
Miss Plato, to be fair, that's an obscure time (5th century), and I had to check for the emperor name [wrote Romulus Augustulus initially, but then doubted, rightly, whether Ricimer was there at the actual end of the Western Empire].
In the final years, Gothic warlords dictated what really happened, with a titular emperor (usually very short-lived) perching on the throne pretending the Romans were still in charge.
"With more runners in the race than we would normally expect this might add a new level of uncertainty to the outcome of the leadership race, there is also the danger that all of this jostling makes David Cameron look like a lame duck leader which may lead to him standing down as Prime Minister sooner than he anticipated. Cameron must surely now regret his answer to James Landale’s question about his future during the election campaign."
Or, it could all play into Dave's hands.
He doesn't have to be tied by the Lansdale comments - if the succession looks like an unholy mess by this time next year, he could renew his mandate with a confidence vote and call an immediate election.
Adam Clifford, 36, who was trounced as a Class War candidate in May’s election, has appeared in an “erotic instructional video”. He called last week’s demo “the best night out in ages”.
< Haha, his insane rantings do cover more than just the SNP you know. But the core of his fantasy is an inveterate hate of Scotland. He even admits that he's just making it all up in his latest "article".
A confession: the more astute among you may be asking why these graphs start in 2008 and why I've used indexed data in two cases. The answer is simple - it serves my argument best to present the data that way.
I understand why you are embarrassed by the routine demolition of SNP policy - but admitting to selectivity in data presentation is hardly "making it all up"
If he wants to do that I'm sure he'll know where to look!
Now you're just embarrassing yourself.
Arguments should be derived from data not the other way around. Hague freely admits he manipulates the data to back up his argument. That is the definition of making it up. The guy is a self-admitted liar and a charlatan.
It's the core problem with Loyalists. Anyone looking at the data with fresh eyes and no ideological bias sees very clearly that Scotland has been harmed from the Union. That's how I went from a staunch (albeit Republican) Unionist, card carrying member of the Conservative and Unionist Party to backing Scottish Independence and voting for the SNP (but not a member, I don't care the vehicle).
The Loyalists can't win an argument because they don't have the numbers, the amount of money drained out of Scotland over the last 50 years is VAST, around £500bn. Even worse, you can see not 200 miles away over the North Sea what retaining that wealth within the country would actually do to an economy and a nation.
But Loyalism is not pragmatic or rational or realist. It is an ideologically driven desire to justify and maintain a Union which is harmful to Scotland. And the only way to justify this is by lying about the numbers - as Hague freely admits he does.
LOL Billy Bragg on Sky claiming that Tories didn't really win, and that it was the fault of stupid Lib Dems who didn't really know better, and the country didn't really make a choice... and he's rejoined Labour...
Such an insulting attitude. One which Corbyn himself has made, stating that people didn't realise what voting in the Tories meant (despite Labour including him presumably telling us). I must say the 19 year old Labour candidate in my seat was more convincing than Mr Bragg.
One impressively sparky member of the 2015 intake remarked: “When I was elected I was worried that I would be labelled hard left. Now I seem to be centre-right.” Although sponsored by one of the most leftwing of the trade unions, this MP reported that she was already getting some trouble from activists in her constituency party for displaying insufficient levels of dedication to Corbynism
Andrew Rawnsley is halfway there. But he doesn't seem to appreciate that Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell are following a clear strategy which makes all of their behaviour fall into place.
Once you realise that their primary goal is not to win the next election, everything falls into place.
What is their primary goal? Or should I read that as "their primary goal is to not win the next election"? ;-)
< Haha, his insane rantings do cover more than just the SNP you know. But the core of his fantasy is an inveterate hate of Scotland. He even admits that he's just making it all up in his latest "article".
A confession: the more astute among you may be asking why these graphs start in 2008 and why I've used indexed data in two cases. The answer is simple - it serves my argument best to present the data that way.
I understand why you are embarrassed by the routine demolition of SNP policy - but admitting to selectivity in data presentation is hardly "making it all up"
If he wants to do that I'm sure he'll know where to look!
Now you're just embarrassing yourself.
Arguments should be derived from data not the other way around. Hague freely admits he manipulates the data to back up his argument. That is the definition of making it up. The guy is a self-admitted liar and a charlatan.
It's the core problem with Loyalists. Anyone looking at the data with fresh eyes and no ideological bias sees very clearly that Scotland has been harmed from the Union. That's how I went from a staunch (albeit Republican) Unionist, card carrying member of the Conservative and Unionist Party to backing Scottish Independence and voting for the SNP (but not a member, I don't care the vehicle).
The Loyalists can't win an argument because they don't have the numbers, the amount of money drained out of Scotland over the last 50 years is VAST, around £500bn. Even worse, you can see not 200 miles away over the North Sea what retaining that wealth within the country would actually do to an economy and a nation.
But Loyalism is not pragmatic or rational or realist. It is an ideologically driven desire to justify and maintain a Union which is harmful to Scotland. And the only way to justify this is by lying about the numbers - as Hague freely admits he does.
Before the Union, Scotland was a bankrupt peripheral Kingdom, divided between violent feudal tribes in the Highlands and a zealous puritanical elite in the Lowlands, both of which hated the other. Under the Union, Scotland formed a united national identity, boomed as a centre of industry and world trade, and a co-equal partner in the greatest Empire the world has ever seen.
The benefits of the union have been present into the 21st century. Even during the peak of the oil boom, Scotland was a net drain on public finances, being subsidised by England and the South East:
Classic few words from Dave He really is good at his job.
If you think his job is coming over well in an interview. Which rather seems to be the issue.
No mate. He is the master of the put down. Calm down dear was a classic as enraged the ghastly woman.
Pity the joke's on the British people as the national debt has doubled and the balance of trade is through the floor. Perhaps Dave could aim some put downs at looming economic disaster, see if that works.
I have never seen anybody make a convincing case for how Osborne could have stopped the national debt from doubling, given the economy and the trajectory of the national debt he inherited. Please, be the one that enlightens us.
Tory Debt OK Labour Debt Time Bomb
"Tory Debt" is debt that would inevitably have been there anyway if Gordon Brown had, by some quirk of the Universe, got re-elected.
Or do Labour think you can convince anyone that the National Debt would have fallen on their watch?
The national debt was falling on Labour's watch -- remember Gordon Brown talking about paying off Tory debt? Until the global financial crisis hit, the national debt was lower under Labour than under the previous Conservative government.
Not so. I remember prior to 2008 a File on 4 programme on Radio 4 that talked about the real levels of debt compared to the official figures once you started taking things like PFI commitments and all the other 'off the book' stuff into account. The idea that debt was falling under Labour is simply not true. They had just reclassified it so it was no longer considered debt.
Classic few words from Dave He really is good at his job.
If you think his job is coming over well in an interview. Which rather seems to be the issue.
No mate. He is the master of the put down. Calm down dear was a classic as enraged the ghastly woman.
Pity the joke's on the British people as the national debt has doubled and the balance of trade is through the floor. Perhaps Dave could aim some put downs at looming economic disaster, see if that works.
I have never seen anybody make a convincing case for how Osborne could have stopped the national debt from doubling, given the economy and the trajectory of the national debt he inherited. Please, be the one that enlightens us.
On the debt/deficit issue, very possibly you are correct, at least in political terms. Obviously he could have done more (see measures taken in Ireland for examples), but that would have meant putting the chances of re-election in less than first place.
However, as for the issue of trade and industry, Osborne and indeed the government in general could have done an awful lot. Mr. AlanBrooke, gent of this parish, is the man to speak to for details on this, but from where I sit all Osborne has mostly done is to reflate the consumption/finance bubble that got us in the sh!t in the first place, plus invite foreign asset strippers in and pretend that its inward investment and therefore a good thing. After more than five years of Osborne at the economic helm the UK's biggest export remains its wealth.
The longer the Cameron/Osborne partnership goes on the more it seems to me to resemble the Blair/Brown axis (without the hatred). Osborne is an over mighty chancellor who has too many of his fingers in too many pies and seeks to control too much.
Plus it was the right thing to do - not cripple the economy to meet an arbitrary target. Plus there was a coalton with a LD deputy PM and LD deputy chancellor and LD business secretary. Osborne is First Secretary of State - that is the deputy PM.
< Haha, his insane rantings do cover more than just the SNP you know. But the core of his fantasy is an inveterate hate of Scotland. He even admits that he's just making it all up in his latest "article".
A confession: the more astute among you may be asking why these graphs start in 2008 and why I've used indexed data in two cases. The answer is simple - it serves my argument best to present the data that way.
I understand why you are embarrassed by the routine demolition of SNP policy - but admitting to selectivity in data presentation is hardly "making it all up"
If he wants to do that I'm sure he'll know where to look!
Now you're just embarrassing yourself.
Arguments should be derived from data not the other way around. Hague freely admits he manipulates the data to back up his argument. That is the definition of making it up. The guy is a self-admitted liar and a charlatan.
It's the core problem with Loyalists. Anyone looking at the data with fresh eyes and no ideological bias sees very clearly that Scotland has been harmed from the Union. That's how I went from a staunch (albeit Republican) Unionist, card carrying member of the Conservative and Unionist Party to backing Scottish Independence and voting for the SNP (but not a member, I don't care the vehicle).
The Loyalists can't win an argument because they don't have the numbers, the amount of money drained out of Scotland over the last 50 years is VAST, around £500bn. Even worse, you can see not 200 miles away over the North Sea what retaining that wealth within the country would actually do to an economy and a nation.
But Loyalism is not pragmatic or rational or realist. It is an ideologically driven desire to justify and maintain a Union which is harmful to Scotland. And the only way to justify this is by lying about the numbers - as Hague freely admits he does.
The Oil will run out in 50 years anyway
No it won't.
Yes it will it is a finite resource we need renewables and nuclear energy longer-term
Classic few words from Dave He really is good at his job.
If you think his job is coming over well in an interview. Which rather seems to be the issue.
No mate. He is the master of the put down. Calm down dear was a classic as enraged the ghastly woman.
Pity the joke's on the British people as the national debt has doubled and the balance of trade is through the floor. Perhaps Dave could aim some put downs at looming economic disaster, see if that works.
I have never seen anybody make a convincing case for how Osborne could have stopped the national debt from doubling, given the economy and the trajectory of the national debt he inherited. Please, be the one that enlightens us.
Tory Debt OK Labour Debt Time Bomb
"Tory Debt" is debt that would inevitably have been there anyway if Gordon Brown had, by some quirk of the Universe, got re-elected.
Or do Labour think you can convince anyone that the National Debt would have fallen on their watch?
The national debt was falling on Labour's watch -- remember Gordon Brown talking about paying off Tory debt? Until the global financial crisis hit, the national debt was lower under Labour than under the previous Conservative government.
Why was it rising if there hadn't be a recession well over than a decade? I think this argument may have been done before.
Classic few words from Dave He really is good at his job.
If you think his job is coming over well in an interview. Which rather seems to be the issue.
No mate. He is the master of the put down. Calm down dear was a classic as enraged the ghastly woman.
Pity the joke's on the British people as the national debt has doubled and the balance of trade is through the floor. Perhaps Dave could aim some put downs at looming economic disaster, see if that works.
I have never seen anybody make a convincing case for how Osborne could have stopped the national debt from doubling, given the economy and the trajectory of the national debt he inherited. Please, be the one that enlightens us.
Tory Debt OK Labour Debt Time Bomb
"Tory Debt" is debt that would inevitably have been there anyway if Gordon Brown had, by some quirk of the Universe, got re-elected.
Or do Labour think you can convince anyone that the National Debt would have fallen on their watch?
The national debt was falling on Labour's watch -- remember Gordon Brown talking about paying off Tory debt? Until the global financial crisis hit, the national debt was lower under Labour than under the previous Conservative government.
Debt as a percentage of GDP only fell during the first term, during which Labour was following Conservative spending plans. It increased after 2001. And this was during the boom, during which any believer in Keynesianism should be substantially reducing debt so they can spend more during a bust. Labour advocates like to have it both ways: that debt should be kept level during a boom but should counter balance the economic cycle during a bust.
< Haha, his insane rantings do cover more than just the SNP you know. But the core of his fantasy is an inveterate hate of Scotland. He even admits that he's just making it all up in his latest "article".
A confession: the more astute among you may be asking why these graphs start in 2008 and why I've used indexed data in two cases. The answer is simple - it serves my argument best to present the data that way.
I understand why you are embarrassed by the routine demolition of SNP policy - but admitting to selectivity in data presentation is hardly "making it all up"
If he wants to do that I'm sure he'll know where to look!
Now you're just embarrassing yourself.
Arguments should be derived from data not the other way around. Hague freely admits he manipulates the data to back up his argument. That is the definition of making it up. The guy is a self-admitted liar and a charlatan.
It's the core problem with Loyalists. Anyone looking at the data with fresh eyes and no ideological bias sees very clearly that Scotland has been harmed from the Union. That's how I went from a staunch (albeit Republican) Unionist, card carrying member of the Conservative and Unionist Party to backing Scottish Independence and voting for the SNP (but not a member, I don't care the vehicle).
The Loyalists can't win an argument because they don't have the numbers, the amount of money drained out of Scotland over the last 50 years is VAST, around £500bn. Even worse, you can see not 200 miles away over the North Sea what retaining that wealth within the country would actually do to an economy and a nation.
But Loyalism is not pragmatic or rational or realist. It is an ideologically driven desire to justify and maintain a Union which is harmful to Scotland. And the only way to justify this is by lying about the numbers - as Hague freely admits he does.
The Oil will run out in 50 years anyway
No it won't.
Yes it will it is a finite resource we need renewables and nuclear energy longer-term
Of course it is a finite resource. But it is not one that will run out in 50 years. Not even close. Even if we never found another oil field it will last a lot longer than that.
Besides, due to its quality, a significant portion of North Sea oil is not used for energy but for petrochemicals, lubricants and other non-burny type stuff. renewables and nuclear will do nothing to stop that demand.
One impressively sparky member of the 2015 intake remarked: “When I was elected I was worried that I would be labelled hard left. Now I seem to be centre-right.” Although sponsored by one of the most leftwing of the trade unions, this MP reported that she was already getting some trouble from activists in her constituency party for displaying insufficient levels of dedication to Corbynism
Andrew Rawnsley is halfway there. But he doesn't seem to appreciate that Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell are following a clear strategy which makes all of their behaviour fall into place.
Once you realise that their primary goal is not to win the next election, everything falls into place.
What is their primary goal? Or should I read that as "their primary goal is to not win the next election"? ;-)
Shifting the labour party to the left by *democratising* the structures.
Classic few words from Dave He really is good at his job.
If you think his job is coming over well in an interview. Which rather seems to be the issue.
No mate. He is the master of the put down. Calm down dear was a classic as enraged the ghastly woman.
Pity the joke's on the British people as the national debt has doubled and the balance of trade is through the floor. Perhaps Dave could aim some put downs at looming economic disaster, see if that works.
I have never seen anybody make a convincing case for how Osborne could have stopped the national debt from doubling, given the economy and the trajectory of the national debt he inherited. Please, be the one that enlightens us.
Wasting breath on luckyguy. Bleating about doubling the debt when the defect was 160 billion in the first place and the economy shrunk by 7% is plain pathetic.
Classic few words from Dave He really is good at his job.
If you think his job is coming over well in an interview. Which rather seems to be the issue.
No mate. He is the master of the put down. Calm down dear was a classic as enraged the ghastly woman.
s.
s.
Tory Debt OK Labour Debt Time Bomb
"Tory Debt" is debt that would inevitably have been there anyway if Gordon Brown had, by some quirk of the Universe, got re-elected.
Or do Labour think you can convince anyone that the National Debt would have fallen on their watch?
The national debt was falling on Labour's watch -- remember Gordon Brown talking about paying off Tory debt? Until the global financial crisis hit, the national debt was lower under Labour than under the previous Conservative government.
You can keep trotting out that crap. And you will keep losing elections. "Everything in the garden was rosy under Labour's careful management of the economy, until the Yank banks broke the system..." It's bollocks, and the voters know it's bollocks.
Classic few words from Dave He really is good at his job.
If you think his job is coming over well in an interview. Which rather seems to be the issue.
No mate. He is the master of the put down. Calm down dear was a classic as enraged the ghastly woman.
Pity the joke's on the British people as the national debt has doubled and the balance of trade is through the floor. Perhaps Dave could aim some put downs at looming economic disaster, see if that works.
I have never seen anybody make a convincing case for how Osborne could have stopped the national debt from doubling, given the economy and the trajectory of the national debt he inherited. Please, be the one that enlightens us.
Tory Debt OK Labour Debt Time Bomb
"Tory Debt" is debt that would inevitably have been there anyway if Gordon Brown had, by some quirk of the Universe, got re-elected.
Or do Labour think you can convince anyone that the National Debt would have fallen on their watch?
The national debt was falling on Labour's watch -- remember Gordon Brown talking about paying off Tory debt? Until the global financial crisis hit, the national debt was lower under Labour than under the previous Conservative government.
Debt as a percentage of GDP only fell during the first term, during which Labour was following Conservative spending plans. It increased after 2001. And this was during the boom, during which any believer in Keynesianism should be substantially reducing debt so they can spend more during a bust. Labour advocates like to have it both ways: that debt should be kept level during a boom but should counter balance the economic cycle during a bust.
If only they kept Debt level in the Boom!
The labour government borrowed thought the boom, in particular borrowing another £40 Billion in 2005!
The UKs national debt detracted faster under Gordon Brown than any other EU country over the same time period apart from Hungary! and that's weather you use debt to GDP or debt per person.
He has at least demonstrated in spectacular style the fallacy that is Keynesianism 'economics'!
GE2015 - Farron becomes leader: 7 polls - Tory lead over Labour 9%
Farron becomes leader - Corbyn becomes leader: 7 polls - Tory lead over Labour 9%
Corbyn becomes leader - Now: 7 polls - Tory lead over Labour 7.3%
Tory lead over Labour at the election 6. 5% so a 0.4% swing to the Tories since Corbyn became Labour leader
More precisely, 0.85% swing from Tory to Labour since Corbyn became leader.
But that is arguing that Corbyn was not widely expected to win the leadership from some time before the date of election. Hence, to some extent, he was already 'in the price' and has merely converted some of the 'soft pledges' of those who said they would support Labour if he won.
< Haha, his insane rantings do cover more than just the SNP you know. But the core of his fantasy is an inveterate hate of Scotland. He even admits that he's just making it all up in his latest "article".
A confession: the more astute among you may be asking why these graphs start in 2008 and why I've used indexed data in two cases. The answer is simple - it serves my argument best to present the data that way.
I understand why you are embarrassed by the routine demolition of SNP policy - but admitting to selectivity in data presentation is hardly "making it all up"
If he wants to do that I'm sure he'll know where to look!
Now you're just embarrassing yourself.
Arguments should be derived from data not the other way around. Hague freely admits he manipulates the data to back up his argument. That is the definition of making it up. The guy is a self-admitted liar and a charlatan.
It's the core problem with Loyalists. Anyone looking at the data with fresh eyes and no ideological bias sees very clearly that Scotland has been harmed from the Union. That's how I went from a staunch (albeit Republican) Unionist, card carrying member of the Conservative and Unionist Party to backing Scottish Independence and voting for the SNP (but not a member, I don't care the vehicle).
The Loyalists can't win an argument because they don't have the numbers, the amount of money drained out of Scotland over the last 50 years is VAST, around £500bn. Even worse, you can see not 200 miles away over the North Sea what retaining that wealth within the country would actually do to an economy and a nation.
But Loyalism is not pragmatic or rational or realist. It is an ideologically driven desire to justify and maintain a Union which is harmful to Scotland. And the only way to justify this is by lying about the numbers - as Hague freely admits he does.
The Oil will run out in 50 years anyway
No it won't.
Yes it will it is a finite resource we need renewables and nuclear energy longer-term
Of course it is a finite resource. But it is not one that will run out in 50 years. Not even close. Even if we never found another oil field it will last a lot longer than that.
Besides, due to its quality, a significant portion of North Sea oil is not used for energy but for petrochemicals, lubricants and other non-burny type stuff. renewables and nuclear will do nothing to stop that demand.
Depends on reports you look at and lubricant will not meet our long-term energy needs
Classic few words from Dave He really is good at his job.
If you think his job is coming over well in an interview. Which rather seems to be the issue.
No mate. He is the master of the put down. Calm down dear was a classic as enraged the ghastly woman.
Pity the joke's on the British people as the national debt has doubled and the balance of trade is through the floor. Perhaps Dave could aim some put downs at looming economic disaster, see if that works.
I have never seen anybody make a convincing case for how Osborne could have stopped the national debt from doubling, given the economy and the trajectory of the national debt he inherited. Please, be the one that enlightens us.
Tory Debt OK Labour Debt Time Bomb
"Tory Debt" is debt that would inevitably have been there anyway if Gordon Brown had, by some quirk of the Universe, got re-elected.
Or do Labour think you can convince anyone that the National Debt would have fallen on their watch?
The national debt was falling on Labour's watch -- remember Gordon Brown talking about paying off Tory debt? Until the global financial crisis hit, the national debt was lower under Labour than under the previous Conservative government.
Debt as a percentage of GDP only fell during the first term, during which Labour was following Conservative spending plans. It increased after 2001. And this was during the boom, during which any believer in Keynesianism should be substantially reducing debt so they can spend more during a bust. Labour advocates like to have it both ways: that debt should be kept level during a boom but should counter balance the economic cycle during a bust.
If only they kept Debt level in the Boom!
The labour government borrowed thought the boom, in particular borrowing another £40 Billion in 2005!
The UKs national debt detracted faster under Gordon Brown than any other EU country over the same time period apart from Hungary! and that's weather you use debt to GDP or debt per person.
He has at least demonstrated in spectacular style the fallacy that is Keynesianism 'economics'!
Except that Keynes would have run a surplus during the boom.
Brown was just a 'tax and spend' social democrat, not a serious economist
Classic few words from Dave He really is good at his job.
If you think his job is coming over well in an interview. Which rather seems to be the issue.
No mate. He is the master of the put down. Calm down dear was a classic as enraged the ghastly woman.
Pity the joke's on the British people as the national debt has doubled and the balance of trade is through the floor. Perhaps Dave could aim some put downs at looming economic disaster, see if that works.
I have never seen anybody make a convincing case for how Osborne could have stopped the national debt from doubling, given the economy and the trajectory of the national debt he inherited. Please, be the one that enlightens us.
Tory Debt OK Labour Debt Time Bomb
"Tory Debt" is debt that would inevitably have been there anyway if Gordon Brown had, by some quirk of the Universe, got re-elected.
Or do Labour think you can convince anyone that the National Debt would have fallen on their watch?
The national debt was falling on Labour's watch -- remember Gordon Brown talking about paying off Tory debt? Until the global financial crisis hit, the national debt was lower under Labour than under the previous Conservative government.
Debt as a percentage of GDP only fell during the first term, during which Labour was following Conservative spending plans. It increased after 2001. And this was during the boom, during which any believer in Keynesianism should be substantially reducing debt so they can spend more during a bust. Labour advocates like to have it both ways: that debt should be kept level during a boom but should counter balance the economic cycle during a bust.
If only they kept Debt level in the Boom!
The labour government borrowed thought the boom, in particular borrowing another £40 Billion in 2005!
The UKs national debt detracted faster under Gordon Brown than any other EU country over the same time period apart from Hungary! and that's weather you use debt to GDP or debt per person.
He has at least demonstrated in spectacular style the fallacy that is Keynesianism 'economics'!
What matters is debt as a percentage of GDP. You cannot expect Britain to have lower levels of debt than Ireland..
LOL Billy Bragg on Sky claiming that Tories didn't really win, and that it was the fault of stupid Lib Dems who didn't really know better, and the country didn't really make a choice... and he's rejoined Labour...
Bragg on Sky today? He's come a long way from just being a part-time reporter in the graveyard slot of This Week.
I noticed that the Conservative briefers in the media this morning apart from Cameron were Francis Maude and Matt Hancock. Not top drawer. Close to Osborne. Maybe Osborne thinks denying space to rivals is best?
Classic few words from Dave He really is good at his job.
If you think his job is coming over well in an interview. Which rather seems to be the issue.
No mate. He is the master of the put down. Calm down dear was a classic as enraged the ghastly woman.
s.
s.
Tory Debt OK Labour Debt Time Bomb
"Tory Debt" is debt that would inevitably have been there anyway if Gordon Brown had, by some quirk of the Universe, got re-elected.
Or do Labour think you can convince anyone that the National Debt would have fallen on their watch?
The national debt was falling on Labour's watch -- remember Gordon Brown talking about paying off Tory debt? Until the global financial crisis hit, the national debt was lower under Labour than under the previous Conservative government.
You can keep trotting out that crap. And you will keep losing elections. "Everything in the garden was rosy under Labour's careful management of the economy, until the Yank banks broke the system..." It's bollocks, and the voters know it's bollocks.
I'm not the Labour Party. As I've said over the past five years, Labour needed to have countered the Tory narrative, with newspaper adverts showing that I'm right and you're wrong. For instance, Labour have allowed voters to believe that Tories don't run deficits, when in fact Labour has run more budget surpluses than the Conservatives (leaving aside that we are begging the question of whether surpluses are a good thing -- probably if we had one, most Conservatives would be appalled).
Classic few words from Dave He really is good at his job.
If you think his job is coming over well in an interview. Which rather seems to be the issue.
No mate. He is the master of the put down. Calm down dear was a classic as enraged the ghastly woman.
s.
s.
Tory Debt OK Labour Debt Time Bomb
"Tory Debt" is debt that would inevitably have been there anyway if Gordon Brown had, by some quirk of the Universe, got re-elected.
Or do Labour think you can convince anyone that the National Debt would have fallen on their watch?
The national debt was falling on Labour's watch -- remember Gordon Brown talking about paying off Tory debt? Until the global financial crisis hit, the national debt was lower under Labour than under the previous Conservative government.
You can keep trotting out that crap. And you will keep losing elections. "Everything in the garden was rosy under Labour's careful management of the economy, until the Yank banks broke the system..." It's bollocks, and the voters know it's bollocks.
I'm not the Labour Party. As I've said over the past five years, Labour needed to have countered the Tory narrative, with newspaper adverts showing that I'm right and you're wrong. For instance, Labour have allowed voters to believe that Tories don't run deficits, when in fact Labour has run more budget surpluses than the Conservatives (leaving aside that we are begging the question of whether surpluses are a good thing -- probably if we had one, most Conservatives would be appalled).
Comments
Looks the part and sounds the part. I think the Tories will move a little but to the right after Cameron and Raab sits there.
I must admit it's still a very long shot though.
http://www.tmcentertainment.co.uk/images/speaker-index/SpeakOutAlexanderArmstrongweb.jpg
I look forward to reading his next book It Really Is The End Of The Party, perhaps? Andrew Rawnsley is halfway there. But he doesn't seem to appreciate that Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell are following a clear strategy which makes all of their behaviour fall into place.
Once you realise that their primary goal is not to win the next election, everything falls into place.
Once you realise that their primary goal is not to win the next election, everything falls into place.
Perhaps, although their initial goal wasn't to win the labour leadership contest either but they still did. A GE is a different beast, if they even get that far, but a troubling thought nonetheless that the same lack of care could win again. Low probability though I'd hope.
As a side issue, it used to be the case that headteachers could only spend three hours a year observing teachers who worked in the school give lessons, and these sessions had to be pre-announced and negotiated with the teacher concerned. This requirement was removed in 2012.
https://schoolleaders.thekeysupport.com/staff/performance-management/lesson-observations/lesson-observation-protocol-duration-of-observations
It was a hideous barrier that could only prevent a head from realising when things are going wrong inside a class. I cannot think why this was seen to be of advantage to the teacher or pupils.
Although NASUWT might not have noticed the law change:
http://www.nasuwt.org.uk/MemberSupport/NASUWTPublications/LessonObservation/
https://github.com/edmundedgar/greasemonkey-widgets
It can take a couple of reloads to get it to work - then you can filter/favourite posters to save time reading a thread.
This school was not alone by far. Then OFSTED turn up on the doorstep and place the school in special measures and the parents are on the phone screaming blue murder.
EDIT: Assuming (a) he goes for it rather than backs another person and (b) the economy and thus his reputation isn't derailed by events.
The 90% of Labour MPs that are not supporters of Corbyn are either praying for a miracle or putting support of the Leader before the survival of the party.
Nothing wrong with wanting to stay in EU if that's your thing, but honestly 'just what I wanted to hear'... His spinners must be patting themselves on the back when they read that
That's 30 permanently stripped of their passports using a Royal Prerogative re Enemies of the State [anyone know about this?] And 20 temporarily basis.
There's the betting value. Figuring out who she will be is the key.
Or is that a different law? IANAL
Once you realise that their primary goal is not to win the next election, everything falls into place.
You think their plan is to adhere to ideological purity rather winning elections? You might have a good point there...hmm...
The name is Gareth.
Labour Debt Time Bomb
I agree that deficit reduction should be stepped up, but it's worth noting the last Parliament did suffer from the impact of the eurozone sovereign debt crisis.
You can't see Rightists doing this at a Labour conference can you? What does that tell you? http://t.co/31LugQ9kLs http://t.co/U0sBU1Vwq6
Once you realise that their primary goal is not to win the next election, everything falls into place.
It is just a pragmatic acceptance that Labour cannot put forward an offer to the voters that will win an election.
Until/Unless he gets some serious media training, I wouldn't let him out again. Very unimpressive - stumbling, defensive, err ummm, didn't Do Human...
Not my idea of a potential Tory leader in a million years.
Or do Labour think you can convince anyone that the National Debt would have fallen on their watch?
However, as for the issue of trade and industry, Osborne and indeed the government in general could have done an awful lot. Mr. AlanBrooke, gent of this parish, is the man to speak to for details on this, but from where I sit all Osborne has mostly done is to reflate the consumption/finance bubble that got us in the sh!t in the first place, plus invite foreign asset strippers in and pretend that its inward investment and therefore a good thing. After more than five years of Osborne at the economic helm the UK's biggest export remains its wealth.
The longer the Cameron/Osborne partnership goes on the more it seems to me to resemble the Blair/Brown axis (without the hatred). Osborne is an over mighty chancellor who has too many of his fingers in too many pies and seeks to control too much.
Not that I consider Osborne some economic guru, but what he inherited was an absolute mess.
But for the record I would ask what austerity? The Tories went no where near far enough with dealing with the deficit and should have slashed public spending by far more than they did. Even if one accepts that they were limited by the Lib Dems, that does not apply now so we should be seeing massive cuts in public spending - not least removing every benefit bar the basic pension given to wealthier pensioners. Instead we have the idiocy of maternity leave for grandparents and other such sops to the pensioners. We need real cuts to sort out the deficit and start making some headway on the debt, not the tinkering round the edges we have had for the last 5 years or more.
In the final years, Gothic warlords dictated what really happened, with a titular emperor (usually very short-lived) perching on the throne pretending the Romans were still in charge.
Mr. T, my gast has never been less flabbered.
Or, it could all play into Dave's hands.
He doesn't have to be tied by the Lansdale comments - if the succession looks like an unholy mess by this time next year, he could renew his mandate with a confidence vote and call an immediate election.
Does anyone actually want dave to stand down?
Once you realise that their primary goal is not to win the next election, everything falls into place.
What is their primary goal?
Or should I read that as "their primary goal is to not win the next election"? ;-)
The benefits of the union have been present into the 21st century. Even during the peak of the oil boom, Scotland was a net drain on public finances, being subsidised by England and the South East:
http://www.isitfair.co.uk/reports/public/oe ukpublicfinance.pdf
With an oil price around $50 a barrel, Scotland receives even more subsidies today.
Plus there was a coalton with a LD deputy PM and LD deputy chancellor and LD business secretary.
Osborne is First Secretary of State - that is the deputy PM.
I think this argument may have been done before.
Besides, due to its quality, a significant portion of North Sea oil is not used for energy but for petrochemicals, lubricants and other non-burny type stuff. renewables and nuclear will do nothing to stop that demand.
Or should I read that as "their primary goal is to not win the next election"? ;-)
Shifting the labour party to the left by *democratising* the structures.
Basically expunging new labour, from labour.
That's what I assume, anyway.
The labour government borrowed thought the boom, in particular borrowing another £40 Billion in 2005!
The UKs national debt detracted faster under Gordon Brown than any other EU country over the same time period apart from Hungary! and that's weather you use debt to GDP or debt per person.
He has at least demonstrated in spectacular style the fallacy that is Keynesianism 'economics'!
Brown was just a 'tax and spend' social democrat, not a serious economist
@BBCNormanS: International Development Secretary @JustineGreening dismisses question over whether she wd stand for leadership as "a distraction"
In anybody's book swing of 0.85% to Labour from Conservative after Corbyn became leader