But you will have to come to one of my talks to hear the rest!!)
I would like to and so, I am sure, would a chum of mine who "teaches" on women's issues. How do we get an invite?
They are not yet public. As soon as I do a public one I will let you know.
Ah, go on! You could smuggle a couple of people into the back. Nobody would notice and we could easily have a credible cover plan worked out if they did.
Well that is true. And I'd have to smuggle in Casino Royale as well.
But my next one is at 9 am tomorrow so (a) no time; (b) I need my dinner and sleep; (c) I'd have to shoot you all afterwards or something because my cover would be blown.....Smiley Face!!!
''If women want the conventions broken down, they should not erect barriers to men who also break other conventions.''
I always think its funny how women want an ever wider range of opportunities, and at the same time a vast store of eligible men with good careers to marry, because women simply don;t date down.
Where are all the good men???.....er.....you took their jobs.
Oh dear - first you accuse others of not doing much without thinking that they might do more than you know. Then you assume that women don't marry down - not true - there are plenty of women who marry men who earn less than them. And finally you assume that there are only a limited number of good jobs and if women get them men can't or, as economists might call it, the Lump of Labour Fallacy. The same mistake the Left make when they assume there is only a finite amount of wealth in the country and that the only role of government is to distribute it rather than grow it.
All women want is to have the same opportunities and choices and not be patronised by those who see it all as a zero sum game. What they do with those choices is up to them.
Lawyers often marry in. When they have children the woman invariably becomes the child rearer, irrespective of which is the better lawyer. I've often wanted to ask what discussions they've had about this, if any.
Apparently it isn't the 'done' thing for a man, especially one who was earning reasonably well.
Here's the question. How many of those saying it isn;t the done thing are blokes? and how many women?
From memory I've had three comments, all from men. One was concerned about how my career might be harmed - which is fine with me, as I don't particularly want to go back into this industry if I can help it. The other two were more dismissive about the choice, although no-one was out-and-out rude, or even, I think, meant to be rude.
Having said that, most of my long-term friends are well used to me making 'odd' decisions in my life, particularly wrt what might be referred to as my 'career', which I only stumbled into.
However, whilst most of the mothers have been very welcoming, I do detect a certain stand-offishness in one or two. Nothing verbal, and no comments - just a reluctance to admit me into a couple of small circles. This has only occurred after our baby's become a toddler, as if the cuteness of a baby breaks through any such reluctance. Than again, some have gone out of their way to include me.
Reverting to stereotyping, that seems to be a difference between the sexes - the men who think it is odd say something but do nothing, the women who think it is odd say nothing and do something,
So from my experience, it works both ways. If women want the conventions broken down, they should not erect barriers to men who also break other conventions.
Your last point is a very good one. Some of the stay-at-home mothers at my childrens' schools could be a bit stand-offish to those of us who worked - and would always organise events for 11 am in the week and be a bit sniffy when I pointed out that I was ...er .... working then. My husband, on the other hand, would rather have stuck pins in his eyes than hang around with such women and would, the moment the children were in school, disappear off on long country and somewhat boozy walks with his mates, only just making it back to collect the children looking like - well like someone does after a few hours in the country and the pub.
That sounds bloody great. Can I be a house-husband please?
I don't know what equity markets you have been looking at over the last five years, but the ones I have invested in have done very well. Now, though, I think it is time to take a break and to get a lot more watchful.
But you will have to come to one of my talks to hear the rest!!)
I would like to and so, I am sure, would a chum of mine who "teaches" on women's issues. How do we get an invite?
They are not yet public. As soon as I do a public one I will let you know.
Ah, go on! You could smuggle a couple of people into the back. Nobody would notice and we could easily have a credible cover plan worked out if they did.
Well that is true. And I'd have to smuggle in Casino Royale as well.
But my next one is at 9 am tomorrow so (a) no time; (b) I need my dinner and sleep; (c) I'd have to shoot you all afterwards or something because my cover would be blown.....Smiley Face!!!
It's a bit simplistic to say that women were second-class citizens confined to specific roles in the past. Yes they were - for reasons to do with child-bearing, child-rearing, the amount of work required to maintain a home, and the nature of work. But men were equally confined to specific roles, and I'm not sure that the men always got the better deal. Quite apart from (say) the First World War, what about boys born into mining communities in the 1920s, effectively condemned to spend their lives (and probably short lives) down the pits? Or the sons of the aristocracy, effectively compelled (if they weren't the eldest) to a career in the army, the navy or the church?
Autres temps, autres moeurs. It's silly to judge them from a twenty-first century perspective.
That's a good point. Whilst the majority of people have been pleasant about my decision, I've had a few barbed comments about my decision to become, for the moment at least, a stay-at-home father / house-husband.
Apparently it isn't the 'done' thing for a man, especially one who was earning reasonably well.
Yet for us it was the obvious and logical thing to do.
Both men and women have to try to fit into the roles expected of them. These strict and sometimes nonsensical restrictions are being broken down for both sexes. This is mostly positive, although there can be downsides.
Personally I feel happier taking my toddler to a playgroup than I ever would chanting at some overpaid idiots on the football field.
My husband was a stay at home father for a while. It worked for us too. And he didn't care two hoots what others thought. I think that as a family you have to work out what's best for you and accept that it may change at different stages.
We always had a rule that one of us was always there in the evening / for school events / if the tother was travelling and that weekends were absolutely sacred. When the children were younger I never went to social events in the evening because I felt that I wanted time for my family and that work got enough out of me as it was.
But whatever choice you make don't let others make you feel guilty about it.
I don't feel guilty about it. It's the right decision for us, and if other people think it's odd, then it's their problem, not ours.
I'm quite proud of the fact that some friends of ours, with a son just a month younger than ours, have recently made a similar decision. Now their son's a year old, he's chucked in his job to become full-time carer, and she's gone back to work four days a week. Apparently my example was instrumental in this.
Apparently it isn't the 'done' thing for a man, especially one who was earning reasonably well.
Here's the question. How many of those saying it isn;t the done thing are blokes? and how many women?
From memory I've had three comments, all from men. One was concerned about how my career might be harmed - which is fine with me, as I don't particularly want to go back into this industry if I can help it. The other two were more dismissive about the choice, although no-one was out-and-out rude, or even, I think, meant to be rude.
Having said that, most of my long-term friends are well used to me making 'odd' decisions in my life, particularly wrt what might be referred to as my 'career', which I only stumbled into.
However, whilst most of the mothers have been very welcoming, I do detect a certain stand-offishness in one or two. Nothing verbal, and no comments - just a reluctance to admit me into a couple of small circles. This has only occurred after our baby's become a toddler, as if the cuteness of a baby breaks through any such reluctance. Than again, some have gone out of their way to include me.
Reverting to stereotyping, that seems to be a difference between the sexes - the men who think it is odd say something but do nothing, the women who think it is odd say nothing and do something,
So from my experience, it works both ways. If women want the conventions broken down, they should not erect barriers to men who also break other conventions.
Your last point is a very good one. Some of the stay-at-home mothers at my childrens' schools could be a bit stand-offish to those of us who worked - and would always organise events for 11 am in the week and be a bit sniffy when I pointed out that I was ...er .... working then. My husband, on the other hand, would rather have stuck pins in his eyes than hang around with such women and would, the moment the children were in school, disappear off on long country and somewhat boozy walks with his mates, only just making it back to collect the children looking like - well like someone does after a few hours in the country and the pub.
That sounds bloody great. Can I be a house-husband please?
Lawyers often marry in. When they have children the woman invariably becomes the child rearer, irrespective of which is the better lawyer. I've often wanted to ask what discussions they've had about this, if any.
I think that professional people in general, marry in, to a far greater extent than previously.
It's a bit simplistic to say that women were second-class citizens confined to specific roles in the past. Yes they were - for reasons to do with child-bearing, child-rearing, the amount of work required to maintain a home, and the nature of work. But men were equally confined to specific roles, and I'm not sure that the men always got the better deal. Quite apart from (say) the First World War, what about boys born into mining communities in the 1920s, effectively condemned to spend their lives (and probably short lives) down the pits? Or the sons of the aristocracy, effectively compelled (if they weren't the eldest) to a career in the army, the navy or the church?
Autres temps, autres moeurs. It's silly to judge them from a twenty-first century perspective.
That's a good point. Whilst the majority of people have been pleasant about my decision, I've had a few barbed comments about my decision to become, for the moment at least, a stay-at-home father / house-husband.
Apparently it isn't the 'done' thing for a man, especially one who was earning reasonably well.
Yet for us it was the obvious and logical thing to do.
Both men and women have to try to fit into the roles expected of them. These strict and sometimes nonsensical restrictions are being broken down for both sexes. This is mostly positive, although there can be downsides.
Personally I feel happier taking my toddler to a playgroup than I ever would chanting at some overpaid idiots on the football field.
My husband was a stay at home father for a while. It worked for us too. And he didn't care two hoots what others thought. I think that as a family you have to work out what's best for you and accept that it may change at different stages.
We always had a rule that one of us was always there in the evening / for school events / if the tother was travelling and that weekends were absolutely sacred. When the children were younger I never went to social events in the evening because I felt that I wanted time for my family and that work got enough out of me as it was.
But whatever choice you make don't let others make you feel guilty about it.
I don't feel guilty about it. It's the right decision for us, and if other people think it's odd, then it's their problem, not ours.
I'm quite proud of the fact that some friends of ours, with a son just a month younger than ours, have recently made a similar decision. Now their son's a year old, he's chucked in his job to become full-time carer, and she's gone back to work four days a week. Apparently my example was instrumental in this.
"It's hard to know where to start with Theresa May's awful, ugly, misleading, cynical and irresponsible speech to the Conservative Party conference today. If you haven't seen reports of it, allow me to summarise: "Immigrants are stealing your job, making you poorer and ruining your country. Never mind the facts, just feel angry at foreigners. And make me Conservative leader." "
james Kirkup - The Telegraph
Immigration is the coming fault line on the centre-right, I think. i'd have quite a lot of time for Theresa May, if I thought she wasn't playing to the gallery.
Absolutely. I've noticed a eurosceptic hardening, but a metropolitan softening on immigration within the Conservative Party.
Any other kind of trend, perhaps demographic, you might want to add to that?
In many ways it's not a bad direction of travel, at least in terms of the party's long-run survivability, though I have mixed feelings over Europe.
"It's hard to know where to start with Theresa May's awful, ugly, misleading, cynical and irresponsible speech to the Conservative Party conference today. If you haven't seen reports of it, allow me to summarise: "Immigrants are stealing your job, making you poorer and ruining your country. Never mind the facts, just feel angry at foreigners. And make me Conservative leader." "
james Kirkup - The Telegraph
Immigration is the coming fault line on the centre-right, I think.
Kirkup's article was the sort of classic left-wing virtue signalling on this issue. He is incapable of seeing the difference between criticising immigration and criticising immigrants. Nothing in May's speech encouraged anger at foreigners. This faux outrage is merely a distraction tactic from those who would rather discuss words that people use rather than the underlying issue, because they have lost the argument on the underlying issue.
Kirkup was just writing click-bait stuff, not for the first time.
Is the silence from the Tories Mays UKIP speech because they disagree with her or they don't want to agree then have to u turn when Dave or George disown it?
May's speech was not UKIP, it was considered and central. Balancing fairness and control, openness and restrictions.
Personally I don't agree as I believe in more openness but no party leader has ever been more open than that and May's speech IMO is entirely consistent with Dave saying he wants net migration in the tens of thousands.
It is not consistent with the racist one-trick-pony that the arsehole Farage has become.
Racist,you don't know the meaning pal,try having red house bricks thrown through your windows and called white basta*ds.
I really am now pissed off with your moaning. Oh poor you weekend are not available. Oh deaR what a shame ...evenings are missed. My heart bleeds for you and You break my bloody heart.
We do the job we choose and I chose a job in the full knowledge that it would probably cost me a family life in the future. My family know this and they support me. I post this from yet another location abroad travelling.
I am just utterly sick and tired of you people moaning your lot. Just fe k off and get another job if you don't like the NHS or what you do.
You really really don't know the half of it. To put it in prospective my youngest daughter was 5 years old before I had a Christmas home with her. Our choice or someone else's but you were lucky.
"It's hard to know where to start with Theresa May's awful, ugly, misleading, cynical and irresponsible speech to the Conservative Party conference today. If you haven't seen reports of it, allow me to summarise: "Immigrants are stealing your job, making you poorer and ruining your country. Never mind the facts, just feel angry at foreigners. And make me Conservative leader." "
james Kirkup - The Telegraph
Immigration is the coming fault line on the centre-right, I think.
Kirkup's article was the sort of classic left-wing virtue signalling on this issue. He is incapable of seeing the difference between criticising immigration and criticising immigrants. Nothing in May's speech encouraged anger at foreigners. This faux outrage is merely a distraction tactic from those who would rather discuss words that people use rather than the underlying issue, because they have lost the argument on the underlying issue.
It's a metropolitan thing: I'm a fiscally dry successful young professional, you're a bit of a Lefty successful young third sector worker; but we're both friends, graduates, went to the same university and live in town.
We both hate the plebs and their ignorant attitudes on foreigners.
And this after refusing to condemn ISIS, as that would be "Islamophobic".
Maybe I'm missing something, but what exactly is the point of passing motions about historical events? Have these students nothing better to do with their time?
''If women want the conventions broken down, they should not erect barriers to men who also break other conventions.''
I always think its funny how women want an ever wider range of opportunities, and at the same time a vast store of eligible men with good careers to marry, because women simply don;t date down.
Where are all the good men???.....er.....you took their jobs.
Not to mention the feminists who think that imprisonment is a fitting punishment for male criminals, but inhuman and degrading treatment for female criminals.
Such as Vicky Pryce, who claims women are usually in jail because of men?
Apparently it isn't the 'done' thing for a man, especially one who was earning reasonably well.
Here's the question. How many of those saying it isn;t the done thing are blokes? and how many women?
From memory I've had three comments, all from men. One was concerned about how my career might be harmed - which is fine with me, as I don't particularly want to go back into this industry if I can help it. The other two were more dismissive about the choice, although no-one was out-and-out rude, or even, I think, meant to be rude.
Having said that, most of my long-term friends are well used to me making 'odd' decisions in my life, particularly wrt what might be referred to as my 'career', which I only stumbled into.
However, whilst most of the mothers have been very welcoming, I do detect a certain stand-offishness in one or two. Nothing verbal, and no comments - just a reluctance to admit me into a couple of small circles. This has only occurred after our baby's become a toddler, as if the cuteness of a baby breaks through any such reluctance. Than again, some have gone out of their way to include me.
Reverting to stereotyping, that seems to be a difference between the sexes - the men who think it is odd say something but do nothing, the women who think it is odd say nothing and do something,
So from my experience, it works both ways. If women want the conventions broken down, they should not erect barriers to men who also break other conventions.
Your last point is a very good one. Some of the stay-at-home mothers at my childrens' schools could be a bit stand-offish to those of us who worked - and would always organise events for 11 am in the week and be a bit sniffy when I pointed out that I was ...er .... working then. My husband, on the other hand, would rather have stuck pins in his eyes than hang around with such women and would, the moment the children were in school, disappear off on long country and somewhat boozy walks with his mates, only just making it back to collect the children looking like - well like someone does after a few hours in the country and the pub.
That sounds bloody great. Can I be a house-husband please?
One of the worst thing for me about having a kid is that my long walks have had to be curtailed. He can just about manage two or three hours in the pram as long as I stop at every playground we pass (on one walk we stopped at all five playgrounds in our village), but day- or week-long walks are an impossibility.
And when I do get the opportunity, I become a stupid idiot and break my elbow on the first day. :0
You seem to be implying that the legions of sistahs wailing about the lack of good men are complaining about nothing then....???
''Stop crying you silly girl and marry that lovely white van man. ''
I judge people by how they behave not their social status. How others judge people is up to them. One of my children's godparents is what you might call a white van man. To me and mine he is a lovely kind and funny individual who has been immeasurably kind to us in times of trouble.
I wonder if you would mind elaborating on what you said about the previous owner in my Italian cafe story? There is a possibility apparently that the previous owner was the person who informed the immigration department. As you say my friend didn't do due diligence and though the original owner was the original employer it's difficult to see how that helps?
But you will have to come to one of my talks to hear the rest!!)
I would like to and so, I am sure, would a chum of mine who "teaches" on women's issues. How do we get an invite?
They are not yet public. As soon as I do a public one I will let you know.
Ah, go on! You could smuggle a couple of people into the back. Nobody would notice and we could easily have a credible cover plan worked out if they did.
Well that is true. And I'd have to smuggle in Casino Royale as well.
But my next one is at 9 am tomorrow so (a) no time; (b) I need my dinner and sleep; (c) I'd have to shoot you all afterwards or something because my cover would be blown.....Smiley Face!!!
So next time, eh??
I've met you!
Ssh......I hope I didn't tell you my real name.
You did, but I've forgotten. Not that I care anyway - no offence!
She will have increased her currency today, but (a) she's dull (b) she never answers a straight question directly, and oozes 'politicianness' and, (c) no-one has forgotten how she attacked her own party at its lowest ebb.
If it weren't for all that she could be Thatcher: The Next Generation.
She didn't attack the party at its lowest ebb she told some home truths that needed to be said. If nobody says the truth then nobody can fix the problems.
No, she gave a name to the branding problem the Conservatives had that will forever be hung around our necks by our enemies (to quote a friend)
There were ways to get that message across to the party faithful: that was absolutely not it.
She lost me the moment she said it.
She didn't call the party the nasty party, she said that some people call us that and it is unfair and addressed what we needed to do to address the issue.
So the direction of policy will be clear. And our plans will be in place for next year's elections. Yes we've made progress.
But let's not kid ourselves. There's a way to go before we can return to government.
There's a lot we need to do in this party of ours. Our base is too narrow and so, occasionally, are our sympathies. You know what some people call us - the nasty party.
I know that's unfair. You know that's unfair but it's the people out there we need to convince - and we can only do that by avoiding behaviour and attitudes that play into the hands of our opponents. No more glib moralising, no more hypocritical finger-wagging.
We need to reach out to all areas of our society.
I want us to be the party that represents the whole of Britain and not merely some mythical place called "Middle England", but the truth is that as our country has become more diverse, our party has remained the same.
Our enemies were already winning, we'd already suffered two of the greatest electoral defeats in our history and by identifying what was wrong we were later able to fix it and get electoral success.
I've not heard a single speaker all conference use the phrase Middle England, it is all One Nation now and it our enemies that our floundering not us.
''One of my children's godparents is what you might call a white van man. To me and mine he is a lovely kind and funny individual who has been immeasurably kind to us in times of trouble''
I'm sure he's beating off the career women with a stick....
A Jewish state is a Crusader state? Really?? Do they not know what the Crusaders did to Jews?
(Silly question, I suppose.)
It's completely barmy. You could be an anti-Zionist and STILL condemn the Holocaust. The Nazis didn't kill 6 million Jews because Hitler had a beef about Jewish settlements in Palestine
Maybe I'm missing something, but what exactly is the point of passing motions about historical events? Have these students nothing better to do with their time?
Well for starters they could consider going to some history lectures, but they might want to try a different university if the student union is any indication of the quality of teaching.
Loving the new found love between lefties and the Sun .. something just tells me it won't end well
It's a cross party issue now ...you righties were all wrongies on this weren't you?
You seen the polling on benefit cuts have you?
I've said it before - the polling on benefit cuts may be clear. But 75% of those who are going to get hammered by the tax credit cuts do not even know they are coming. It is the £20,000-£25,000 earners with a couple of kids who work like shit to get somewhere in life that are gonna get clobbered...not the feckless unemployed. Joe Public thinks benefit cuts means the unemployed and the lazy...these cuts won't affect them..why the hell do you think the Tories are getting cold feet...a moral conscience? No...it's because they are going to get blamed for hurting those they claim to support.
It's not , I have a daughter of the precise same opinion and she is right. We would not even think to mention that.
I am reminded of a very bad mistake I made a few years ago with a young lady that came for a job interview. She was very qualified and had some experience behind her in the scientifically technical work she had been doing previously. She was entering a pretty much 99% all male environment in shall be say isolated locations. I asked her why like others, she had not put down any outside interests on her Cv?. She challenged me does that impact on what I am applying for or if I can do my job?
Nope! She was superb and achieved finally a very senior position and had every right to do so.
I never ever asked that question again of male or female in any interview I did.
We all learn......
It depends upon the position you're hiring for and level of experience your applicants have. I have found for school leavers etc especially that outside interests can demonstrate qualities like Leadership, Teamwork, Creativity etc and are a part of the puzzle of trying to find the best candidates.
Not everything by any means buy not worthless either.
It was one of those questions at the end. Her qualifications, experience and her professional attitude had already resolved the decision before I asked.
Hence my comment on it depends upon the position you're hiring for and level of experience they have. For people leaving education that do not yet have work experience extra-curricular activities are a useful proxy for measures. For more mature and serious candidates the same can't be said. It's just a case of asking sensible questions that fit the interview and not asking the same question to everyone in all circumstances.
Loving the new found love between lefties and the Sun .. something just tells me it won't end well
It's a cross party issue now ...you righties were all wrongies on this weren't you?
You seen the polling on benefit cuts have you?
I've said it before - the polling on benefit cuts may be clear. But 75% of those who are going to get hammered by the tax credit cuts do not even know they are coming. It is the £20,000-£25,000 earners with a couple of kids who work like shit to get somewhere in life that are gonna get clobbered...not the feckless unemployed. Joe Public thinks benefit cuts means the unemployed and the lazy...these cuts won't affect them..why the hell do you think the Tories are getting cold feet...a moral conscience? No...it's because they are going to get blamed for hurting those they claim to support.
Keeping people on Gordon Brown's 80% tax rate is not supporting anyone.
I've said it before - the polling on benefit cuts may be clear. But 75% of those who are going to get hammered by the tax credit cuts do not even know they are coming. It is the £20,000-£25,000 earners with a couple of kids who work like shit to get somewhere in life that are gonna get clobbered...not the feckless unemployed. Joe Public thinks benefit cuts means the unemployed and the lazy...these cuts won't affect them..why the hell do you think the Tories are getting cold feet...a moral conscience? No...it's because they are going to get blamed for hurting those they claim to support.
Most of the people affected will not see a cash cut in benefits so won't even notice.
Is the silence from the Tories Mays UKIP speech because they disagree with her or they don't want to agree then have to u turn when Dave or George disown it?
May's speech was not UKIP, it was considered and central. Balancing fairness and control, openness and restrictions.
Personally I don't agree as I believe in more openness but no party leader has ever been more open than that and May's speech IMO is entirely consistent with Dave saying he wants net migration in the tens of thousands.
It is not consistent with the racist one-trick-pony that the arsehole Farage has become.
Ooh!
Tell me you disagree, go on.
May's speech was full of balance and contrast rather than vehemence and aggression. Speaking of a deal and fairness. It was very much an attempt to address the issue from all sides.
Farage now would never give a speech like that as he has become a poor parody of himself post-election, we saw that when he was on This Week last week. He has lost his touch and no longer gives balanced speeches like that. If you can give me an example of one like May's post-election I'd be curious to see it and I'll apologise if I'm wrong but he's lost what balance he had.
''One of my children's godparents is what you might call a white van man. To me and mine he is a lovely kind and funny individual who has been immeasurably kind to us in times of trouble''
I'm sure he's beating off the career women with a stick....
I hope not. He's a happily married grandfather.
If other women can't see past the packaging they risk missing good men. Their problem not mine.
Loving the new found love between lefties and the Sun .. something just tells me it won't end well
It's a cross party issue now ...you righties were all wrongies on this weren't you?
You seen the polling on benefit cuts have you?
I've said it before - the polling on benefit cuts may be clear. But 75% of those who are going to get hammered by the tax credit cuts do not even know they are coming. It is the £20,000-£25,000 earners with a couple of kids who work like shit to get somewhere in life that are gonna get clobbered...not the feckless unemployed. Joe Public thinks benefit cuts means the unemployed and the lazy...these cuts won't affect them..why the hell do you think the Tories are getting cold feet...a moral conscience? No...it's because they are going to get blamed for hurting those they claim to support.
You ignore , as always the impact of tax cuts, NLW, increasing working hours which makes your 'hammer' somewhat less potent for most - the budget was clear, work will pay insteads of governments. The lefty squeals are the anguish of them losing their client vote for good. We heard very similar rhetoric 5 years ago about public sector job cuts - how's that meme going after May2015.
I've said it before - the polling on benefit cuts may be clear. But 75% of those who are going to get hammered by the tax credit cuts do not even know they are coming. It is the £20,000-£25,000 earners with a couple of kids who work like shit to get somewhere in life that are gonna get clobbered...not the feckless unemployed. Joe Public thinks benefit cuts means the unemployed and the lazy...these cuts won't affect them..why the hell do you think the Tories are getting cold feet...a moral conscience? No...it's because they are going to get blamed for hurting those they claim to support.
Most of the people affected will not see a cash cut in benefits so won't even notice.
Plus restrictions on giving unlimited money for an unlimited amount of children don't take place for any children already born, or conceived.
One of the worst thing for me about having a kid is that my long walks have had to be curtailed. He can just about manage two or three hours in the pram as long as I stop at every playground we pass (on one walk we stopped at all five playgrounds in our village), but day- or week-long walks are an impossibility.
And when I do get the opportunity, I become a stupid idiot and break my elbow on the first day. :0
My advice to you would be to get him a balance bike as soon as possible. One with pneumatic tyres and a metal frame, not one of those silly wooden ones. My daughter would go for miles on one, and I would just have to jog along behind. They can handle reasonably uneven ground and unmade footpaths and make learning to ride a proper bike a doddle. Suitable for about 2 year-olds and older. Took my daughter a couple of days to get the hang of it. We had a Puky one - best toy we ever got in terms of the amount of pleasure derived from it.
Loving the new found love between lefties and the Sun .. something just tells me it won't end well
It's a cross party issue now ...you righties were all wrongies on this weren't you?
You seen the polling on benefit cuts have you?
I've said it before - the polling on benefit cuts may be clear. But 75% of those who are going to get hammered by the tax credit cuts do not even know they are coming. It is the £20,000-£25,000 earners with a couple of kids who work like shit to get somewhere in life that are gonna get clobbered...not the feckless unemployed. Joe Public thinks benefit cuts means the unemployed and the lazy...these cuts won't affect them..why the hell do you think the Tories are getting cold feet...a moral conscience? No...it's because they are going to get blamed for hurting those they claim to support.
You ignore , as always the impact of tax cuts, NLW, increasing working hours which makes your 'hammer' somewhat less potent for most - the budget was clear, work will pay insteads of governments. The lefty squeals are the anguish of them losing their client vote for good. We heard very similar rhetoric 5 years ago about public sector job cuts - how's that meme going after May2015.
Exactly well said - and as people will not be on an 80% tax rate as those receiving tax credits are they'll be on a 32% tax rate instead.
Now which is better and encourages and enables them to be able to improve their own life? Which is fairer?
For me there is no justification in Brown's 80% tax rate and Osborne is making great progress at dumping that into history.
I wonder if you would mind elaborating on what you said about the previous owner in my Italian cafe story? There is a possibility apparently that the previous owner was the person who informed the immigration department. As you say my friend didn't do due diligence and though the original owner was the original employer it's difficult to see how that helps?
I did wonder whether that might be the case.
What I was getting at was whether there was a contract for the sale of the cafe which had in it any terms e.g. some sort of indemnity or warranty by the previous owner to the effect that all applicable laws had been complied with etc which might entitle your friend to sue for damages i.e. the fine and other consequential loss. Were any oral representations made before the agreement to buy on which your friend relied? If that is the case then your friend should speak to a good contract lawyer to see what might be possible, though I would stress that none of this would be easy and could be expensive.
But it sounds as if he didn't have anything like that in place.
A neighbour (and utter luvvie) has sent me a 38 degrees email titled "Murdoch vs the BBC". Here's a sample:
Government plans to rip out the heart of the BBC are taking shape. Imagine a BBC where newsnight is riddled with adverts. Or a BBC so underfunded that independent news becomes a thing of the past and the airwaves are dominated by Rupert Murdoch’s media. This is what the Government wants - we need to stop them.
If we’re going to stop these plans we can’t rely on newspapers or TV channels owned by Murdoch and other media moguls. Instead, we’re going to have to use people-power to show the government that we won’t stand for them destroying our independent BBC.
There's a lot more in the same vein, but I shan't trouble the thread with it. They kindly including a link to the government's questionnaire (complete with 'hints' on how 'best' to answer it) and I had a lot of fun answering the questions. Not necessarily in the way they expected, obviously. So if you're bored: https://speakout.38degrees.org.uk/surveys/bbc-consultation
Is the silence from the Tories Mays UKIP speech because they disagree with her or they don't want to agree then have to u turn when Dave or George disown it?
May's speech was not UKIP, it was considered and central. Balancing fairness and control, openness and restrictions.
Personally I don't agree as I believe in more openness but no party leader has ever been more open than that and May's speech IMO is entirely consistent with Dave saying he wants net migration in the tens of thousands.
It is not consistent with the racist one-trick-pony that the arsehole Farage has become.
Ooh!
Tell me you disagree, go on.
May's speech was full of balance and contrast rather than vehemence and aggression. Speaking of a deal and fairness. It was very much an attempt to address the issue from all sides.
Farage now would never give a speech like that as he has become a poor parody of himself post-election, we saw that when he was on This Week last week. He has lost his touch and no longer gives balanced speeches like that. If you can give me an example of one like May's post-election I'd be curious to see it and I'll apologise if I'm wrong but he's lost what balance he had.
Any particular day of the week this speech had to be made?!
May said today what UKIP have been saying for five years or more about immigration... The wage depression, the threat to jobs, the lack of a cohesive society.
I don't know why you think that if I can't find a particular speech by farage in the last 5 months that somehow makes you right? I never said he had. You're the one that brought him into it, I get you don't like him. I merely stated the fact that she has highlighted many points that UKIP have long been saying in today's speech.
One of the worst thing for me about having a kid is that my long walks have had to be curtailed. He can just about manage two or three hours in the pram as long as I stop at every playground we pass (on one walk we stopped at all five playgrounds in our village), but day- or week-long walks are an impossibility.
And when I do get the opportunity, I become a stupid idiot and break my elbow on the first day. :0
My advice to you would be to get him a balance bike as soon as possible. One with pneumatic tyres and a metal frame, not one of those silly wooden ones. My daughter would go for miles on one, and I would just have to jog along behind. They can handle reasonably uneven ground and unmade footpaths and make learning to ride a proper bike a doddle. Suitable for about 2 year-olds and older. Took my daughter a couple of days to get the hang of it. We had a Puky one - best toy we ever got in terms of the amount of pleasure derived from it.
Or there are some very good solid baby carriers designed for proper walks. We imported ours from the US.
It is the £20,000-£25,000 earners with a couple of kids who work like shit to get somewhere in life that are gonna get clobbered...not the feckless unemployed.
As you say contract lawyers are expensive and the Home office have agreed to accept payment over two years so building up his costs isn't a wise option. As it happens he gets a discount for paying all in one go so if he'll take it I'm going to lend him the money. Just one of those things to put down to experience but so unfair in my opinion. But thanks for your advice
But you will have to come to one of my talks to hear the rest!!)
I would like to and so, I am sure, would a chum of mine who "teaches" on women's issues. How do we get an invite?
They are not yet public. As soon as I do a public one I will let you know.
Ah, go on! You could smuggle a couple of people into the back. Nobody would notice and we could easily have a credible cover plan worked out if they did.
Well that is true. And I'd have to smuggle in Casino Royale as well.
But my next one is at 9 am tomorrow so (a) no time; (b) I need my dinner and sleep; (c) I'd have to shoot you all afterwards or something because my cover would be blown.....Smiley Face!!!
So next time, eh??
I've met you!
Ssh......I hope I didn't tell you my real name.
You did, but I've forgotten. Not that I care anyway - no offence!
Whilst there may be concern about Saudi Arabia the "minor transgressions" are happening here to us.
What you describe is not restricted to men. I've had women get over familiar with me, and I've seen it happen to other men too, on plenty of occasions.
But that's alright, because as men we're supposed to enjoy it, right? because we're such sex perverts?
Most disturbing experience of my life: when I was a student, after a funeral, I went into a wine bar with a few of the other mourners (it was the favourite haunt of the friend we were saying goodbye to).
A woman in her mid 50s looked at me...and slowly licked her lips...
She will have increased her currency today, but (a) she's dull (b) she never answers a straight question directly, and oozes 'politicianness' and, (c) no-one has forgotten how she attacked her own party at its lowest ebb.
If it weren't for all that she could be Thatcher: The Next Generation.
She didn't attack the party at its lowest ebb she told some home truths that needed to be said. If nobody says the truth then nobody can fix the problems.
No, she gave a name to the branding problem the Conservatives had that will forever be hung around our necks by our enemies (to quote a friend)
There were ways to get that message across to the party faithful: that was absolutely not it.
She lost me the moment she said it.
She didn't call the party the nasty party, she said that some people call us that and it is unfair and addressed what we needed to do to address the issue.
So the direction of policy will be clear. And our plans will be in place for next year's elections. Yes we've made progress.
But let's not kid ourselves. There's a way to go before we can return to government.
There's a lot we need to do in this party of ours. Our base is too narrow and so, occasionally, are our sympathies. You know what some people call us - the nasty party.
I know that's unfair. You know that's unfair but it's the people out there we need to convince - and we can only do that by avoiding behaviour and attitudes that play into the hands of our opponents. No more glib moralising, no more hypocritical finger-wagging.
We need to reach out to all areas of our society.
I want us to be the party that represents the whole of Britain and not merely some mythical place called "Middle England", but the truth is that as our country has become more diverse, our party has remained the same.
Our enemies were already winning, we'd already suffered two of the greatest electoral defeats in our history and by identifying what was wrong we were later able to fix it and get electoral success.
I've not heard a single speaker all conference use the phrase Middle England, it is all One Nation now and it our enemies that our floundering not us.
Lance Price, ex BBC journo and Blairite spin doctor (ex Director of Comms for the Labour party) claims to have invented "the nasty party" (I think around 2000, as it was linked to Ivan Massow's temporary defection).
A neighbour (and utter luvvie) has sent me a 38 degrees email titled "Murdoch vs the BBC". Here's a sample:
Government plans to rip out the heart of the BBC are taking shape. Imagine a BBC where newsnight is riddled with adverts. Or a BBC so underfunded that independent news becomes a thing of the past and the airwaves are dominated by Rupert Murdoch’s media. This is what the Government wants - we need to stop them.
If we’re going to stop these plans we can’t rely on newspapers or TV channels owned by Murdoch and other media moguls. Instead, we’re going to have to use people-power to show the government that we won’t stand for them destroying our independent BBC.
There's a lot more in the same vein, but I shan't trouble the thread with it. They kindly including a link to the government's questionnaire (complete with 'hints' on how 'best' to answer it) and I had a lot of fun answering the questions. Not necessarily in the way they expected, obviously. So if you're bored: https://speakout.38degrees.org.uk/surveys/bbc-consultation
8 variations of scrap the licence fee posted, one for each question
It's not , I have a daughter of the precise same opinion and she is right. We would not even think to mention that.
I am reminded of a very bad mistake I made a few years ago with a young lady that came for a job interview. She was very qualified and had some experience behind her in the scientifically technical work she had been doing previously. She was entering a pretty much 99% all male environment in shall be say isolated locations. I asked her why like others, she had not put down any outside interests on her Cv?. She challenged me does that impact on what I am applying for or if I can do my job?
Nope! She was superb and achieved finally a very senior position and had every right to do so.
I never ever asked that question again of male or female in any interview I did.
We all learn......
It depends upon the position you're hiring for and level of experience your applicants have. I have found for school leavers etc especially that outside interests can demonstrate qualities like Leadership, Teamwork, Creativity etc and are a part of the puzzle of trying to find the best candidates.
Not everything by any means buy not worthless either.
It was one of those questions at the end. Her qualifications, experience and her professional attitude had already resolved the decision before I asked.
Hence my comment on it depends upon the position you're hiring for and level of experience they have. For people leaving education that do not yet have work experience extra-curricular activities are a useful proxy for measures. For more mature and serious candidates the same can't be said. It's just a case of asking sensible questions that fit the interview and not asking the same question to everyone in all circumstances.
I think I already agreed with that.
She was already a professional. Not just out of school as you refer but you make a good point anyway. Live and learn
No, no, no. My neighbour is an elderly actor of the old school. You'd think he'd spent his career treading the boards with Olivier rather than getting bit parts in soap operas and - to be fair - the occasional 'proper' drama.
As you say contract lawyers are expensive and the Home office have agreed to accept payment over two years so building up his costs isn't a wise option. As it happens he gets a discount for paying all in one go so if he'll take it I'm going to lend him the money. Just one of those things to put down to experience but so unfair in my opinion. But thanks for your advice
Well, it's a hard lesson to learn - not least realising that you cannot take anything or anyone on trust - but checking the status of employees is absolutely vital. I have had to do the same when recently hiring someone from outside the EU though it is much easier in a large organization.
Is the silence from the Tories Mays UKIP speech because they disagree with her or they don't want to agree then have to u turn when Dave or George disown it?
May's speech was not UKIP, it was considered and central. Balancing fairness and control, openness and restrictions.
Personally I don't agree as I believe in more openness but no party leader has ever been more open than that and May's speech IMO is entirely consistent with Dave saying he wants net migration in the tens of thousands.
It is not consistent with the racist one-trick-pony that the arsehole Farage has become.
Ooh!
Tell me you disagree, go on.
May's speech was full of balance and contrast rather than vehemence and aggression. Speaking of a deal and fairness. It was very much an attempt to address the issue from all sides.
Farage now would never give a speech like that as he has become a poor parody of himself post-election, we saw that when he was on This Week last week. He has lost his touch and no longer gives balanced speeches like that. If you can give me an example of one like May's post-election I'd be curious to see it and I'll apologise if I'm wrong but he's lost what balance he had.
Any particular day of the week this speech had to be made?!
May said today what UKIP have been saying for five years or more about immigration... The wage depression, the threat to jobs, the lack of a cohesive society.
I don't know why you think that if I can't find a particular speech by farage in the last 5 months that somehow makes you right? I never said he had. You're the one that brought him into it, I get you don't like him. I merely stated the fact that she has highlighted many points that UKIP have long been saying in today's speech.
I agree she addressed many issues raised but she did so in a balanced manner IMO that UKIP haven't. Nor was it new to a Party that has been seeking to restrain immigration for as long as I can remember.
Whilst there may be concern about Saudi Arabia the "minor transgressions" are happening here to us.
What you describe is not restricted to men. I've had women get over familiar with me, and I've seen it happen to other men too, on plenty of occasions.
But that's alright, because as men we're supposed to enjoy it, right? because we're such sex perverts?
Most disturbing experience of my life: when I was a student, after a funeral, I went into a wine bar with a few of the other mourners (it was the favourite haunt of the friend we were saying goodbye to).
A woman in her mid 50s looked at me...and slowly licked her lips...
I knew a guy who worked in a bar where all the waiters wore kilts. The number of women who tried to see underneath them or would even grope underneath them was shocking. I doubt you'd ever get a bar in this country where so many men groped the waitresses.
As you say contract lawyers are expensive and the Home office have agreed to accept payment over two years so building up his costs isn't a wise option. As it happens he gets a discount for paying all in one go so if he'll take it I'm going to lend him the money. Just one of those things to put down to experience but so unfair in my opinion. But thanks for your advice
Well, it's a hard lesson to learn - not least realising that you cannot take anything or anyone on trust - but checking the status of employees is absolutely vital. I have had to do the same when recently hiring someone from outside the EU though it is much easier in a large organization.
I hope he makes a go of the cafe in any case.
(And my pleasure.)
Given the short time he'd had the business, is there no mileage in claiming the checks were in progress at the time the inspectors arrived? Or scheduled for the following week or somesuch? IANAL
As you say contract lawyers are expensive and the Home office have agreed to accept payment over two years so building up his costs isn't a wise option. As it happens he gets a discount for paying all in one go so if he'll take it I'm going to lend him the money. Just one of those things to put down to experience but so unfair in my opinion. But thanks for your advice
Well, it's a hard lesson to learn - not least realising that you cannot take anything or anyone on trust - but checking the status of employees is absolutely vital. I have had to do the same when recently hiring someone from outside the EU though it is much easier in a large organization.
I hope he makes a go of the cafe in any case.
(And my pleasure.)
Given the short time he'd had the business, is there no mileage in claiming the checks were in progress at the time the inspectors arrived? Or scheduled for the following week or somesuch? IANAL
IANAL but I have taken over a business before and we had to do due diligence before hand. I don't think it would have much mileage.
Is the silence from the Tories Mays UKIP speech because they disagree with her or they don't want to agree then have to u turn when Dave or George disown it?
May's speech was not UKIP, it was considered and central. Balancing fairness and control, openness and restrictions.
Personally I don't agree as I believe in more openness but no party leader has ever been more open than that and May's speech IMO is entirely consistent with Dave saying he wants net migration in the tens of thousands.
It is not consistent with the racist one-trick-pony that the arsehole Farage has become.
Ooh!
Tell me you disagree, go on.
May's speech was full of balance and contrast rather than vehemence and aggression. Speaking of a deal and fairness. It was very much an attempt to address the issue from all sides.
Farage now would never give a speech like that as he has become a poor parody of himself post-election, we saw that when he was on This Week last week. He has lost his touch and no longer gives balanced speeches like that. If you can give me an example of one like May's post-election I'd be curious to see it and I'll apologise if I'm wrong but he's lost what balance he had.
Any particular day of the week this speech had to be made?!
May said today what UKIP have been saying for five years or more about immigration... The wage depression, the threat to jobs, the lack of a cohesive society.
I don't know why you think that if I can't find a particular speech by farage in the last 5 months that somehow makes you right? I never said he had. You're the one that brought him into it, I get you don't like him. I merely stated the fact that she has highlighted many points that UKIP have long been saying in today's speech.
I agree she addressed many issues raised but she did so in a balanced manner IMO that UKIP haven't. Nor was it new to a Party that has been seeking to restrain immigration for as long as I can remember.
No. The Tory party has played lip service to immigration for as long as I can remember. This was just another speech promising plenty and delivering nothing.
Is the silence from the Tories Mays UKIP speech because they disagree with her or they don't want to agree then have to u turn when Dave or George disown it?
May's speech was not UKIP, it was considered and central. Balancing fairness and control, openness and restrictions.
Personally I don't agree as I believe in more openness but no party leader has ever been more open than that and May's speech IMO is entirely consistent with Dave saying he wants net migration in the tens of thousands.
It is not consistent with the racist one-trick-pony that the arsehole Farage has become.
Ooh!
Tell me you disagree, go on.
May's speech was full of balance and contrast rather than vehemence and aggression. Speaking of a deal and fairness. It was very much an attempt to address the issue from all sides.
Farage now would never give a speech like that as he has become a poor parody of himself post-election, we saw that when he was on This Week last week. He has lost his touch and no longer gives balanced speeches like that. If you can give me an example of one like May's post-election I'd be curious to see it and I'll apologise if I'm wrong but he's lost what balance he had.
Any particular day of the week this speech had to be made?!
May said today what UKIP have been saying for five years or more about immigration... The wage depression, the threat to jobs, the lack of a cohesive society.
I don't know why you think that if I can't find a particular speech by farage in the last 5 months that somehow makes you right? I never said he had. You're the one that brought him into it, I get you don't like him. I merely stated the fact that she has highlighted many points that UKIP have long been saying in today's speech.
I agree she addressed many issues raised but she did so in a balanced manner IMO that UKIP haven't. Nor was it new to a Party that has been seeking to restrain immigration for as long as I can remember.
Hillary 2016. Interesting story developing. Fox is reporting that a close confidant of Hillary is advising her to get a criminal defense lawyer. The story is upfront that this in not an indication that an indictment is imminent, but the advice is to have the lawyer in place now to pry information out of the FBI on the direction their investigation is heading and so to get ahead of any potential developments.
The issue arises because it now appears that the FBI have been able to recover most or all of the deleted emails from Hillary's server. Given that there are some 33,000 such emails and that she stated under oath that these we to do with her daughter's wedding, yoga classes and communications with Bill, there is plenty of potential from a significant number of the deleted emails to be about things that rightly should have been preserved as federal records and which should have been amenable to FOIA requests. The ice is getting very thin.
Whilst there may be concern about Saudi Arabia the "minor transgressions" are happening here to us.
What you describe is not restricted to men. I've had women get over familiar with me, and I've seen it happen to other men too, on plenty of occasions.
But that's alright, because as men we're supposed to enjoy it, right? because we're such sex perverts?
Most disturbing experience of my life: when I was a student, after a funeral, I went into a wine bar with a few of the other mourners (it was the favourite haunt of the friend we were saying goodbye to).
A woman in her mid 50s looked at me...and slowly licked her lips...
I knew a guy who worked in a bar where all the waiters wore kilts. The number of women who tried to see underneath them or would even grope underneath them was shocking. I doubt you'd ever get a bar in this country where so many men groped the waitresses.
Some men, and some women, can be pretty crude, boorish, and unpleasant. I doubt if such behaviour is more common in one sex than the other.
Hillary 2016. Interesting story developing. Fox is reporting that a close confidant of Hillary is advising her to get a criminal defense lawyer. The story is upfront that this in not an indication that an indictment is imminent, but the advice is to have the lawyer in place now to pry information out of the FBI on the direction their investigation is heading and so to get ahead of any potential developments.
The issue arises because it now appears that the FBI have been able to recover most or all of the deleted emails from Hillary's server. Given that there are some 33,000 such emails and that she stated under oath that these we to do with her daughter's wedding, yoga classes and communications with Bill, there is plenty of potential from a significant number of the deleted emails to be about things that rightly should have been preserved as federal records and which should have been amenable to FOIA requests. The ice is getting very thin.
Shame Jon Stewart has gone. He'd have been lovin' this.
Is the silence from the Tories Mays UKIP speech because they disagree with her or they don't want to agree then have to u turn when Dave or George disown it?
May's speech was not UKIP, it was considered and central. Balancing fairness and control, openness and restrictions.
Personally I don't agree as I believe in more openness but no party leader has ever been more open than that and May's speech IMO is entirely consistent with Dave saying he wants net migration in the tens of thousands.
It is not consistent with the racist one-trick-pony that the arsehole Farage has become.
Ooh!
Tell me you disagree, go on.
May's speech was full of balance and contrast rather than vehemence and aggression. Speaking of a deal and fairness. It was very much an attempt to address the issue from all sides.
Farage now would never give a speech like that as he has become a poor parody of himself post-election, we saw that when he was on This Week last week. He has lost his touch and no longer gives balanced speeches like that. If you can give me an example of one like May's post-election I'd be curious to see it and I'll apologise if I'm wrong but he's lost what balance he had.
Any particular day of the week this speech had to be made?!
May said today what UKIP have been saying for five years or more about immigration... The wage depression, the threat to jobs, the lack of a cohesive society.
I don't know why you think that if I can't find a particular speech by farage in the last 5 months that somehow makes you right? I never said he had. You're the one that brought him into it, I get you don't like him. I merely stated the fact that she has highlighted many points that UKIP have long been saying in today's speech.
I agree she addressed many issues raised but she did so in a balanced manner IMO that UKIP haven't. Nor was it new to a Party that has been seeking to restrain immigration for as long as I can remember.
No. The Tory party has played lip service to immigration for as long as I can remember. This was just another speech promising plenty and delivering nothing.
Actually it was a grown-up speech addressing the difficulties and saying it will be difficult rather than easy.
Quite unlike opposition parties that want easy solutions without actually being governable.
A neighbour (and utter luvvie) has sent me a 38 degrees email titled "Murdoch vs the BBC". Here's a sample:
Government plans to rip out the heart of the BBC are taking shape. Imagine a BBC where newsnight is riddled with adverts. Or a BBC so underfunded that independent news becomes a thing of the past and the airwaves are dominated by Rupert Murdoch’s media. This is what the Government wants - we need to stop them.
If we’re going to stop these plans we can’t rely on newspapers or TV channels owned by Murdoch and other media moguls. Instead, we’re going to have to use people-power to show the government that we won’t stand for them destroying our independent BBC.
There's a lot more in the same vein, but I shan't trouble the thread with it. They kindly including a link to the government's questionnaire (complete with 'hints' on how 'best' to answer it) and I had a lot of fun answering the questions. Not necessarily in the way they expected, obviously. So if you're bored: https://speakout.38degrees.org.uk/surveys/bbc-consultation
She will have increased her currency today, but (a) she's dull (b) she never answers a straight question directly, and oozes 'politicianness' and, (c) no-one has forgotten how she attacked her own party at its lowest ebb.
If it weren't for all that she could be Thatcher: The Next Generation.
She didn't attack the party at its lowest ebb she told some home truths that needed to be said. If nobody says the truth then nobody can fix the problems.
No, she gave a name to the branding problem the Conservatives had that will forever be hung around our necks by our enemies (to quote a friend)
She lost me the moment she said it.
She didn't call the party the nasty party, she said that some people call us that and it is unfair and addressed what we needed to do to address the issue.
So the direction of policy will be clear. And our plans will be in place for next year's elections. Yes we've made progress.
But let's not kid ourselves. There's a way to go before we can return to government.
There's a lot we need to do in this party of ours. Our base is too narrow and so, occasionally, are our sympathies. You know what some people call us - the nasty party.
I know that's unfair. You know that's unfair but it's the people out there we need to convince - and we can only do that by avoiding behaviour and attitudes that play into the hands of our opponents. No more glib moralising, no more hypocritical finger-wagging.
We need to reach out to all areas of our society.
I want us to be the party that represents the whole of Britain and not merely some mythical place called "Middle England", but the truth is that as our country has become more diverse, our party has remained the same.
Our enemies were already winning, we'd already suffered two of the greatest electoral defeats in our history and by identifying what was wrong we were later able to fix it and get electoral success.
I've not heard a single speaker all conference use the phrase Middle England, it is all One Nation now and it our enemies that our floundering not us.
Lance Price, ex BBC journo and Blairite spin doctor (ex Director of Comms for the Labour party) claims to have invented "the nasty party" (I think around 2000, as it was linked to Ivan Massow's temporary defection).
It's a bit pathetic that the allegedly knowledgeable people on PB can misquote and misrepresent May on this issue. And its not for the first time. It's repeated at every opportunity. Not many signs of sentient beings populating the last few PB threads.
Is the silence from the Tories Mays UKIP speech because they disagree with her or they don't want to agree then have to u turn when Dave or George disown it?
May's speech was not UKIP, it was considered and central. Balancing fairness and control, openness and restrictions.
Personally I don't agree as I believe in more openness but no party leader has ever been more open than that and May's speech IMO is entirely consistent with Dave saying he wants net migration in the tens of thousands.
It is not consistent with the racist one-trick-pony that the arsehole Farage has become.
Ooh!
Tell me you disagree, go on.
May's speech was full of balance and contrast rather than vehemence and aggression. Speaking of a deal and fairness. It was very much an attempt to address the issue from all sides.
Farage now would never give a speech like that as he has become a poor parody of himself post-election, we saw that when he was on This Week last week. He has lost his touch and no longer gives balanced speeches like that. If you can give me an example of one like May's post-election I'd be curious to see it and I'll apologise if I'm wrong but he's lost what balance he had.
Any particular day of the week this speech had to be made?!
May said today what UKIP have been saying for five years or more about immigration... The wage depression, the threat to jobs, the lack of a cohesive society.
I don't know why you think that if I can't find a particular speech by farage in the last 5 months that somehow makes you right? I never said he had. You're the one that brought him into it, I get you don't like him. I merely stated the fact that she has highlighted many points that UKIP have long been saying in today's speech.
I agree she addressed many issues raised but she did so in a balanced manner IMO that UKIP haven't. Nor was it new to a Party that has been seeking to restrain immigration for as long as I can remember.
No. The Tory party has played lip service to immigration for as long as I can remember. This was just another speech promising plenty and delivering nothing.
Is the silence from the Tories Mays UKIP speech because they disagree with her or they don't want to agree then have to u turn when Dave or George disown it?
the racist one-trick-pony that the arsehole Farage has become.
Ooh!
Tell me you disagree, go on.
May's speech was full of balance and contrast rather than vehemence and aggression. Speaking of a deal and fairness. It was very much an attempt to address the issue from all sides.
Farage now would never give a speech like that as he has become a poor parody of himself post-election, we saw that when he was on This Week last week. He has lost his touch and no longer gives balanced speeches like that. If you can give me an example of one like May's post-election I'd be curious to see it and I'll apologise if I'm wrong but he's lost what balance he had.
Any particular day of the week this speech had to be made?!
May said today what UKIP have been saying for five years or more about immigration... The wage depression, the threat to jobs, the lack of a cohesive society.
I don't know why you think that if I can't find a particular speech by farage in the last 5 months that somehow makes you right? I never said he had. You're the one that brought him into it, I get you don't like him. I merely stated the fact that she has highlighted many points that UKIP have long been saying in today's speech.
I agree she addressed many issues raised but she did so in a balanced manner IMO that UKIP haven't. Nor was it new to a Party that has been seeking to restrain immigration for as long as I can remember.
Correct
Forget your dislike of me and hatred of UKIP... Don't you find it incredible for someone that has been home sec for 5 years having been given the task of reducing net migration to the tens of thousands to
Preside over record numbers of net migration
Then
Say that mass immigration is at odds with a cohesive society, depresses wages, places jobs at risk?
It strikes me as incompetence beyond belief. One of the most amazing things I've seen in politics Andrew Neil was practically laughing at her on the TV earlier
It's the equivalent of a builder trying to repair a botch job carried out by Cowboys, making it worse, then banging on about how important it is to put it right
I can only imagine they think that labour won't attack them because Corbyn wants even more immigration and UKIP are sn irrelevance in parliament so they can get away with it
No. The Tory party has played lip service to immigration for as long as I can remember. This was just another speech promising plenty and delivering nothing.
Quite so.
Whenever I hear a politician's lips move on "immigration" I put it in the same mental partition as "housing". They're speaking about it because they want to communicate that their opinions on it tally with those of voters - or at least, whichever subset of voters they're trying to reach out to at that moment.
But I rarely believe they're going to do anything about it - they're issues where it seems to have got beyond the capability of a pol to enact meaningful change. Sometimes The System has a life of its own.
isam - the Home Secretary addressed your points in her speech. She was making a distinction between different types of migration and said that those which had been tackled had seen results while others haven't been and need to be. I would think it is grown up to admit where things haven't gone right rather than delusionally pretending everything is sunny but you condemn her for being honest.
The UK has a fast growing economy at a time that the Eurozone is still mired in disaster. The immigration numbers currently are a case of a victim of your own success.
Whilst there may be concern about Saudi Arabia the "minor transgressions" are happening here to us.
What you describe is not restricted to men. I've had women get over familiar with me, and I've seen it happen to other men too, on plenty of occasions.
But that's alright, because as men we're supposed to enjoy it, right? because we're such sex perverts?
Most disturbing experience of my life: when I was a student, after a funeral, I went into a wine bar with a few of the other mourners (it was the favourite haunt of the friend we were saying goodbye to).
A woman in her mid 50s looked at me...and slowly licked her lips...
I knew a guy who worked in a bar where all the waiters wore kilts. The number of women who tried to see underneath them or would even grope underneath them was shocking. I doubt you'd ever get a bar in this country where so many men groped the waitresses.
Some men, and some women, can be pretty crude, boorish, and unpleasant. I doubt if such behaviour is more common in one sex than the other.
Hornchurch kebab shop in Saturday night just gone... I simply couldn't believe the language from a young girl to the staff... More c-bombs than I've ever heard, and she wasn't even angry! Just matter of fact crudity it was unreal
I told her she reminded me of Lady Di and she said 'who?'
Hillary 2016. Interesting story developing. Fox is reporting that a close confidant of Hillary is advising her to get a criminal defense lawyer. The story is upfront that this in not an indication that an indictment is imminent, but the advice is to have the lawyer in place now to pry information out of the FBI on the direction their investigation is heading and so to get ahead of any potential developments.
The issue arises because it now appears that the FBI have been able to recover most or all of the deleted emails from Hillary's server. Given that there are some 33,000 such emails and that she stated under oath that these we to do with her daughter's wedding, yoga classes and communications with Bill, there is plenty of potential from a significant number of the deleted emails to be about things that rightly should have been preserved as federal records and which should have been amenable to FOIA requests. The ice is getting very thin.
Unless the clusters on the hard drive had been fully over written, she must have known that they can be recovered. What on earth were her advisors telling her?
I really am now pissed off with your moaning. Oh poor you weekend are not available. Oh deaR what a shame ...evenings are missed. My heart bleeds for you and You break my bloody heart.
We do the job we choose and I chose a job in the full knowledge that it would probably cost me a family life in the future. My family know this and they support me. I post this from yet another location abroad travelling.
I am just utterly sick and tired of you people moaning your lot. Just fe k off and get another job if you don't like the NHS or what you do.
You really really don't know the half of it. To put it in prospective my youngest daughter was 5 years old before I had a Christmas home with her. Our choice or someone else's but you were lucky.
Grrrrrrrrr
What a plonker you are!
If you re-read my post, I pointed out that I did not mind sharing domestic duties, just that the logistics are difficult when working shifts. I have worked weekends, holidays and nights my whole career,
I do not regret it and love my job, and fully recognise that other people work irregular hours too.
O/T the other day someone posted a link to a thread header they wrote a few years ago (IIRC after Sandy Hook) on would Obama challenge the Second Amendment.
O/T the other day someone posted a link to a thread header they wrote a few years ago (IIRC after Sandy Hook) on would Obama challenge the Second Amendment.
Does anyone have the link to that please?
I've always wondered how different the history of the USA would have been if every citizen had the right to arm bears.
I really am now pissed off with your moaning. Oh poor you weekend are not available. Oh deaR what a shame ...evenings are missed. My heart bleeds for you and You break my bloody heart.
We do the job we choose and I chose a job in the full knowledge that it would probably cost me a family life in the future. My family know this and they support me. I post this from yet another location abroad travelling.
I am just utterly sick and tired of you people moaning your lot. Just fe k off and get another job if you don't like the NHS or what you do.
You really really don't know the half of it. To put it in prospective my youngest daughter was 5 years old before I had a Christmas home with her. Our choice or someone else's but you were lucky.
Grrrrrrrrr
What a plonker you are!
If you re-read my post, I pointed out that I did not mind sharing domestic duties, just that the logistics are difficult when working shifts. I have worked weekends, holidays and nights my whole career,
I do not regret it and love my job, and fully recognise that other people work irregular hours too.
I think the issue is your moaning about Dave's seven day NHS plans.
It is an absolute disgrace that we don't have a seven day NHS, that if you fall sick on a weekend (or worse a bank holiday weekend) that you are far more likely to die. I am so sick of hearing about Saturdays being covered by "out of hours" service.
Sickness does not strike in working hours alone. It is a disgrace that you can get a Domino's Pizza seven days a week no issue but you fall sick on a Saturday and you are more likely to die let alone be unable to see a GP swiftly. The NHS is more important than a pizza and absolutely must be seven days.
O/T the other day someone posted a link to a thread header they wrote a few years ago (IIRC after Sandy Hook) on would Obama challenge the Second Amendment.
Does anyone have the link to that please?
I've always wondered how different the history of the USA would have been if every citizen had the right to arm bears.
Whilst there may be concern about Saudi Arabia the "minor transgressions" are happening here to us.
What you describe is not restricted to men. I've had women get over familiar with me, and I've seen it happen to other men too, on plenty of occasions.
But that's alright, because as men we're supposed to enjoy it, right? because we're such sex perverts?
Most disturbing experience of my life: when I was a student, after a funeral, I went into a wine bar with a few of the other mourners (it was the favourite haunt of the friend we were saying goodbye to).
A woman in her mid 50s looked at me...and slowly licked her lips...
I knew a guy who worked in a bar where all the waiters wore kilts. The number of women who tried to see underneath them or would even grope underneath them was shocking. I doubt you'd ever get a bar in this country where so many men groped the waitresses.
Some men, and some women, can be pretty crude, boorish, and unpleasant. I doubt if such behaviour is more common in one sex than the other.
Hornchurch kebab shop in Saturday night just gone... I simply couldn't believe the language from a young girl to the staff... More c-bombs than I've ever heard, and she wasn't even angry! Just matter of fact crudity it was unreal
I told her she reminded me of Lady Di and she said 'who?'
Glad to see you're still living it up in South Romford!
@TimReidBBC: I understand MP Michelle Thomson's been referred to the parliamentary standards watchdog over alleged property deals being probed by police
Actually it was a grown-up speech addressing the difficulties and saying it will be difficult rather than easy.
Quite unlike opposition parties that want easy solutions without actually being governable.
Yup, it so difficult that even after five years in the job she hasn't worked out how to even start it. But we are to have another "crackdown" on people seeking asylum. 600,000 people came to the UK as immigrants in the last year for which stats are available, Theresa May says that is too many and damaging to to the fabric of society. What is she going to do about it? Have a crackdown on asylum seekers of which there are relatively trivial numbers.
If she wants fewer immigrants then she could start by issuing fewer visas. Apparently that is too hard. However, the number of visas her department does issue are not enough for the skilled workers that UK industry is so short of (though why UK industry is incapable of training people is a question never asked, but let that pass).
Why some people think that a person so completely incapable of dealing with one issue is a good candidate for party leader and, probably, prime minister is beyond me. In a well run business she would have been sacked years ago as grossly incompetent.
Actually it was a grown-up speech addressing the difficulties and saying it will be difficult rather than easy.
Quite unlike opposition parties that want easy solutions without actually being governable.
Nope. It was a speech that stated the obvious and then made vague promises which May knows cannot be achieved so long as the UK remains a member of either the EU or (my preferred option) of the EEA. Freedom of movement is a fundamental principle of the EU and there is nothing May can do about that unless she is going to back Leaving.
A neighbour (and utter luvvie) has sent me a 38 degrees email titled "Murdoch vs the BBC". Here's a sample:
Government plans to rip out the heart of the BBC are taking shape. Imagine a BBC where newsnight is riddled with adverts. Or a BBC so underfunded that independent news becomes a thing of the past and the airwaves are dominated by Rupert Murdoch’s media. This is what the Government wants - we need to stop them.
If we’re going to stop these plans we can’t rely on newspapers or TV channels owned by Murdoch and other media moguls. Instead, we’re going to have to use people-power to show the government that we won’t stand for them destroying our independent BBC.
There's a lot more in the same vein, but I shan't trouble the thread with it. They kindly including a link to the government's questionnaire (complete with 'hints' on how 'best' to answer it) and I had a lot of fun answering the questions. Not necessarily in the way they expected, obviously. So if you're bored: https://speakout.38degrees.org.uk/surveys/bbc-consultation
Thanks for the link. It needs to be privatised.
LOL. Filled out the form. Called for the complete abolition of the license fee system and for the Beeb to stop doing entertainment, concentrating on public service, education and news.
Watching a youtube video I got a preroll ad which was a McDonald promotion essentially saying 'We know you think our McNuggets are made of ground up offcut meat, but it really isn't'. I'm curious they would run such an ad - we all know (or think we know) what their product is, quality wise, and it doesn't stop us eating it.
Actually it was a grown-up speech addressing the difficulties and saying it will be difficult rather than easy.
Quite unlike opposition parties that want easy solutions without actually being governable.
Yup, it so difficult that even after five years in the job she hasn't worked out how to even start it. But we are to have another "crackdown" on people seeking asylum. 600,000 people came to the UK as immigrants in the last year for which stats are available, Theresa May says that is too many and damaging to to the fabric of society. What is she going to do about it? Have a crackdown on asylum seekers of which there are relatively trivial numbers.
If she wants fewer immigrants then she could start by issuing fewer visas. Apparently that is too hard. However, the number of visas her department does issue are not enough for the skilled workers that UK industry is so short of (though why UK industry is incapable of training people is a question never asked, but let that pass).
Why some people think that a person so completely incapable of dealing with one issue is a good candidate for party leader and, probably, prime minister is beyond me. In a well run business she would have been sacked years ago as grossly incompetent.
May is starting to remind me of the chairmen of big companies or some of those banks that came close to collapse due to mismanagement. They admit that they have failed but then say they have to stay in their post because they are need to put it right again.
Watching a youtube video I got a preroll ad which was a McDonald promotion essentially saying 'We know you think our McNuggets are made of ground up offcut meat, but it really isn't'. I'm curious they would run such an ad - we all know (or think we know) what their product is, quality wise, and it doesn't stop us eating it.
On that, a good night to all.
Yes I saw that and also the ones on chips and burgers.. I thought they were an anti mcDonalds thing at first glance... Doesn't strike me as wise to be mentioning all the dodgy rumours! Like you say, no one seems to mind much
I was surprised by the Institute of Directors reaction to Theresa May's speech. I was a member of the IoD once and found it to be more right wing than the Conservative party.
A neighbour (and utter luvvie) has sent me a 38 degrees email titled "Murdoch vs the BBC". Here's a sample:
Government plans to rip out the heart of the BBC are taking shape. Imagine a BBC where newsnight is riddled with adverts. Or a BBC so underfunded that independent news becomes a thing of the past and the airwaves are dominated by Rupert Murdoch’s media. This is what the Government wants - we need to stop them.
If we’re going to stop these plans we can’t rely on newspapers or TV channels owned by Murdoch and other media moguls. Instead, we’re going to have to use people-power to show the government that we won’t stand for them destroying our independent BBC.
There's a lot more in the same vein, but I shan't trouble the thread with it. They kindly including a link to the government's questionnaire (complete with 'hints' on how 'best' to answer it) and I had a lot of fun answering the questions. Not necessarily in the way they expected, obviously. So if you're bored: https://speakout.38degrees.org.uk/surveys/bbc-consultation
Thanks for the link. It needs to be privatised.
LOL. Filled out the form. Called for the complete abolition of the license fee system and for the Beeb to stop doing entertainment, concentrating on public service, education and news.
Ditto, broadly. Although I was slightly more nuanced, conceding that BBC Radio does things that the commercial sector cannot and does not, and that I can't really think of a way of moving BBC Radio to a subscription service.
Actually it was a grown-up speech addressing the difficulties and saying it will be difficult rather than easy.
Quite unlike opposition parties that want easy solutions without actually being governable.
Yup, it so difficult that even after five years in the job she hasn't worked out how to even start it. But we are to have another "crackdown" on people seeking asylum. 600,000 people came to the UK as immigrants in the last year for which stats are available, Theresa May says that is too many and damaging to to the fabric of society. What is she going to do about it? Have a crackdown on asylum seekers of which there are relatively trivial numbers.
If she wants fewer immigrants then she could start by issuing fewer visas. Apparently that is too hard. However, the number of visas her department does issue are not enough for the skilled workers that UK industry is so short of (though why UK industry is incapable of training people is a question never asked, but let that pass).
Why some people think that a person so completely incapable of dealing with one issue is a good candidate for party leader and, probably, prime minister is beyond me. In a well run business she would have been sacked years ago as grossly incompetent.
That is not the only issue she raised. She also addressed student visas being overstayed and EU migration, especially benefits paid to EU migrants. She also said that those (and the others mentioned before asylum) were the main reason.
As for her record, it is excellent which is why she is the longest serving Home Secretary in over half a century. Crime is down considerably and as she said migration was half its peak at one stage before rising again (which is frankly just a result of us doing well while others struggle).
A neighbour (and utter luvvie) has sent me a 38 degrees email titled "Murdoch vs the BBC". Here's a sample:
Government plans to rip out the heart of the BBC are taking shape. Imagine a BBC where newsnight is riddled with adverts. Or a BBC so underfunded that independent news becomes a thing of the past and the airwaves are dominated by Rupert Murdoch’s media. This is what the Government wants - we need to stop them.
If we’re going to stop these plans we can’t rely on newspapers or TV channels owned by Murdoch and other media moguls. Instead, we’re going to have to use people-power to show the government that we won’t stand for them destroying our independent BBC.
There's a lot more in the same vein, but I shan't trouble the thread with it. They kindly including a link to the government's questionnaire (complete with 'hints' on how 'best' to answer it) and I had a lot of fun answering the questions. Not necessarily in the way they expected, obviously. So if you're bored: https://speakout.38degrees.org.uk/surveys/bbc-consultation
Thanks for the link. It needs to be privatised.
LOL. Filled out the form. Called for the complete abolition of the license fee system and for the Beeb to stop doing entertainment, concentrating on public service, education and news.
Ditto, broadly. Although I was slightly more nuanced, conceding that BBC Radio does things that the commercial sector cannot and does not, and that I can't really think of a way of moving BBC Radio to a subscription service.
If you love BBC Radio pay for it. I don't listen to BBC Radio, I can't stand it primarily full of pretentious presenters more than music so I listen to Heart - yet a quarter of my "telly tax" goes to BBC Radio. Why should I listen to ads on my choice of station and pay for BBC Radio in order to watch TV with ads?
@ Anorak re 38 Degree BBC questionnaire This is perfect. I've just got an email from the 38 degrees team thanking me for filling out the form and asking me to send the link to five of my friends. It also helpfully attaches how I answered to help guide their answers. Clearly, they did not read my answers:
How should the relationship between Parliament, Government, Ofcom, the National Audit Office and the BBC work? What accountability structures and expectations, including financial transparency and spending controls should apply? The relationship should be rewritten in its entirety, with power given entirely to the consumer, the license fee payer in the form of being able to decide not to purchase BBC products.
How should we pay for the BBC and how should the licence fee be modernised? The license fee should be scrapped and the BBC made a subscription service.
Has the BBC been doing enough to deliver value for money? How could it go further? No. Sack half its management, stop doing entertainment and revert to its core operation as a public service.
Is the expansion of the BBC’s services justified in the context of increased choice for audiences? Is the BBC crowding out commercial competition and, if so, is this justified? As noted to the last question, the free public money the BBC gets with no accountability to its license fee payers is a massive market distortion crowding out better, more efficient and higher quality alternatives and pushing up the pay for those made famous by the BBC on the taxpayers' pound.
Where does the evidence suggest the BBC has a positive or negative wider impact on the market? The license fee is a huge market distortion, and as all market distortions, this inevitably has adverse impacts, sucking money and talent away from better programme producers without access to free public money.
Is the BBC’s content sufficiently high quality and distinctive from that of other broadcasters? What could improve it? Sports and entertainment programmes are not particularly distinctive or high quality. 24 hour news likewise. It's strength like in deeper analysis, but this is often biased based on the self-selection of those who seek employment at the BBC. In this regard, it is has a left-of-centre bias similar to CNN and mainstream US media other than Fox. It is not particularly good at unbiased reportage or analysis.
Which elements of universality are most important for the BBC? The BBC should limit itself to news, public information and educational programmes that the markets do not produce. It should not be in the business of entertainment or sports, for which there are plenty of commercial outlets better connected to market needs.
How well is the BBC serving its national and international audiences? The BBC is a bloated, self-centered bureaucracy run increasingly on behalf of the management and the celebrities they employ at taxpayers' expense. It is not serving the public well.
Comments
All women want is to have the same opportunities and choices and not be patronised by those who see it all as a zero sum game. What they do with those choices is up to them.
Larry Elliott is always worth reading.
I don't know what equity markets you have been looking at over the last five years, but the ones I have invested in have done very well. Now, though, I think it is time to take a break and to get a lot more watchful.
Just as an example, Footsie close today 6298, footsie close 10.12.07, 6565. I don't invest in index trackers. I too have done okay but one man's okay can be another man's absolutely fantastic. I had to google LE as I don't read comics but .... http://www.adamsmith.org/blog/regulation-industry/its-a-pity-to-see-larry-elliott-going-off-the-rails/
The boozy walks are still happening.......
You seem to be implying that the legions of sistahs wailing about the lack of good men are complaining about nothing then....???
''Stop crying you silly girl and marry that lovely white van man. ''
In many ways it's not a bad direction of travel, at least in terms of the party's long-run survivability, though I have mixed feelings over Europe.
I really am now pissed off with your moaning. Oh poor you weekend are not available. Oh deaR what a shame ...evenings are missed. My heart bleeds for you and You break my bloody heart.
We do the job we choose and I chose a job in the full knowledge that it would probably cost me a family life in the future. My family know this and they support me. I post this from yet another location abroad travelling.
I am just utterly sick and tired of you people moaning your lot. Just fe k off and get another job if you don't like the NHS or what you do.
You really really don't know the half of it. To put it in prospective my youngest daughter was 5 years old before I had a Christmas home with her. Our choice or someone else's but you were lucky.
Grrrrrrrrr
We both hate the plebs and their ignorant attitudes on foreigners.
(Silly question, I suppose.)
And when I do get the opportunity, I become a stupid idiot and break my elbow on the first day. :0
Still, we're at least lucky that we get some legal protections. Unlike the poor pagans and atheists.
I wonder if you would mind elaborating on what you said about the previous owner in my Italian cafe story? There is a possibility apparently that the previous owner was the person who informed the immigration department. As you say my friend didn't do due diligence and though the original owner was the original employer it's difficult to see how that helps?
I've not heard a single speaker all conference use the phrase Middle England, it is all One Nation now and it our enemies that our floundering not us.
I'm sure he's beating off the career women with a stick....
Most of the people affected will not see a cash cut in benefits so won't even notice.
May's speech was full of balance and contrast rather than vehemence and aggression. Speaking of a deal and fairness. It was very much an attempt to address the issue from all sides.
Farage now would never give a speech like that as he has become a poor parody of himself post-election, we saw that when he was on This Week last week. He has lost his touch and no longer gives balanced speeches like that. If you can give me an example of one like May's post-election I'd be curious to see it and I'll apologise if I'm wrong but he's lost what balance he had.
If other women can't see past the packaging they risk missing good men. Their problem not mine.
Now which is better and encourages and enables them to be able to improve their own life? Which is fairer?
For me there is no justification in Brown's 80% tax rate and Osborne is making great progress at dumping that into history.
I did wonder whether that might be the case.
What I was getting at was whether there was a contract for the sale of the cafe which had in it any terms e.g. some sort of indemnity or warranty by the previous owner to the effect that all applicable laws had been complied with etc which might entitle your friend to sue for damages i.e. the fine and other consequential loss. Were any oral representations made before the agreement to buy on which your friend relied? If that is the case then your friend should speak to a good contract lawyer to see what might be possible, though I would stress that none of this would be easy and could be expensive.
But it sounds as if he didn't have anything like that in place.
Government plans to rip out the heart of the BBC are taking shape. Imagine a BBC where newsnight is riddled with adverts. Or a BBC so underfunded that independent news becomes a thing of the past and the airwaves are dominated by Rupert Murdoch’s media. This is what the Government wants - we need to stop them.
If we’re going to stop these plans we can’t rely on newspapers or TV channels owned by Murdoch and other media moguls. Instead, we’re going to have to use people-power to show the government that we won’t stand for them destroying our independent BBC.
There's a lot more in the same vein, but I shan't trouble the thread with it. They kindly including a link to the government's questionnaire (complete with 'hints' on how 'best' to answer it) and I had a lot of fun answering the questions. Not necessarily in the way they expected, obviously. So if you're bored: https://speakout.38degrees.org.uk/surveys/bbc-consultation
May said today what UKIP have been saying for five years or more about immigration... The wage depression, the threat to jobs, the lack of a cohesive society.
I don't know why you think that if I can't find a particular speech by farage in the last 5 months that somehow makes you right? I never said he had. You're the one that brought him into it, I get you don't like him. I merely stated the fact that she has highlighted many points that UKIP have long been saying in today's speech.
As you say contract lawyers are expensive and the Home office have agreed to accept payment over two years so building up his costs isn't a wise option. As it happens he gets a discount for paying all in one go so if he'll take it I'm going to lend him the money. Just one of those things to put down to experience but so unfair in my opinion. But thanks for your advice
A woman in her mid 50s looked at me...and slowly licked her lips...
I've not heard a single speaker all conference use the phrase Middle England, it is all One Nation now and it our enemies that our floundering not us.
Lance Price, ex BBC journo and Blairite spin doctor (ex Director of Comms for the Labour party) claims to have invented "the nasty party" (I think around 2000, as it was linked to Ivan Massow's temporary defection).
She was already a professional. Not just out of school as you refer but you make a good point anyway.
Live and learn
He wears a cravat. Nuff said.
I hope he makes a go of the cafe in any case.
(And my pleasure.)
We've got an exhibition next year on the role of beauty in Ancient Egypt - a talk from you might be a nice addition to the evening programme.
The issue arises because it now appears that the FBI have been able to recover most or all of the deleted emails from Hillary's server. Given that there are some 33,000 such emails and that she stated under oath that these we to do with her daughter's wedding, yoga classes and communications with Bill, there is plenty of potential from a significant number of the deleted emails to be about things that rightly should have been preserved as federal records and which should have been amenable to FOIA requests. The ice is getting very thin.
http://blogs.new.spectator.co.uk/2015/10/full-text-boris-johnson-2015-conservative-conference-speech/
Quite unlike opposition parties that want easy solutions without actually being governable.
It needs to be privatised.
It's a bit pathetic that the allegedly knowledgeable people on PB can misquote and misrepresent May on this issue. And its not for the first time. It's repeated at every opportunity. Not many signs of sentient beings populating the last few PB threads.
Preside over record numbers of net migration
Then
Say that mass immigration is at odds with a cohesive society, depresses wages, places jobs at risk?
It strikes me as incompetence beyond belief. One of the most amazing things I've seen in politics
Andrew Neil was practically laughing at her on the TV earlier
It's the equivalent of a builder trying to repair a botch job carried out by Cowboys, making it worse, then banging on about how important it is to put it right
I can only imagine they think that labour won't attack them because Corbyn wants even more immigration and UKIP are sn irrelevance in parliament so they can get away with it
But I rarely believe they're going to do anything about it - they're issues where it seems to have got beyond the capability of a pol to enact meaningful change. Sometimes The System has a life of its own.
The UK has a fast growing economy at a time that the Eurozone is still mired in disaster. The immigration numbers currently are a case of a victim of your own success.
I told her she reminded me of Lady Di and she said 'who?'
What on earth were her advisors telling her?
If you re-read my post, I pointed out that I did not mind sharing domestic duties, just that the logistics are difficult when working shifts. I have worked weekends, holidays and nights my whole career,
I do not regret it and love my job, and fully recognise that other people work irregular hours too.
Does anyone have the link to that please?
It is an absolute disgrace that we don't have a seven day NHS, that if you fall sick on a weekend (or worse a bank holiday weekend) that you are far more likely to die. I am so sick of hearing about Saturdays being covered by "out of hours" service.
Sickness does not strike in working hours alone. It is a disgrace that you can get a Domino's Pizza seven days a week no issue but you fall sick on a Saturday and you are more likely to die let alone be unable to see a GP swiftly. The NHS is more important than a pizza and absolutely must be seven days.
It isn't a serious job.
@TimReidBBC: I understand MP Michelle Thomson's been referred to the parliamentary standards watchdog over alleged property deals being probed by police
If she wants fewer immigrants then she could start by issuing fewer visas. Apparently that is too hard. However, the number of visas her department does issue are not enough for the skilled workers that UK industry is so short of (though why UK industry is incapable of training people is a question never asked, but let that pass).
Why some people think that a person so completely incapable of dealing with one issue is a good candidate for party leader and, probably, prime minister is beyond me. In a well run business she would have been sacked years ago as grossly incompetent.
On that, a good night to all.
As for her record, it is excellent which is why she is the longest serving Home Secretary in over half a century. Crime is down considerably and as she said migration was half its peak at one stage before rising again (which is frankly just a result of us doing well while others struggle).
This is perfect. I've just got an email from the 38 degrees team thanking me for filling out the form and asking me to send the link to five of my friends. It also helpfully attaches how I answered to help guide their answers. Clearly, they did not read my answers:
How should the relationship between Parliament, Government, Ofcom, the National Audit Office and the BBC work? What accountability structures and expectations, including financial transparency and spending controls should apply?
The relationship should be rewritten in its entirety, with power given entirely to the consumer, the license fee payer in the form of being able to decide not to purchase BBC products.
How should we pay for the BBC and how should the licence fee be modernised?
The license fee should be scrapped and the BBC made a subscription service.
Has the BBC been doing enough to deliver value for money? How could it go further?
No. Sack half its management, stop doing entertainment and revert to its core operation as a public service.
Is the expansion of the BBC’s services justified in the context of increased choice for audiences? Is the BBC crowding out commercial competition and, if so, is this justified?
As noted to the last question, the free public money the BBC gets with no accountability to its license fee payers is a massive market distortion crowding out better, more efficient and higher quality alternatives and pushing up the pay for those made famous by the BBC on the taxpayers' pound.
Where does the evidence suggest the BBC has a positive or negative wider impact on the market?
The license fee is a huge market distortion, and as all market distortions, this inevitably has adverse impacts, sucking money and talent away from better programme producers without access to free public money.
Is the BBC’s content sufficiently high quality and distinctive from that of other broadcasters? What could improve it?
Sports and entertainment programmes are not particularly distinctive or high quality. 24 hour news likewise. It's strength like in deeper analysis, but this is often biased based on the self-selection of those who seek employment at the BBC. In this regard, it is has a left-of-centre bias similar to CNN and mainstream US media other than Fox. It is not particularly good at unbiased reportage or analysis.
Which elements of universality are most important for the BBC?
The BBC should limit itself to news, public information and educational programmes that the markets do not produce. It should not be in the business of entertainment or sports, for which there are plenty of commercial outlets better connected to market needs.
How well is the BBC serving its national and international audiences?
The BBC is a bloated, self-centered bureaucracy run increasingly on behalf of the management and the celebrities they employ at taxpayers' expense. It is not serving the public well.