The attacks on Theresa May's speech are quite bizarre. As others have pointed out, the attacks from the likes of the Indy and from Labour are simple absurd: they are attacking stuff which bears no relation to anything she said.
Again he read that Theresa May has been a 'very good' Home Secretary, despite record breaking high immigration figures against a target to cut them by 2/3
This is the lib dems fault of course, or the result of the great economic recovery (which is the Tories triumph)
Doesn't the fact that May herself notes the negative effect of mass immigration on working class wages and job security destroy the 'mass immigration is a result of our booming economy' line?
What's the point if a booming economy if everyone's skint?
My sex abuse claim against Lord Brittan started off as just a joke: 'Victim' pressured to complain by two 'well-known' campaigners
Man said he provided a list of names as ‘a joke suggestion to start with’ Claim featured in BBC Panorama documentary on Met's inquiry into alleged Westminster paedophile ring The man told the programme: ‘I believe it is time that the truth came out'
On the leadership, I think one thing to think about is whether Osborne wants the top job. Does he prefer being the power behind the throne? Is he happier getting on with running the country while a more publicly acceptable colleague fronts it up? Does he think the public will consider him unelectable? Do Tory MPs think the same?
If any of the above are true, then the best candidate will be someone prepared to cut a deal with Osborne, someone uninterested in detail but happy to be the genial face of Osborne's government.
The attacks on Theresa May's speech are quite bizarre. As others have pointed out, the attacks from the likes of the Indy and from Labour are simple absurd: they are attacking stuff which bears no relation to anything she said.
In terms of her leadership chances, the principal complaint one can make of the speech was that it was rather dry and technical. Boring, in fact. She's been a very good Home Secretary and is a safe pair of hands; one can easily see that she would make a decent leader and PM, but I don't think anyone is particularly enthused by her. She's not an inspiring speaker and she's not particularly good at answering questions - she tends to waffle. She's be an OK choice, but I think she won't be the choice which the party eventually makes. For a non-Osborne alternative, look to some of the younger figures.
I think the jury is out on her record as Home Secretary. Even overlooking the failure to reduce immigration - or even stop it rising - she has upset the right by handing powers to the EU and liberals from all wings of the party in things like the snooper's charter and limits on free speech. And I can't think of any major successes she can tout. If your platform is you don't have good interview skills or speechmaking ability but you have a good record, you need something more impressive than that. Perhaps if immigration suddenly falls to under 200k she will have something to tout but I do not see it.
The quietly and competently getting on with the job candidate is Hammond.
Given the record of the Home Office in destroying political careers its some achievement to have lasted there for a whole Parliament without a scandal. As you say though, she is probably a bit bland, but would be a safe pair of hands in the top job and a clear winner against Corbyn.
I guess the key is going to be who stands for the leadership, and how they are eliminated. IDS got the job by default as Clarke beat Portillo in the runoff, Michael P would have beaten IDS easily if his name had been given to the members.
I still think that's a steal. If she can get to the final two - her weakness will be her MP base, but Boris has the same problem - she has a good chance against Osborne.
And therein lies hope for Labour.
Why?
Because a Tory party that moves rightwards gives a new Labour leader the opportunity to move back to the centre.
You think the Tory party taking action to fulfil its 2015 manifesto pledge on immigration - the number one issue for voters - would be seen as moving rightwards?
I'm with you CS. A desire for action on immigration is across the board, if anything with a bias to the left, hence UKIP's GE showing in Labour's heartlands.
I don't see how on earth they can meet their manifesto commitment. Wasn't it something like get net migration down to 10s of thousands? Only an opt-out from free movement in EU or leaving EU will get them there.
I agree with you and didn't say it would be easy. However it's a lot easier if you try than if you don't.
As I've been sick for much of the week, I've watched snippets of the Conservative gathering. To be fair, one could certainly not accuse the Conservatives so far of hubristic triumphalism.
It's been about people this week but the mood has been relentlessly downbeat. If you're here, expect to work longer hours for less but it's the only way you'll have any chance to make ends meet. If you want to come here, don't bother unless if you have a skill we need in which case stay for as long as you have value to us and then leave.
It's almost Orwellian - imagine the future "a blue rosette stamping on a human face forever".
It is the politics of insecurity, fear and anxiety - it plays to people's concerns about their economic, cultural and social identity but in a wholly negative way. "Work hard" seems to be all the Conservatives have to offer.
It's not even about "work smart" - where is the spirit of technological innovation that, far from keeping us chained to the workplace, should be liberating us to spend more time in other areas of our lives ? What of the computerised processes designed to release labour, what of progress ? Even the transport infrastructural improvements are predicated on getting more people to travel further to work longer.
The truth is with a potentially unlimited pool of cheap labour, who cares about productivity or innovation ? Well, perhaps, the Living Wage will encourage such thoughts as it becomes more expensive to hire.
The other truth is someone has to be at the bottom - Boris's beloved office cleaners have to come from somewhere. The aspirational message to the cleaner is simple - work hard and you can progress away from the night work to a day job from a bedsit to a nice flat or even a house. If that happens, someone else has to do the cleaning.
Merkel realises this - in a demographically difficult place, she realised bringing in the economic migrants to do the cleaning keeps the aspirational train running. Are we in a place where the replacement cleaners will be the sons and daughters of the current cleaners because there will be no progress - wither aspiration (so to speak) ?
I think Amazon's Gearknobs could swiftly embarass the new Evans' Top Gear.
The mistake the BBC are making IMHO is the Clarkson, Hammond and May have become the brand in their own right - hence all the successful programmes they commissioned for them and which they individually hosted themselves - but what's left is an empty vessel.
seanf - but notice how some people on here seem to think that post Brexit the rights of British expats in Spain should be a high priority for the British government in any negotiation with the EU. Also notice that the government is changing the laws on expats' voting rights to make them lifelong - presumably in the (not necessarily correct) assumption that most of them are Tories.
I think Amazon's Gearknobs could swiftly embarass the new Evans' Top Gear.
The mistake the BBC are making IMHO is the Clarkson, Hammond and May have become the brand in their own right - hence all the successful programmes they commissioned for them and which they individually hosted themselves - but what's left is an empty vessel.
Totally - it's not Dr Who - it was a show for people whether they liked cars or not. I'd suspect it's demise has contributed to the drop in Uk interest in F1.
My sex abuse claim against Lord Brittan started off as just a joke: 'Victim' pressured to complain by two 'well-known' campaigners
Man said he provided a list of names as ‘a joke suggestion to start with’ Claim featured in BBC Panorama documentary on Met's inquiry into alleged Westminster paedophile ring The man told the programme: ‘I believe it is time that the truth came out'
Surely that has to blow a large hole in the investigation? Perhaps there will be an investigation into why this investigation got as far as it did without uncovering this rather large blooper.
Mr. Slackbladder, not just the absence of variety, but having one presenter means no bickering. And no challenges/races.
Mr. Sandpit, McNish is a top bloke, ought to be commentating on TV alongside Coulthard.
I share your unimpressed stance on the timing of the F1 calendar, regarding Le Mans.
I think Amazon will have that aspect of Top Gear covered with their new show so the BBC might want an all new formula for the original. Single presenter with weekly guests from the world of motoring is what I have heard. It is going to more serious than Top Gear ever was, a bit more like Fifth Gear.
Well that won't attract a fraction of the audience of the old show. Old TG worked because it was about the only non-PC blokey show on TV, with the dynamic between the three presenters being the USP. 5th Gear but with supercars won't have the same appeal.
I think the BBC know that without Clarkson, May and Hammond they won't be able to recapture the old magic so they need to try for a new formula, one which doesn't have any competition at the moment.
Listen up George! I hear that David Cameron might flesh out what he means by 'serving a full term' when he speaks to #CPC15 today — Christopher Hope (@christopherhope) October 7, 2015
Again he read that Theresa May has been a 'very good' Home Secretary, despite record breaking high immigration figures against a target to cut them by 2/3
This is the lib dems fault of course, or the result of the great economic recovery (which is the Tories triumph)
Doesn't the fact that May herself notes the negative effect of mass immigration on working class wages and job security destroy the 'mass immigration is a result of our booming economy' line?
What's the point if a booming economy if everyone's skint?
We may be skint but the vast bulk of us are warm, healthy, well fed and do not have ISIS or some equivalent legion of death rolling over us.
This may surprise some, but I'm not very into cars (unless they're going at 200mph). Not after a motoring show. After some chaps, cocking about and not using the Guardian-approved dictionary to dictate their discourse.
Mr. Flashman (deceased), not sure that's the case, so much as the shift to pay TV coupled with an uncompetitive season.
Listen up George! I hear that David Cameron might flesh out what he means by 'serving a full term' when he speaks to #CPC15 today — Christopher Hope (@christopherhope) October 7, 2015
He'll kill all the talk by saying a full term means a full term IMHO. A stunt Blair tried I seem to recall.
As I've been sick for much of the week, I've watched snippets of the Conservative gathering. To be fair, one could certainly not accuse the Conservatives so far of hubristic triumphalism.
It's been about people this week but the mood has been relentlessly downbeat. If you're here, expect to work longer hours for less but it's the only way you'll have any chance to make ends meet. If you want to come here, don't bother unless if you have a skill we need in which case stay for as long as you have value to us and then leave.
It's almost Orwellian - imagine the future "a blue rosette stamping on a human face forever".
It is the politics of insecurity, fear and anxiety - it plays to people's concerns about their economic, cultural and social identity but in a wholly negative way. "Work hard" seems to be all the Conservatives have to offer.
It's not even about "work smart" - where is the spirit of technological innovation that, far from keeping us chained to the workplace, should be liberating us to spend more time in other areas of our lives ? What of the computerised processes designed to release labour, what of progress ? Even the transport infrastructural improvements are predicated on getting more people to travel further to work longer.
The truth is with a potentially unlimited pool of cheap labour, who cares about productivity or innovation ? Well, perhaps, the Living Wage will encourage such thoughts as it becomes more expensive to hire.
The other truth is someone has to be at the bottom - Boris's beloved office cleaners have to come from somewhere. The aspirational message to the cleaner is simple - work hard and you can progress away from the night work to a day job from a bedsit to a nice flat or even a house. If that happens, someone else has to do the cleaning.
Merkel realises this - in a demographically difficult place, she realised bringing in the economic migrants to do the cleaning keeps the aspirational train running. Are we in a place where the replacement cleaners will be the sons and daughters of the current cleaners because there will be no progress - wither aspiration (so to speak) ?
Hope you're feeling better and by the way one of the best pieces I've read on here for a long time. But is this really so different to the coalition you spent 5 years supporting? I know Cable had his admirers but he seldom seemed to get much public support from the 'quad' who were concerned with 'cleaning up Labour's mess' and effectively preparing the ground for the current road to nowhere.
Clegg might have bemoaned fear triumphing over hope at the election but what did he do in his five years to sell a more positive vision of the future than the Tories?
5th Gear but with supercars won't have the same appeal.
Given their rumoured budget not Top Gear are likely to more than match anything supercar-ish that the BBC can manage. The sniggering about them going online ended as soon as reports of how much Amazon had reportedly paid came out, and whilst the figures haven't been confirmed Bezos has said it was "very, very, very expensive". It's certainly going to be interesting to see what three middle-aged boys can do with such a large amount of money.
As I've been sick for much of the week, I've watched snippets of the Conservative gathering. To be fair, one could certainly not accuse the Conservatives so far of hubristic triumphalism.
It's been about people this week but the mood has been relentlessly downbeat. If you're here, expect to work longer hours for less but it's the only way you'll have any chance to make ends meet. If you want to come here, don't bother unless if you have a skill we need in which case stay for as long as you have value to us and then leave.
It's almost Orwellian - imagine the future "a blue rosette stamping on a human face forever".
It is the politics of insecurity, fear and anxiety - it plays to people's concerns about their economic, cultural and social identity but in a wholly negative way. "Work hard" seems to be all the Conservatives have to offer.
It's not even about "work smart" - where is the spirit of technological innovation that, far from keeping us chained to the workplace, should be liberating us to spend more time in other areas of our lives ? What of the computerised processes designed to release labour, what of progress ? Even the transport infrastructural improvements are predicated on getting more people to travel further to work longer.
The truth is with a potentially unlimited pool of cheap labour, who cares about productivity or innovation ? Well, perhaps, the Living Wage will encourage such thoughts as it becomes more expensive to hire.
The other truth is someone has to be at the bottom - Boris's beloved office cleaners have to come from somewhere. The aspirational message to the cleaner is simple - work hard and you can progress away from the night work to a day job from a bedsit to a nice flat or even a house. If that happens, someone else has to do the cleaning.
Merkel realises this - in a demographically difficult place, she realised bringing in the economic migrants to do the cleaning keeps the aspirational train running. Are we in a place where the replacement cleaners will be the sons and daughters of the current cleaners because there will be no progress - wither aspiration (so to speak) ?
How many cleaners does Merkel think she needs? The Germans must be a very mucky lot.
As noted upthread, the SNP will dutifuly scrutinise this decision by the SNP, before deciding that the SNP acted enitrely properly in the interest of the SNP Scotland
5th Gear but with supercars won't have the same appeal.
Given their rumoured budget not Top Gear are likely to more than match anything supercar-ish that the BBC can manage. The sniggering about them going online ended as soon as reports of how much Amazon had reportedly paid came out, and whilst the figures haven't been confirmed Bezos has said it was "very, very, very expensive". It's certainly going to be interesting to see what three middle-aged boys can do with such a large amount of money.
OKC.. People from the UK have always been able to move to and live in other European countries...well before the EU was invented...It is a simple procedure..you ask permission first..then fill in the qualifying requirements..one of which is to be financially self supporting...seemed to work well then and it would still work after Brexit..
Nothing could be more straightforward, we simply copy what Australia and Canada do.
Moving to Australia isn’t that simple.
Exactly, as Mr Dodd points out you must prove you are self supporting. There is absolutely no reason to suggest that Spain or any other EU country wouldn't welcome our retired folk, they support whole communities in Spain.
I would consider it entirely reasonable for British people to have no automatic right to move to Spain, but rather for the Spanish government to grant or refuse permission on the basis of national self-interest.
Exactly
Not a sensible approach if you want the votes of hundreds of thousands of expats currently living in Spain, France, etc - they need to be re-assured or they will vote remain.
The attacks on Theresa May's speech are quite bizarre. As others have pointed out, the attacks from the likes of the Indy and from Labour are simple absurd: they are attacking stuff which bears no relation to anything she said.
In terms of her leadership chances, the principal complaint one can make of the speech was that it was rather dry and technical. Boring, in fact. She's been a very good Home Secretary and is a safe pair of hands; one can easily see that she would make a decent leader and PM, but I don't think anyone is particularly enthused by her. She's not an inspiring speaker and she's not particularly good at answering questions - she tends to waffle. She's be an OK choice, but I think she won't be the choice which the party eventually makes. For a non-Osborne alternative, look to some of the younger figures.
I think the jury is out on her record as Home Secretary. Even overlooking the failure to reduce immigration - or even stop it rising - she has upset the right by handing powers to the EU and liberals from all wings of the party in things like the snooper's charter and limits on free speech. And I can't think of any major successes she can tout. If your platform is you don't have good interview skills or speechmaking ability but you have a good record, you need something more impressive than that. Perhaps if immigration suddenly falls to under 200k she will have something to tout but I do not see it.
The quietly and competently getting on with the job candidate is Hammond.
Given the record of the Home Office in destroying political careers its some achievement to have lasted there for a whole Parliament without a scandal. As you say though, she is probably a bit bland, but would be a safe pair of hands in the top job and a clear winner against Corbyn.
I guess the key is going to be who stands for the leadership, and how they are eliminated. IDS got the job by default as Clarke beat Portillo in the runoff, Michael P would have beaten IDS easily if his name had been given to the members.
I personally very much doubt that Portillo would have beaten IDS in the members' vote. Portillo was exceptionally unpopular with the Tory grassroots in 2001, not just because of his journey from right to left but because he was seen to have been very disloyal to Hague. Even in the relatively liberal London seat where I was deputy chairman at the time, almost no members had a good word to say about Portillo and almost all were happy he was eliminated from the contest. Out in the shires that sentiment could only have been stronger. I think Portillo's only chance of winning would have been if he had faced Clarke in the final two
This may surprise some, but I'm not very into cars (unless they're going at 200mph). Not after a motoring show. After some chaps, cocking about and not using the Guardian-approved dictionary to dictate their discourse.
Mr. Flashman (deceased), not sure that's the case, so much as the shift to pay TV coupled with an uncompetitive season.
It'd be good if someone could do an investigation into ever-shrinking cars. I'm 6 foot 2, although with shortish legs and longish body. I fit in my Honda Jazz well, yet two brand-new estate cars I've tried - a VW and a Honda - have been too small for me. In the case of the Honda, my eyeline with the seat fully down (as checked by the salesman) was far up the windscreen. In the case of the VW, my head was hitting the roof unless the seat was right down and the seat slanted back.
I cannot remember ever having had trouble with estate cars before. I wonder if, in order to reduce drag, they've lowered the cars profile (also, a lower windscreen and curves roof can be more aerodynamic).
It looks as though it will be an SUV for us, which is not what we really want. Unless we can find a better estate.
There was a report of a leaked German Gov docu in Times yesterday - it said that officials expected 7/8 family members to join the migrants Germany had accepted so far.
That'd make about 7m extra people in Germany. Their population is 80m IIRC.
As I've been sick for much of the week, I've watched snippets of the Conservative gathering. To be fair, one could certainly not accuse the Conservatives so far of hubristic triumphalism.
It's been about people this week but the mood has been relentlessly downbeat. If you're here, expect to work longer hours for less but it's the only way you'll have any chance to make ends meet. If you want to come here, don't bother unless if you have a skill we need in which case stay for as long as you have value to us and then leave.
It's almost Orwellian - imagine the future "a blue rosette stamping on a human face forever".
It is the politics of insecurity, fear and anxiety - it plays to people's concerns about their economic, cultural and social identity but in a wholly negative way. "Work hard" seems to be all the Conservatives have to offer.
It's not even about "work smart" - where is the spirit of technological innovation that, far from keeping us chained to the workplace, should be liberating us to spend more time in other areas of our lives ? What of the computerised processes designed to release labour, what of progress ? Even the transport infrastructural improvements are predicated on getting more people to travel further to work longer.
The truth is with a potentially unlimited pool of cheap labour, who cares about productivity or innovation ? Well, perhaps, the Living Wage will encourage such thoughts as it becomes more expensive to hire.
The other truth is someone has to be at the bottom - Boris's beloved office cleaners have to come from somewhere. The aspirational message to the cleaner is simple - work hard and you can progress away from the night work to a day job from a bedsit to a nice flat or even a house. If that happens, someone else has to do the cleaning.
Merkel realises this - in a demographically difficult place, she realised bringing in the economic migrants to do the cleaning keeps the aspirational train running. Are we in a place where the replacement cleaners will be the sons and daughters of the current cleaners because there will be no progress - wither aspiration (so to speak) ?
How many cleaners does Merkel think she needs? The Germans must be a very mucky lot.
It was rather funny when Jeremy hosted HIGNFY and someone tried sniggering and was corrected with £165m...
It is possible that Amazon have over paid and will regret the deal, but what it does show is that the internet video services are now as much a part of the TV landscape as the BBC, ITV or Sky. Other programmes and talent are likely to follow the Top Gear team.
Listen up George! I hear that David Cameron might flesh out what he means by 'serving a full term' when he speaks to #CPC15 today — Christopher Hope (@christopherhope) October 7, 2015
He'll kill all the talk by saying a full term means a full term IMHO. A stunt Blair tried I seem to recall.
We have a fixed term parliament so he can resign/retire close to election and let it be fought by his successor much more easily than in the past.
Listen up George! I hear that David Cameron might flesh out what he means by 'serving a full term' when he speaks to #CPC15 today — Christopher Hope (@christopherhope) October 7, 2015
He'll kill all the talk by saying a full term means a full term IMHO. A stunt Blair tried I seem to recall.
Except obviously it doesn't. While it is technically possible for him to serve the entire parliament with a PM-designate as party leader for the last few weeks of the election campaign, in practice it'd be ludicrous (though I think India did something similar not too long ago?).
So the new Tory leader has to be in place for the election and - in reality - for long enough in advance to be able to have significant input into the campaign plan and manifesto. That probably means a switch no later than Autumn 2019, with the party conference acting as either the launchpad for the leadership election as in 2005, or - more probably - the coronation of the successful candidate after an election taking place with the MPs rounds in June / July and the members' vote over the summer.
My sex abuse claim against Lord Brittan started off as just a joke: 'Victim' pressured to complain by two 'well-known' campaigners
Man said he provided a list of names as ‘a joke suggestion to start with’ Claim featured in BBC Panorama documentary on Met's inquiry into alleged Westminster paedophile ring The man told the programme: ‘I believe it is time that the truth came out'
Surely that has to blow a large hole in the investigation? Perhaps there will be an investigation into why this investigation got as far as it did without uncovering this rather large blooper.
We need an investigation into the deputy leader of the labour party.
He will vow to transform “generation rent” into “generation buy” by reforming planning rules on affordable housing to include low-cost “starter homes”.
He will say that having a generation of young people “waking up each morning in their childhood bedrooms” is a “wakeup call” for the Government. The reforms will stop developers being forced to build affordable homes for rent, allowing them to build low-cost homes for sale.
I'd look at addressing some of the real concerns about Uber - requiring regular vehicle checks, requiring the company to take out insurance on the fleet, establishing that Uber bears the responsibility for the actions of its drivers (ie that there is an employer-employee relationship rather than this "self-employed agent" bullshit). Those would all be reasonable things to address.
Calm down Charles. It's only a taxi; it's not micro-surgery.
The market will sort it out. Or should be able to. Boris is all over the shop on this, but the shop is firmly on the wrong side of everything.
Wrong.
Sometimes bad drives out good.
In this case, with lower protection for consumers, Uber can charge less. Consumers won't realise it's a problem until it's too late - by which time the traditional black cab business model may have been fatally undermined. The answer is simple: put in minimum regulatory standards and require Uber to stand behind its drivers.
And it's not "only a taxi". It's a safe journey home late at night for my wife.
She tried a sip of the first bowl. So sweet and warm, but she was watching her figure and knew she'd grow fat and sloth with the amount of sugar that was left on this particular bowl of porridge.
The next bowl was cold with no salt or sugar for flavouring. Ah she knew it would be great for her figure, but it was very unappealing and unappetising. It was also a little cold.So she passed it up.
Then she arrived at a bowl labelled 'George'. This porridge tastes great, but I know I won't grow too fat on this one she mused. So she ate it all up.
Some hours later Boris showed up after his daily walk in the woods. He saw a girl sleeping in the house, but she was in George's bed, not his !
A girl being in someone else's bed hasn't stop Boris in the past...
Always a good start to the day visualising SNPouters frenetically & fruitlessly entering various search criteria in Google to support their ill informed guff. Your WATP wallpaper is gash by the way.
The attacks on Theresa May's speech are quite bizarre. As others have pointed out, the attacks from the likes of the Indy and from Labour are simple absurd: they are attacking stuff which bears no relation to anything she said.
It's being interpreted - not unfairly IMO - as a dog-whistle. The Mail thinks it's great because it articulates widespread fears, but they do note that as Home Secretary for 5 years she's not actually addressed the issue that she's complaining about.
A comparison might be if Balls had made a speech in 2009 denouncing bankers' greed - for all I know he may have done. Supporters would have nodded and said yes, good man, but as he hadn't actually done much to tighten control of banking speculation, it would rightly have been interpreted as political positioning.
On Uber: it's like Boris and the taxi drivers are trying to hold back the tide. Can anyone think of an occasion where improvements in technology has been held off successfully for a sustained period?
They're the new Luddites.
Edit: I'm not sure I've ever been in a black cab, and I lived in London for four years.
Minicabs are London's great success story since Ken (or maybe Boris but I think it was Ken) tightened up the licence conditions and also limited the age of cars that can be used.
Even outside of "executive cars" (aka posh minicabs) you will typically have a people carrier or high class saloon -- with Mercs more common than probably most private owners would expect.
Indeed. The biggest beneficiary of that is Addison Lee, who started off as a courier company and now also do a very good job of getting people around London. They even have motorbike minicabs for anyone mad enough who wants to beat the rush hour traffic.
I used motobikes a huge amount in Paris - best way to get around.
Always a good start to the day visualising SNPouters frenetically & fruitlessly entering various search criteria in Google to support their ill informed guff. Your WATP wallpaper is gash by the way.
So the leader of Business for Scotland and the highest profile/richest backer have departed the scene - who will make the enterprise case in Indyref 2 ? A chip van owner from Dalgety ?
Miss Plato, a conservative estimate, as up to 1.5m are expecting in Germany (before they shove the ones they don't want elsewhere in Schengen).
Saw that HIGNFY. Osman was amusing at first, but he kept on banging on and on about Clarkson's firing. It was a shade obsessive.
Mr. Jessop, aren't Clarkson and May both fairly tall?
I believe so. But that would involve them taking a serious interest in the sorts of cars most people buy, which they don't do (and neither should they - everyday cars are not the program's point).
I do wonder if it's just me, or whether other people have problems. I know a friend of mine who is 6'5" occasionally has trouble with hire cars when he travels on business.
I still think that's a steal. If she can get to the final two - her weakness will be her MP base, but Boris has the same problem - she has a good chance against Osborne.
And therein lies hope for Labour.
Why?
Because a Tory party that moves rightwards gives a new Labour leader the opportunity to move back to the centre.
You think the Tory party taking action to fulfil its 2015 manifesto pledge on immigration - the number one issue for voters - would be seen as moving rightwards?
I'm with you CS. A desire for action on immigration is across the board, if anything with a bias to the left, hence UKIP's GE showing in Labour's heartlands.
I don't see how on earth they can meet their manifesto commitment. Wasn't it something like get net migration down to 10s of thousands? Only an opt-out from free movement in EU or leaving EU will get them there.
I agree with you and didn't say it would be easy. However it's a lot easier if you try than if you don't.
Net migration IS in the 10s of thousands - 32 of them.
As a Department Leader Theresa May has done a marvellous job considering that she was impeded by LDs for 5 years and has been starved of resources by Osborne to tackle border controls and enforcement. She also had a department renowned to be full of sub standard civil servants. However I still remember the ammo she provided on "they regard us as the nasty party" (or similar). She is by far the best Head of Department and capable to be the CEO. Her outside experience also places her well ahead of most of the rest.
Felix.. It will not make any difference to them...In or Out..just the same.. as it would be for a Spaniard living in the UK..
That is not what people think - they need to be convinced and re-assured and many of the posters on here today would fail to allay their fears one jot.
I'd look at addressing some of the real concerns about Uber - requiring regular vehicle checks, requiring the company to take out insurance on the fleet, establishing that Uber bears the responsibility for the actions of its drivers (ie that there is an employer-employee relationship rather than this "self-employed agent" bullshit). Those would all be reasonable things to address.
Calm down Charles. It's only a taxi; it's not micro-surgery.
The market will sort it out. Or should be able to. Boris is all over the shop on this, but the shop is firmly on the wrong side of everything.
Wrong.
Sometimes bad drives out good.
In this case, with lower protection for consumers, Uber can charge less. Consumers won't realise it's a problem until it's too late - by which time the traditional black cab business model may have been fatally undermined. The answer is simple: put in minimum regulatory standards and require Uber to stand behind its drivers.
And it's not "only a taxi". It's a safe journey home late at night for my wife.
No need to over-dramatise things Charles. Other options are available for your wife. It sounds like the market is working perfectly. You don't like this whole Uber malarkey so you can exercise your freedom never to take them and so can your wife.
For you both the world of black cabs and 24-hr mini-cab offices awaits.
I think differently. If I read in the newspapers that Uber cars are flying off the road into buildings because of faulty maintenance or suchlike I might think again. But for the moment, I will continue to use them.
There was a very funny survey done a few yrs ago about Boris - he was voted the politician most wives wanted to have dinner with - and the one most husband's didn't want him to have.
@JournoStephen: "Slashing college places for working-class kids to pay for free university for the wealthy" - @DavidMundellDCT laying into SNP record #cpc15
Felix.. I think you may be misjudging the level of intelligence of the average Ex Pat..they will be looking for and getting all the info they need...long before any vote is cast.....
I'd look at addressing some of the real concerns about Uber - requiring regular vehicle checks, requiring the company to take out insurance on the fleet, establishing that Uber bears the responsibility for the actions of its drivers (ie that there is an employer-employee relationship rather than this "self-employed agent" bullshit). Those would all be reasonable things to address.
Calm down Charles. It's only a taxi; it's not micro-surgery.
The market will sort it out. Or should be able to. Boris is all over the shop on this, but the shop is firmly on the wrong side of everything.
Wrong.
Sometimes bad drives out good.
In this case, with lower protection for consumers, Uber can charge less. Consumers won't realise it's a problem until it's too late - by which time the traditional black cab business model may have been fatally undermined. The answer is simple: put in minimum regulatory standards and require Uber to stand behind its drivers.
And it's not "only a taxi". It's a safe journey home late at night for my wife.
Quite right, Mr. Charles, and I hope you would ensure that your good lady never travels by mini-cab at any time of day. The risks involved of getting an unlicensed, uninsured, driver who doesn't actually know where he or she is going are not worth the trivial savings in the fare.
When I worked in London I used cabs extensively - if I couldn't walk there because of time or bad weather I took a cab. Twice the client for whom I was working arranged for an Addsion Lee car to drive me around between meetings etc. The first time I put down to a possible one off, after the second I said never again.
I'd look at addressing some of the real concerns about Uber - requiring regular vehicle checks, requiring the company to take out insurance on the fleet, establishing that Uber bears the responsibility for the actions of its drivers (ie that there is an employer-employee relationship rather than this "self-employed agent" bullshit). Those would all be reasonable things to address.
Calm down Charles. It's only a taxi; it's not micro-surgery.
The market will sort it out. Or should be able to. Boris is all over the shop on this, but the shop is firmly on the wrong side of everything.
Wrong.
Sometimes bad drives out good.
In this case, with lower protection for consumers, Uber can charge less. Consumers won't realise it's a problem until it's too late - by which time the traditional black cab business model may have been fatally undermined. The answer is simple: put in minimum regulatory standards and require Uber to stand behind its drivers.
And it's not "only a taxi". It's a safe journey home late at night for my wife.
Quite right, Mr. Charles, and I hope you would ensure that your good lady never travels by mini-cab at any time of day. The risks involved of getting an unlicensed, uninsured, driver who doesn't actually know where he or she is going are not worth the trivial savings in the fare.
When I worked in London I used cabs extensively - if I couldn't walk there because of time or bad weather I took a cab. Twice the client for whom I was working arranged for an Addsion Lee car to drive me around between meetings etc. The first time I put down to a possible one off, after the second I said never again.
Morning all. Race to succeed Dave in full swing, although I wonder if in the back of his head he'll stay on to the election if he wins the EU referendum..?
An interesting discussion on the overnight thread on immigration, I still think the problem is that no-one dares to separate "good" and "bad" immigration types for fears of not being PC.
FWIW I would give the companies complaining about skills shortages unlimited visas, if they agree to pay the salary again of the employee (maybe a minimum of £40k or £50k) into an education fund set up to address the skills shortages. That way universities and colleges could work with the businesses to address areas where skills are needed. Maybe anyone wanting a Masters in a STEM subject should have their tuition paid, maybe if we need more engineers, doctors, pilots etc. we could make sure that the newly qualified in these areas aren't up to their necks in debt if they agree to stay in the UK for a period of time.
Well quite: most immigrants are good for us. Some aren't. We need to distinguish between the two. More of the former. None of the latter. And all has to be done with the open consent of people here and the benefits and costs shared fairly amongst all.
Instead, all are let in - without any sensible discrimination between good and bad. Our ability or willingness to remove those we don't want is close to zero. Consent is not properly obtained and poisons trust between ruler and ruled and the benefits and costs are most unfairly shared. The rich get the cheap nannies, cleaners and plumbers and the poor get their jobs taken, wages depressed and neighbourhoods changed out of all recognition. And are told that they are Luddite bigots to add insult to injury.
How we get from here to where we would like to be is what May - and any other putative leader - needs to answer, on this question at least.
Who is going to decide which is which? Why do you think, say, British imams would come up with the same answers as yourself?
My sex abuse claim against Lord Brittan started off as just a joke: 'Victim' pressured to complain by two 'well-known' campaigners
Man said he provided a list of names as ‘a joke suggestion to start with’ Claim featured in BBC Panorama documentary on Met's inquiry into alleged Westminster paedophile ring The man told the programme: ‘I believe it is time that the truth came out'
Surely that has to blow a large hole in the investigation? Perhaps there will be an investigation into why this investigation got as far as it did without uncovering this rather large blooper.
We need an investigation into the deputy leader of the labour party.
Last night Ms Morgan narrowly escaped protesters when she arrived late for a Tory bash in Manchester's gay village. The Conservative party's LGBT members had been heckled earlier as they entered the function. But the protesters were said to have moved on "to go for their dinner", when Ms Morgan arrived.
Ms Morgan, who had been running late from her previous engagement, roared with laughter as Tory activists told her the protesters had missed their chance to shout abuse at the Equalities secretary.
I'd look at addressing some of the real concerns about Uber - requiring regular vehicle checks, requiring the company to take out insurance on the fleet, establishing that Uber bears the responsibility for the actions of its drivers (ie that there is an employer-employee relationship rather than this "self-employed agent" bullshit). Those would all be reasonable things to address.
Calm down Charles. It's only a taxi; it's not micro-surgery.
The market will sort it out. Or should be able to. Boris is all over the shop on this, but the shop is firmly on the wrong side of everything.
Wrong.
Sometimes bad drives out good.
In this case, with lower protection for consumers, Uber can charge less. Consumers won't realise it's a problem until it's too late - by which time the traditional black cab business model may have been fatally undermined. The answer is simple: put in minimum regulatory standards and require Uber to stand behind its drivers.
And it's not "only a taxi". It's a safe journey home late at night for my wife.
Quite right, Mr. Charles, and I hope you would ensure that your good lady never travels by mini-cab at any time of day. The risks involved of getting an unlicensed, uninsured, driver who doesn't actually know where he or she is going are not worth the trivial savings in the fare.
When I worked in London I used cabs extensively - if I couldn't walk there because of time or bad weather I took a cab. Twice the client for whom I was working arranged for an Addsion Lee car to drive me around between meetings etc. The first time I put down to a possible one off, after the second I said never again.
Listen up George! I hear that David Cameron might flesh out what he means by 'serving a full term' when he speaks to #CPC15 today — Christopher Hope (@christopherhope) October 7, 2015
He'll kill all the talk by saying a full term means a full term IMHO. A stunt Blair tried I seem to recall.
Except obviously it doesn't. While it is technically possible for him to serve the entire parliament with a PM-designate as party leader for the last few weeks of the election campaign, in practice it'd be ludicrous (though I think India did something similar not too long ago?).
So the new Tory leader has to be in place for the election and - in reality - for long enough in advance to be able to have significant input into the campaign plan and manifesto. That probably means a switch no later than Autumn 2019, with the party conference acting as either the launchpad for the leadership election as in 2005, or - more probably - the coronation of the successful candidate after an election taking place with the MPs rounds in June / July and the members' vote over the summer.
Speccy says Cameron sources have been clear that he will fire the starting pistol in April/May 2019, allow a beauty contest over the summer, and then have the new leader announced by/during/just after Conference 2019. The new leader then beds in for 6 months and fights GE2020 solo.
I would rate May's chances ahead of Johnson's. Still, I doubt either will be PM.
(Caveat: if she leads the "Out" charge, and "Out" wins, then that could change.)
(To add: since Boris Johnson's article on Uber, I would rather cut my own hand off than vote for him in any capacity.)
London black cabs are a closed shop.
Boris and TFL's actions are utterly disgusting. Uber (and I'm sure other virtual taxi firms in time) is increasing choice and availability for consumers, while lowering prices. It allows flexible working for drivers (who give up a far smaller share of their earnings than they did when they worked for minicab firms).
And it brings quality control: Uber drivers need to keep scoring 4.5/5.0, otherwise they get dropped from the system.
I feel for taxi drivers, I really do. They spent three years educating themselves, and the value of that knowledge has declined. But regulation must always be consumer led. And the existence of Uber is unambiguously good for consumers. Artificial measures (5 minute cooldowns, for example) to try and make Uber less attractive are a travesty.
I could never vote for Boris. I could never vote for a Conservative Party he led.
I don't understand why you couldn't have a similar app for black cabs.
The other thing that worries me about Uber drivers is how do I know that they have passed CRB checks? Or don't otherwise have criminal convictions.
Felix.. It will not make any difference to them...In or Out..just the same.. as it would be for a Spaniard living in the UK..
That is not what people think - they need to be convinced and re-assured and many of the posters on here today would fail to allay their fears one jot.
I would expect that people who were lawfully settled in the UK, or Spain, would retain rights to permanent residence. People who wished to settle in either country in the future would have to apply for permission.
Listen up George! I hear that David Cameron might flesh out what he means by 'serving a full term' when he speaks to #CPC15 today — Christopher Hope (@christopherhope) October 7, 2015
He'll kill all the talk by saying a full term means a full term IMHO. A stunt Blair tried I seem to recall.
Except obviously it doesn't. While it is technically possible for him to serve the entire parliament with a PM-designate as party leader for the last few weeks of the election campaign, in practice it'd be ludicrous (though I think India did something similar not too long ago?).
So the new Tory leader has to be in place for the election and - in reality - for long enough in advance to be able to have significant input into the campaign plan and manifesto. That probably means a switch no later than Autumn 2019, with the party conference acting as either the launchpad for the leadership election as in 2005, or - more probably - the coronation of the successful candidate after an election taking place with the MPs rounds in June / July and the members' vote over the summer.
Speccy says Cameron sources have been clear that he will fire the starting pistol in April/May 2019, allow a beauty contest over the summer, and then have the new leader announced by/during/just after Conference 2019. The new leader then beds in for 6 months and fights GE2020 solo.
So my money is on 2019.
But the referendum may turn that plan upside down. Cameron sitting on a very upset party (if maj for Remain) or looking like a reject after a vote for Leave.
He will vow to transform “generation rent” into “generation buy” by reforming planning rules on affordable housing to include low-cost “starter homes”.
He will say that having a generation of young people “waking up each morning in their childhood bedrooms” is a “wakeup call” for the Government. The reforms will stop developers being forced to build affordable homes for rent, allowing them to build low-cost homes for sale.
Good news for BTL landlords - less competition from new build. I know people obsess about owning their homes, so it'll go down well with people worried that they can't manage it, but in practice quite a lot still won't be able to manage it, and they'll find themselves forced to pay even more rent as a result.
Merely squeezing the rental market to fuel the sales market isn't a sensible answer - we need more homes of both kinds, whether by building higher, spreading outwards or any other solution.
I'd look at addressing some of the real concerns about Uber - requiring regular vehicle checks, requiring the company to take out insurance on the fleet, establishing that Uber bears the responsibility for the actions of its drivers (ie that there is an employer-employee relationship rather than this "self-employed agent" bullshit). Those would all be reasonable things to address.
Calm down Charles. It's only a taxi; it's not micro-surgery.
The market will sort it out. Or should be able to. Boris is all over the shop on this, but the shop is firmly on the wrong side of everything.
Wrong.
Sometimes bad drives out good.
In this case, with lower protection for consumers, Uber can charge less. Consumers won't realise it's a problem until it's too late - by which time the traditional black cab business model may have been fatally undermined. The answer is simple: put in minimum regulatory standards and require Uber to stand behind its drivers.
And it's not "only a taxi". It's a safe journey home late at night for my wife.
In the United States, Uber provides the insurance. Is it different in the UK?
Ultimately, my view is that the consumer should decide. Not politicians in thrall to vested interests.
I would rate May's chances ahead of Johnson's. Still, I doubt either will be PM.
(Caveat: if she leads the "Out" charge, and "Out" wins, then that could change.)
(To add: since Boris Johnson's article on Uber, I would rather cut my own hand off than vote for him in any capacity.)
London black cabs are a closed shop.
Boris and TFL's actions are utterly disgusting. Uber (and I'm sure other virtual taxi firms in time) is increasing choice and availability for consumers, while lowering prices. It allows flexible working for drivers (who give up a far smaller share of their earnings than they did when they worked for minicab firms).
And it brings quality control: Uber drivers need to keep scoring 4.5/5.0, otherwise they get dropped from the system.
I feel for taxi drivers, I really do. They spent three years educating themselves, and the value of that knowledge has declined. But regulation must always be consumer led. And the existence of Uber is unambiguously good for consumers. Artificial measures (5 minute cooldowns, for example) to try and make Uber less attractive are a travesty.
I could never vote for Boris. I could never vote for a Conservative Party he led.
I don't understand why you couldn't have a similar app for black cabs.
The other thing that worries me about Uber drivers is how do I know that they have passed CRB checks? Or don't otherwise have criminal convictions.
If the Wikipedia entry for Uber is in any way correct, I don't think it's the type of company I would wish to support.
Felix.. It will not make any difference to them...In or Out..just the same.. as it would be for a Spaniard living in the UK..
That is not what people think - they need to be convinced and re-assured and many of the posters on here today would fail to allay their fears one jot.
I would expect that people who were lawfully settled in the UK, or Spain, would retain rights to permanent residence. People who wished to settle in either country in the future would have to apply for permission.
Though whether the Brit retirees would still be eligible for the Spanish equivalent of the NHS must be less certain. Indeed if they have lived more than 12 months outside the UK they would not be eligible for the British NHS either!
A big effect on resale values in retirement areas in Spain and Portugal, and increased pressure on house prices on the South coast of England in the medium term too.
Without wanting to wade into the Scottish argument too far, what I would say is that the argument for Holyrood needs to focus on the SNP record, not on unionism, leave that for Westminster. The Tories and Labour need to attract the 10% of unionists who vote for the SNP because they are the only serious party of government in Scotland. The Tories may have realised this and their attacking of the SNP record on student fees, housing and cronyism seems to be bearing fruit in the locals with their vote share up on average. Labour seem to be falling back on scare stories about independence which didn't work last time and given the result of the referendum, also won't work this time. There is still time before the Holyrood election for them to build a proper policy platform, but they are so bereft of any real talent that their campaign will most likely be a rerun of the referendum campaign which saw their most loyal supporters vote for independence.
I seriously think that the Tories have a good chance of coming second to the SNP, what are the odds for that?
Hope you're feeling better and by the way one of the best pieces I've read on here for a long time. But is this really so different to the coalition you spent 5 years supporting? I know Cable had his admirers but he seldom seemed to get much public support from the 'quad' who were concerned with 'cleaning up Labour's mess' and effectively preparing the ground for the current road to nowhere.
Clegg might have bemoaned fear triumphing over hope at the election but what did he do in his five years to sell a more positive vision of the future than the Tories?
Thanks for the kind word, Frank, and thanks also for engaging on this. Apart from a cheap jibe, all the Tories on here want to do, it seems, to talk among themselves and to themselves at present.
I don't know what was said and what wasn't said in the Coalition but I suspect the initial Civil Service briefings painted an overly negative view of the state of the public finances but there was an element of "having to clean up the mess" though the method for doing that has been shown to be questionable and I've never supported QE.
I think in areas such as paternity leave, free school meals and green energy measures there was a genuine attempt to try to improve the lot of the poorest and to address future challenges. It was well-intentioned if not always well-directed but given the balance within the Coalition itself it was about as much as Clegg could expect.
It's hard to blame Nick Clegg for the crisis in Syria or the problems in the Eurozone (although some will no doubt) and these external issues fundamentally impacted on the Coalition's ability to do any more than keep going.
My issue with the deficit management policy has always been the artificial ring-fencing of certain areas, the NHS, pensioners' benefits and a few others as examples as well as the progressive vilification of those on benefits. That the LDs signed up to some of these measures is something with which the Party has to live going forward.
My only other thought was I never heard Ed Miliband come up with anything positive either - even at the very end I could not imagine what a Britain led by Ed Miliband would like and the policies his Government would enact. At least with Corbyn there'll be much less ambiguity.
I'd look at addressing some of the real concerns about Uber - requiring regular vehicle checks, requiring the company to take out insurance on the fleet, establishing that Uber bears the responsibility for the actions of its drivers (ie that there is an employer-employee relationship rather than this "self-employed agent" bullshit). Those would all be reasonable things to address.
Calm down Charles. It's only a taxi; it's not micro-surgery.
The market will sort it out. Or should be able to. Boris is all over the shop on this, but the shop is firmly on the wrong side of everything.
Wrong.
Sometimes bad drives out good.
In this case, with lower protection for consumers, Uber can charge less. Consumers won't realise it's a problem until it's too late - by which time the traditional black cab business model may have been fatally undermined. The answer is simple: put in minimum regulatory standards and require Uber to stand behind its drivers.
And it's not "only a taxi". It's a safe journey home late at night for my wife.
In the United States, Uber provides the insurance. Is it different in the UK?
Ultimately, my view is that the consumer should decide. Not politicians in thrall to vested interests.
I don't think they do in the UK at the moment.
I agree the consumer should decide. But there is also a role for consumer protection laws.
And I don't like Uber's belief that they can ride roughshod over the law in multiple countries.
My sex abuse claim against Lord Brittan started off as just a joke: 'Victim' pressured to complain by two 'well-known' campaigners
Man said he provided a list of names as ‘a joke suggestion to start with’ Claim featured in BBC Panorama documentary on Met's inquiry into alleged Westminster paedophile ring The man told the programme: ‘I believe it is time that the truth came out'
Surely that has to blow a large hole in the investigation? Perhaps there will be an investigation into why this investigation got as far as it did without uncovering this rather large blooper.
We need an investigation into the deputy leader of the labour party.
I would rate May's chances ahead of Johnson's. Still, I doubt either will be PM.
(Caveat: if she leads the "Out" charge, and "Out" wins, then that could change.)
(To add: since Boris Johnson's article on Uber, I would rather cut my own hand off than vote for him in any capacity.)
London black cabs are a closed shop.
Boris and TFL's actions are utterly disgusting. Uber (and I'm sure other virtual taxi firms in time) is increasing choice and availability for consumers, while lowering prices. It allows flexible working for drivers (who give up a far smaller share of their earnings than they did when they worked for minicab firms).
And it brings quality control: Uber drivers need to keep scoring 4.5/5.0, otherwise they get dropped from the system.
I feel for taxi drivers, I really do. They spent three years educating themselves, and the value of that knowledge has declined. But regulation must always be consumer led. And the existence of Uber is unambiguously good for consumers. Artificial measures (5 minute cooldowns, for example) to try and make Uber less attractive are a travesty.
I could never vote for Boris. I could never vote for a Conservative Party he led.
Black cabs seem to be a real con. I got one from Heathrow recently to a meeting , just a few miles , almost £30 pounds. On the way back I got a private hire cab and it was £11. No wonder they do not like their monopoly being threatened.
Speaking personally, black cabs are by far my preferred method of getting round central London, if I'm not walking.
If black cabs and “the knowledge” are being rendered redundant by sat navs etc, isn’t that just the way of the world? After all, it was their grandfather’s superior technology which allowed them to supercede horse-drawn hansom cabs.
Knowing your way around a place and being able to read maps are not redundant even in the days of satnavs, IMO.
'One does have to wonder how much Tom Watson's hand is in all of this.
His hands are either deep in the muck, or he's been a very useful idiot. Either way, it does not reflect well on his position as deputy leader of the Labour party.'
When can we expect a public apology from Watson ?
He then needs to stop the grandstanding & shut the f$ck up.
I'd look at addressing some of the real concerns about Uber - requiring regular vehicle checks, requiring the company to take out insurance on the fleet, establishing that Uber bears the responsibility for the actions of its drivers (ie that there is an employer-employee relationship rather than this "self-employed agent" bullshit). Those would all be reasonable things to address.
Calm down Charles. It's only a taxi; it's not micro-surgery.
The market will sort it out. Or should be able to. Boris is all over the shop on this, but the shop is firmly on the wrong side of everything.
Wrong.
Sometimes bad drives out good.
In this case, with lower protection for consumers, Uber can charge less. Consumers won't realise it's a problem until it's too late - by which time the traditional black cab business model may have been fatally undermined. The answer is simple: put in minimum regulatory standards and require Uber to stand behind its drivers.
And it's not "only a taxi". It's a safe journey home late at night for my wife.
In the United States, Uber provides the insurance. Is it different in the UK?
Ultimately, my view is that the consumer should decide. Not politicians in thrall to vested interests.
I don't think they do in the UK at the moment.
I agree the consumer should decide. But there is also a role for consumer protection laws.
And I don't like Uber's belief that they can ride roughshod over the law in multiple countries.
Nor its efforts to sabotage competitors. Rather than a consumer champion, it sounds more like an organisation trying to establish a monopoly.
Given we're all talking Uber, can I share an experience I had in San Francisco earlier this year. I had dinner at a friend's house near Candlestick Park (which is a pretty rundown, working class area). Historically, getting a cab there was incredibly difficult, and public transport (the bus) was infrequent.
Anyway: at the end of dinner, I got out my phone and pressed the button for an Uber.
Instead of ordering an UberX, as I normally do, I found myself accidentally ordering an UberPop.
What is UberPop? It's a $7 flat fee service from anywhere in San Francisco to anywhere else. But there's a rub. It's not a direct run. The car probably has a passenger or two in when you get in, and then delivers one of them, and picks up another along the way. In other words, they use complicated algorithims to dynamically route cars.
In the car with me for my journey were two construction workers, who were working on the night shift of some large project. They told me that before UberX they walked to the bus stop, waited for it, then got the bus to the subway stop before transferring. At 11pm at night, this could be an hour and 20 to get to work. Now it took them 20 to 25 minutes, and cost them just $7. (The same price as public transport.)
Uber for me was just a way of saving money and getting a car when I needed it. For these guys, Uber had literally changed their lives.
@SkyNewsBreak: FIFA presidential candidate Chung Mong-joon has said he plans to sue Sepp #Blatter for embezzlement and that #FIFA was "organised crime"
He will vow to transform “generation rent” into “generation buy” by reforming planning rules on affordable housing to include low-cost “starter homes”.
He will say that having a generation of young people “waking up each morning in their childhood bedrooms” is a “wakeup call” for the Government. The reforms will stop developers being forced to build affordable homes for rent, allowing them to build low-cost homes for sale.
Good news for BTL landlords - less competition from new build. I know people obsess about owning their homes, so it'll go down well with people worried that they can't manage it, but in practice quite a lot still won't be able to manage it, and they'll find themselves forced to pay even more rent as a result.
Merely squeezing the rental market to fuel the sales market isn't a sensible answer - we need more homes of both kinds, whether by building higher, spreading outwards or any other solution.
The devil is in the detail or, more precisely, what is defined by "affordable" and "low-cost". If it is a percentage of the full market price, that creates a problem because salaries are so out of kilter with house prices in so many parts of the country.
I think the requirement to build "starter/affordable homes" should be scrapped. In the round if say 1,000,000 new 5 bedroom luxury homes are built - the people from the 2 and 3 beds with decent equity will move to the new 5 beds, and then those 2 and 3 beds etc can be bought by first time buyers etc. In addition if 2nd/3rd/nth time movers are moving to new homes then there is no chain beyond that point thus making the whole queue/chain a bit easier. Plus if we build enough nicer homes even though it might in the round devalue your existing home slightly if you move to a better home even though you might nominally lose out there won't really be a problem with that. I guess if you've bought a load of homes you don't live in as an investment it could be a problem... but property shouldn't be a risk free investment
BTL is a seperate issue, building affordable homes or not makes no difference to that really. Osborne seems to be covering that to a fair degree though in his various budgets.
I would rate May's chances ahead of Johnson's. Still, I doubt either will be PM.
(Caveat: if she leads the "Out" charge, and "Out" wins, then that could change.)
(To add: since Boris Johnson's article on Uber, I would rather cut my own hand off than vote for him in any capacity.)
London black cabs are a closed shop.
Boris and TFL's actions are utterly disgusting. Uber (and I'm sure other virtual taxi firms in time) is increasing choice and availability for consumers, while lowering prices. It allows flexible working for drivers (who give up a far smaller share of their earnings than they did when they worked for minicab firms).
And it brings quality control: Uber drivers need to keep scoring 4.5/5.0, otherwise they get dropped from the system.
I feel for taxi drivers, I really do. They spent three years educating themselves, and the value of that knowledge has declined. But regulation must always be consumer led. And the existence of Uber is unambiguously good for consumers. Artificial measures (5 minute cooldowns, for example) to try and make Uber less attractive are a travesty.
I could never vote for Boris. I could never vote for a Conservative Party he led.
Black cabs seem to be a real con. I got one from Heathrow recently to a meeting , just a few miles , almost £30 pounds. On the way back I got a private hire cab and it was £11. No wonder they do not like their monopoly being threatened.
Speaking personally, black cabs are by far my preferred method of getting round central London, if I'm not walking.
If black cabs and “the knowledge” are being rendered redundant by sat navs etc, isn’t that just the way of the world? After all, it was their grandfather’s superior technology which allowed them to supercede horse-drawn hansom cabs.
Knowing your way around a place and being able to read maps are not redundant even in the days of satnavs, IMO.
Sat Navs can be very unreliable, in my experience.
Re Uber again: my understanding is that Uber drivers in London hold minicab licenses, so they will have gone through the same criminal record checking as any minicab driver.
I would rate May's chances ahead of Johnson's. Still, I doubt either will be PM.
(Caveat: if she leads the "Out" charge, and "Out" wins, then that could change.)
(To add: since Boris Johnson's article on Uber, I would rather cut my own hand off than vote for him in any capacity.)
London black cabs are a closed shop.
Boris and TFL's actions are utterly disgusting. Uber (and I'm sure other virtual taxi firms in time) is increasing choice and availability for consumers, while lowering prices. It allows flexible working for drivers (who give up a far smaller share of their earnings than they did when they worked for minicab firms).
And it brings quality control: Uber drivers need to keep scoring 4.5/5.0, otherwise they get dropped from the system.
I feel for taxi drivers, I really do. They spent three years educating themselves, and the value of that knowledge has declined. But regulation must always be consumer led. And the existence of Uber is unambiguously good for consumers. Artificial measures (5 minute cooldowns, for example) to try and make Uber less attractive are a travesty.
I could never vote for Boris. I could never vote for a Conservative Party he led.
Black cabs seem to be a real con. I got one from Heathrow recently to a meeting , just a few miles , almost £30 pounds. On the way back I got a private hire cab and it was £11. No wonder they do not like their monopoly being threatened.
Speaking personally, black cabs are by far my preferred method of getting round central London, if I'm not walking.
If black cabs and “the knowledge” are being rendered redundant by sat navs etc, isn’t that just the way of the world? After all, it was their grandfather’s superior technology which allowed them to supercede horse-drawn hansom cabs.
Knowing your way around a place and being able to read maps are not redundant even in the days of satnavs, IMO.
Sat Navs can be very unreliable, in my experience.
But every day Google gets better. In the long run, technology like Waze brings the knowledge of London cabbies to every driver.
Given we're all talking Uber, can I share an experience I had in San Francisco earlier this year. I had dinner at a friend's house near Candlestick Park (which is a pretty rundown, working class area). Historically, getting a cab there was incredibly difficult, and public transport (the bus) was infrequent.
Anyway: at the end of dinner, I got out my phone and pressed the button for an Uber.
Instead of ordering an UberX, as I normally do, I found myself accidentally ordering an UberPop.
What is UberPop? It's a $7 flat fee service from anywhere in San Francisco to anywhere else. But there's a rub. It's not a direct run. The car probably has a passenger or two in when you get in, and then delivers one of them, and picks up another along the way. In other words, they use complicated algorithims to dynamically route cars.
In the car with me for my journey were two construction workers, who were working on the night shift of some large project. They told me that before UberX they walked to the bus stop, waited for it, then got the bus to the subway stop before transferring. At 11pm at night, this could be an hour and 20 to get to work. Now it took them 20 to 25 minutes, and cost them just $7. (The same price as public transport.)
Uber for me was just a way of saving money and getting a car when I needed it. For these guys, Uber had literally changed their lives.
And when I've used it (in SF) it has been very good.
There is clearly demand for its services.
But that doesn't put it above the law, above taxation, above doing business in a moral and sustainable way.
I would rate May's chances ahead of Johnson's. Still, I doubt either will be PM.
(Caveat: if she leads the "Out" charge, and "Out" wins, then that could change.)
(To add: since Boris Johnson's article on Uber, I would rather cut my own hand off than vote for him in any capacity.)
London black cabs are a closed shop.
Boris and TFL's actions are utterly disgusting. Uber (and I'm sure other virtual taxi firms in time) is increasing choice and availability for consumers, while lowering prices. It allows flexible working for drivers (who give up a far smaller share of their earnings than they did when they worked for minicab firms).
And it brings quality control: Uber drivers need to keep scoring 4.5/5.0, otherwise they get dropped from the system.
I feel for taxi drivers, I really do. They spent three years educating themselves, and the value of that knowledge has declined. But regulation must always be consumer led. And the existence of Uber is unambiguously good for consumers. Artificial measures (5 minute cooldowns, for example) to try and make Uber less attractive are a travesty.
I could never vote for Boris. I could never vote for a Conservative Party he led.
Black cabs seem to be a real con. I got one from Heathrow recently to a meeting , just a few miles , almost £30 pounds. On the way back I got a private hire cab and it was £11. No wonder they do not like their monopoly being threatened.
Speaking personally, black cabs are by far my preferred method of getting round central London, if I'm not walking.
If black cabs and “the knowledge” are being rendered redundant by sat navs etc, isn’t that just the way of the world? After all, it was their grandfather’s superior technology which allowed them to supercede horse-drawn hansom cabs.
Knowing your way around a place and being able to read maps are not redundant even in the days of satnavs, IMO.
Sat Navs can be very unreliable, in my experience.
My SatNav (a Garmin) gets you to the vicinity, but very rarely the actual address. It seems to believe we live in an alley about 100 yards from our actual house!
Comments
This is the lib dems fault of course, or the result of the great economic recovery (which is the Tories triumph)
Doesn't the fact that May herself notes the negative effect of mass immigration on working class wages and job security destroy the 'mass immigration is a result of our booming economy' line?
What's the point if a booming economy if everyone's skint?
If any of the above are true, then the best candidate will be someone prepared to cut a deal with Osborne, someone uninterested in detail but happy to be the genial face of Osborne's government.
I guess the key is going to be who stands for the leadership, and how they are eliminated. IDS got the job by default as Clarke beat Portillo in the runoff, Michael P would have beaten IDS easily if his name had been given to the members.
As I've been sick for much of the week, I've watched snippets of the Conservative gathering. To be fair, one could certainly not accuse the Conservatives so far of hubristic triumphalism.
It's been about people this week but the mood has been relentlessly downbeat. If you're here, expect to work longer hours for less but it's the only way you'll have any chance to make ends meet. If you want to come here, don't bother unless if you have a skill we need in which case stay for as long as you have value to us and then leave.
It's almost Orwellian - imagine the future "a blue rosette stamping on a human face forever".
It is the politics of insecurity, fear and anxiety - it plays to people's concerns about their economic, cultural and social identity but in a wholly negative way. "Work hard" seems to be all the Conservatives have to offer.
It's not even about "work smart" - where is the spirit of technological innovation that, far from keeping us chained to the workplace, should be liberating us to spend more time in other areas of our lives ? What of the computerised processes designed to release labour, what of progress ? Even the transport infrastructural improvements are predicated on getting more people to travel further to work longer.
The truth is with a potentially unlimited pool of cheap labour, who cares about productivity or innovation ? Well, perhaps, the Living Wage will encourage such thoughts as it becomes more expensive to hire.
The other truth is someone has to be at the bottom - Boris's beloved office cleaners have to come from somewhere. The aspirational message to the cleaner is simple - work hard and you can progress away from the night work to a day job from a bedsit to a nice flat or even a house. If that happens, someone else has to do the cleaning.
Merkel realises this - in a demographically difficult place, she realised bringing in the economic migrants to do the cleaning keeps the aspirational train running. Are we in a place where the replacement cleaners will be the sons and daughters of the current cleaners because there will be no progress - wither aspiration (so to speak) ?
The mistake the BBC are making IMHO is the Clarkson, Hammond and May have become the brand in their own right - hence all the successful programmes they commissioned for them and which they individually hosted themselves - but what's left is an empty vessel.
— Christopher Hope (@christopherhope) October 7, 2015
Mr. Flashman (deceased), not sure that's the case, so much as the shift to pay TV coupled with an uncompetitive season.
http://www.politics.co.uk/blogs/2014/09/15/the-right-wing-business-tycoons-behind-alex-salmond-s-indepe
https://www.facebook.com/theSNP/posts/10150319230294078
http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/jim-mccoll-considers-scotland-move-after-yes-vote-1-3451197
Clegg might have bemoaned fear triumphing over hope at the election but what did he do in his five years to sell a more positive vision of the future than the Tories?
As noted upthread, the SNP will dutifuly scrutinise this decision by the SNP, before deciding that the SNP acted enitrely properly in the interest of
the SNPScotlandNothing to see here, move along...
I cannot remember ever having had trouble with estate cars before. I wonder if, in order to reduce drag, they've lowered the cars profile (also, a lower windscreen and curves roof can be more aerodynamic).
It looks as though it will be an SUV for us, which is not what we really want. Unless we can find a better estate.
That'd make about 7m extra people in Germany. Their population is 80m IIRC.
Round of applause at Tory conference as speaker reminds audience that defector Mark Reckless lost his seat in May
But feel happy to dance on the head of a pin if you like.
So the new Tory leader has to be in place for the election and - in reality - for long enough in advance to be able to have significant input into the campaign plan and manifesto. That probably means a switch no later than Autumn 2019, with the party conference acting as either the launchpad for the leadership election as in 2005, or - more probably - the coronation of the successful candidate after an election taking place with the MPs rounds in June / July and the members' vote over the summer.
We need an investigation into the deputy leader of the labour party.
Saw that HIGNFY. Osman was amusing at first, but he kept on banging on and on about Clarkson's firing. It was a shade obsessive.
Mr. Jessop, aren't Clarkson and May both fairly tall?
I note being a smart chap he's finally seen the light..
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-independence/11453007/Jim-McColl-drops-support-for-Scottish-independence.html
Sometimes bad drives out good.
In this case, with lower protection for consumers, Uber can charge less. Consumers won't realise it's a problem until it's too late - by which time the traditional black cab business model may have been fatally undermined. The answer is simple: put in minimum regulatory standards and require Uber to stand behind its drivers.
And it's not "only a taxi". It's a safe journey home late at night for my wife.
A comparison might be if Balls had made a speech in 2009 denouncing bankers' greed - for all I know he may have done. Supporters would have nodded and said yes, good man, but as he hadn't actually done much to tighten control of banking speculation, it would rightly have been interpreted as political positioning.
I do wonder if it's just me, or whether other people have problems. I know a friend of mine who is 6'5" occasionally has trouble with hire cars when he travels on business.
Mundell raises a surprise laugh. Once in a lifetime independence referendum. "We didn't realise it was the lifetime of the Scottish midge"
For you both the world of black cabs and 24-hr mini-cab offices awaits.
I think differently. If I read in the newspapers that Uber cars are flying off the road into buildings because of faulty maintenance or suchlike I might think again. But for the moment, I will continue to use them.
Isn't the market wonderful?
When I worked in London I used cabs extensively - if I couldn't walk there because of time or bad weather I took a cab. Twice the client for whom I was working arranged for an Addsion Lee car to drive me around between meetings etc. The first time I put down to a possible one off, after the second I said never again.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Khrpy4V0-U4
Set Phasers tae Malky !!
the nonce finder General?
So my money is on 2019.
The other thing that worries me about Uber drivers is how do I know that they have passed CRB checks? Or don't otherwise have criminal convictions.
Merely squeezing the rental market to fuel the sales market isn't a sensible answer - we need more homes of both kinds, whether by building higher, spreading outwards or any other solution.
http://blogs.new.spectator.co.uk/2015/10/theresa-mays-immigration-speech-was-as-tawdry-as-it-was-contemptible/
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/11913927/Theresa-Mays-immigration-speech-is-dangerous-and-factually-wrong.html
Ultimately, my view is that the consumer should decide. Not politicians in thrall to vested interests.
A big effect on resale values in retirement areas in Spain and Portugal, and increased pressure on house prices on the South coast of England in the medium term too.
I seriously think that the Tories have a good chance of coming second to the SNP, what are the odds for that?
I don't know what was said and what wasn't said in the Coalition but I suspect the initial Civil Service briefings painted an overly negative view of the state of the public finances but there was an element of "having to clean up the mess" though the method for doing that has been shown to be questionable and I've never supported QE.
I think in areas such as paternity leave, free school meals and green energy measures there was a genuine attempt to try to improve the lot of the poorest and to address future challenges. It was well-intentioned if not always well-directed but given the balance within the Coalition itself it was about as much as Clegg could expect.
It's hard to blame Nick Clegg for the crisis in Syria or the problems in the Eurozone (although some will no doubt) and these external issues fundamentally impacted on the Coalition's ability to do any more than keep going.
My issue with the deficit management policy has always been the artificial ring-fencing of certain areas, the NHS, pensioners' benefits and a few others as examples as well as the progressive vilification of those on benefits. That the LDs signed up to some of these measures is something with which the Party has to live going forward.
My only other thought was I never heard Ed Miliband come up with anything positive either - even at the very end I could not imagine what a Britain led by Ed Miliband would like and the policies his Government would enact. At least with Corbyn there'll be much less ambiguity.
I agree the consumer should decide. But there is also a role for consumer protection laws.
And I don't like Uber's belief that they can ride roughshod over the law in multiple countries.
Already been done...
'One does have to wonder how much Tom Watson's hand is in all of this.
His hands are either deep in the muck, or he's been a very useful idiot. Either way, it does not reflect well on his position as deputy leader of the Labour party.'
When can we expect a public apology from Watson ?
He then needs to stop the grandstanding & shut the f$ck up.
Anyway: at the end of dinner, I got out my phone and pressed the button for an Uber.
Instead of ordering an UberX, as I normally do, I found myself accidentally ordering an UberPop.
What is UberPop? It's a $7 flat fee service from anywhere in San Francisco to anywhere else. But there's a rub. It's not a direct run. The car probably has a passenger or two in when you get in, and then delivers one of them, and picks up another along the way. In other words, they use complicated algorithims to dynamically route cars.
In the car with me for my journey were two construction workers, who were working on the night shift of some large project. They told me that before UberX they walked to the bus stop, waited for it, then got the bus to the subway stop before transferring. At 11pm at night, this could be an hour and 20 to get to work. Now it took them 20 to 25 minutes, and cost them just $7. (The same price as public transport.)
Uber for me was just a way of saving money and getting a car when I needed it. For these guys, Uber had literally changed their lives.
Merely squeezing the rental market to fuel the sales market isn't a sensible answer - we need more homes of both kinds, whether by building higher, spreading outwards or any other solution.
The devil is in the detail or, more precisely, what is defined by "affordable" and "low-cost". If it is a percentage of the full market price, that creates a problem because salaries are so out of kilter with house prices in so many parts of the country.
BTL is a seperate issue, building affordable homes or not makes no difference to that really. Osborne seems to be covering that to a fair degree though in his various budgets.
There is clearly demand for its services.
But that doesn't put it above the law, above taxation, above doing business in a moral and sustainable way.