Many people worldwide are losing confidence in their governments. Its not quite show time yet, but the moment where a critical mass of people lose confidence is coming, possibly the first half of 2017. And with measures like this, its hardly surprising.
Surely the point of the law was not to raise money but to make Denmark look like a relatively unattractive destination for refugees. It's far too early to say whether it's succeeded. Actually confiscating anything might not be necessary. The threat may be enough.
Whatever the intent behind it, a law like that should never have got off the starting blocks. There's always a possibility another government may not have the same scruples about implementing it.
I entirely agree. I'm just saying that one shouldn't console oneself that has failed.
Chris Grayling - Leader of the House of Commons Iain Duncan Smith - Work and Pensions Secretary Priti Patel - Employment Minister Theresa Villiers - Northern Ireland Secretary John Whittingdale - Culture Secretary
Who's on the fence?
Sajid Javid - Business Secretary Michael Gove - Justice Secretary Theresa May - Home Secretary Boris Johnson - Mayor of London/Political Cabinet Liz Truss - Environment Secretary Michael Fallon - Defence Secretary Justine Greening - International Development Secretary
Who would vote 'In'
David Cameron - Prime Minister George Osborne - Chancellor Philip Hammond - Foreign Secretary Stephen Crabb - Welsh Secretary Amber Rudd - Energy Secretary Greg Clarke - Communities Secretary Mark Harper - Chief Whip Anna Soubry - Minister for Small Business Nicky Morgan - Education Secretary Patrick McLouglin - Transport Secretary Jeremy Hunt - Health Secretary Oliver Letwin - Cabinet Office Minister Matthew Hancock - Cabinet Office Minister
...said London's status as Europe's financial hub would not be threatened by an exit because there was no "plausible alternative in the western hemisphere"...
I keep forgetting London's status is underwritten by God, and that business cannot possibly go somewhere else because it's still 1650 and we can only travel by mule.
[edt: unfuck tags]
Absolutely, London as a financial centre is as safe as the Birmingham motorcycle industry or the Lancashire cotton trade.
Of course it isn't safe and nor does it have a God- given right to exist. The question is whether its chances of surviving and thriving as an honest, well run and well regulated sector are better in the EU under Cameron's new deal and subject to the rules of the ECB and QMV by eurozone states or outside.
Honest, well run and well regulated?
Cyclefree, you know how to tell a joke...
See my later post. This is what it should be. Change is beginning to happen - very slowly and far far too late - in banks here. It has not even begun in European banks, most of whom have not even owned up properly to the levels of non-performing assets on their books. I would not trust the accounts of most European banks as far as I could throw them. And yet you think that Italian and German politicians and regulators should have the final say on regulating our industry. It's a point of view, I suppose.
...said London's status as Europe's financial hub would not be threatened by an exit because there was no "plausible alternative in the western hemisphere"...
I keep forgetting London's status is underwritten by God, and that business cannot possibly go somewhere else because it's still 1650 and we can only travel by mule.
[edt: unfuck tags]
Absolutely, London as a financial centre is as safe as the Birmingham motorcycle industry or the Lancashire cotton trade.
Of course it isn't safe and nor does it have a God- given right to exist. The question is whether its chances of surviving and thriving as an honest, well run and well regulated sector are better in the EU under Cameron's new deal and subject to the rules of the ECB and QMV by eurozone states or outside.
I'm not an expert on the City and am not knowledgable about the City stuff you and others have discussed tonight, so I'll take what you're saying on trust.
However, I do need to point out that I cracked up laughing when I read "honest, well run and well regulated".
It needs to be that - even if it isn't now.
Good luck to you if you think that having Italian politicians and regulators involved in making the rules for the UK will be an improvement. Italy is a country where the securities regulator had to take enforcement action against the governor of the Bank of Italy in relation to his dubious involvement in a highly contested bank takeover.
Large German banks are virtually unregulatable and BaFin, the German regulator, is one of the weakest around. That leaves France: a country once described as being like Italy but without Italian magistrates. See also BNParibas and how it got fined by the US over sanctions busting and money-laundering. Even the French government didn't try hard to defend it.
Whoah. I don't often disagree with you, but BNP did something totally legal in France. It just happened to be in US dollars. I thought they were treated disgracefully.
My sources in the popcorn industry are telling me they are reaching a tipping point (as it were) in global corn supplies.
@OliverCooper: "The student left in Oxford have some kind of problem with Jews." The Chair of Oxford Uni Labour resigns in disgust. https://t.co/lyi5u8dqLP
Not the same issue, but when you consider how highly-sought-after places at Oxford are, it seems very odd that many of the people who've managed to get there want to change it into something different.
Labour just sign up to everything from inside the EEA. Just how dim do you have to be to miss all that. Talk about pissing into the wind! The eu is not going to go away it will still exert sn influence and if it becomes more monolithic it will exert a stronger one. Glorious isolation is not an optipn.
Er they can't. Once again you show your utter lack of understanding of what EEA membership means. EEA involvement with the EU is limited to single market issues and nothing more. Even if they wanted to Labour could not commit us to any of the other areas of EU competancy without us rejoining the EU.
You really are the most willfully ignorant poster on PB.
Ahem.
I recommend Googling:
Norway Schengen Norway EU Emissions Trading System Norway European Asylum Support Office
...said London's status as Europe's financial hub would not be threatened by an exit because there was no "plausible alternative in the western hemisphere"...
I keep forgetting London's status is underwritten by God, and that business cannot possibly go somewhere else because it's still 1650 and we can only travel by mule.
[edt: unfuck tags]
Absolutely, London as a financial centre is as safe as the Birmingham motorcycle industry or the Lancashire cotton trade.
Of course it isn't safe and nor does it have a God- given right to exist. The question is whether its chances of surviving and thriving as an honest, well run and well regulated sector are better in the EU under Cameron's new deal and subject to the rules of the ECB and QMV by eurozone states or outside.
I'm not an expert on the City and am not knowledgable about the City stuff you and others have discussed tonight, so I'll take what you're saying on trust.
However, I do need to point out that I cracked up laughing when I read "honest, well run and well regulated".
It needs to be that - even if it isn't now.
Good luck to you if you think that having Italian politicians and regulators involved in making the rules for the UK will be an improvement. Italy is a country where the securities regulator had to take enforcement action against the governor of the Bank of Italy in relation to his dubious involvement in a highly contested bank takeover.
Large German banks are virtually unregulatable and BaFin, the German regulator, is one of the weakest around. That leaves France: a country once described as being like Italy but without Italian magistrates. See also BNParibas and how it got fined by the US over sanctions busting and money-laundering. Even the French government didn't try hard to defend it.
I just had a dozen oysters at Sheekeys, then their famous smoked haddock frittata, with two bottles of fine Chablis, before watching the truly brilliant production of Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, at the Theatre Royal Drury Lane - all in the company of my giggling nine year old daughter Lucy and her best friend Florence.
They loved it. I loved it. That's it, right there. Happiness.
...said London's status as Europe's financial hub would not be threatened by an exit because there was no "plausible alternative in the western hemisphere"...
I keep forgetting London's status is underwritten by God, and that business cannot possibly go somewhere else because it's still 1650 and we can only travel by mule.
[edt: unfuck tags]
Absolutely, London as a financial centre is as safe as the Birmingham motorcycle industry or the Lancashire cotton trade.
Of course it isn't safe and nor does it have a God- given right to exist. The question is whether its chances of surviving and thriving as an honest, well run and well regulated sector are better in the EU under Cameron's new deal and subject to the rules of the ECB and QMV by eurozone states or outside.
I'm not an expert on the City and am not knowledgable about the City stuff you and others have discussed tonight, so I'll take what you're saying on trust.
However, I do need to point out that I cracked up laughing when I read "honest, well run and well regulated".
It needs to be that - even if it isn't now.
Good luck to you if you think that having Italian politicians and regulators involved in making the rules for the UK will be an improvement. Italy is a country where the securities regulator had to take enforcement action against the governor of the Bank of Italy in relation to his dubious involvement in a highly contested bank takeover.
Large German banks are virtually unregulatable and BaFin, the German regulator, is one of the weakest around. That leaves France: a country once described as being like Italy but without Italian magistrates. See also BNParibas and how it got fined by the US over sanctions busting and money-laundering. Even the French government didn't try hard to defend it.
As I said, I don't know enough about the City to assess the veracity or otherwise of what you speak: in the absence of knowledge of my own I'm willing to take what you say on trust. My original point was that Tosca's contention (that there is no plausible alternative) is prima facie risible.
SCOTLAND is poised to go into debt for the first time in more than three centuries after the SNP Government indicated that it is preparing to use borrowing powers for the first time.
@George_Osborne: This pm we held first formal meeting of Commissioners for Reduction of National Debt in 150 years. See history here: https://t.co/o8dWKmayqY
...said London's status as Europe's financial hub would not be threatened by an exit because there was no "plausible alternative in the western hemisphere"...
I keep forgetting London's status is underwritten by God, and that business cannot possibly go somewhere else because it's still 1650 and we can only travel by mule.
[edt: unfuck tags]
Absolutely, London as a financial centre is as safe as the Birmingham motorcycle industry or the Lancashire cotton trade.
Of course it isn't safe and nor does it have a God- given right to exist. The question is whether its chances of surviving and thriving as an honest, well run and well regulated sector are better in the EU under Cameron's new deal and subject to the rules of the ECB and QMV by eurozone states or outside.
I'm not an expert on the City and am not knowledgable about the City stuff you and others have discussed tonight, so I'll take what you're saying on trust.
However, I do need to point out that I cracked up laughing when I read "honest, well run and well regulated".
It needs to be that - even if it isn't now.
Good luck to you if you think that having Italian politicians and regulators involved in making the rules for the UK will be an improvement. Italy is a country where the securities regulator had to take enforcement action against the governor of the Bank of Italy in relation to his dubious involvement in a highly contested bank takeover.
Large German banks are virtually unregulatable and BaFin, the German regulator, is one of the weakest around. That leaves France: a country once described as being like Italy but without Italian magistrates. See also BNParibas and how it got fined by the US over sanctions busting and money-laundering. Even the French government didn't try hard to defend it.
Whoah. I don't often disagree with you, but BNP did something totally legal in France. It just happened to be in US dollars. I thought they were treated disgracefully.
Standard Chartered were done for sanctions busting by the USA too, and also has a fistful of dodgy assets.
When the house prices drop, and the financial tide goes out we shall find out who has no costume on!
Anyone who thinks that either economics or politics works with such clockwork precision has no idea what they're talking about. I particularly liked his effort to shoehorn 1762 in as the start of the American Revolution, as if it was (1) a great revolutionary year, (2) related to global economic long cycles rather than the SevenYears War, and(3) far more significant than, say, 1775/6, or 1789.
...said London's status as Europe's financial hub would not be threatened by an exit because there was no "plausible alternative in the western hemisphere"...
I keep forgetting London's status is underwritten by God, and that business cannot possibly go somewhere else because it's still 1650 and we can only travel by mule.
[edt: unfuck tags]
Absolutely, London as a financial centre is as safe as the Birmingham motorcycle industry or the Lancashire cotton trade.
Of course it isn't safe and nor does it have a God- given right to exist. The question is whether its chances of surviving and thriving as an honest, well run and well regulated sector are better in the EU under Cameron's new deal and subject to the rules of the ECB and QMV by eurozone states or outside.
I'm not an expert on the City and am not knowledgable about the City stuff you and others have discussed tonight, so I'll take what you're saying on trust.
However, I do need to point out that I cracked up laughing when I read "honest, well run and well regulated".
It needs to be that - even if it isn't now.
Good luck to you if you think that having Italian politicians and regulators involved in making the rules for the UK will be an improvement. Italy is a country where the securities regulator had to take enforcement action against the governor of the Bank of Italy in relation to his dubious involvement in a highly contested bank takeover.
Large German banks are virtually unregulatable and BaFin, the German regulator, is one of the weakest around. That leaves France: a country once described as being like Italy but without Italian magistrates. See also BNParibas and how it got fined by the US over sanctions busting and money-laundering. Even the French government didn't try hard to defend it.
Whoah. I don't often disagree with you, but BNP did something totally legal in France. It just happened to be in US dollars. I thought they were treated disgracefully.
They were repeatedly warned over the years that they were facilitating the financing of terrorism by failing to take appropriate action to tighten up their money laundering procedures. And they ignored those warnings. If they didn't want to be caught by US laws they shouldn't have used the US's currency to do what they were doing. They ignored the warnings because it was too profitable for them. The French government did not strive hard to defend them. And Paribas were treated no worse than other banks which breached US laws.
I just had a dozen oysters at Sheekeys, then their famous smoked haddock frittata, with two bottles of fine Chablis, before watching the truly brilliant production of Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, at the Theatre Royal Drury Lane - all in the company of my giggling nine year old daughter Lucy and her best friend Florence.
They loved it. I loved it. That's it, right there. Happiness.
You can't beat Caprice Group Holdings
I think Sheekeys is quite possible my favourite restaurant in the universe. And I do go to a few. Their oysters are amazing. But the atmos makes it, the conviviality of the oyster bar pre-theatre is just FAB.
And I have visited every oyster bar in London (and plenty further afield) in the last decade.
Sheekeys have nailed it.
It's good, but I (personally) think Le Caprice is their best restaurant.
They were repeatedly warned over the years that they were facilitating the financing of terrorism by failing to take appropriate action to tighten up their money laundering procedures. And they ignored those warnings. If they didn't want to be caught by US laws they shouldn't have used the US's currency to do what they were doing. They ignored the warnings because it was too profitable for them. The French government did not strive hard to defend them. And Paribas were treated no worse than other banks which breached US laws.
Nevertheless, what they did was completely legal where it was done.
SCOTLAND is poised to go into debt for the first time in more than three centuries after the SNP Government indicated that it is preparing to use borrowing powers for the first time.
@George_Osborne: This pm we held first formal meeting of Commissioners for Reduction of National Debt in 150 years. See history here: https://t.co/o8dWKmayqY
Labour just sign up to everything from inside the EEA. Just how dim do you have to be to miss all that. Talk about pissing into the wind! The eu is not going to go away it will still exert sn influence and if it becomes more monolithic it will exert a stronger one. Glorious isolation is not an optipn.
Er they can't. Once again you show your utter lack of understanding of what EEA membership means. EEA involvement with the EU is limited to single market issues and nothing more. Even if they wanted to Labour could not commit us to any of the other areas of EU competancy without us rejoining the EU.
You really are the most willfully ignorant poster on PB.
Ahem.
I recommend Googling:
Norway Schengen Norway EU Emissions Trading System Norway European Asylum Support Office
Us joining the EFTA part of the EEA would fundamentally change it. We would have about 80% of its population and 2/3 or so of its economy. It would be like inviting a grizzly bear to a teddy bears picnic and expecting no spillage.
I just had a dozen oysters at Sheekeys, then their famous smoked haddock frittata, with two bottles of fine Chablis, before watching the truly brilliant production of Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, at the Theatre Royal Drury Lane - all in the company of my giggling nine year old daughter Lucy and her best friend Florence.
They loved it. I loved it. That's it, right there. Happiness.
You can't beat Caprice Group Holdings
I think Sheekeys is quite possible my favourite restaurant in the universe. And I do go to a few. Their oysters are amazing. But the atmos makes it, the conviviality of the oyster bar pre-theatre is just FAB.
And I have visited every oyster bar in London (and plenty further afield) in the last decade.
Sheekeys have nailed it.
It's good, but I (personally) think Le Caprice is their best restaurant.
I love the Caprice, but I adore oysters even more. Hence, perhaps, my preference.
I work next to Caprice, so I'm biased.
There's not a bad restaurant in the Caprice stable. (Ironically the most famous, the Ivy, is probably the worst.)
They were repeatedly warned over the years that they were facilitating the financing of terrorism by failing to take appropriate action to tighten up their money laundering procedures. And they ignored those warnings. If they didn't want to be caught by US laws they shouldn't have used the US's currency to do what they were doing. They ignored the warnings because it was too profitable for them. The French government did not strive hard to defend them. And Paribas were treated no worse than other banks which breached US laws.
Nevertheless, what they did was completely legal where it was done.
The Tom Hayes defence, I see! Sorry - no - they used the US banking system and thus brought themselves within US jurisdiction.
They were repeatedly warned over the years that they were facilitating the financing of terrorism by failing to take appropriate action to tighten up their money laundering procedures. And they ignored those warnings. If they didn't want to be caught by US laws they shouldn't have used the US's currency to do what they were doing. They ignored the warnings because it was too profitable for them. The French government did not strive hard to defend them. And Paribas were treated no worse than other banks which breached US laws.
Nevertheless, what they did was completely legal where it was done.
The Tom Hayes defence, I see! Sorry - no - they used the US banking system and thus brought themselves within US jurisdiction.
My understanding was that they used US dollars. That's not quite the same thing
I just had a dozen oysters at Sheekeys, then their famous smoked haddock frittata, with two bottles of fine Chablis, before watching the truly brilliant production of Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, at the Theatre Royal Drury Lane - all in the company of my giggling nine year old daughter Lucy and her best friend Florence.
They loved it. I loved it. That's it, right there. Happiness.
You can't beat Caprice Group Holdings
I think Sheekeys is quite possible my favourite restaurant in the universe. And I do go to a few. Their oysters are amazing. But the atmos makes it, the conviviality of the oyster bar pre-theatre is just FAB.
And I have visited every oyster bar in London (and plenty further afield) in the last decade.
Sheekeys have nailed it.
It's good, but I (personally) think Le Caprice is their best restaurant.
I love the Caprice, but I adore oysters even more. Hence, perhaps, my preference.
I work next to Caprice, so I'm biased.
There's not a bad restaurant in the Caprice stable. (Ironically the most famous, the Ivy, is probably the worst.)
Agreed. I like the Ivy, but it suffers in comparison.
Sorry to hark back to the previous thread but Richard N there's not a cat in hell's chance that Hunt will get his way with the new contract without major disruption.
Us joining the EFTA part of the EEA would fundamentally change it. We would have about 80% of its population and 2/3 or so of its economy. It would be like inviting a grizzly bear to a teddy bears picnic and expecting no spillage.
This is true, and it's an important consideration for those who think we could just sign up to the EEA (as a non-EU member) without bothering to ask the 30 other countries for their views on the matter. In practice, I'm sure there would have to be some tailoring of the EEA treaties if we were to take that route; as well as our sheer size as an economy, there's the dominance of the City in Europe. However, I'm sure all that could be negotiated relatively quickly (say a couple of years), using the existing EEA agreement as a basis.
The particular point I was addressing was Richard T's bizarre and gratuitously rude post regarding an EEA state opting-in to EU competences outside the EEA agreement. Of course they can do so, if both sides agree, as in Schengen.
Anyone who thinks that either economics or politics works with such clockwork precision has no idea what they're talking about. I particularly liked his effort to shoehorn 1762 in as the start of the American Revolution, as if it was (1) a great revolutionary year, (2) related to global economic long cycles rather than the SevenYears War, and(3) far more significant than, say, 1775/6, or 1789.
I'll let this article from the insitute of American History do the talking, ok 1 year out at 1763:
They were repeatedly warned over the years that they were facilitating the financing of terrorism by failing to take appropriate action to tighten up their money laundering procedures. And they ignored those warnings. If they didn't want to be caught by US laws they shouldn't have used the US's currency to do what they were doing. They ignored the warnings because it was too profitable for them. The French government did not strive hard to defend them. And Paribas were treated no worse than other banks which breached US laws.
Nevertheless, what they did was completely legal where it was done.
The Tom Hayes defence, I see! Sorry - no - they used the US banking system and thus brought themselves within US jurisdiction.
My understanding was that they used US dollars. That's not quite the same thing
Not my understanding. One reason why part of the penalty was that they were shut out of the US payments system for a period of time, a pretty severe penalty and not one which has been imposed on other banks. Paribas really pissed off the US and the clue is in the terrorist financing link, one reason why the French government, after some token chest-beating, kept very quiet and left Paribas to take their punishment.
Sorry to hark back to the previous thread but Richard N there's not a cat in hell's chance that Hunt will get his way with the new contract without major disruption.
I'm sure half of the junior doctors are packing their bags as we speak.
It was a brilliant protest. More people are talking about it on twitter than if he had scored a 14th 147. Mr Hearn wasn't too happy though! The analogy Ronnie drew with a 3k Mercedes was pretty good I thought!
All the polls (online and phone) show a reduction in REMAIN lead OR Increase in LEAVE lead.
And, as I previously mentioned, there are no events in the pipeline that could persuade people onto the REMAIN side, but plenty the other way. Mike has finally cottoned on to this!
And the latest news is the Europe MEPs could vote down the terms of the negotiation for remaining in the EU AFTER the referendum, if it is held in June. Who in their right mind is going to buy such a pig in a poke. They've let the cat out of the bag.
George W Bush sounds incredibly reasonable, measured and moderate in this speech. Just shows how off the wall crazily right wing the GOP race is this year.
Sorry to hark back to the previous thread but Richard N there's not a cat in hell's chance that Hunt will get his way with the new contract without major disruption.
I'm sure half of the junior doctors are packing their bags as we speak.
48% was the figure not taking up junior doctor posts after completing the mandatory F2 year. So about half was correct before imposition. It will be worse this August.
George W Bush sounds incredibly reasonable, measured and moderate in this speech. Just shows how off the wall crazily right wing the GOP race is this year.
Like I've said many times before, poor economic times lead to radical politics on left and right, good economic times lead to everyone converging on the centre ground. Economics drives politics, not the other way around as history all too clearly demonstrates.
Sorry to hark back to the previous thread but Richard N there's not a cat in hell's chance that Hunt will get his way with the new contract without major disruption.
I'm sure half of the junior doctors are packing their bags as we speak.
48% was the figure not taking up junior doctor posts after completing the mandatory F2 year. So about half was correct before imposition. It will be worse this August.
Sorry to hark back to the previous thread but Richard N there's not a cat in hell's chance that Hunt will get his way with the new contract without major disruption.
I'm sure half of the junior doctors are packing their bags as we speak.
48% was the figure not taking up junior doctor posts after completing the mandatory F2 year. So about half was correct before imposition. It will be worse this August.
Sorry to hark back to the previous thread but Richard N there's not a cat in hell's chance that Hunt will get his way with the new contract without major disruption.
I'm sure half of the junior doctors are packing their bags as we speak.
48% was the figure not taking up junior doctor posts after completing the mandatory F2 year. So about half was correct before imposition. It will be worse this August.
Likely Republican presidential primary voters were selected at random from a list of registered voters based on party participation and registration date. Household ages and locations were extracted as well from this list. In excess of 40,000 households were called over the duration of the poll.
1300 respondents, 40,000 households called - why do British polls never put down the number of contacts made to get the respondent no ?
Sorry to hark back to the previous thread but Richard N there's not a cat in hell's chance that Hunt will get his way with the new contract without major disruption.
I'm sure half of the junior doctors are packing their bags as we speak.
48% was the figure not taking up junior doctor posts after completing the mandatory F2 year. So about half was correct before imposition. It will be worse this August.
Labour just sign up to everything from inside the EEA. Just how dim do you have to be to miss all that. Talk about pissing into the wind! The eu is not going to go away it will still exert sn influence and if it becomes more monolithic it will exert a stronger one. Glorious isolation is not an optipn.
Er they can't. Once again you show your utter lack of understanding of what EEA membership means. EEA involvement with the EU is limited to single market issues and nothing more. Even if they wanted to Labour could not commit us to any of the other areas of EU competancy without us rejoining the EU.
You really are the most willfully ignorant poster on PB.
I think Labour votes would be needed to get a EEA bill through the Commons as there would be some number of Conservative ultras who would see it as a betrayal (EU by the backdoor etc). Labour would presumably exact a price for their support and some mechanism would have to be found. EEA membership plus some protocol that committed us to the social chapter or something? It would be the pro-EEA faction that would have to get creative and find a way to meet Labour's price. Otherwise they just sit on their hands and laugh as the Tories leave one European organisation and fail to agree to join another.
I suspect there are enough Labour MPs right now who would vote for EFTA membership even if it meant defying their own party leadership.
Sorry to hark back to the previous thread but Richard N there's not a cat in hell's chance that Hunt will get his way with the new contract without major disruption.
I'm sure half of the junior doctors are packing their bags as we speak.
48% was the figure not taking up junior doctor posts after completing the mandatory F2 year. So about half was correct before imposition. It will be worse this August.
Do you know what % quit the medical profession for good?
Its an increasing one, but hard to measure accuratly. If someone disappears off the medical register it may well be quitting the profession rather than quitting our shores.
Sorry to hark back to the previous thread but Richard N there's not a cat in hell's chance that Hunt will get his way with the new contract without major disruption.
I'm sure half of the junior doctors are packing their bags as we speak.
48% was the figure not taking up junior doctor posts after completing the mandatory F2 year. So about half was correct before imposition. It will be worse this August.
Let me rephrase myself. Half of current junior doctors.
F2 doctors are current junior doctors, and not part of the pay protection in Hunt's scheme. I suspect retention will be about 40% or so.
How can they be junior doctors if the figure was for those "not taking up junior doctor posts"?
Its a breakpoint in the career structure. The first two years are Foundation training (F1 and F2) and both are mandatory for UK practice.
The next set of jobs are the CT or ST posts that train specialists or GPs. It looks like only about 50% stay in training at this point. It was 73% as recently as 2013. It is a pretty major retention crisis, and worth noting is that these are the 2015 figures, pre-dating the current row.
Labour just sign up to everything from inside the EEA. Just how dim do you have to be to miss all that. Talk about pissing into the wind! The eu is not going to go away it will still exert sn influence and if it becomes more monolithic it will exert a stronger one. Glorious isolation is not an optipn.
Er they can't. Once again you show your utter lack of understanding of what EEA membership means. EEA involvement with the EU is limited to single market issues and nothing more. Even if they wanted to Labour could not commit us to any of the other areas of EU competancy without us rejoining the EU.
You really are the most willfully ignorant poster on PB.
I think Labour votes would be needed to get a EEA bill through the Commons as there would be some number of Conservative ultras who would see it as a betrayal (EU by the backdoor etc). Labour would presumably exact a price for their support and some mechanism would have to be found. EEA membership plus some protocol that committed us to the social chapter or something? It would be the pro-EEA faction that would have to get creative and find a way to meet Labour's price. Otherwise they just sit on their hands and laugh as the Tories leave one European organisation and fail to agree to join another.
I suspect there are enough Labour MPs right now who would vote for EFTA membership even if it meant defying their own party leadership.
There may be Labour MPs who would favour EFTA membership but is there a single one who would favour it over the pleasure of seeing the Tories squirming on a hook?
Sorry to hark back to the previous thread but Richard N there's not a cat in hell's chance that Hunt will get his way with the new contract without major disruption.
I'm sure half of the junior doctors are packing their bags as we speak.
48% was the figure not taking up junior doctor posts after completing the mandatory F2 year. So about half was correct before imposition. It will be worse this August.
Do you know what % quit the medical profession for good?
Its an increasing one, but hard to measure accuratly. If someone disappears off the medical register it may well be quitting the profession rather than quitting our shores.
I very much doubt Carson's rump vote will go either to Trump (they will already have jumped ship) or Cruz (Carson now hates Cruz). If they just don't vote, that leaves the Establishment in the lead once they get their act together.
I very much doubt Carson's rump vote will go either to Trump (they will already have jumped ship) or Cruz (Carson now hates Cruz). If they just don't vote, that leaves the Establishment in the lead once they get their act together.
This is going to be a long contest.
That's an interesting perspective and I hope your right. It's way too entertaining to end any time soon.
I just had a dozen oysters at Sheekeys, then their famous smoked haddock frittata, with two bottles of fine Chablis, before watching the truly brilliant production of Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, at the Theatre Royal Drury Lane - all in the company of my giggling nine year old daughter Lucy and her best friend Florence.
They loved it. I loved it. That's it, right there. Happiness.
You can't beat Caprice Group Holdings
I think Sheekeys is quite possible my favourite restaurant in the universe. And I do go to a few. Their oysters are amazing. But the atmos makes it, the conviviality of the oyster bar pre-theatre is just FAB.
And I have visited every oyster bar in London (and plenty further afield) in the last decade.
Sheekeys have nailed it.
It's good, but I (personally) think Le Caprice is their best restaurant.
I love the Caprice, but I adore oysters even more. Hence, perhaps, my preference.
I work next to Caprice, so I'm biased.
There's not a bad restaurant in the Caprice stable. (Ironically the most famous, the Ivy, is probably the worst.)
Doesn't The Economist have their offices in that area?
I very much doubt Carson's rump vote will go either to Trump (they will already have jumped ship) or Cruz (Carson now hates Cruz). If they just don't vote, that leaves the Establishment in the lead once they get their act together.
Labour just sign up to everything from inside the EEA. Just how dim do you have to be to miss all that. Talk about pissing into the wind! The eu is not going to go away it will still exert sn influence and if it becomes more monolithic it will exert a stronger one. Glorious isolation is not an optipn.
Er they can't. Once again you show your utter lack of understanding of what EEA membership means. EEA involvement with the EU is limited to single market issues and nothing more. Even if they wanted to Labour could not commit us to any of the other areas of EU competancy without us rejoining the EU.
You really are the most willfully ignorant poster on PB.
Ahem.
I recommend Googling:
Norway Schengen Norway EU Emissions Trading System Norway European Asylum Support Office
I suggest you look at what I wrote since I was very careful with my wording:
"Labour could not commit us to any of the other areas of EU competency without us rejoining the EU"
Notice that word 'commit'.
All of those agreements you mention - and many more - are voluntary and can be withdrawn from if there is a change of government with a different view. None of them are prerequisites of EEA membership and then either the EEA nor the EU can stop Norway withdrawing from them - unlike anything agreed under EU law from which we do not have a specific opt out./
So I suggest you crawl back under your rock and join Flightpath in trying to learn something about how the EU/EEA work so you don't make yourself look quite so bloody stupid next time.
Us joining the EFTA part of the EEA would fundamentally change it. We would have about 80% of its population and 2/3 or so of its economy. It would be like inviting a grizzly bear to a teddy bears picnic and expecting no spillage.
This is true, and it's an important consideration for those who think we could just sign up to the EEA (as a non-EU member) without bothering to ask the 30 other countries for their views on the matter. In practice, I'm sure there would have to be some tailoring of the EEA treaties if we were to take that route; as well as our sheer size as an economy, there's the dominance of the City in Europe. However, I'm sure all that could be negotiated relatively quickly (say a couple of years), using the existing EEA agreement as a basis.
The particular point I was addressing was Richard T's bizarre and gratuitously rude post regarding an EEA state opting-in to EU competences outside the EEA agreement. Of course they can do so, if both sides agree, as in Schengen.
Read my reply. As always you were utterly wrong. Not that I expect you to admit it. After all you are wrong so often that you probably don't even notice it these days.
You averaged time-dependent data over time? That's like saying I averaged a centenarian's age over the century and on average he was 50 years old: it's true, but it's not helpful.
You averaged time-dependent data over time? That's like saying I averaged a centenarian's age over the century and on average he was 50 years old: it's true, but it's not helpful.
Sorry, I'm in nitpicky mode.
Don't see what your point is. Only a finite number of polls were conducted so far this year.
You averaged time-dependent data over time? That's like saying I averaged a centenarian's age over the century and on average he was 50 years old: it's true, but it's not helpful.
Sorry, I'm in nitpicky mode.
I'm in a good mood because I thought I'd had my laptop stolen from the luggage room of a London hotel and I've just discovered that I haven't lost it after all.
Sorry to hark back to the previous thread but Richard N there's not a cat in hell's chance that Hunt will get his way with the new contract without major disruption.
I'm sure half of the junior doctors are packing their bags as we speak.
48% was the figure not taking up junior doctor posts after completing the mandatory F2 year. So about half was correct before imposition. It will be worse this August.
Let me rephrase myself. Half of current junior doctors.
F2 doctors are current junior doctors, and not part of the pay protection in Hunt's scheme. I suspect retention will be about 40% or so.
How can they be junior doctors if the figure was for those "not taking up junior doctor posts"?
Its a breakpoint in the career structure. The first two years are Foundation training (F1 and F2) and both are mandatory for UK practice.
The next set of jobs are the CT or ST posts that train specialists or GPs. It looks like only about 50% stay in training at this point. It was 73% as recently as 2013. It is a pretty major retention crisis, and worth noting is that these are the 2015 figures, pre-dating the current row.
The solution might be to make the F1 and F2 positions unpaid, with bursaries available and use the money saved to increase salaries above this grade.
You averaged time-dependent data over time? That's like saying I averaged a centenarian's age over the century and on average he was 50 years old: it's true, but it's not helpful.
Sorry, I'm in nitpicky mode.
If changes in opinion are slow, then it is a valid approach
"Corbyn is a Hokey Cokey European. He claims to be “In”, but really he’s “Out”. So over the next few months we’re going to see him shaking it all about. "
Hodges: no idea if he's right but he raised a chuckle anyhow
You averaged time-dependent data over time? That's like saying I averaged a centenarian's age over the century and on average he was 50 years old: it's true, but it's not helpful.
Sorry, I'm in nitpicky mode.
If changes in opinion are slow, then it is a valid approach
Not sure that a 10% change between two polls can be interpreted as a slow change though.
You averaged time-dependent data over time? That's like saying I averaged a centenarian's age over the century and on average he was 50 years old: it's true, but it's not helpful.
Sorry, I'm in nitpicky mode.
If changes in opinion are slow, then it is a valid approach
Not sure that a 10% change between two polls can be interpreted as a slow change though.
Sorry to hark back to the previous thread but Richard N there's not a cat in hell's chance that Hunt will get his way with the new contract without major disruption.
I'm sure half of the junior doctors are packing their bags as we speak.
48% was the figure not taking up junior doctor posts after completing the mandatory F2 year. So about half was correct before imposition. It will be worse this August.
Do you know what % quit the medical profession for good?
The number replying as "left the profession" was 0.3%.
"The remaining trainees had taken a non-service role such as anatomy demonstrator (5.5%), taken a locum appointment for training in the UK (0.5%), or had left the profession (0.3%)"
The rest of the 2015 numbers are:
Straight to speciality training: 52.0% Seeking employment as a doctor in the UK: 8.6%. Non-training (service) role in the UK: 9.2% Career break (travelling, charity I guess): 13.1% Appointment outside UK: 6% Seeking Appointment outside UK: 4.3% Speciality training outside UK: 0.4%
So it looks like we lost just over 10% for however long they stay overseas, and have just over 70% in employment or training in the UK, which will turn into 80% when the career-breakers return.
The survey should be good, as "The survey received 7168 responses from 7533 foundation doctors who were due to complete their foundation training in August 2015, a 95% response rate."
From my BMA-o-sceptic viewpoint, I think that reinforces the point that this is not an existential crisis and the BMA are massively overplaying their hand propaganda-wise, even if there is a valid point smoewhere underneath.
The straight to speciality training numbers have fallen from 71.6% in 2011, but that was the year of the fees Cleggasm, and I would need to see 10 years of numbers, *and* the details of how the make up of the NHS is changing (eg specialist nurses have far more scope now, especially in GP surgeries).
Comments
Chris Grayling - Leader of the House of Commons
Iain Duncan Smith - Work and Pensions Secretary
Priti Patel - Employment Minister
Theresa Villiers - Northern Ireland Secretary
John Whittingdale - Culture Secretary
Who's on the fence?
Sajid Javid - Business Secretary
Michael Gove - Justice Secretary
Theresa May - Home Secretary
Boris Johnson - Mayor of London/Political Cabinet
Liz Truss - Environment Secretary
Michael Fallon - Defence Secretary
Justine Greening - International Development Secretary
Who would vote 'In'
David Cameron - Prime Minister
George Osborne - Chancellor
Philip Hammond - Foreign Secretary
Stephen Crabb - Welsh Secretary
Amber Rudd - Energy Secretary
Greg Clarke - Communities Secretary
Mark Harper - Chief Whip
Anna Soubry - Minister for Small Business
Nicky Morgan - Education Secretary
Patrick McLouglin - Transport Secretary
Jeremy Hunt - Health Secretary
Oliver Letwin - Cabinet Office Minister
Matthew Hancock - Cabinet Office Minister
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/eureferendum/12158702/David-Cameron-set-to-call-EU-referendum-on-Friday-after-backing-down-over-Cabinet-gag.html?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
I recommend Googling:
Norway Schengen
Norway EU Emissions Trading System
Norway European Asylum Support Office
You might then care to apologise to @flightpath01
The German reinsurance market is one of the few financial sectors in the EU that has stood up to London.
Meanwhile
@George_Osborne: This pm we held first formal meeting of Commissioners for Reduction of National Debt in 150 years. See history here: https://t.co/o8dWKmayqY
When the house prices drop, and the financial tide goes out we shall find out who has no costume on!
They were repeatedly warned over the years that they were facilitating the financing of terrorism by failing to take appropriate action to tighten up their money laundering procedures. And they ignored those warnings. If they didn't want to be caught by US laws they shouldn't have used the US's currency to do what they were doing. They ignored the warnings because it was too profitable for them. The French government did not strive hard to defend them. And Paribas were treated no worse than other banks which breached US laws.
Meanwhile
@George_Osborne: This pm we held first formal meeting of Commissioners for Reduction of National Debt in 150 years. See history here: https://t.co/o8dWKmayqY
More "Borrow and Spend" than "Tax and Spend".
http://video.foxnews.com/v/2553565088001/jeb-bush-holds-a-rally-with-pres-george-w-bush-in-north-charleston-sc/?#sp=watch-live
There's not a bad restaurant in the Caprice stable. (Ironically the most famous, the Ivy, is probably the worst.)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/snooker/35581281
The Tom Hayes defence, I see! Sorry - no - they used the US banking system and thus brought themselves within US jurisdiction.
How would you feel about the Eurozone saying that things that involved Euros in London were subject to EU laws?
How would such laws be arrived at? Unanimity or QMV?
Trump 37
Cruz 23
Rubio 19
Jeb 9
http://www.oann.com/pollsc/
The particular point I was addressing was Richard T's bizarre and gratuitously rude post regarding an EEA state opting-in to EU competences outside the EEA agreement. Of course they can do so, if both sides agree, as in Schengen.
https://www.gilderlehrman.org/history-by-era/essays/american-revolution-1763–1783
Trump 32.7% (-1.8)
Rubio 14.0% (+1.5)
Cruz 13.9% (-1.6)
Bush 13.4% (+0.4)
Kasich 9.8% (+1.3)
Carson 5.8%
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B4lhKxf9pMitY1A1OExNSnNrNmM/view
And, as I previously mentioned, there are no events in the pipeline that could persuade people onto the REMAIN side, but plenty the other way. Mike has finally cottoned on to this!
And the latest news is the Europe MEPs could vote down the terms of the negotiation for remaining in the EU AFTER the referendum, if it is held in June. Who in their right mind is going to buy such a pig in a poke. They've let the cat out of the bag.
"We've taken a decision that we have been pro-European" Emma Reynolds MP on Lab not to debate IN/OUT intra-party
BBC Newsnight ✔ @BBCNewsnight
"Several" EU OUTers in shadow cabinet: according to Eurosceptic Labour donor John Mills #Newsnight #EU
http://careers.bmj.com/careers/advice/Nearly_half_of_trainees_chose_not_to_progress_straight_to_specialty_training_in_2015
http://video.foxnews.com/v/2553565088001/jeb-bush-holds-a-rally-with-pres-george-w-bush-in-north-charleston-sc/?#sp=watch-live
voters based on party participation and registration date. Household ages and locations were
extracted as well from this list. In excess of 40,000 households were called over the duration
of the poll.
1300 respondents, 40,000 households called - why do British polls never put down the number of contacts made to get the respondent no ?
The next set of jobs are the CT or ST posts that train specialists or GPs. It looks like only about 50% stay in training at this point. It was 73% as recently as 2013. It is a pretty major retention crisis, and worth noting is that these are the 2015 figures, pre-dating the current row.
http://video.foxnews.com/v/2553565088001/jeb-bush-holds-a-rally-with-pres-george-w-bush-in-north-charleston-sc/?#sp=watch-live
Looks like Squeaky Osborne has got lucky again.
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/02/japanese-gambler-donald-trump-213635
Thanks to Speedy for mentioning Trump and Japan a few days ago.
I very much doubt Carson's rump vote will go either to Trump (they will already have jumped ship) or Cruz (Carson now hates Cruz). If they just don't vote, that leaves the Establishment in the lead once they get their act together.
This is going to be a long contest.
Reason I ask is surely the key now is whether Trump can build a big delegate lead before the Establishment candidates are reduced to one.
But you can only build a big delegate lead relatively early on (say after 15 states) by winning Winner Takes All states.
Remain 44%
Leave 41%
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republican_Party_presidential_primaries,_2016
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republican_Party_presidential_primaries,_2016
https://today.yougov.com/news/2015/12/28/trump-still-ahead-cruz-gains/
I suggest you look at what I wrote since I was very careful with my wording:
"Labour could not commit us to any of the other areas of EU competency without us rejoining the EU"
Notice that word 'commit'.
All of those agreements you mention - and many more - are voluntary and can be withdrawn from if there is a change of government with a different view. None of them are prerequisites of EEA membership and then either the EEA nor the EU can stop Norway withdrawing from them - unlike anything agreed under EU law from which we do not have a specific opt out./
So I suggest you crawl back under your rock and join Flightpath in trying to learn something about how the EU/EEA work so you don't make yourself look quite so bloody stupid next time.
Sorry, I'm in nitpicky mode.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/universityeducation/12158352/The-intolerant-student-Left-has-even-turned-on-me-a-lifelong-civil-rights-campaigner.html
Hodges: no idea if he's right but he raised a chuckle anyhow
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/Jeremy_Corbyn/12158633/Why-Jeremy-Corbyn-could-privately-support-Brexit.html
btw as an overseas voter, do you reckon i get a vote in this referendum?
Not sure that a 10% change between two polls can be interpreted as a slow change though.
"The remaining trainees had taken a non-service role such as anatomy demonstrator (5.5%), taken a locum appointment for training in the UK (0.5%), or had left the profession (0.3%)"
The rest of the 2015 numbers are:
Straight to speciality training: 52.0%
Seeking employment as a doctor in the UK: 8.6%.
Non-training (service) role in the UK: 9.2%
Career break (travelling, charity I guess): 13.1%
Appointment outside UK: 6%
Seeking Appointment outside UK: 4.3%
Speciality training outside UK: 0.4%
So it looks like we lost just over 10% for however long they stay overseas, and have just over 70% in employment or training in the UK, which will turn into 80% when the career-breakers return.
The survey should be good, as "The survey received 7168 responses from 7533 foundation doctors who were due to complete their foundation training in August 2015, a 95% response rate."
From my BMA-o-sceptic viewpoint, I think that reinforces the point that this is not an existential crisis and the BMA are massively overplaying their hand propaganda-wise, even if there is a valid point smoewhere underneath.
The straight to speciality training numbers have fallen from 71.6% in 2011, but that was the year of the fees Cleggasm, and I would need to see 10 years of numbers, *and* the details of how the make up of the NHS is changing (eg specialist nurses have far more scope now, especially in GP surgeries).
http://careers.bmj.com/careers/advice/Nearly_half_of_trainees_chose_not_to_progress_straight_to_specialty_training_in_2015