I don't think much of UNITE, the union, but the action this day is in Egypt, where according to Sky News a military coup is underway. Reports that Morsi being prevented from leaving the country.
Has there been a recorded case of anyone in the UK starving to death snce 2010..apparently there seems to be a number in NHS hospitals in Staffordshire prior to that date..it was called severe malnutrition..sick people who could not feed themselves in hospital.
Food banks and overcrowded classes are ignored by the PM, who prefers to talk about Len McCluskey. Hmmm
It is not demand for food banks that has gone up, it is supply. Once you give something for nothing, it's not surprising that people start taking it up, especially if there's little or no local social stigma to doing so.
Blimey. That famous Tory empathy with the less fortunate on full display on PB today.
Yep, queues of grasping scroungers, who have plenty of money for food but fancy a free tin of nearly out of date tuna on top, lining up for a free lunch. That's EXACTLY how food banks work.
Though, of course, the charities concerned say themselves that demand is soaring because more and more people don't have enough money for food. Which, given that these poor souls are referrals by poverty charities or health workers, kinda makes sense. Perhaps they're all Labour stooges, eh.
And what is the great solution that Labour is offering the country? What are the easy answers that they wont tell us about? Surely the best way to help those facing tough times is to get the economy growing again. Which is precisely what the Coalition is doing, much to the chagrin of the opposition no doubt.
Well the easy answer that seems to be coming from pbtories is that it is the fault of food banks opening that causes people to use them . No doubt you would be happier if they were all closed and the poor starved out of sight behind closed doors .
my children at uni use foodbanks because they can't afford the Lib Dem fees.
Hey, it's a coalition. Dave lied on the NHS reorganisation, Clegg on tuition fees. The Lib Dems didn't force Date Night to break his word on the NHS.
well they all admire Tony so what do you expect ?
Could somebody tell Andy Murray to turn up to his match ?
Food banks and overcrowded classes are ignored by the PM, who prefers to talk about Len McCluskey. Hmmm
It is not demand for food banks that has gone up, it is supply. Once you give something for nothing, it's not surprising that people start taking it up, especially if there's little or no local social stigma to doing so.
Blimey. That famous Tory empathy with the less fortunate on full display on PB today.
Yep, queues of grasping scroungers, who have plenty of money for food but fancy a free tin of nearly out of date tuna on top, lining up for a free lunch. That's EXACTLY how food banks work.
Though, of course, the charities concerned say themselves that demand is soaring because more and more people don't have enough money for food. Which, given that these poor souls are referrals by poverty charities or health workers, kinda makes sense. Perhaps they're all Labour stooges, eh.
And what is the great solution that Labour is offering the country? What are the easy answers that they wont tell us about? Surely the best way to help those facing tough times is to get the economy growing again. Which is precisely what the Coalition is doing, much to the chagrin of the opposition no doubt.
Well the easy answer that seems to be coming from pbtories is that it is the fault of food banks opening that causes people to use them . No doubt you would be happier if they were all closed and the poor starved out of sight behind closed doors .
my children at uni use foodbanks because they can't afford the Lib Dem fees.
Well you should hope Max and TGOHF don't get their way and shut them all down .
Food banks and overcrowded classes are ignored by the PM, who prefers to talk about Len McCluskey. Hmmm
It is not demand for food banks that has gone up, it is supply. Once you give something for nothing, it's not surprising that people start taking it up, especially if there's little or no local social stigma to doing so.
Blimey. That famous Tory empathy with the less fortunate on full display on PB today.
Yep, queues of grasping scroungers, who have plenty of money for food but fancy a free tin of nearly out of date tuna on top, lining up for a free lunch. That's EXACTLY how food banks work.
Though, of course, the charities concerned say themselves that demand is soaring because more and more people don't have enough money for food. Which, given that these poor souls are referrals by poverty charities or health workers, kinda makes sense. Perhaps they're all Labour stooges, eh.
And what is the great solution that Labour is offering the country? What are the easy answers that they wont tell us about? Surely the best way to help those facing tough times is to get the economy growing again. Which is precisely what the Coalition is doing, much to the chagrin of the opposition no doubt.
Well the easy answer that seems to be coming from pbtories is that it is the fault of food banks opening that causes people to use them . No doubt you would be happier if they were all closed and the poor starved out of sight behind closed doors .
my children at uni use foodbanks because they can't afford the Lib Dem fees.
Well you should hope Max and TGOHF don't get their way and shut them all down .
Where did I suggest that should be done Mark. Direct qoute please. You're clearly either a fantasist or a liar.
Food banks and overcrowded classes are ignored by the PM, who prefers to talk about Len McCluskey. Hmmm
It is not demand for food banks that has gone up, it is supply. Once you give something for nothing, it's not surprising that people start taking it up, especially if there's little or no local social stigma to doing so.
Blimey. That famous Tory empathy with the less fortunate on full display on PB today.
Yep, queues of grasping scroungers, who have plenty of money for food but fancy a free tin of nearly out of date tuna on top, lining up for a free lunch. That's EXACTLY how food banks work.
Though, of course, the charities concerned say themselves that demand is soaring because more and more people don't have enough money for food. Which, given that these poor souls are referrals by poverty charities or health workers, kinda makes sense. Perhaps they're all Labour stooges, eh.
And what is the great solution that Labour is offering the country? What are the easy answers that they wont tell us about? Surely the best way to help those facing tough times is to get the economy growing again. Which is precisely what the Coalition is doing, much to the chagrin of the opposition no doubt.
Well the easy answer that seems to be coming from pbtories is that it is the fault of food banks opening that causes people to use them . No doubt you would be happier if they were all closed and the poor starved out of sight behind closed doors .
my children at uni use foodbanks because they can't afford the Lib Dem fees.
Well you should hope Max and TGOHF don't get their way and shut them all down .
Where did I suggest that should be done Mark. Direct qoute please. You're clearly either a fantasist or a liar.
Food banks and overcrowded classes are ignored by the PM, who prefers to talk about Len McCluskey. Hmmm
It is not demand for food banks that has gone up, it is supply. Once you give something for nothing, it's not surprising that people start taking it up, especially if there's little or no local social stigma to doing so.
Blimey. That famous Tory empathy with the less fortunate on full display on PB today.
Yep, queues of grasping scroungers, who have plenty of money for food but fancy a free tin of nearly out of date tuna on top, lining up for a free lunch. That's EXACTLY how food banks work.
Though, of course, the charities concerned say themselves that demand is soaring because more and more people don't have enough money for food. Which, given that these poor souls are referrals by poverty charities or health workers, kinda makes sense. Perhaps they're all Labour stooges, eh.
And what is the great solution that Labour is offering the country? What are the easy answers that they wont tell us about? Surely the best way to help those facing tough times is to get the economy growing again. Which is precisely what the Coalition is doing, much to the chagrin of the opposition no doubt.
Well the easy answer that seems to be coming from pbtories is that it is the fault of food banks opening that causes people to use them . No doubt you would be happier if they were all closed and the poor starved out of sight behind closed doors .
my children at uni use foodbanks because they can't afford the Lib Dem fees.
Well you should hope Max and TGOHF don't get their way and shut them all down .
Bit of a lie that Mark -on the contrary they are an excellent example of Dave's big society.
Nice to see Lib Dems praising their coalition partners policies.
I know this sounds incredibly simplistic and naive, but what are the downsides for the Egyptian people of Egypt coming under military rule?
Isn't miltary rule better than the way they were heading, ie: sharia rule?
Let's be honest, and again, mind my naivety, but countries like Egypt/Syria/Libya/Iraq (name your desert-land) must be light-years away from achieving democracies such as ours. Sad though it is. So I think I'd take military law over one which shoots my daughter in the head for daring to read a book.
Food banks and overcrowded classes are ignored by the PM, who prefers to talk about Len McCluskey. Hmmm
It is not demand for food banks that has gone up, it is supply. Once you give something for nothing, it's not surprising that people start taking it up, especially if there's little or no local social stigma to doing so.
Blimey. That famous Tory empathy with the less fortunate on full display on PB today.
Yep, queues of grasping scroungers, who have plenty of money for food but fancy a free tin of nearly out of date tuna on top, lining up for a free lunch. That's EXACTLY how food banks work.
Though, of course, the charities concerned say themselves that demand is soaring because more and more people don't have enough money for food. Which, given that these poor souls are referrals by poverty charities or health workers, kinda makes sense. Perhaps they're all Labour stooges, eh.
And what is the great solution that Labour is offering the country? What are the easy answers that they wont tell us about? Surely the best way to help those facing tough times is to get the economy growing again. Which is precisely what the Coalition is doing, much to the chagrin of the opposition no doubt.
Well the easy answer that seems to be coming from pbtories is that it is the fault of food banks opening that causes people to use them . No doubt you would be happier if they were all closed and the poor starved out of sight behind closed doors .
my children at uni use foodbanks because they can't afford the Lib Dem fees.
Well you should hope Max and TGOHF don't get their way and shut them all down .
Bit of a lie that Mark -on the contrary they are an excellent example of Dave's big society.
Nice to see Lib Dems praising their coalition partners policies.
The task of the Lib Dems in government is to stop the Conservatives implementing the right wing loony policies that you and others espouse on here .
What was Southam saying about cheap attack lines rather than policy?
Isn't SO a strong advocate for the restoration of grammar schools? It is increasingly difficult to discern whether he or 'cut benefits' tim is more the right-wing loon. Quite disconcerting.
When do you win your free school bet with tim? Can we regard it as the first installment for the second pbTory cocktail extravaganza? Also I'd like to see if I can manage Swansea as a temporary berth next time.
Food banks and overcrowded classes are ignored by the PM, who prefers to talk about Len McCluskey. Hmmm
It is not demand for food banks that has gone up, it is supply. Once you give something for nothing, it's not surprising that people start taking it up, especially if there's little or no local social stigma to doing so.
Blimey. That famous Tory empathy with the less fortunate on full display on PB today.
Yep, queues of grasping scroungers, who have plenty of money for food but fancy a free tin of nearly out of date tuna on top, lining up for a free lunch. That's EXACTLY how food banks work.
Though, of course, the charities concerned say themselves that demand is soaring because more and more people don't have enough money for food. Which, given that these poor souls are referrals by poverty charities or health workers, kinda makes sense. Perhaps they're all Labour stooges, eh.
And what is the great solution that Labour is offering the country? What are the easy answers that they wont tell us about? Surely the best way to help those facing tough times is to get the economy growing again. Which is precisely what the Coalition is doing, much to the chagrin of the opposition no doubt.
Well the easy answer that seems to be coming from pbtories is that it is the fault of food banks opening that causes people to use them . No doubt you would be happier if they were all closed and the poor starved out of sight behind closed doors .
my children at uni use foodbanks because they can't afford the Lib Dem fees.
Well you should hope Max and TGOHF don't get their way and shut them all down .
Bit of a lie that Mark -on the contrary they are an excellent example of Dave's big society.
Nice to see Lib Dems praising their coalition partners policies.
The task of the Lib Dems in government is to stop the Conservatives implementing the right wing loony policies that you and others espouse on here .
Eds briefing notes are really truly astounding..total nonsense.. and this fella wants to run the country..and those notes are all he can come up with.. pathetic..
When do you win your free school bet with tim? Can we regard it as the first installment for the second pbTory cocktail extravaganza? Also I'd like to see if I can manage Swansea as a temporary berth next time.
September, IIRC. Of course tim might admit defeat and do a Paddy Power...
I 'm sure we can manage another cocktail extravaganza, although the Nabavi cellar is also in need of some Labour investment.
Eds briefing notes are really truly astounding..total nonsense.. and this fella wants to run the country..and those notes are all he can come up with.. pathetic..
Somebody goes to the bother of typing yah boo sucks. Cameron's will be just the same, PMQ is a total waste of time.
I 'm sure we can manage another cocktail extravaganza, although the Nabavi cellar is also in need of some Labour investment.
Sadly I dont have any outstanding bets due to pay out until the next GE. I tried to get tim to bet that the Tories would be bigger housing benefit junkies than Labour were but he wasnt biting. He's slowly learning!
Good to see tim and SO trawl through the NAO and other parliamentary publications to try to find supporting evidence for DOE negligence under Gove and Laws.
The fact remains that there would have been no problem had Ed Balls, when Education Secretary, recognised the upcoming capacity problems and had he taken steps to allocate resources in time for the extra places to be made available when needed.
The failure to identify the cause of the problem and to take action to avert it is at the root of the subsequent and costly exception management.
Unlike Boris I don't think Balls can predict where the next babies in London are going to be conceived. The DoE has had the infomation since Sept 2010, but was busy with other things.
tim
You need to reattend primary school to brush up on your arithmetic skills.
Children must attend primary school from the September following their 5th birthday. Four year olds may optionally attend on the same qualification basis.
So for reception in September 2013, the five year olds must have been born in or before August 2008 and the four year olds a year later in 2009.
Reliable birth statistics indicating a rising demand for primary school places will have been available to Ed Balls from late 2008. Balls failed to respond adequately and consequently the problem was shifted onto to incoming the Coalition government nearly two years later. The problem was aggravated by Balls's failure to take timely action.
All this UNITE malarkey is most amusing - I missed this bit
"Unite has threatened legal action against Labour, saying it has been a victim of a "smear campaign" and an attempt by the party to impose a candidate from Westminster." http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-23166053
And now they're saying:
norman smith @BBCNormanS Len McLuskey statement:"There can be absolutely no question about who runs the Labour Party. It is Ed Miliband and he has my full support"
I 'm sure we can manage another cocktail extravaganza, although the Nabavi cellar is also in need of some Labour investment.
Sadly I dont have any outstanding bets due to pay out until the next GE. I tried to get tim to bet that the Tories would be bigger housing benefit junkies than Labour were but he wasnt biting. He's slowly learning!
Me too (and I've just lost £50 to Mr Kelly - Hi James, I know you're out there looking in through the steel railings - on the franchise for the Scottish referendum.
I guess we'll have to be Dr. N's benefit junkies. I wonder if he can provide the food bank too.
If Cameron's sole aim at PMQs were to impress the voters, going on about UNITE would be a failure, but it isn't.
There are three things Cameron wants to do at PMQs: impress the voters, reassure his back benches, and unnerve the opposition. If he can do all three at once, that's great, but it's seldom possible. Success at any one is still success.
Today, he seemed to be concentrating on unnerving Labour - repeatedly raising UNITE in an attempt to make Labour backbenchers feel they're on dodgy ground.
Whether or not they were rattled I couldn't say, but if they were, it won't matter that the typical voter wasn't impressed. It's not as if there's much chance of them remembering this week's PMQs come the next election.
"Equally debatable is the impact of party leaders. True, the Tories still managed to snatch power in 1970 and 1979 with leaders who were far less popular than the Labour premiers they were up against. But many psephologists would argue that leadership evaluations are more important drivers of voting today than they were back then, in which case Labour has some cause for concern. Ed Miliband might not trail David Cameron by much when it comes to people being asked who would make the best Prime Minister. But if we use Lord Ashcroft’s latest mega-poll and put together their relative scores on being seen as "strong", as "competent", as "decisive" and as "up to the job", then Cameron’s lead is above 10 per cent across all social classes and English regions.
The same poll also gives the Conservatives a few more reasons to be cheerful in that it hints that they might be doing better among some important groups of voters – for example, those living in the Midlands and those working in the growing private rather than the shrinking public sector – than their overall score would lead us to think.
That said, it looks as if the highly-prized C2 voters are still very much up for grabs. Which of the two main parties they plump for may well decide whether Labour or the Tories emerge from the next election as the largest party. Whether either of the two main parties can come out of it with a working, let alone a comfortable majority, however, looks doubtful at best. Hung parliament (take two) here we come."
If Cameron's sole aim at PMQs were to impress the voters, going on about UNITE would be a failure, but it isn't.
There are three things Cameron wants to do at PMQs: impress the voters, reassure his back benches, and unnerve the opposition. If he can do all three at once, that's great, but it's seldom possible. Success at any one is still success.
Today, he seemed to be concentrating on unnerving Labour - repeatedly raising UNITE in an attempt to make Labour backbenchers feel they're on dodgy ground.
Whether or not they were rattled I couldn't say, but if they were, it won't matter that the typical voter wasn't impressed. It's not as if there's much chance of them remembering this week's PMQs come the next election.
Given the 'oh this is a fuss about nothing', 'he mentioned UNITE too much', blah blah and then UNITE actually sticking out a We Have Complete Confidence In EdM press release - I'd call that 10/10 rattled.
Most amusing regardless of what the long term if any impact it has.
His PPS leaving the briefing notes in the bog are just icing on the cake of woe :^ )
I see heads are rolling all by themselves in Tameside.
"The two most senior managers at a hospital investigated for high death rates have resigned from their jobs.
The resignations were announced on the day it emerged Tameside Hospital had been criticised for its poor patient care by two independent reviews.
Christine Green, chief executive of Tameside Hospital Trust, has left her job while Medical Director Tariq Mahmood has also stepped down. Tameside is one of 14 hospitals under scrutiny for its high death rates.
A trust spokesman said Mr Mahmood had offered his resignation three months ago, for family reasons, but the trust delayed its announcement until a replacement was found...Ms Green, who has been chief executive since 1988, decided to resign last week after finalising plans for a "listening exercise" to hear what local people and groups such as GPs thought of the hospital." http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-23164723
If Cameron's sole aim at PMQs were to impress the voters, going on about UNITE would be a failure, but it isn't.
There are three things Cameron wants to do at PMQs: impress the voters, reassure his back benches, and unnerve the opposition. If he can do all three at once, that's great, but it's seldom possible. Success at any one is still success.
Today, he seemed to be concentrating on unnerving Labour - repeatedly raising UNITE in an attempt to make Labour backbenchers feel they're on dodgy ground.
Whether or not they were rattled I couldn't say, but if they were, it won't matter that the typical voter wasn't impressed. It's not as if there's much chance of them remembering this week's PMQs come the next election.
Call me old fashioned but I have always thought PMQ were for the opposition leaders to ask questions and get answers from the PM of the day . For the PM to ignore those questions and follow an agenda of his own is contrary to accepted parliamentary procedure and should have been stamped on by the Speaker . I do accept that my view may not be representative of the general public most of whom take no interest or notice of PMQs at all .
The Markit Composite Output Index for the Eurozone countries was published today. It confirmed that the Eurozone has now been in recession for seven consecutive quarters.
The Markit Eurozone PMI Composite Output Index rose to 48.7 in June, up from May's reading of 47.7, indicating a further easing in the rate of contraction (readings above 50 indicate expansion in activity) in economic output to a 15 month low. The figure was revised downwards from the preliminary estimate of 48.9 and signaled that overall activity has now fallen for the last 17 months.
A small glimpse of light is that the rates of decline are attenuating. Spain in particular declined at its slowest rate for two years, with both Italy and France with less impressive but still slowing contraction. The problem is Germany, traditionally the engine of Eurozone growth.
Chris Williamson, Chief Economist of Markit, noting that it was difficult to detect growth drivers in the German economy, commented:
“This suggests that the pace of economic expansion for the region as a whole is likely to remain subdued until business confidence improves further and unemployment starts falling from its alarming record high of 12.2%.”
if the EZ is still going down the pan now would be the time to put some countermeasures in place to ensure it doesn't hit the UK. Unfortunately we've got George in the way.
Alanbrooke.. PMQ notes The difference is that the LOTO gets to ask the questions..on any subject..and this is what he and all of his advisers came up with..truly pathetic.
if the EZ is still going down the pan now would be the time to put some countermeasures in place to ensure it doesn't hit the UK. Unfortunately we've got George in the way.
I am not sure the EZ is going down the pan, Mr Brooke. Semi-submerged but still floating would be a better description.
if the EZ is still going down the pan now would be the time to put some countermeasures in place to ensure it doesn't hit the UK. Unfortunately we've got George in the way.
I am not sure the EZ is going down the pan, Mr Brooke. Semi-submerged but still floating would be a better description.
Eds briefing notes are really truly astounding..total nonsense.. and this fella wants to run the country..and those notes are all he can come up with.. pathetic..
Somebody goes to the bother of typing yah boo sucks. Cameron's will be just the same, PMQ is a total waste of time.
Dave's read
Len McCluskey Unite Date Night Len McCluskey Unite Date Night Len McCluskey Unite Date Night Len McCluskey Unite Date Night Len McCluskey Unite Come on Andy Len McCluskey Unite Date Night Len McCluskey Unite Date Night Len McCluskey Unite Date Night Len McCluskey Unite Date Night Pasty Large One Len McCluskey Unite Date Night Len McCluskey Unite Date Night Len McCluskey Unite Date Night Lock and Load Len McCluskey Unite Date Night One Up The Spout Len McCluskey Unite Date Night
Tim, you're not genuinelly criticising someone for being repetitive! Imagine banging on about the same subject over and over and over again.
Alanbrooke.. PMQ notes The difference is that the LOTO gets to ask the questions..on any subject..and this is what he and all of his advisers came up with..truly pathetic.
I think it's a bit scarier than that. Is he afraid ? embarrassed ? about his party and its policies, he's not even taking a high level position on what Labour is about. It's just drifting wood which has nothing coherent to hold it together. There was a time when you knew what Labour was about, you didn't have to like it but they had the courage to say it and with pride. Now it's just mulch and spinelessness. What's the point of Labour ?
Why do people on here point out how many posts Tim does, yet, looking down the page most of you are asking him questions or quoting him? Surely, if you weren't asking him so many questions, there wouldn't be so many posts?
Why do people on here point out how many posts Tim does, yet, looking down the page most of you are asking him questions or quoting him? Surely, if you weren't asking him so many questions, there wouldn't be so many posts?
tell you what RR let's give tim a night off - good tennis match - why don't you explain what Labour would do on the economy if in office ?
His PPS leaving the briefing notes in the bog are just icing on the cake of woe :^ )
There seems to be some confusion.
Did Ed leave his notes in a toilet, or did he get his notes from things written on a toilet wall?
That reminds me of the funniest bit of toilet graffiti I've ever seen (Edinburgh University Library, third floor). Someone had written the always hilarious "I shagged yer maw".
Underneath this (written I'm guessing by a genius with a PhD) was scrawled the immortal line "Go home Dad, you're drunk"!
Why do people on here point out how many posts Tim does, yet, looking down the page most of you are asking him questions or quoting him? Surely, if you weren't asking him so many questions, there wouldn't be so many posts?
tell you what RR let's give tim a night off - good tennis match - why don't you explain what Labour would do on the economy if in office ?
I don't need to. There are so many on here who think they already know and repeatedly tell Tim what will happen day after day, hour after hour, I would be just going over old ground. In fact they repeat it so often, you would think Mr Cameron must be following the same line regards Unite.
His PPS leaving the briefing notes in the bog are just icing on the cake of woe :^ )
There seems to be some confusion.
Did Ed leave his notes in a toilet, or did he get his notes from things written on a toilet wall?
That reminds me of the funniest bit of toilet graffiti I've ever seen (Edinburgh University Library, third floor). Someone had written the always hilarious "I shagged yer maw".
Underneath this (written I'm guessing by a genius with a PhD) was scrawled the immortal line "Go home Dad, you're drunk"!
ooh toilet grafitti - most of it's bordering on Moderator territory, this is a family blog after all. I don't think OGH would want anything that would startle the innocence of Junior :-)
Why do people on here point out how many posts Tim does, yet, looking down the page most of you are asking him questions or quoting him? Surely, if you weren't asking him so many questions, there wouldn't be so many posts?
tell you what RR let's give tim a night off - good tennis match - why don't you explain what Labour would do on the economy if in office ?
I don't need to. There are so many on here who think they already know and repeatedly tell Tim what will happen day after day, hour after hour, I would be just going over old ground.
You mean you can't. No need to be embarrassed about it, it's just where Labour are bankrupt of ideas.
Two years out I don't think I could tell you how any of the parties would do on the economy. I would say ask the OBR, however, they are so poor at predictions you would get a better chance of being advised correctly if you looked at tea leaves at the bottom of a cup. Maybe the O.B.R. should recruit on here seeing so many of you can see into the future, you lot couldn't be any worse...surely?
Two years out I don't think I could tell you how any of the parties would do on the economy. I would say ask the OBR, however, they are so poor at predictions you would get a better chance of being advised correctly if you looked at tea leaves at the bottom of a cup. Maybe the O.B.R. should recruit on here seeing so many of you can see into the future, you lot couldn't be any worse...surely?
Two years out ? Economic policy isn't about election gimmicks, economic policies are long term plays and take between 2-5 years to have effect . If you don't know what you'd do now then you'll still be clueless in 2015, but with a big bag of meaningless gimmicks. As I said bankrupt of ideas,
Two years out I don't think I could tell you how any of the parties would do on the economy. I would say ask the OBR, however, they are so poor at predictions you would get a better chance of being advised correctly if you looked at tea leaves at the bottom of a cup. Maybe the O.B.R. should recruit on here seeing so many of you can see into the future, you lot couldn't be any worse...surely?
Two years out ? Economic policy isn't about election gimmicks, economic policies are long term plays and take between 2-5 years to have effect . If you don't know what you'd do now then you'll still be clueless in 2015, but with a big bag of meaningless gimmicks. As I said bankrupt of ideas,
Here's the core of Labours economic policy
@faisalislam: with £120bn planned spend on housing benefit over next 5 years, could pay for construction of 1.2m homes* http://t.co/PEYsUatfsH
So faisal islam is now setting out Labour policy ?. I thought it was George Osborne. Shouldn't the two Eds maybe give it a try ?
Use the money that Subprime George is leveraging into a housing bubble as well, and phase down housing benefit.
He's not. It's a contingent liability.
You'll have to do better than that. What you're actually saying is that you want to borrow an additional £50bn or so, maybe more. Good luck with persuading the markets that that is a good idea.
Two years out I don't think I could tell you how any of the parties would do on the economy. I would say ask the OBR, however, they are so poor at predictions you would get a better chance of being advised correctly if you looked at tea leaves at the bottom of a cup. Maybe the O.B.R. should recruit on here seeing so many of you can see into the future, you lot couldn't be any worse...surely?
Two years out ? Economic policy isn't about election gimmicks, economic policies are long term plays and take between 2-5 years to have effect . If you don't know what you'd do now then you'll still be clueless in 2015, but with a big bag of meaningless gimmicks. As I said bankrupt of ideas,
Here's the core of Labours economic policy
@faisalislam: with £120bn planned spend on housing benefit over next 5 years, could pay for construction of 1.2m homes* http://t.co/PEYsUatfsH
Aside from the ludicrous idea that Labour would actually do this after their infantile Pathfinder Project, let us look at the figures:
£120 billion for 1.2 million 'homes' gives £100,000 per home. Considering the average house price in the UK is currently over £230,000 (1), you are looking at some rather cheap houses.
It would be interesting to see if the figure has been pulled out of someone's backside (or found in a Hoc toilet) or is realistic, and whether it includes all the extras: land purchase, roads, services, facilities etc. Also of interest would be the timescales involved.
In fact, it would be interesting to see the quality of such homes and whether anyone would want to live in them.
No doubt it was the Cam tweet that won it !! Seriously though what a match that was.have to say I thought Murray was a gonner.Great great credit to him for fighting his way out of that. I also have to say though that he never needed to be in that position in the first place. he was pretty much dross in the 1st Set in particular.Howver all's well that ends well.
@faisalislam: with £120bn planned spend on housing benefit over next 5 years, could pay for construction of 1.2m homes* http://t.co/PEYsUatfsH
Good idea, tim.
The only thing is - how do the people currently on housing benefit, from whom this £120bn would be taken, manage in the meantime?
Use the money that Subprime George is leveraging into a housing bubble as well, and phase down housing benefit.
Tory benefit junkies will hate it as much as they'll hate a living wage which cuts benefits payment. Because remember Richard, Thatcher, Major and Cameron, all Tories are the same in creating new benefit spending peaks
tim
1. No local government has built social housing to any scale for over 20 years. Since 1993 the proportion of council dwellings completed has averaged less than 1% of total or just over 3,000 maximum in any one year.
2. Even Housing Association builds have only accounted for an average of 15.3% of total annual builds in the same period, with less than 40,000 dwellings the maximum built in any one year.
3. Private Enterprise has built an average of 84% of the total or around 156,000 per year. Pre financial crisis the private sector was building nearly 200,000 dwellings per year.
4. The whole residential property construction industry is geared towards private sector builds. Private companies hold the land and planning consents and have both the financial and construction resources to increase output to pre crisis levels.
5. There is no equivalent capability which would support a major switch to state financed construction of social housing.
On the supply side, land would need to be purchased, planning consents granted, architectural plans reworked to new requirements. Above all new financing models and distribution channels would need to be established.
On the demand side the whole culture of property ownership aspiration, and, ownership to rental ratio expectations would need to change to satisfy 1.2 million new household occupants.
6. Government borrowing (whether local or central) would need to be ramped up to finance your suggested building programme. Around £100 billion extra borrowing would be needed over say a five year term.
7. Housing benefit claims will rise and fall in line with rental incomes. Rental incomes will primarily rise and fall in inverse ratio to the capital value of residential property. If property prices keep pace with inflation (or better still inflation -1%) then the current above inflation rent rises will abate and normalise. The ratio of supply to demand ratio is a secondary influence on pricing.
8. Osborne's current stimulus of the housing market is broadly borrowing neutral. The equity participation schemes match liabilities with assets and are net neutral. The guarantees are contingent liabilities with no impact on borrowing. Administration and normal credit risk is covered by fees from the banks. There is no pot of money to transfer to other means of financing housing construction.
Given all of the above, your proposals make no economic, market or political sense at all.
A cap that on optimistic forecasts will save £100 million, while Osborne has increased housing benefit payments by £4 Billion per annum. That works well.
Well he has managed to reverse the amazing increase in average eligible private sector rents paid under housing benefit. It rose 45% in real terms in 10 years under Labour but is falling in real terms under Osborne.
I'd like Tim to let us know how they're going to build houses - including all services and facilities - for £100,000 a pop. Especially if they are in an area where there is employment, and feature family homes as well as one-bed apartments.
Only idiots would believe such a thing is possible, and fap themselves off over it. Oh, hang on ...
Comments
RT @BBCNormanS: Labour sources confirm that Ed Miliband's [PMQ] briefing notes were left behind in the toilet.
Could somebody tell Andy Murray to turn up to his match ?
Or is it vice versa. Can't remember ;-)
http://order-order.com/2013/07/03/read-milibands-pmqs-briefing-notes-in-full/
Nice to see Lib Dems praising their coalition partners policies.
Isn't miltary rule better than the way they were heading, ie: sharia rule?
Let's be honest, and again, mind my naivety, but countries like Egypt/Syria/Libya/Iraq (name your desert-land) must be light-years away from achieving democracies such as ours. Sad though it is. So I think I'd take military law over one which shoots my daughter in the head for daring to read a book.
Mr. K, you're quite right that the Egypt situation is the top story today.
When do you win your free school bet with tim? Can we regard it as the first installment for the second pbTory cocktail extravaganza? Also I'd like to see if I can manage Swansea as a temporary berth next time.
That's a bit odd, isn't it?
Time to get his knighthood back if he's found wanting here.
I 'm sure we can manage another cocktail extravaganza, although the Nabavi cellar is also in need of some Labour investment.
Fantastic. The Syrian government has called for Morsi to stand down for the sake of his country. With no irony intended.
You need to reattend primary school to brush up on your arithmetic skills.
Children must attend primary school from the September following their 5th birthday. Four year olds may optionally attend on the same qualification basis.
So for reception in September 2013, the five year olds must have been born in or before August 2008 and the four year olds a year later in 2009.
Reliable birth statistics indicating a rising demand for primary school places will have been available to Ed Balls from late 2008. Balls failed to respond adequately and consequently the problem was shifted onto to incoming the Coalition government nearly two years later. The problem was aggravated by Balls's failure to take timely action.
"Unite has threatened legal action against Labour, saying it has been a victim of a "smear campaign" and an attempt by the party to impose a candidate from Westminster." http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-23166053
And now they're saying:
norman smith @BBCNormanS
Len McLuskey statement:"There can be absolutely no question about who runs the Labour Party. It is Ed Miliband and he has my full support"
Me too (and I've just lost £50 to Mr Kelly - Hi James, I know you're out there looking in through the steel railings - on the franchise for the Scottish referendum.
I guess we'll have to be Dr. N's benefit junkies. I wonder if he can provide the food bank too.
There are three things Cameron wants to do at PMQs: impress the voters, reassure his back benches, and unnerve the opposition. If he can do all three at once, that's great, but it's seldom possible. Success at any one is still success.
Today, he seemed to be concentrating on unnerving Labour - repeatedly raising UNITE in an attempt to make Labour backbenchers feel they're on dodgy ground.
Whether or not they were rattled I couldn't say, but if they were, it won't matter that the typical voter wasn't impressed. It's not as if there's much chance of them remembering this week's PMQs come the next election.
"Equally debatable is the impact of party leaders. True, the Tories still managed to snatch power in 1970 and 1979 with leaders who were far less popular than the Labour premiers they were up against. But many psephologists would argue that leadership evaluations are more important drivers of voting today than they were back then, in which case Labour has some cause for concern. Ed Miliband might not trail David Cameron by much when it comes to people being asked who would make the best Prime Minister. But if we use Lord Ashcroft’s latest mega-poll and put together their relative scores on being seen as "strong", as "competent", as "decisive" and as "up to the job", then Cameron’s lead is above 10 per cent across all social classes and English regions.
The same poll also gives the Conservatives a few more reasons to be cheerful in that it hints that they might be doing better among some important groups of voters – for example, those living in the Midlands and those working in the growing private rather than the shrinking public sector – than their overall score would lead us to think.
That said, it looks as if the highly-prized C2 voters are still very much up for grabs. Which of the two main parties they plump for may well decide whether Labour or the Tories emerge from the next election as the largest party. Whether either of the two main parties can come out of it with a working, let alone a comfortable majority, however, looks doubtful at best. Hung parliament (take two) here we come."
Most amusing regardless of what the long term if any impact it has.
His PPS leaving the briefing notes in the bog are just icing on the cake of woe :^ )
"The two most senior managers at a hospital investigated for high death rates have resigned from their jobs.
The resignations were announced on the day it emerged Tameside Hospital had been criticised for its poor patient care by two independent reviews.
Christine Green, chief executive of Tameside Hospital Trust, has left her job while Medical Director Tariq Mahmood has also stepped down. Tameside is one of 14 hospitals under scrutiny for its high death rates.
A trust spokesman said Mr Mahmood had offered his resignation three months ago, for family reasons, but the trust delayed its announcement until a replacement was found...Ms Green, who has been chief executive since 1988, decided to resign last week after finalising plans for a "listening exercise" to hear what local people and groups such as GPs thought of the hospital." http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-23164723
I do accept that my view may not be representative of the general public most of whom take no interest or notice of PMQs at all .
The Markit Composite Output Index for the Eurozone countries was published today. It confirmed that the Eurozone has now been in recession for seven consecutive quarters.
The Markit Eurozone PMI Composite Output Index rose to 48.7 in June, up from May's reading of 47.7, indicating a further easing in the rate of contraction (readings above 50 indicate expansion in activity) in economic output to a 15 month low. The figure was revised downwards from the preliminary estimate of 48.9 and signaled that overall activity has now fallen for the last 17 months.
A small glimpse of light is that the rates of decline are attenuating. Spain in particular declined at its slowest rate for two years, with both Italy and France with less impressive but still slowing contraction. The problem is Germany, traditionally the engine of Eurozone growth.
Chris Williamson, Chief Economist of Markit, noting that it was difficult to detect growth drivers in the German economy, commented:
“This suggests that the pace of economic expansion for the region as a whole is likely to remain subdued until business confidence improves further and unemployment starts falling from its alarming record high of 12.2%.”
Thank Gove, the UK has Osborne.
The rest was a ream of empty paper.
It is the latter that tells the real story.
if the EZ is still going down the pan now would be the time to put some countermeasures in place to ensure it doesn't hit the UK. Unfortunately we've got George in the way.
Colour me skeptical on that point.
George's sanitary practices are beyond reproach.
You mean he's a well-groomed arse ?
Did Ed leave his notes in a toilet, or did he get his notes from things written on a toilet wall?
Underneath this (written I'm guessing by a genius with a PhD) was scrawled the immortal line "Go home Dad, you're drunk"!
The only thing is - how do the people currently on housing benefit, from whom this £120bn would be taken, manage in the meantime?
Semi line-up
Murray v. Janowicz
Djokovic v. Del Potro
You'll have to do better than that. What you're actually saying is that you want to borrow an additional £50bn or so, maybe more. Good luck with persuading the markets that that is a good idea.
£120 billion for 1.2 million 'homes' gives £100,000 per home. Considering the average house price in the UK is currently over £230,000 (1), you are looking at some rather cheap houses.
It would be interesting to see if the figure has been pulled out of someone's backside (or found in a Hoc toilet) or is realistic, and whether it includes all the extras: land purchase, roads, services, facilities etc. Also of interest would be the timescales involved.
In fact, it would be interesting to see the quality of such homes and whether anyone would want to live in them.
(1): http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/in_depth/uk_house_prices/html/houses.stm
Oh, wait...
Maybe he should, but, if that is the intention, he's going about it in a very counter-productive way. Hasn't he just pledged to do the opposite?
Let's hope Salmond chooses to boycott the All England Club.
Britain spends more annually on housing benefit than the much-reduced GDP of Latvia...
Maybe some sort of cap would be popular?
Oh, wait...
Seriously though what a match that was.have to say I thought Murray was a gonner.Great great credit to him for fighting his way out of that. I also have to say though that he never needed to be in that position in the first place. he was pretty much dross in the 1st Set in particular.Howver all's well that ends well.
Here is Baxter's latest prediction:
Lab 44% (-2)
SNP 36% (+6)
Con 12% (+1)
UKIP 5% (+2)
LD 2% (-8)
Oth 1% (+1)
Could the Unite aspect swing it into winnable territory for the SNP?
1. No local government has built social housing to any scale for over 20 years. Since 1993 the proportion of council dwellings completed has averaged less than 1% of total or just over 3,000 maximum in any one year.
2. Even Housing Association builds have only accounted for an average of 15.3% of total annual builds in the same period, with less than 40,000 dwellings the maximum built in any one year.
3. Private Enterprise has built an average of 84% of the total or around 156,000 per year. Pre financial crisis the private sector was building nearly 200,000 dwellings per year.
4. The whole residential property construction industry is geared towards private sector builds. Private companies hold the land and planning consents and have both the financial and construction resources to increase output to pre crisis levels.
5. There is no equivalent capability which would support a major switch to state financed construction of social housing.
On the supply side, land would need to be purchased, planning consents granted, architectural plans reworked to new requirements. Above all new financing models and distribution channels would need to be established.
On the demand side the whole culture of property ownership aspiration, and, ownership to rental ratio expectations would need to change to satisfy 1.2 million new household occupants.
6. Government borrowing (whether local or central) would need to be ramped up to finance your suggested building programme. Around £100 billion extra borrowing would be needed over say a five year term.
7. Housing benefit claims will rise and fall in line with rental incomes. Rental incomes will primarily rise and fall in inverse ratio to the capital value of residential property. If property prices keep pace with inflation (or better still inflation -1%) then the current above inflation rent rises will abate and normalise. The ratio of supply to demand ratio is a secondary influence on pricing.
8. Osborne's current stimulus of the housing market is broadly borrowing neutral. The equity participation schemes match liabilities with assets and are net neutral. The guarantees are contingent liabilities with no impact on borrowing. Administration and normal credit risk is covered by fees from the banks. There is no pot of money to transfer to other means of financing housing construction.
Given all of the above, your proposals make no economic, market or political sense at all.
No not Ed ....
The King of the Belgians abdicates :
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-23167525
Only idiots would believe such a thing is possible, and fap themselves off over it. Oh, hang on ...
A ludicrous idea.