politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » PB Nighthawks is now open
If you’re a lurker, why not delurk, you should Jump at the opportunity, you’ll realise that it’s not No Good Advice, it’ll be good to hear The Sound of the Underground.
Caution: there's an article by Mary Riddell in there at 18 without a suitable sanity warning. As a public service announcement - ensure that you adjust your bolloxometers to 'High' before clicking.
So to-day we learned how quickly Red's smoke & mirrors would unravel,but some of PB's gullible lefties believed him.
'Miliband’s high-profile reforms are less risky than they may appear at first sight because the total amount of “political” money being paid by three million union members will not be reduced.
Currently members pay money into their union’s political fund, with a small proportion of this – typically £3 a year – earmarked for Labour as an affiliation fee. The money is paid unless they actively “opt out” and is worth a total £8m a year for the party.
Under the reforms members would for the first time have to “opt in” to pay the affiliation fee, meaning Labour could lose millions of pounds it currently receives directly.
Yet the overall political fund would maintain an “opt-out” system, meaning unions would still receive the same amounts of money – while passing less of it on to Labour.
That means the unions will have extra millions which can be used by unions for policy campaigning and – crucially – for big donations to Labour, for example at election time.
That will make it even more important for Labour MPs to keep the union general secretaries on side; the opposite of what you might have believed.
The reforms which the union leaders fear – to dilute their power over conference votes and leadership elections – were only vaguely hinted at by Miliband.
At present the unions have a half of votes at annual conference and a third of those for leadership contests. Miliband said merely that this would be considered in the Ray Collins review.'
Mr. Eagles, whilst differential front end grip is thrilling, it's also not a common feature of races.
Fixed gear ratios may be as big an issue as tyres, or even bigger, in 2014.
I wish they'd sort out the race calendar out, there's huge gaps in the calendar and the season is ending close to December, I remember the good old days when the season ended in mid October.
Mr. Eagles, at first I thought you meant the uncertainty around New Jersey and Sochi. Sadly I think we'll get the tedious street circuit in New York, and the Russian circuit seems less likely but still entirely possible.
The large gaps are deliberate to allow development and for teams to have a bit of a rest. One consequence of in-season testing will be to make development easier but diminish the break the teams get.
I remember hearing that Korea's likely to go after its current deal expires.
So today we learned that Mike Smithson was right, Miliband is prepared to lead his party and face down his fringe elements. While the pathetically weak Cameron kowtows and panders to the right and UKIP.
Nobody really doubted that Mike knew more about politics than the PB Tories though did they? Seriously?
And there happened in the end what should have happened in the beginning...and everyone knew and has never forgotten that whoever has a mind turned to wickedness is sure to end badly.
Mr. Eagles, at first I thought you meant the uncertainty around New Jersey and Sochi. Sadly I think we'll get the tedious street circuit in New York, and the Russian circuit seems less likely but still entirely possible.
The large gaps are deliberate to allow development and for teams to have a bit of a rest. One consequence of in-season testing will be to make development easier but diminish the break the teams get.
I remember hearing that Korea's likely to go after its current deal expires.
Mr Dancer, can I commend your restraint in last night's nighthawks, which included two gratuitous insults at Hannibal.
UK evangelist wants to install a vomit button for men kissing.....
I left my studio one evening and saw two of the tramps who regularly drank cider in the little park outside having sex on one of the park benches. The following morning I walked past the bench and noticed the memorial plaque which said "In memory of Eileen Cantor. She loved flowers"
Mr. Eagles, I may've missed those. I think I had an earlyish night.
Back to fixed gear ratios: this means we could see some very odd results at the more extreme circuits (Monza and Singapore, for example, at opposite ends of the spectrum). That could mean that pre-practice betting opportunities (like Mercedes at Monaco this year but at more races) could abound.
Mr. Eagles, I may've missed those. I think I had an earlyish night.
Back to fixed gear ratios: this means we could see some very odd results at the more extreme circuits (Monza and Singapore, for example, at opposite ends of the spectrum). That could mean that pre-practice betting opportunities (like Mercedes at Monaco this year but at more races) could abound.
Has anyone done a correlation between the number of posts by PB's most prolific poster and the fortunes of the Labour Party, especially if ED is speaking and the journo's are having trouble believing what he is saying will actually come to pass?? The symmetry is probably exact.
He announced that instead of stealing money by default from Union members who were deemed to have decided to support the Labour party he is going to steal it from them at the discretion of the Union bosses who will choose how to allocate their funds.
He announced that he wanted to have a further discussion with the other party leaders seeking to limit the individual contribution that anyone can make to a political party. No proposals, just another discussion.
He chucked in a diversion about MPs having second jobs.
Give any indication as to what he is going to do about the Unite actions in Falkirk and at least 40 other seats.
Explain why he was in favour of Unions paying the first year subscriptions of their members to the Labour party until he was against it.
Explain why, and in what way, the actions of Unite were different from the other factions of the Labour party who have sought to have their favourites selected from time immemorial.
So today we learned that Mike Smithson was right, Miliband is prepared to lead his party and face down his fringe elements. While the pathetically weak Cameron kowtows and panders to the right and UKIP.
Nobody really doubted that Mike knew more about politics than the PB Tories though did they? Seriously?
UKIP and the Right are 25% of the electorate, between them. Explain how Cameron wins without them.
On balance it is just as well that, like all his other speeches, everyone will have forgotten what Ed said by the weekend (or even sooner if the cricket goes well).
Which makes good reading alongside number 8 in the threader.
The article seems to confirm that White British people have left London at a rate of knots, over the past 20 years. That obviously boosts the Labour vote share in London.
Which makes good reading alongside number 8 in the threader.
The article seems to confirm that White British people have left London at a rate of knots, over the past 20 years. That obviously boosts the Labour vote share in London.
Which makes good reading alongside number 8 in the threader.
The article seems to confirm that White British people have left London at a rate of knots, over the past 20 years. That obviously boosts the Labour vote share in London.
White British people have always left London, hence the age profile of the city. In a few years time Indians will leave the city as Jews left the city. It's what happens.
You do know how to smear the subject,when was the last time six hundred thousand leave in a short period of time ?
Which makes good reading alongside number 8 in the threader.
The article seems to confirm that White British people have left London at a rate of knots, over the past 20 years. That obviously boosts the Labour vote share in London.
White British people have always left London, hence the age profile of the city. In a few years time Indians will leave the city as Jews left the city. It's what happens.
. But unless there were 400,000 white immigrants into London between 1991-2001 it would seem they are leaving faster than ever
Which makes good reading alongside number 8 in the threader.
The article seems to confirm that White British people have left London at a rate of knots, over the past 20 years. That obviously boosts the Labour vote share in London.
White British people have always left London, hence the age profile of the city. In a few years time Indians will leave the city as Jews left the city. It's what happens.
How White British is your neighbourhood, tim? Do you even know?
Footy Humour (@FootyHumour) 09/07/2013 18:08 BREAKING NEWS: Luis Suarez & John Terry spotted speaking together in London... Does this mean he's joining Chelsea?!
pic.twitter.com/A2OW3IiqEQ
While we are on the topic of immigrants and racists...
So today we learned that Mike Smithson was right, Miliband is prepared to lead his party and face down his fringe elements. While the pathetically weak Cameron kowtows and panders to the right and UKIP.
Nobody really doubted that Mike knew more about politics than the PB Tories though did they? Seriously?
LOL! When ru and Smithson gonna tie the knot or ru just bffs?
Footy Humour (@FootyHumour) 09/07/2013 18:08 BREAKING NEWS: Luis Suarez & John Terry spotted speaking together in London... Does this mean he's joining Chelsea?!
pic.twitter.com/A2OW3IiqEQ
While we are on the topic of immigrants and racists...
OT - the documentary 'The Art of Killing' about the anti-communist pogrom in Indonesia in the mid-Sixties is stunning.
After failing to get the victims to talk, the documentary maker, at their suggestion, spoke to the perpetrators - who were more than happy to talk, convinced they did nothing wrong. The old adage about 'giving them enough rope' never proved truer...as gradually their certainty erodes. In the film, a government minister, with growing realisation at how all this will look, argues 'of course we must massacre the communists - but maybe in a more humane way.'
The unremitting horror of what they did - cheerfully described - is leavened by some surreal comedy, where the murderers act out their movie fantasies - one big fat one, in lurid drag (a sly dig at President Suharto's avaricious wife, Ibu Tein), providing welcome relief.
@suttonnick: Wednesday's Times front page - "Unions to be sidelined if they stall Labour reform" #tomorrowspaperstoday #bbcpapers http://t.co/opUzScgMcE
Ezekiel 25:17. "The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men. Blessed is he who, is the name of charity and good will, shepherds the weak through the valley of darkness, for he is truly his brother's keeper and the finder of lost children. And I will strike down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger those who attempt to poison and destroy my brothers. And you will know my name is the Lord when I lay my vengeance upon thee."
Didn't Ed poison and destroy David's career prospects?
@suttonnick: Wednesday's Times front page - "Unions to be sidelined if they stall Labour reform" #tomorrowspaperstoday #bbcpapers http://t.co/opUzScgMcE
Ezekiel 25:17. "The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men. Blessed is he who, is the name of charity and good will, shepherds the weak through the valley of darkness, for he is truly his brother's keeper and the finder of lost children. And I will strike down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger those who attempt to poison and destroy my brothers. And you will know my name is the Lord when I lay my vengeance upon thee."
Like I posted earlier in the day,ed did well today,but even you know this could come back and bite miliband on the arse,not just bite him finish him.
@Sunil, you have something in common with Ed Miliband.
Ed's done an interview talking about his girlfriends, and he says
She (Justine) has banned him from using his BlackBerry at the dinner table.
“She’ll say, ‘Pleeease! We’re trying to eat’,” he says. “I think it was Justine’s idea to stop taking my phone on holiday. We have her phone and it means people are less likely to ring.”
@Sunil, you have something in common with Ed Miliband.
Ed's done an interview talking about his girlfriends, and he says
She (Justine) has banned him from using his BlackBerry at the dinner table.
“She’ll say, ‘Pleeease! We’re trying to eat’,” he says. “I think it was Justine’s idea to stop taking my phone on holiday. We have her phone and it means people are less likely to ring.”
Ah but does he use his BB to access Politicalbetting.com?
@Sunil, you have something in common with Ed Miliband.
Ed's done an interview talking about his girlfriends, and he says
She (Justine) has banned him from using his BlackBerry at the dinner table.
“She’ll say, ‘Pleeease! We’re trying to eat’,” he says. “I think it was Justine’s idea to stop taking my phone on holiday. We have her phone and it means people are less likely to ring.”
Ah but does he use his BB to access Politicalbetting.com?
Which makes good reading alongside number 8 in the threader.
The article seems to confirm that White British people have left London at a rate of knots, over the past 20 years. That obviously boosts the Labour vote share in London.
White British people have always left London, hence the age profile of the city. In a few years time Indians will leave the city as Jews left the city. It's what happens.
The white British population of London had been 95%+ for a thousand years up until WWII.
@suttonnick: Wednesday's Times front page - "Unions to be sidelined if they stall Labour reform" #tomorrowspaperstoday #bbcpapers http://t.co/opUzScgMcE
Ezekiel 25:17. "The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men. Blessed is he who, is the name of charity and good will, shepherds the weak through the valley of darkness, for he is truly his brother's keeper and the finder of lost children. And I will strike down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger those who attempt to poison and destroy my brothers. And you will know my name is the Lord when I lay my vengeance upon thee."
Like I posted earlier in the day,ed did well today,but even you know this could come back and bite miliband on the arse,not just bite him finish him.
Like I posted earlier, it could finish him. He's no choice but to push ahead now. High stakes, and as Mike says the comparison with weak Dave is stark so far. But there's a way to go.
Hope ed as worked out how all his plans are going to work because this wasn't even on labours radar 2 or 3 weeks back,was it tim ? did he panic ?
Which makes good reading alongside number 8 in the threader.
All my extended family used to live in an inner-london manor. Over the last 30 years they all gradually moved to the outskirts to get away from a gang culture that doesn't officially exist.
Is that Jonathan Portes the same person who wrote the report mentioned by Andrew Neather?
"English MPs are to be given the power to “veto” Westminster laws that do not relate to Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland, as part of sweeping constitutional reforms being drawn up by ministers."
Which makes good reading alongside number 8 in the threader.
All my extended family used to live in an inner-london manor. Over the last 30 years they all gradually moved to the outskirts to get away from a gang culture that doesn't officially exist.
Yes,London gangs started just after the Krays and the Richardsons.
"English MPs are to be given the power to “veto” Westminster laws that do not relate to Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland, as part of sweeping constitutional reforms being drawn up by ministers."
@Sunil, you have something in common with Ed Miliband.
Ed's done an interview talking about his girlfriends, and he says
She (Justine) has banned him from using his BlackBerry at the dinner table.
“She’ll say, ‘Pleeease! We’re trying to eat’,” he says. “I think it was Justine’s idea to stop taking my phone on holiday. We have her phone and it means people are less likely to ring.”
Ah but does he use his BB to access Politicalbetting.com?
Last time Labour had a majority they had a majority of English MPs. Yup in 2005.
So you support the proposals?
Let's see what Dave comes up with, and remember 1/5 of Lib Dem MPs are from Scotland. But if Cameron wants to bog himself down in this during the election run up then let him. Be funny if he ended up in a position needing the DUP after an election.
Same could be said about ed's plans with the unions,inward looking.
So, nothing there that any sane person could argue with. Those are all features, not bugs. After all, why should Scottish MPs, whose constituents are completely unaffected by large chunks of Westminster legislation, provide the ministers who introduce that legislation, or have a vote on it?
Of course, given the anti-democratic shenanigans of the LibDems and Labour on the entirely uncontroversial proposal for equalised constituency sizes, we must expect howls of hypocritical faux-outrage from some.
"English MPs are to be given the power to “veto” Westminster laws that do not relate to Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland, as part of sweeping constitutional reforms being drawn up by ministers."
Not a great deal of detail on that Indie piece and it seems to be skipping over the fact that I somehow doubt the lib dems will be delighted with this if the legislation is exactly as the Indie reports it.
Regardless, the myth about labour needing scottish MPs is just that, a myth.
Last time Labour had a majority they had a majority of English MPs. Yup in 2005.
But in 2005 Tories got more votes in England!
Yup sunil,tories even had micheal howard as leader and he got more votes than labour in England,now that's funny ;-)
Getting more votes in the wrong places doesn't matter under FPTP. And Tories reluctance to vote tactically in seats they can't win makes it even more amusing.
I know that tim lad,just remember that 2005 campaign for howard going on every interview on his immigration policy and the piss take out of him but still he got more votes in England,now that's funny.
"For Ed Miliband, grappling with a crisis over the influence of the unions, the proposed changes are another blow. Indeed, it is no surprise that the West Lothian question took a back seat while devolution went ahead, under Tony Blair, and in the Labour-governed years that followed."
Under the proposals, you could find that a majority of English MPs of a different political persuasion to the UK government could try to pass its own legislation. Which would be amusing. Maybe there should be an English government of ministers with English-only remits.
Always someone else to blame for Daves inability to control his own party.He could've got the boundary changes if he hadn't been so weak.
Any politician of integrity, of any party, would have voted for removing the appalling gerry-mandering of the unequal constituency sizes. Labour, and sadly the LibDems, should be completely ashamed of themselves. How they can live with their consciences on actively voting to keep boundaries which are manifestly skewed to one party is a question for them, not for me or for Dave.
Last time Labour had a majority they had a majority of English MPs. Yup in 2005.
But in 2005 Tories got more votes in England!
Yup sunil,tories even had micheal howard as leader and he got more votes than labour in England,now that's funny ;-)
Getting more votes in the wrong places doesn't matter under FPTP. And Tories reluctance to vote tactically in seats they can't win makes it even more amusing.
"English MPs are to be given the power to “veto” Westminster laws that do not relate to Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland, as part of sweeping constitutional reforms being drawn up by ministers."
Last time Labour had a majority they had a majority of English MPs. Yup in 2005.
But in 2005 Tories got more votes in England!
Yup sunil,tories even had micheal howard as leader and he got more votes than labour in England,now that's funny ;-)
Getting more votes in the wrong places doesn't matter under FPTP. And Tories reluctance to vote tactically in seats they can't win makes it even more amusing.
I know that tim lad,just remember that 2005 campaign for howard going on every interview on his immigration policy and the piss take out of him but still he got more votes in England,now that's funny.
He did really well, that's why Dave could only put 3.6% on his vote in 2010, he'd raised the bar so high.It wasn't that Dave is mediocre.
I blame Hague for not adding any substantial Tory votes or seats in 2001!
So, nothing there that any sane person could argue with. Those are all features, not bugs. After all, why should Scottish MPs, whose constituents are completely unaffected by large chunks of Westminster legislation, provide the ministers who introduce that legislation or have a vote on it?
Of course, given the anti-democratic shenanigans of the LibDems and Labour on the entirely uncontroversial proposal for equalised constituency sizes, we must expect howls of hypocritical faux-outrage from some.
Always someone else to blame for Daves inability to control his own party.He could've got the boundary changes if he hadn't been so weak. Has he remembered the Welsh Tories do you think this time? And the Scottish Lib Dems.
To be fair the scottish lib dems aren't expected to have a "surge" any time soon. Though if Clegg nods this through he'll pretty much castrate what's left of them after 2015.
It might surprise you that voters might want a prime minister who can't "control" his party. It's called democracy. We would have got 90 days' detention without trial if Blair was able to control his own party. When we have a majority government, one of the few things that can challenge the government's primacy is backbench rebellion. We need more of it, not less.
In any case, what torpedoed the boundary review was the Lib Dems responding to a Tory vote on something completely different with partisan point-scoring tit-for-tat.
"English MPs are to be given the power to “veto” Westminster laws that do not relate to Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland, as part of sweeping constitutional reforms being drawn up by ministers."
"We will give the report very serious consideration before we respond substantively."
It looks like that's what they have done, and are responding substantively.....
Unsourced reports of proposals being drawn up by ministers are not quite the same as the real thing, but as I said, we shall see.
I also said long ago McKay had the power to drop a very amusing bomb on scottish labour and scottish lib dem MPs. They will not like this one bit. Very sad.
Excellent and very poignant documentary about the Piper Alpha tragedy, still find it difficult to watch in places as my own Dad was working out in the North Sea at that time. I remember just a couple of years before it happened being given a guided tour of the area in Aberdeen A&E set aside for such a major disaster. One of my friends was on duty that night at Aberdeen Royal Infirmary, and she spoke of a huge sense of despair when the casualties for such a major incident on an oil rig failed to appear at the hospital as they all stood on standby. That is when it really hit them just what a huge loss of life there had been in this disaster.
We were promised a speech that would foreshadow ‘historic’ changes in the relationship between Labour and the unions, the dawn of a ‘new politics’.
What Ed Miliband offered instead was a leisurely review, chaired by a veteran trade unionist – a blatant delaying tactic to help him wriggle off the hook over the seat-rigging scandal engulfing his party.
True, he had some promising suggestions, such as giving non-party members a say in choosing Labour candidates through American-style open primarie
But it remains highly questionable how much his changes (if they happen) would loosen the unions’ stranglehold on the party. Indeed, there are grounds to fear some could have the opposite effect.
As for reforming the political levy, under which union members automatically contribute to Labour funds unless they opt out, he could act immediately if he were really serious about it.
Indeed, Nick Clegg has offered to legislate for a genuinely voluntary opt-in system in his forthcoming lobbying Bill.
But Mr Miliband speaks only of ‘working through the implications’. Clearly, he’s in no hurry to right a manifest injustice.
Meanwhile, his idea of capping MPs’ earnings from second jobs would make politics even less attractive to people with senior experience in the real world.
But like so much of his speech, wasn’t this merely posturing to divert attention from Labour’s woes?
Would it be over-cynical to suggest that Mr Miliband’s secret agenda is a switch to state funding for political parties, to make up any shortfall from the unions?
If this is to be his ‘new politics’, taxpayers will want none of it.
The most ridiculous thing about the Falkirk saga is that there are few seats in the country which have less relevance to the next general election than Falkirk. If Labour lose votes in crucial marginal seats because of the dispute it really will be an example of shooting oneself in the foot.
I can only guess (still living with your mum at your age does support this) that you are a bit thick.
Labour don't need Scottish MPs. Labour doesn't have a majority at the moment. But then neither do the Tories.
@IOS Nasty little personal attacks like this towards other posters tend to undermine your contributions to the site, and therefore makes them far easier to ignore.
I can only guess (still living with your mum at your age does support this) that you are a bit thick.
Labour don't need Scottish MPs. Labour doesn't have a majority at the moment. But then neither do the Tories.
@IOS Nasty little personal attacks like this towards other posters tend to undermine your contributions to the site, and therefore makes them far easier to ignore.
I agree, I may disagree with fitalass on politics quite often, but her anecdotes and tales of family life confirm to me she is in all likelihood a very decent person. No need for personal attacks is spot on; but by all means attack political positions with sound reasoning!
Comments
I've quite literally nothing to add at this point.
Alan Johnson also shares the shame fashion guru as Gerald Kaufman.
Worth repeating this exciting [it is, actually] news: in 2014 F1 cars will have to have a single fixed set of gear ratios for the entire season.
This is an interesting rule change and may result in some good betting opportunities.
Fixed gear ratios may be as big an issue as tyres, or even bigger, in 2014.
Though if Private Eye still do the OBN....
So to-day we learned how quickly Red's smoke & mirrors would unravel,but some of PB's gullible lefties believed him.
'Miliband’s high-profile reforms are less risky than they may appear at first sight because the total amount of “political” money being paid by three million union members will not be reduced.
Currently members pay money into their union’s political fund, with a small proportion of this – typically £3 a year – earmarked for Labour as an affiliation fee. The money is paid unless they actively “opt out” and is worth a total £8m a year for the party.
Under the reforms members would for the first time have to “opt in” to pay the affiliation fee, meaning Labour could lose millions of pounds it currently receives directly.
Yet the overall political fund would maintain an “opt-out” system, meaning unions would still receive the same amounts of money – while passing less of it on to Labour.
That means the unions will have extra millions which can be used by unions for policy campaigning and – crucially – for big donations to Labour, for example at election time.
That will make it even more important for Labour MPs to keep the union general secretaries on side; the opposite of what you might have believed.
The reforms which the union leaders fear – to dilute their power over conference votes and leadership elections – were only vaguely hinted at by Miliband.
At present the unions have a half of votes at annual conference and a third of those for leadership contests. Miliband said merely that this would be considered in the Ray Collins review.'
The large gaps are deliberate to allow development and for teams to have a bit of a rest. One consequence of in-season testing will be to make development easier but diminish the break the teams get.
I remember hearing that Korea's likely to go after its current deal expires.
I left my studio one evening and saw two of the tramps who regularly drank cider in the little park outside having sex on one of the park benches. The following morning I walked past the bench and noticed the memorial plaque which said "In memory of Eileen Cantor. She loved flowers"
Back to fixed gear ratios: this means we could see some very odd results at the more extreme circuits (Monza and Singapore, for example, at opposite ends of the spectrum). That could mean that pre-practice betting opportunities (like Mercedes at Monaco this year but at more races) could abound.
http://www7.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2013/07/08/pb-nighthawks-is-now-open-18/
http://order-order.com/2013/07/09/ed-fudges-as-len-smiles/
You ?
I shouldn't have thought there were anywhere near 400,000 non British white immigrants coming to live in London in the previous decade
He announced that instead of stealing money by default from Union members who were deemed to have decided to support the Labour party he is going to steal it from them at the discretion of the Union bosses who will choose how to allocate their funds.
He announced that he wanted to have a further discussion with the other party leaders seeking to limit the individual contribution that anyone can make to a political party. No proposals, just another discussion.
He chucked in a diversion about MPs having second jobs.
Did I miss anything?
to all my lefty pb posters,here's a example of white flight.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/news/vote2001/hi/english/features/newsid_1347000/1347766.stm
Give any indication as to what he is going to do about the Unite actions in Falkirk and at least 40 other seats.
Explain why he was in favour of Unions paying the first year subscriptions of their members to the Labour party until he was against it.
Explain why, and in what way, the actions of Unite were different from the other factions of the Labour party who have sought to have their favourites selected from time immemorial.
'tim posted - Don't know whether there's any White Flighters left on here
You ?'
No, Tim lives in 97.8% white Merseyside.
http://t.co/rURkWBal4B
09/07/2013 18:08
BREAKING NEWS: Luis Suarez & John Terry spotted speaking together in London... Does this mean he's joining Chelsea?!
pic.twitter.com/A2OW3IiqEQ
While we are on the topic of immigrants and racists...
LOL! When ru and Smithson gonna tie the knot or ru just bffs?
After failing to get the victims to talk, the documentary maker, at their suggestion, spoke to the perpetrators - who were more than happy to talk, convinced they did nothing wrong. The old adage about 'giving them enough rope' never proved truer...as gradually their certainty erodes. In the film, a government minister, with growing realisation at how all this will look, argues 'of course we must massacre the communists - but maybe in a more humane way.'
The unremitting horror of what they did - cheerfully described - is leavened by some surreal comedy, where the murderers act out their movie fantasies - one big fat one, in lurid drag (a sly dig at President Suharto's avaricious wife, Ibu Tein), providing welcome relief.
Unmissable - but I doubt I could watch it again.
http://www.politicshome.com/uk/article/81656/the_daily_mail_tuesday_9th_july_2013.html
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p019bt95/Piper_Alpha_Fire_in_the_Night/
Ed's done an interview talking about his girlfriends, and he says
She (Justine) has banned him from using his BlackBerry at the dinner table.
“She’ll say, ‘Pleeease! We’re trying to eat’,” he says. “I think it was Justine’s idea to stop taking my phone on holiday. We have her phone and it means people are less likely to ring.”
It is. Award winning and deservedly so.
(Not concurrently though)
Is that Jonathan Portes the same person who wrote the report mentioned by Andrew Neather?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/6418456/Labour-wanted-mass-immigration-to-make-UK-more-multicultural-says-former-adviser.html
edit: according to this the civil servant who wrote the report Neather mentioned was called jonathan portes
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1222769/Dishonest-Blair-Straw-accused-secret-plan-multicultural-UK.html
Instead of saying "white flight" try lazy uncompetitive economic losers.
Capitalism is a competition baby and they lost.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/english-revolution-in-house-of-commons-plan-to-give-englands-mps-right-of-veto-on-issues-not-affecting-scotland-wales-or-northern-ireland-8698505.html
The challenges it would throw up:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/a-neat-solution-to-the-west-lothian-question-but-what-might-go-wrong-8698507.html
And the maths on why Labour will not be happy:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/the-constitutional-bombshell-that-would-reshape-british-politics-8698506.html
That's the critical bit.
Last time Labour had a majority they had a majority of English MPs. Yup in 2005.
We have FPTP in this country, And if Labour has a majority nationally it has one in England.
No more free dinners? Oh well, that £10,000 pay rise the very same watchdog is proposing ought to over it. Utterly mad.
Of course, given the anti-democratic shenanigans of the LibDems and Labour on the entirely uncontroversial proposal for equalised constituency sizes, we must expect howls of hypocritical faux-outrage from some.
Regardless, the myth about labour needing scottish MPs is just that, a myth.
http://wingsoverscotland.com/why-labour-doesnt-need-scotland/
Not that scottish labour MPs won't lose their minds and panic in a most amusing way at the very prospect of such legislation.
'Hope ed as worked out how all his plans are going to work because this wasn't even on labours radar 2 or 3 weeks back,was it tim ? did he panic ?'
When Tony agrees with Red and Len agrees with Tony you know it's a stitch up.
"For Ed Miliband, grappling with a crisis over the influence of the unions, the proposed changes are another blow. Indeed, it is no surprise that the West Lothian question took a back seat while devolution went ahead, under Tony Blair, and in the Labour-governed years that followed."
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/editorials/another-west-lothian-question-in-the-offing-8697921.html
2010 England:
Tories 298 seats
Labour 191 seats
I can only guess (still living with your mum at your age does support this) that you are a bit thick.
Labour don't need Scottish MPs. Labour doesn't have a majority at the moment. But then neither do the Tories.
Though if Clegg nods this through he'll pretty much castrate what's left of them after 2015.
We shall see. Fun times ahead.
It might surprise you that voters might want a prime minister who can't "control" his party. It's called democracy. We would have got 90 days' detention without trial if Blair was able to control his own party. When we have a majority government, one of the few things that can challenge the government's primacy is backbench rebellion. We need more of it, not less.
In any case, what torpedoed the boundary review was the Lib Dems responding to a Tory vote on something completely different with partisan point-scoring tit-for-tat.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQC5bQKPj6o
England 2010:
Tories 298 seats
Labour 191 seats
There!
Unsourced reports of proposals being drawn up by ministers are not quite the same as the real thing, but as I said, we shall see.
I also said long ago McKay had the power to drop a very amusing bomb on scottish labour and scottish lib dem MPs. They will not like this one bit. Very sad.
IOS is a kid that gets pissed and comes on here,just ignore the little twit.
Will opt-in system only apply to new union members? If so, Labour avoids big funding hit.
http://www.markpack.org.uk/44223/lisa-forbes-labour-peterborough/?wt=2&utm_source=WordTwit&utm_campaign=wordtwit&utm_medium=referral
Are we surprised sunil ;-)
Ed’s secret agenda?
We were promised a speech that would foreshadow ‘historic’ changes in the relationship between Labour and the unions, the dawn of a ‘new politics’.
What Ed Miliband offered instead was a leisurely review, chaired by a veteran trade unionist – a blatant delaying tactic to help him wriggle off the hook over the seat-rigging scandal engulfing his party.
True, he had some promising suggestions, such as giving non-party members a say in choosing Labour candidates through American-style open primarie
But it remains highly questionable how much his changes (if they happen) would loosen the unions’ stranglehold on the party. Indeed, there are grounds to fear some could have the opposite effect.
As for reforming the political levy, under which union members automatically contribute to Labour funds unless they opt out, he could act immediately if he were really serious about it.
Indeed, Nick Clegg has offered to legislate for a genuinely voluntary opt-in system in his forthcoming lobbying Bill.
But Mr Miliband speaks only of ‘working through the implications’. Clearly, he’s in no hurry to right a manifest injustice.
Meanwhile, his idea of capping MPs’ earnings from second jobs would make politics even less attractive to people with senior experience in the real world.
But like so much of his speech, wasn’t this merely posturing to divert attention from Labour’s woes?
Would it be over-cynical to suggest that Mr Miliband’s secret agenda is a switch to state funding for political parties, to make up any shortfall from the unions?
If this is to be his ‘new politics’, taxpayers will want none of it.