Guido has a long memory - let's see how many legs this has with the Lobby instead
"While we are talking about lobbyists, it is time for Ed to come clean about his own dealings. Back in October 2011, getting on for two years ago now, Guido asked Miliband to name the predator lobbyists he had dined with at the home of Roland Rudd. He promised to reveal all:
“I will definitely release the names of the people who were at the dinner.”
21 months on, Miliband is still refusing to say who was present. Just because Rudd’s known clients include investment banks, not so environmentally sensitive mining companies and firms owned by asset stripping private equity companies, there is no reason for Ed to be shy. Of course there definitely wouldn’t have been any other dodgy lobbyists present at the dinner who lobbied him about anything unsavoury. With Miliband repeatedly saying Cameron “can’t keep evading questions”, he wouldn’t want to be accused of hypocrisy. Guido is sure he has as convincing and full-proof an answer as Crosby’s, so now would be as good a time as ever for him to stay true to his word. Over to you, Ed…" http://order-order.com/2013/07/23/two-years-since-ed-promised-lobbying-dinner-details/
There is apparently a new Yougov Welsh VI poll out for Westminster , Assembly and Assembly Regional . The results are mostly within M of E of the last poll for Wales in February .
Member of AEU..NUM..ACTT..BECTU. Was Shop Steward and national negotiating officer for two of them, therefore it figures that I know absolutely nothing about the inner workings of Trade Unions,,what a d*rk
I have probably been a member of more trade unions than some of the more more prolific posters here
I've been with CWU, STE and Unison. I find it interesting how few PBers are sharing on this subject - I assume they've never been in one as its hardly something to be reticent about.
I think I was a member of USDAW for a while but I'm not sure as I never paid any attention and if I joined it would have been almost by default as everyone else was in it.
Anyway. I was having a think. If you look at economic statistics this year, and compare them to what was expected at the beginning of the year, then you get the following:
UK ++ Japan ++ Spain + Ireland + USA = Germany =/- Australia - Italy - France - China --
Essentially, economic statistics have been beating expectations in the UK, Japan, Spain and Ireland; while they've been in-line in the US and Germany; Italy, France and China are the laggards.
Inside the Eurozone, it has been those countries most willing to undergo painful structural reforms and internal devaluations that have been showing the greatest improvements. While those who have buried their heads in the sand (Italy, France) are not seeing improvements.
Outside the Eurozone, the big story has been the slowdown in China.
There is apparently a new Yougov Welsh VI poll out for Westminster , Assembly and Assembly Regional . The results are mostly within M of E of the last poll for Wales in February .
I cannot understand why the Assembly poll is so markedly different from the Assembly Regional. Is this because of the silent kipper ?
It's because a decent slice of the Welsh electorate understand the voting system.
Your first vote is FPTP, so voting for minor parties is mostly a waste of time - hence large Labour vote, and relatively large Conservative and Plaid votes where they are best placed to challenge Labour in particular constituencies.
The second, regional, vote is on a PR/top-up basis, so here voting for Labour is probably a waste of time, as they will most likely take so many of the FPTP seats. However, voting for UKIP, Plaid and minor parties will likely be rewarded, particularly as those parties will in many areas not win any of the FPTP seats.
Anyway. I was having a think. If you look at economic statistics this year, and compare them to what was expected at the beginning of the year, then you get the following:
UK ++ Japan ++ Spain + Ireland + USA = Germany =/- Australia - Italy - France - China --
Essentially, economic statistics have been beating expectations in the UK, Japan, Spain and Ireland; while they've been in-line in the US and Germany; Italy, France and China are the laggards.
Inside the Eurozone, it has been those countries most willing to undergo painful structural reforms and internal devaluations that have been showing the greatest improvements. While those who have buried their heads in the sand (Italy, France) are not seeing improvements.
Outside the Eurozone, the big story has been the slowdown in China.
From an economics point of view the most interesting comparison is between the UK and Japan: post austerity growth vs. stimulus growth.
Which of the two will prove to be more sustainable and freer of unwanted side-effects?
Very interesting debate going on within the IMF on this at present with the Board supporting the UK line and the staff rooting for Abe.
King Cole, chat on Twitter suggested it might be to fill the gap left if New Jersey is again delayed.
On Thailand, they've banned racing in certain parts of the city. That may mean it's unlikely to go ahead. I hope so, as the calendar doesn't need yet more tedious street circuits.
Anyway. I was having a think. If you look at economic statistics this year, and compare them to what was expected at the beginning of the year, then you get the following:
UK ++ Japan ++ Spain + Ireland + USA = Germany =/- Australia - Italy - France - China --
Essentially, economic statistics have been beating expectations in the UK, Japan, Spain and Ireland; while they've been in-line in the US and Germany; Italy, France and China are the laggards.
Inside the Eurozone, it has been those countries most willing to undergo painful structural reforms and internal devaluations that have been showing the greatest improvements. While those who have buried their heads in the sand (Italy, France) are not seeing improvements.
Outside the Eurozone, the big story has been the slowdown in China.
From an economics point of view the most interesting comparison is between the UK and Japan: post austerity growth vs. stimulus growth.
Which of the two will prove to be more sustainable and freer of unwanted side-effects?
Very interesting debate going on within the IMF on this at present with the Board supporting the UK line and the staff rooting for Abe.
There are many paths to the top of the mountain, but the view is always the same.
Not convinced the two are all that far apart anyway: both have involved printing and borrowing huge sums of money. The UK is just a little further down the post-stimulus retrenchment path.
As an international organisation, it's difficult for the IMF to support competitive devaluation as a tool of policy.
Good morning everyone. Shaping up to be another cracking day on the American Riviera. Shame I was up into the small hours on a call with some German farmers.
Cyclefree from a couple of threads ago asked why "Arthur" would be too loaded a name. How high do you think expectations would be for King Arthur? (plus the only major recorded Arthur in royal history died a teenager and then his wife married his brother...)
The last Stephen was a homicidal maniac who damn near destroyed England in his bloodlust and search for personal power. Otherwise a good choice ;-)
There is apparently a new Yougov Welsh VI poll out for Westminster , Assembly and Assembly Regional . The results are mostly within M of E of the last poll for Wales in February .
I cannot understand why the Assembly poll is so markedly different from the Assembly Regional. Is this because of the silent kipper ?
It's because a decent slice of the Welsh electorate understand the voting system.
Your first vote is FPTP, so voting for minor parties is mostly a waste of time - hence large Labour vote, and relatively large Conservative and Plaid votes where they are best placed to challenge Labour in particular constituencies.
The second, regional, vote is on a PR/top-up basis, so here voting for Labour is probably a waste of time, as they will most likely take so many of the FPTP seats. However, voting for UKIP, Plaid and minor parties will likely be rewarded, particularly as those parties will in many areas not win any of the FPTP seats.
Whilst what you say is clearly true , the discrepancy between the two sets of figures in this poll is very much greater than in the last real assembly election and greater than in the Feb poll .
The Betfair baby name market is hilarious - It's the amateur traders happy hour.
Odds fluctuating all over the place, all it takes is a couple of hundred to frighten the liquidity away completely. I've managed to make the odds on Arthur double, then halve. Same for Louis. A few bookies are blatantly tracking betfair, too.
One thing is clear, no one has much of a clue. I guess I should quit before I get stung...
The British Chambers of Commerce published a report on the UK's export activities and prospects today.
It is worth quoting the principal findings in full:
The latest DHL/BCC Trade Confidence Index report – which measures UK exporting activity (Export Index) and business confidence (Confidence Index) – shows that exporting activity is at its highest level since 2007. Responses from more than 1,700 businesses show that export orders and sales have increased, with confidence levels in both future turnover and future profitability also remaining high. More businesses have taken on new staff in the second quarter of this year, with many expecting to hire further in Q3.
The index number, which is calculated from the volume of export documents issued to businesses by Chambers of Commerce, now stands at 118.12. This represents an increase of 2.85% on Q1 2013 and is 2.94% higher compared with the same quarter last year.
The key findings from the report are:
• Export orders for service sector businesses increased for 50% of firms to the highest figure on record. 44% of manufacturing firms increased their export orders resulting in the highest figure since Q1 2012.
• Nearly half of exporters (48%) said their export sales increased in Q2 2013, compared to 10% who said that they decreased.
• 42% of manufacturing firms reported an increase in export sales – up from 36% of firms in Q1. In the services sector, 52% saw export sales increase – up from 44% of firms in Q1.
• More than half of exporters (51%) believe that their profitability will increase this year, and 60% believe they will see an increase in turnover.
• Nearly a third of firms (31%) said that they expected to increase staff this year, up from 28% in Q1 2013
• The number of businesses claiming that raw material costs were adding to price pressures fell from 42% to 33% in Q2 2013. However, when broken down by size, it appears that micro firms within the service sector are still experiencing price pressures, with 46% citing this as an issue compared with only 25% in the previous quarter.
Nothing much more need be said really. Over to you, tim.
Every year between 1537 and 1547 (Edward VI, Lady Jane Grey, Mary and Elizabeth).
1470 (Edward IV, Edward V, Richard III, Henry VII).
The first year of the timeline will suffice. I'll edit accordingly.
1537 - Henry VIII - Edward VI , Jane Grey, Mary, Philip and Elizabeth
1470 - Correct.
Wouldn't it be Mary & Philip - he was King Consort rather than King in his own right (although the Spanish did have rather archaic views about the rights of women to own property and since the Crown of England was personal property it was really Philip that was King not, Mary Queen).
The Betfair baby name market is hilarious - It's the amateur traders happy hour.
Odds fluctuating all over the place, all it takes is a couple of hundred to frighten the liquidity away completely. I've managed to make the odds on Arthur double, then halve. Same for Louis. A few bookies are blatantly tracking betfair, too.
One thing is clear, no one has much of a clue. I guess I should quit before I get stung...
Yep! I think you should. Mind you I'm thinking of Richard. Richard the IV would floor everyone.
King Cole, chat on Twitter suggested it might be to fill the gap left if New Jersey is again delayed.
On Thailand, they've banned racing in certain parts of the city. That may mean it's unlikely to go ahead. I hope so, as the calendar doesn't need yet more tedious street circuits.
What is UKIP? Below is a blog that will tell you why UKIP is gaining followers and adherents, It could do with some editing but its the idea that counts: http://networkedblogs.com/Nq7hs
The Betfair baby name market is hilarious - It's the amateur traders happy hour.
Odds fluctuating all over the place, all it takes is a couple of hundred to frighten the liquidity away completely. I've managed to make the odds on Arthur double, then halve. Same for Louis. A few bookies are blatantly tracking betfair, too.
One thing is clear, no one has much of a clue. I guess I should quit before I get stung...
The golden rule with markets dominated by enthusiastic amateurs who almost certainly know nothing is: lay the favourite.
I must admit, George would be a very dull choice. If the current Prince of Wales does take George VII as his regnal name (and if the new baby is named George, the likeliness of that event has to recede a little for reasons of avoiding confusing the public - a dynamic also worth considering in reverse), it'd mean that eight of the twelve kings since 1714 would have taken it.
"generally workplaces are either almost entirely unionised or hardly at all"
Thought the closed shop had gone 30 years ago?
The Labour party came from the unions, to me they are virtually synonymous, and joining akin to a declaration of your political views. Obviously I am badly wrong on that!
But in attacking "the unions" surely Cameron (and the tories in general over decades) are essentially just attacking left wingers and left-wing attitudes to business. If a tory voter joined more or less out of expediency for pay negotiations or whatever doesn't mean they would then suddenly be upset by attacks on bloc votes or in favour of drop of a hat Bob Crow style strikes.
Every year between 1537 and 1547 (Edward VI, Lady Jane Grey, Mary and Elizabeth).
1470 (Edward IV, Edward V, Richard III, Henry VII).
The first year of the timeline will suffice. I'll edit accordingly.
1537 - Henry VIII - Edward VI , Jane Grey, Mary, Philip and Elizabeth
1470 - Correct.
Wouldn't it be Mary & Philip - he was King Consort rather than King in his own right (although the Spanish did have rather archaic views about the rights of women to own property and since the Crown of England was personal property it was really Philip that was King not, Mary Queen).
As I indicated on the last thread under the terms of the 1554 Marriage Act Philip was joint monarch and King but only in the lifetime of his wife. Acts of Parliament were issued in their joint name as was coinage and all other formal proceedings of the realm were enacted in both names.
When Mary died in 1558 Philip ceased to be King of England and Elizabeth succeeded.
Why is the media so sloppy that they keep referring to the new prince as "baby Cambridge"? He has a perfectly good title. As soon as he was born he became the Earl of Strathearn. The normal practice for an eldest son is to take his father's second title as a courtesy title. Prince Edward's son is Viscount Severn. The Duke of Kent's heir is the Earl of St Andrews. The Duke of Gloucester's heir is the Earl of Ulster.
RT @liamdutton: Today is the 18th day in a row where a temperature exceeding 28C has been recorded in the UK (via @metoffice) #c4news
At the moment, July 2013 is the joint sixth warmest July in the Central England Temperature (CET) record, 2.6C above average.
By an amusing coincidence, the most anomalously warm month in recent years was April 2011, when the CET was 3.9C above average and the parents of the Prince of Cambridge were married.
As I've enjoyed the recent sunny weather I can only hope that the Prince of Cambridge has a younger sibling soon.
Incidentally for Tim's benefit, I was a winner of the YouGov Royal baby competition, having correctly predicted that he is a he and his weight so 300 YouGov points to me
Why is the media so sloppy that they keep referring to the new prince as "baby Cambridge"? He has a perfectly good title. As soon as he was born he became the Earl of Strathearn. The normal practice for an eldest son is to take his father's second title as a courtesy title. Prince Edward's son is Viscount Severn. The Duke of Kent's heir is the Earl of St Andrews. The Duke of Gloucester's heir is the Earl of Ulster.
Prince of Cambridge has been used quite widely in the media.
I've been more surprised by the number of media outlets that have referred to the Duchess of Cambridge as Kate Middleton.
I do wonder how much use CFD is. Newey seems to not really bother with it (in relative terms) and just uses a drawing board.
Virgin tried CFD-only for their first couple of seasons in, when Wirth was their designer. They eschewed the wind tunnel.
Marussia (the renamed Virgin) now use a wind tunnel as well. Go figure. ;-)
As I understand it, a few designers (Murray being one, Newey another) have an uncanny instinctual knowledge of what works. In Newey's case, it is aerodynamics. They way I heard it described, give him three different detailed designs to achieve something, and he'll sketch out a fourth that is better than the other three. He then passes it onto his Red Bull-fuelled minions to sort out the details in CFD and the wind tunnel.
Having one person who has an instinctual knowledge of the car - as Newey does, and if rumours are correct, Bob Bell - is vital. The whole has to work together as one, and that is hard to do without an overall God-like Authority. And it takes time for the Authority to work his magic, so teams that swap and change technical directors are on a hiding to nothing.
The only question is when (if) Newey gets bored of F1. He nearly did when he left McLaren - he wanted to design racing sailboats. People like him are few and far between. I have heard little but praise of him, both as a genius and a person.
Why is the media so sloppy that they keep referring to the new prince as "baby Cambridge"? He has a perfectly good title. As soon as he was born he became the Earl of Strathearn. The normal practice for an eldest son is to take his father's second title as a courtesy title. Prince Edward's son is Viscount Severn. The Duke of Kent's heir is the Earl of St Andrews. The Duke of Gloucester's heir is the Earl of Ulster.
Mr. Jessop, whilst I admire Newey's talents they are making the recent seasons more boring than might otherwise be the case. I want a new world champion.
It's probably also damaging Vettel's reputation as a driver. He's immensely fast, but there's a view that his car has almost always given him more of an edge than his ability. I don't think that's entirely fair, particularly in 2010 and 2012.
@David Herdson John, Henry III, Edward I are three oldest sons in a row. John's father was Henry II, but John was not the oldest son.
John was not an eldest son (IIRC, he was about the fifth of Henry II's, though the second to survive him after Richard I), so that was only a run of two. You are quite close to an instance though.
a) no not a good name for our future monarch; but b) He & the Tories must be loving the attention that Lab, the Media are lavishing on lobbygate. They look to be white (if not whiter-than-white) and also look to be in the mood to fight this all day and night. This isn't a case of the protagonist disappearing while the PM gives his "support". LC is coming out fighting and it's showing the issue to be non and him to be focused and sincere.
Why is the media so sloppy that they keep referring to the new prince as "baby Cambridge"? He has a perfectly good title. As soon as he was born he became the Earl of Strathearn. The normal practice for an eldest son is to take his father's second title as a courtesy title. Prince Edward's son is Viscount Severn. The Duke of Kent's heir is the Earl of St Andrews. The Duke of Gloucester's heir is the Earl of Ulster.
Prince of Cambridge has been used quite widely in the media.
I've been more surprised by the number of media outlets that have referred to the Duchess of Cambridge as Kate Middleton.
Why is the media so sloppy that they keep referring to the new prince as "baby Cambridge"? He has a perfectly good title. As soon as he was born he became the Earl of Strathearn. The normal practice for an eldest son is to take his father's second title as a courtesy title. Prince Edward's son is Viscount Severn. The Duke of Kent's heir is the Earl of St Andrews. The Duke of Gloucester's heir is the Earl of Ulster.
Prince of Cambridge has been used quite widely in the media.
I've been more surprised by the number of media outlets that have referred to the Duchess of Cambridge as Kate Middleton.
Prince of Cambridge is just not correct, as JackW and I discussed ad nauseum some weeks ago.
BBC's Ms Flanders appears to be getting it at last.
" I know readers will be jumping to correct me. In a recent poll by Ipsos Mori, 48% of people agreed with the statement that "budget cuts have gone too far and threaten social unrest."
But here's the funny thing; the same poll asked people whether they had personally noticed a change in the quality of their local services. 65% said they had not.
That fits with the anecdotal evidence I've been getting, travelling around the UK. Nearly every council leader I speak to - Labour or Conservative - says they're worried about future cuts, but they also say they've managed to protect the bulk of services so far.
The level of satisfaction with some councils is even going up: 74% of people now say they are satisfied with the services delivered by Hackney Council, for example. That compares with 23% in 2001 and 53% in 2006. (Thanks to Ben Page of Ipsos Mori for drawing my attention to these numbers.) ... http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-23424527
Why is the media so sloppy that they keep referring to the new prince as "baby Cambridge"? He has a perfectly good title. As soon as he was born he became the Earl of Strathearn. The normal practice for an eldest son is to take his father's second title as a courtesy title. Prince Edward's son is Viscount Severn. The Duke of Kent's heir is the Earl of St Andrews. The Duke of Gloucester's heir is the Earl of Ulster.
But wouldn't that leave Prince William without a Scottish title? I'm not sure that it would work in the normal way in these circumstances.
o/t - Ireland will have a referendum on 4 October to abolish the second chamber of Parliament (Seanad). Paddy Power will give you 1/2 on it passing or 6/4 on voters deciding the want to pay loads of politicians to sit around doing very little:
Good morning everyone. Shaping up to be another cracking day on the American Riviera. Shame I was up into the small hours on a call with some German farmers.
Cyclefree from a couple of threads ago asked why "Arthur" would be too loaded a name. How high do you think expectations would be for King Arthur? (plus the only major recorded Arthur in royal history died a teenager and then his wife married his brother...)
The last Stephen was a homicidal maniac who damn near destroyed England in his bloodlust and search for personal power. Otherwise a good choice ;-)
Well Charles is an even more loaded name so Arthur's fine. Stephen is a lovely name as is Patrick but the latter will be seen as too Irish and /or Catholic. Arthur, Philip, Francis, Stephen are all old-fashioned names that have stood the test of time.
But wouldn't that leave Prince William without a Scottish title? I'm not sure that it would work in the normal way in these circumstances.
Prince William can still be referred to as the Earl of Strathearn in Scotland. The Duke of Kent is the Earl of St Andrews in Scotland and the Duke of Gloucester is Lord Culloden in Scotland. Prince William should actually have been known as the Earl of Carrick in Scotland but now he has his own Scottish title he can use it.
Twitter norman smith @BBCNormanS 19s Cabinet Secretary Sir Jeremy Haywood rejects Labour call for an inquiry into Lynton Crosby's role
Well, what a surprise. Quite why Labour thought he'd want to inquire into the role of someone who is not employed by the government and has no role in government is a mystery, or at least it would be a mystery if Labour weren't a bunch of smearing shysters.
There seems to be a convention that royal princes do not use courtesy titles
You are quite correct. The child will probably be known as HRH George (or whatever) of Cambridge. It is a shame he will not use his father's title which as a Royal Duke he would perfectly be entitled to do. There remains a great deal of debate over whether James Severn is a Prince or not though under the Royal Letters Patent he is but his grandmother allows him to be simply known as Viscount Severn.
Why is the media so sloppy that they keep referring to the new prince as "baby Cambridge"? He has a perfectly good title. As soon as he was born he became the Earl of Strathearn. The normal practice for an eldest son is to take his father's second title as a courtesy title. Prince Edward's son is Viscount Severn. The Duke of Kent's heir is the Earl of St Andrews. The Duke of Gloucester's heir is the Earl of Ulster.
But wouldn't that leave Prince William without a Scottish title? I'm not sure that it would work in the normal way in these circumstances.
No Charles. The Duke of Cambridge retains the substantive title Earl of Srathearn but the baby uses it as a courtesy title.
One other point when the Prince of Wales becomes king then Prince William will be both Duke and Earl of Strathearn.
o/t - Ireland will have a referendum on 4 October to abolish the second chamber of Parliament (Seanad). Paddy Power will give you 1/2 on it passing or 6/4 on voters deciding the want to pay loads of politicians to sit around doing very little:
I think it will pass but I wouldnt be tempted by those odds. They had much more generous odds on the referendum happening next year but they have withdrawn that market now.
Why is the media so sloppy that they keep referring to the new prince as "baby Cambridge"? He has a perfectly good title. As soon as he was born he became the Earl of Strathearn. The normal practice for an eldest son is to take his father's second title as a courtesy title. Prince Edward's son is Viscount Severn. The Duke of Kent's heir is the Earl of St Andrews. The Duke of Gloucester's heir is the Earl of Ulster.
But wouldn't that leave Prince William without a Scottish title? I'm not sure that it would work in the normal way in these circumstances.
No Charles. The Duke of Cambridge retains the substantive title Earl of Srathearn but the baby uses it as a courtesy title.
One other point when the Prince of Wales becomes king then Prince William will be both Duke and Earl of Strathearn.
Thank you Jack, I assume like me, you are a distant cousin of the little fellow? You however will be related through the Jacobite Tory line whereas I am related through dodgy Hanoverian Whig lines
I think it will pass but I wouldnt be tempted by those odds. They had much more generous odds on the referendum happening next year but they have withdrawn that market now.
Why is the media so sloppy that they keep referring to the new prince as "baby Cambridge"? He has a perfectly good title. As soon as he was born he became the Earl of Strathearn. The normal practice for an eldest son is to take his father's second title as a courtesy title. Prince Edward's son is Viscount Severn. The Duke of Kent's heir is the Earl of St Andrews. The Duke of Gloucester's heir is the Earl of Ulster.
But wouldn't that leave Prince William without a Scottish title? I'm not sure that it would work in the normal way in these circumstances.
No Charles. The Duke of Cambridge retains the substantive title Earl of Srathearn but the baby uses it as a courtesy title.
One other point when the Prince of Wales becomes king then Prince William will be both Duke and Earl of Strathearn.
Thank you Jack, I assume like me, you are a distant cousin of the little fellow? You however will be related through the Jacobite Tory line whereas I am related through dodgy Hanoverian Whig lines
Ha ha ... The curse of those dodgy Liberals strikes you.
@David Herdson John, Henry III, Edward I are three oldest sons in a row. John's father was Henry II, but John was not the oldest son.
John was not an eldest son (IIRC, he was about the fifth of Henry II's, though the second to survive him after Richard I), so that was only a run of two. You are quite close to an instance though.
Henry IV V and VI
Hello Jack - apologies for the delay - 2/3 only, I'm afraid. Henry IV was not himself the eldest son of a monarch.
If Spurs sell Gareth Bale, and once again become a selling club destined to be a 5th/6th fighting enterprise, as happened after Carrick, Berbatov, Modric etc.
And as a direct result of not buying a striker in Jan 2013 despite the weighty intervention I made here on PB, thus missing out on Champo League....
Scrapheap PLC will resign the Lilywhite whip and consider it's future as an independent - End of news.
Why is the media so sloppy that they keep referring to the new prince as "baby Cambridge"? He has a perfectly good title. As soon as he was born he became the Earl of Strathearn. The normal practice for an eldest son is to take his father's second title as a courtesy title. Prince Edward's son is Viscount Severn. The Duke of Kent's heir is the Earl of St Andrews. The Duke of Gloucester's heir is the Earl of Ulster.
Prince of Cambridge has been used quite widely in the media.
I've been more surprised by the number of media outlets that have referred to the Duchess of Cambridge as Kate Middleton.
Prince of Cambridge is just not correct, as JackW and I discussed ad nauseum some weeks ago.
Oh, well, I evidently misremembered what I read there and elsewhere.
From what I can make out the Prince will simply be Prince {name}, and since it is the custom to label babies in hospital as Baby {surname}, that would presumably make the baby currently Prince Baby Cambridge...
Oh, well, I evidently misremembered what I read there and elsewhere.
From what I can make out the Prince will simply be Prince {name}, and since it is the custom to label babies in hospital as Baby {surname}, that would presumably make the baby currently Prince Baby Cambridge...
The distinction I made was between X, Prince of Cambridge, and Prince X of Cambridge.
Perhaps we should draw up a list of royal names that have unaccountably fallen out of fashion in recent years for the royal couple to consider. I'll set the ball rolling with Athelstan and Leopold.
TIM WE HAVE BEEN HERE BEFORE ABOUT THE CCTV TAPES . IF YOU POST ABOUT IT < I WANT TO SEE A CLEAR LINK FROM A REPUTABLE NEWS ORGANISATION SPECIFICALLY BACKING UP WHAT YOU SAY .
"Of course, Crosby's timing is pretty shrewd*, finally burying the row under the cover of the Royal Baby news.
But there is one other possible explanation: the PM always knew this was a non-starter and wanted Labour to inflate the balloon just so it could be poppped easily this week. Maybe that's too clever by half.
Yet some in Labour's ranks wonder whether making Lynton Crosby the bogeyman is all that smart. Trying to make him a proxy for saying Cam is in hock to Big Tobacco, Big Booze and Big Oil was always going to founder without evidence. Some think that it's better to make each case on its merits and on his failure to make the right judgment call on policy, not his choice of CCHQ strategist. Coming across as conspiracy theorists never endears the voters, especially if the conspiracy is disproved.
The 'lobbying scandal that never was' is less important than the actual policy decisions taken. As Elvis didn't quite put it, a little less about the 'conversation', a little more about the 'action' (or inaction) may be Labour's better tactic.
*FOOTNOTE: The fact that the Cabinet Secretary has also today replied to Ed Miliband to say there's no need for an investigation suggests a wider No.10 strategy here too."
Perhaps we should draw up a list of royal names that have unaccountably fallen out of fashion in recent years for the royal couple to consider. I'll set the ball rolling with Athelstan and Leopold.
Leopold falling out of fashion is not unaccountable - a King Leopold would only be slightly more appropriate than a King Stalin or King Pol Pot!
"generally workplaces are either almost entirely unionised or hardly at all"
Thought the closed shop had gone 30 years ago?
The Labour party came from the unions, to me they are virtually synonymous, and joining akin to a declaration of your political views. Obviously I am badly wrong on that!
But in attacking "the unions" surely Cameron (and the tories in general over decades) are essentially just attacking left wingers and left-wing attitudes to business. If a tory voter joined more or less out of expediency for pay negotiations or whatever doesn't mean they would then suddenly be upset by attacks on bloc votes or in favour of drop of a hat Bob Crow style strikes.
The closed shop made it compulsory, and that's gone. But if nearly everyone is a member and they negotiate on your behalf because you have a collective contract, it makes sense - witness the Tories on this thread who have been active members. Think of them as staff associations if that helps?
Attacking unions per se will tend to annoy the not very political people who form much of the membership, in much the same way as when left-wingers attack people for shopping at Tesco instead of their local friendly cooperative. Most union members don't really think very much about the union at all most of the time (which is why turnout for leadership votes is low - most members have little idea who the candidates are, and don't really care very much), and don't see it as a political thing, but more as a possibly useful protection.
Just seen a bit on the news about just how much money has been bet on the Royal baby's name, especially in the last few days. So no surprise that the topic is generating so much talk on a betting site. And I must admit I loved going through baby name books while pregnant and choosing the names.
But this isn't a betting site. It's a political betting site. But I know when I'm beaten... I'll come back tomorrow and see if you've all calmed down...:-)
Why is the media so sloppy that they keep referring to the new prince as "baby Cambridge"? He has a perfectly good title. As soon as he was born he became the Earl of Strathearn. The normal practice for an eldest son is to take his father's second title as a courtesy title. Prince Edward's son is Viscount Severn. The Duke of Kent's heir is the Earl of St Andrews. The Duke of Gloucester's heir is the Earl of Ulster.
Prince of Cambridge has been used quite widely in the media.
I've been more surprised by the number of media outlets that have referred to the Duchess of Cambridge as Kate Middleton.
Prince of Cambridge is just not correct, as JackW and I discussed ad nauseum some weeks ago.
Oh, well, I evidently misremembered what I read there and elsewhere.
From what I can make out the Prince will simply be Prince {name}, and since it is the custom to label babies in hospital as Baby {surname}, that would presumably make the baby currently Prince Baby Cambridge...
The new baby will be titled HRH Prince "Name" of Cambridge but will probably be commonly known as Prince "Name" just as Prince William and Prince Harry are.
One near miss on the Scottish monarchy side is James II and then James III and IV
However James II was the younger twin son of James I. The elder son Alexander died some days after birth.
James II was also a second son, to one who died in infancy.
Quite a number of near misses. It shows how rare 1894 and 2013 are.
1894 doesn't count either - George V was also a second son.
To give the answer (boo), as far as I can tell, there haven't been *any* examples of three successive British monarchs, each of whom was the eldest son of their predecessor. If Charles becomes king, followed by William and then the new baby, it will be a first.
There are (at least?) two other examples of the current position - where there are three eldest sons in line (or where one or more has already succeeded), but without them all having been monarch themselves.
One is during the short life of Edward I's eldest son, John, who lived from 1266-71. Edward himself being the eldest son of Henry III who was the first son of King John. The other (less to your taste, I assume) occurred between the birth of the future George III in 1738 and the death of his father, Frederick, in 1751. Frederick broke the chain by predeceasing his father, George II, with George I completing that set.
PBModerator valiantly attempting to slow tims posting rate down by making him find a link each time he posts.
I'm sure the link, when he provides it, will be chock full of lovely facts and not the opinions of the author, as opinions are, apparently, verboten on here.
Why is the media so sloppy that they keep referring to the new prince as "baby Cambridge"? He has a perfectly good title. As soon as he was born he became the Earl of Strathearn. The normal practice for an eldest son is to take his father's second title as a courtesy title. Prince Edward's son is Viscount Severn. The Duke of Kent's heir is the Earl of St Andrews. The Duke of Gloucester's heir is the Earl of Ulster.
That does not hold when the child born is a royal prince or princess. Had Prince Edward's children not eschewed the title of royal prince or princess, Viscount Severn would be known as Prince James of Wessex. The child is Prince of Cambridge in his own right, not Earl of Strathearn out of courtesy.
One near miss on the Scottish monarchy side is James II and then James III and IV
However James II was the younger twin son of James I. The elder son Alexander died some days after birth.
James II was also a second son, to one who died in infancy.
Quite a number of near misses. It shows how rare 1894 and 2013 are.
1894 doesn't count either - George V was also a second son.
To give the answer (boo), as far as I can tell, there haven't been *any* examples of three successive British monarchs, each of whom was the eldest son of their predecessor. If Charles becomes king, followed by William and then the new baby, it will be a first.
There are (at least?) two other examples of the current position - where there are three eldest sons in line (or where one or more has already succeeded), but without them all having been monarch themselves.
One is during the short life of Edward I's eldest son, John, who lived from 1266-71. Edward himself being the eldest son of Henry III who was the first son of King John. The other (less to your taste, I assume) occurred between the birth of the future George III in 1738 and the death of his father, Frederick, in 1751. Frederick broke the chain by predeceasing his father, George II, with George I completing that set.
You naughty fellow Herders.
Good quiz though .... even better as I got some wrong !! Just shows you should always check the books and not rely on the old grey (fading) matter.
Comments
"While we are talking about lobbyists, it is time for Ed to come clean about his own dealings. Back in October 2011, getting on for two years ago now, Guido asked Miliband to name the predator lobbyists he had dined with at the home of Roland Rudd. He promised to reveal all:
“I will definitely release the names of the people who were at the dinner.”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Mm8Ojv7kHYg
21 months on, Miliband is still refusing to say who was present. Just because Rudd’s known clients include investment banks, not so environmentally sensitive mining companies and firms owned by asset stripping private equity companies, there is no reason for Ed to be shy. Of course there definitely wouldn’t have been any other dodgy lobbyists present at the dinner who lobbied him about anything unsavoury. With Miliband repeatedly saying Cameron “can’t keep evading questions”, he wouldn’t want to be accused of hypocrisy. Guido is sure he has as convincing and full-proof an answer as Crosby’s, so now would be as good a time as ever for him to stay true to his word. Over to you, Ed…" http://order-order.com/2013/07/23/two-years-since-ed-promised-lobbying-dinner-details/
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/10197099/What-bubble-Mortgage-lending-remains-subdued.html
Edit - Oh yes also NUS for the cheap beer
I didn't put the character limit in - blame Dad!
Anyway. I was having a think. If you look at economic statistics this year, and compare them to what was expected at the beginning of the year, then you get the following:
UK ++
Japan ++
Spain +
Ireland +
USA =
Germany =/-
Australia -
Italy -
France -
China --
Essentially, economic statistics have been beating expectations in the UK, Japan, Spain and Ireland; while they've been in-line in the US and Germany; Italy, France and China are the laggards.
Inside the Eurozone, it has been those countries most willing to undergo painful structural reforms and internal devaluations that have been showing the greatest improvements. While those who have buried their heads in the sand (Italy, France) are not seeing improvements.
Outside the Eurozone, the big story has been the slowdown in China.
Mark White @skymarkwhite
BREAKING - 44 y/o Nicholas Jacobs charged with the murder of PC Keith Blakelock in the Broadwater Farm riots almost 3 decades ago
BREAK - Nicholas Jacobs was teenager at time PC Keith Blakelock was murdered. Jacobs allegedly part of the mob who stabbed the PC to death
BREAK - It's understood significant new witness statements and DNA advances have helped make PC Blakelock murder charge possible
Your first vote is FPTP, so voting for minor parties is mostly a waste of time - hence large Labour vote, and relatively large Conservative and Plaid votes where they are best placed to challenge Labour in particular constituencies.
The second, regional, vote is on a PR/top-up basis, so here voting for Labour is probably a waste of time, as they will most likely take so many of the FPTP seats. However, voting for UKIP, Plaid and minor parties will likely be rewarded, particularly as those parties will in many areas not win any of the FPTP seats.
Which of the two will prove to be more sustainable and freer of unwanted side-effects?
Very interesting debate going on within the IMF on this at present with the Board supporting the UK line and the staff rooting for Abe.
On Thailand, they've banned racing in certain parts of the city. That may mean it's unlikely to go ahead. I hope so, as the calendar doesn't need yet more tedious street circuits.
Edited extra bit: more on Austria here: http://www.espn.co.uk/f1/motorsport/story/117581.html
Korea seems like it'll go sooner or later.
Not convinced the two are all that far apart anyway: both have involved printing and borrowing huge sums of money. The UK is just a little further down the post-stimulus retrenchment path.
As an international organisation, it's difficult for the IMF to support competitive devaluation as a tool of policy.
Cyclefree from a couple of threads ago asked why "Arthur" would be too loaded a name. How high do you think expectations would be for King Arthur? (plus the only major recorded Arthur in royal history died a teenager and then his wife married his brother...)
The last Stephen was a homicidal maniac who damn near destroyed England in his bloodlust and search for personal power. Otherwise a good choice ;-)
Odds fluctuating all over the place, all it takes is a couple of hundred to frighten the liquidity away completely. I've managed to make the odds on Arthur double, then halve. Same for Louis. A few bookies are blatantly tracking betfair, too.
One thing is clear, no one has much of a clue. I guess I should quit before I get stung...
RT @liamdutton: Today is the 18th day in a row where a temperature exceeding 28C has been recorded in the UK (via @metoffice) #c4news
The British Chambers of Commerce published a report on the UK's export activities and prospects today.
It is worth quoting the principal findings in full:
The latest DHL/BCC Trade Confidence Index report – which measures UK exporting activity (Export Index) and business confidence (Confidence Index) – shows that exporting activity is at its highest level since 2007. Responses from more than 1,700 businesses show that export orders and sales have increased, with confidence levels in both future turnover and future profitability also remaining high. More businesses have taken on new staff in the second quarter of this year, with many expecting to hire further in Q3.
The index number, which is calculated from the volume of export documents issued to businesses by Chambers of Commerce, now stands at 118.12. This represents an increase of 2.85% on Q1 2013 and is 2.94% higher compared with the same quarter last year.
The key findings from the report are:
• Export orders for service sector businesses increased for 50% of firms to the highest figure on record. 44% of manufacturing firms increased their export orders resulting in the highest figure since Q1 2012.
• Nearly half of exporters (48%) said their export sales increased in Q2 2013, compared to 10% who said that they decreased.
• 42% of manufacturing firms reported an increase in export sales – up from 36% of firms in Q1. In the services sector, 52% saw export sales increase – up from 44% of firms in Q1.
• More than half of exporters (51%) believe that their profitability will increase this year, and 60% believe they will see an increase in turnover.
• Nearly a third of firms (31%) said that they expected to increase staff this year, up from 28% in Q1 2013
• The number of businesses claiming that raw material costs were adding to price pressures fell from 42% to 33% in Q2 2013. However, when broken down by size, it appears that micro firms within the service sector are still experiencing price pressures, with 46% citing this as an issue compared with only 25% in the previous quarter.
Nothing much more need be said really. Over to you, tim.
King Trajan sounds like the sort of chap who'd not put up with any nonsense.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/07/22/lotus_f1_team_sneak_peak_behind_scenes_supercomputer/
"David Cameron still has to answer the question about whether Lynton Crosby had any conversations with him."
This is not a spoof, but (according to the Beeb) a genuine quote from a Labour source!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-23423947
May I respectfully suggest a very old name from the British Isles and a saint's name too: PATRICK
Prince Patrick of Cambridge. Yes - that's good.
Below is a blog that will tell you why UKIP is gaining followers and adherents,
It could do with some editing but its the idea that counts:
http://networkedblogs.com/Nq7hs
I do wonder how much use CFD is. Newey seems to not really bother with it (in relative terms) and just uses a drawing board.
I must admit, George would be a very dull choice. If the current Prince of Wales does take George VII as his regnal name (and if the new baby is named George, the likeliness of that event has to recede a little for reasons of avoiding confusing the public - a dynamic also worth considering in reverse), it'd mean that eight of the twelve kings since 1714 would have taken it.
Nick Palmer said
"generally workplaces are either almost entirely unionised or hardly at all"
Thought the closed shop had gone 30 years ago?
The Labour party came from the unions, to me they are virtually synonymous, and joining akin to a declaration of your political views. Obviously I am badly wrong on that!
But in attacking "the unions" surely Cameron (and the tories in general over decades) are essentially just attacking left wingers and left-wing attitudes to business. If a tory voter joined more or less out of expediency for pay negotiations or whatever doesn't mean they would then suddenly be upset by attacks on bloc votes or in favour of drop of a hat Bob Crow style strikes.
When Mary died in 1558 Philip ceased to be King of England and Elizabeth succeeded.
...................................................
Moving Quiz IV along ;
1662 - Charles II and James II, William III, George I and Mary II
By an amusing coincidence, the most anomalously warm month in recent years was April 2011, when the CET was 3.9C above average and the parents of the Prince of Cambridge were married.
As I've enjoyed the recent sunny weather I can only hope that the Prince of Cambridge has a younger sibling soon.
I've been more surprised by the number of media outlets that have referred to the Duchess of Cambridge as Kate Middleton.
Marussia (the renamed Virgin) now use a wind tunnel as well. Go figure. ;-)
As I understand it, a few designers (Murray being one, Newey another) have an uncanny instinctual knowledge of what works. In Newey's case, it is aerodynamics. They way I heard it described, give him three different detailed designs to achieve something, and he'll sketch out a fourth that is better than the other three. He then passes it onto his Red Bull-fuelled minions to sort out the details in CFD and the wind tunnel.
Having one person who has an instinctual knowledge of the car - as Newey does, and if rumours are correct, Bob Bell - is vital. The whole has to work together as one, and that is hard to do without an overall God-like Authority. And it takes time for the Authority to work his magic, so teams that swap and change technical directors are on a hiding to nothing.
The only question is when (if) Newey gets bored of F1. He nearly did when he left McLaren - he wanted to design racing sailboats. People like him are few and far between. I have heard little but praise of him, both as a genius and a person.
http://order-order.com/2013/07/23/the-invitation-westminster-advisers-wont-comment-about/
It's probably also damaging Vettel's reputation as a driver. He's immensely fast, but there's a view that his car has almost always given him more of an edge than his ability. I don't think that's entirely fair, particularly in 2010 and 2012.
a) no not a good name for our future monarch; but
b) He & the Tories must be loving the attention that Lab, the Media are lavishing on lobbygate. They look to be white (if not whiter-than-white) and also look to be in the mood to fight this all day and night. This isn't a case of the protagonist disappearing while the PM gives his "support". LC is coming out fighting and it's showing the issue to be non and him to be focused and sincere.
http://order-order.com/2013/07/23/two-years-since-ed-promised-lobbying-dinner-details/
Over one and a half years, and he still has not released the names. What is he hiding?
There seems to be a convention that royal princes do not use courtesy titles
King John's eldest son Henry III and Edward I II and III
" I know readers will be jumping to correct me. In a recent poll by Ipsos Mori, 48% of people agreed with the statement that "budget cuts have gone too far and threaten social unrest."
But here's the funny thing; the same poll asked people whether they had personally noticed a change in the quality of their local services. 65% said they had not.
That fits with the anecdotal evidence I've been getting, travelling around the UK. Nearly every council leader I speak to - Labour or Conservative - says they're worried about future cuts, but they also say they've managed to protect the bulk of services so far.
The level of satisfaction with some councils is even going up: 74% of people now say they are satisfied with the services delivered by Hackney Council, for example. That compares with 23% in 2001 and 53% in 2006. (Thanks to Ben Page of Ipsos Mori for drawing my attention to these numbers.) ... http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-23424527
@politicshome
.@Markfergusonuk heads today's Five at Five: Only weeks after Falkirk, another selection row is underway http://polho.me/vr4TiT
http://www.paddypower.com/bet/politics/other-politics/irish-politics?ev_oc_grp_ids=1195154
I presume the referendum will pass but dont know enough to venture a guess as to whether 1/2 is value.
norman smith @BBCNormanS 19s
Cabinet Secretary Sir Jeremy Haywood rejects Labour call for an inquiry into Lynton Crosby's role
One other point when the Prince of Wales becomes king then Prince William will be both Duke and Earl of Strathearn.
One near miss on the Scottish monarchy side is James II and then James III and IV
However James II was the younger twin son of James I. The elder son Alexander died some days after birth.
I think it will pass but I wouldnt be tempted by those odds. They had much more generous odds on the referendum happening next year but they have withdrawn that market now.
If Spurs sell Gareth Bale, and once again become a selling club destined to be a 5th/6th fighting enterprise, as happened after Carrick, Berbatov, Modric etc.
And as a direct result of not buying a striker in Jan 2013 despite the weighty intervention I made here on PB, thus missing out on Champo League....
Scrapheap PLC will resign the Lilywhite whip and consider it's future as an independent - End of news.
From what I can make out the Prince will simply be Prince {name}, and since it is the custom to label babies in hospital as Baby {surname}, that would presumably make the baby currently Prince Baby Cambridge...
WE HAVE BEEN HERE BEFORE ABOUT THE CCTV TAPES . IF YOU POST ABOUT IT < I WANT TO SEE A CLEAR LINK FROM A REPUTABLE NEWS ORGANISATION SPECIFICALLY BACKING UP WHAT YOU SAY .
"Of course, Crosby's timing is pretty shrewd*, finally burying the row under the cover of the Royal Baby news.
But there is one other possible explanation: the PM always knew this was a non-starter and wanted Labour to inflate the balloon just so it could be poppped easily this week. Maybe that's too clever by half.
Yet some in Labour's ranks wonder whether making Lynton Crosby the bogeyman is all that smart. Trying to make him a proxy for saying Cam is in hock to Big Tobacco, Big Booze and Big Oil was always going to founder without evidence. Some think that it's better to make each case on its merits and on his failure to make the right judgment call on policy, not his choice of CCHQ strategist. Coming across as conspiracy theorists never endears the voters, especially if the conspiracy is disproved.
The 'lobbying scandal that never was' is less important than the actual policy decisions taken. As Elvis didn't quite put it, a little less about the 'conversation', a little more about the 'action' (or inaction) may be Labour's better tactic.
*FOOTNOTE: The fact that the Cabinet Secretary has also today replied to Ed Miliband to say there's no need for an investigation suggests a wider No.10 strategy here too."
Attacking unions per se will tend to annoy the not very political people who form much of the membership, in much the same way as when left-wingers attack people for shopping at Tesco instead of their local friendly cooperative. Most union members don't really think very much about the union at all most of the time (which is why turnout for leadership votes is low - most members have little idea who the candidates are, and don't really care very much), and don't see it as a political thing, but more as a possibly useful protection. But this isn't a betting site. It's a political betting site. But I know when I'm beaten... I'll come back tomorrow and see if you've all calmed down...:-)
For some reason history's despots seem to get cuddlier and more acceptable with time!
To give the answer (boo), as far as I can tell, there haven't been *any* examples of three successive British monarchs, each of whom was the eldest son of their predecessor. If Charles becomes king, followed by William and then the new baby, it will be a first.
There are (at least?) two other examples of the current position - where there are three eldest sons in line (or where one or more has already succeeded), but without them all having been monarch themselves.
One is during the short life of Edward I's eldest son, John, who lived from 1266-71. Edward himself being the eldest son of Henry III who was the first son of King John. The other (less to your taste, I assume) occurred between the birth of the future George III in 1738 and the death of his father, Frederick, in 1751. Frederick broke the chain by predeceasing his father, George II, with George I completing that set.
He was a germanic hero as well, Atli in Norse or Etzel in german. His name might even be germanic, although he probably wasn't.
Good quiz though .... even better as I got some wrong !! Just shows you should always check the books and not rely on the old grey (fading) matter.