Tory vans are just empty posturing to detract from other issues
Is that a joke post,what about this sentence - tim's empty anti tory posturing is to detract from the labour opposition having no policies and are useless.
I am not sure that privatisation is wholly responsible for advances in information technology.
You have a point but you have to wonder why advances in technology in the private sector haven't been matched by similar ones on the track side.
The best railway franchise is said to be Chiltern, where the private train operator is allowed (in an experiment) to work more closely with the track people. That's happening on SWT too.
Which brings me on to another point. Rail nationalisation will make an enemyfor labour of every single train operating company, and rightly or wrongly that includes some people with very deep pockets.
Tory vans are just empty posturing to detract from other issues
From a political POV seems to be working doesn't it?
On a website where Tory posters believed the 13,000 deaths/TripAdvisor stuff it doesn't surprise me that they think some stupid vans are a triumph while ignoring the fact that the govt is breaking its promise to count people exiting the country and using a tourism survey for the basis of their policy instead
Get use to it,your party (LABOUR)isn't trusted on immigration.
BBC Breaking News @BBCBreaking 2m The US economy grew at an annualised pace of 1.7% in the second quarter of the year, official figures show http://bbc.in/1aWtTFW
So that would be the UK economy growing faster than the US in the last 3 months...
@loveandgarbage: If a minister shows himself inept at decision making in one dept it may be because of poor legal advice,. To do it in two depts though...
Whatever the rights and wrongs of the decision, and I don't have nearly enough information to express a view, I think that the Judge in this case should have reflected on the comments made by Laws LJ yesterday that were quoted here.
The role of the courts is not to get involved in micro management of government decisions or to make value judgements that are properly political decisions. Every time a court does this another wave of these cases is encouraged and triggered. This was a problem for the last government as much as this. It encourages delay, additional public cost and paralysis. It really needs to be stopped.
1. Vicky Ford MEP 2. Geoffrey Van Orden MEP 3. David Campbell Bannerman MEP 4. John Flack 5. Tom Hunt 6. Margaret Simons 7. Jonathan Collett
It would have been interesting to see a ballot with DCB vs Ford and Van Orden. Top 2 places are safe, third can be at risk. Not automatically reselecting him, they deprived him the chance to push one of 2 other MEPs down into the dangerous spot.
NO I'm saying the state track operator is dragging its feet massively on performance to make the private train companies look bad.
No matter how good the trains are, they can't run without the rails and the signals.
The latter are operated by the government.
AIUI, this is one of the problems with splitting tracks and trains. As demand has gone up, capacity has not. This means that more trains are being squeezed onto existing tracks, leaving less time for maintenance.
If it was just one organisation, sane conversations (sh/w)ould take place to schedule maintenance. Instead, Network Rail has to pay operators money when lines are not available and this leads to a clash between NR and the operators. There is also allegedly a great deal of blame-giving going on, and operators have an incentive to over-claim for delays.
This would have happened however we split the infrastructure from the operators.
As someone said below, the co-operation between Chiltern and NR appears to be working so far.
Shapps/Green does realise that McCluskey is that bloke who Miliband has been having a big public disagreement with does he?
Whatever the truth, the politics is clear. The tories intend to put Ed and other labour MPs in concrete Unite overshoes.
When Unite's political strategy to take over Labour PPC seats is public, its sponsorship of MPs and their offices/campaigns ditto and EdM got the Leadership because they bent the rules... well it doesn't take David Beckham to get the ball in the back of the net.
Labour are terribly vulnerable for at least the next 9 months. And them saying LOOK LOOK TORIES doesn't change the fact that Tory donors have NO VOTES about who is Party leader or any of their MPs or have an official NEC type role in policy setting.
Very interesting, especially with the "low" amount of football testing on what must be the richest and most played/supported sport. Whilst some footballers have been found with "recreational" drugs I can't recall any using performance enhancing drugs - does it just not happen? You would have thought that with the large sums of money in the sport it would, but if it is not in the football culture then that's a great positive for the sport.
Talking about the trains, I agree the current franchising system is far from ideal. I would go the other way and break up Network Rail. I would then have 4-6 privatised companies who own the track, the trains and the stations. I would then cancel all government subsidies and expect the railways to stand on their own two feet. An exception would be that some unprofitable lines could be kept in public ownership and made community railway lines (the government would pay one of the new 4-6 companies to run these lines)
there's nothing wrong about Unite to back candidates in PPC selections. If they do in a perfectly legal way. Progess has done that for years through training and logistical help.
But Unions are a bit crap (and that's probably why some thought it was necessery to overstep the mark in Falkirk) and they are losing more PPC contests than those they are winning so far.
But there's nothing surprising about Tories throwing the mud around (to all PPCs who are members of a Union..given they are Labour, 90% are probably members of some unions. And it's more likely to be a Unite, Unison or GMB member than a Musicians Union member). Labour would have done the same.
On topic, the normal response to a dilemma like this is to sew up one support base then pivot and appeal to the next one. The normal technique is to satisfy your own side first, then aim for centrists closer to the election. This works because your own side are now focused on the contrast between you and your main opponent, so they'll forgive the centrism if it's needed to slap your opponent around.
There are two complications here for Cameron. The first is that the right are never satisfied with whatever concession they get, so you just end up back where you started, but further away from the centre. The other is that Cameron starts out with the branding problem that he was originally elected to solve, so he's going to have a hard time persuading centrists that the pivot is genuine.
That said Mitt Romney left his pivot until the first debate and still managed to close the gap, despite a year spent shamelessly pandering to a party that was obviously as mad as a box of frogs and a notorious reputation for saying whatever was convenient at the time, so it's not hard to see Cameron getting a decent chunk of the right back and still turning around in time to get at least _some_ 2010 LibDems to vote for him.
Tory Peter Cruddas quits after donor access claims
Labour demands
Labour said it wanted the names of Tory donors who have visited government property - including Downing Street and Chequers - and of those who have made submissions to the Downing Street policy unit, to be published.
Labour deputy chairman Tom Watson said: "It's David Cameron that hosts the dinner parties, and people would expect him to explain how - when people have given a quarter of a million pounds - how those dinner parties are held."
Labour MP David Miliband said: "The idea that policy is for sale is grotesque.
"This goes to the heart of the question of the relationship between a party and the government... It crashes through the lines that should exist between party and government."
"Ed Miliband today demanded that he release details of who he met at a lobbying meal in October 2011. He called for an inquiry into how he had not released the names, and called on himself to come clean. He demanded that the details of all the clients of the companies lobbying him should be made public, so that they could be tarred and feathered. 'This goes to the heart of my spinelessness... people want to know how far I will prostitute the Labour Party for tuppence-ha'penny from a donor.'
He also quashed rumours that he had been seen pulling a trolley around WC1 crying out 'Penny for the guy!'.
Labour Deputy Chairman (name to be inserted) could be seen crying into a pint on the Terrace Bar whilst listening to Drenge."
Tennis stats are particularly hilarious given the incredible amount of endurance that male players must possess for long 5 setters in slams (The money end of the sport) and also given how big a boost testosterone would give in the women's game.
Shooting may not look an obvious one for drugs, but I'd imagine beta blockers would be of a big boost in well not only shooting, probably archery, snooker, golf and other 'accuracy' sports.
Does the chart only refer to human drugs/testing ? - the recent Al Zarooni scandals would indicate horses in equestrianism should probably be tested too.
there's nothing wrong about Unite to back candidates in PPC selections. If they do in a perfectly legal way. Progess has done that for years through training and logistical help.
But Unions are a bit crap (and that's probably why some thought it was necessery to overstep the mark in Falkirk) and they are losing more PPC contests than those they are winning so far.
But there's nothing surprising about Tories throwing the mud around (to all PPCs who are members of a Union..given they are Labour, 90% are probably members of some unions. And it's more likely to be a Unite, Unison or GMB member than a Musicians Union member). Labour would have done the same.
IIRC Unite are still winning about 40% of the PPC seats so they're not faring badly at all.
I have to say that the debate I heard on R5 this morning whilst driving in about fracking was immensely depressing. One would have thought that what was being proposed was something completely untested instead of the fastest growing source of energy in the world. How many billions a year does the fracking industry of the US have to turn over before we stop insisting on reinventing the wheel and exploring potential problems that have not materialised?
The mood of the debate was the government was pushing ahead too far, too fast with this. The reality is that we are already years behind with serious adverse implications for manufacturing, balance of payments and growth. For goodness sake, lets get on with it.
Mr. M, I'm not sure that deliberately reducing the size of one of our largest and most important (in tax terms) sectors would necessarily help reduce the deficit.
It caused the deficit.
Typical. Nothing to do with Labour, uh uh not at all.
Some of the Unite backed candidates were the best candidates in the field. And it's not that all of them are left wing (in terms of internal Labour dynamics. They are surely on the Left of you though).
Whatever the rights and wrongs of the decision, and I don't have nearly enough information to express a view, I think that the Judge in this case should have reflected on the comments made by Laws LJ yesterday that were quoted here.
The role of the courts is not to get involved in micro management of government decisions or to make value judgements that are properly political decisions. Every time a court does this another wave of these cases is encouraged and triggered. This was a problem for the last government as much as this. It encourages delay, additional public cost and paralysis. It really needs to be stopped.
Mr Justice Silber is hardly an activist, and Lord Justice Laws' obiter dicta are not relevant to this case in any way. Can I suggest that you read the judgment? The Secretary of State acted unlawfully by purporting to exercise powers in relation to Lewisham that had not been conferred on him by Parliament ([74]-[96] of the judgment of Silber J). That was an issue of statutory construction and the powers of the executive, which manifestly falls within the jurisdiction of the courts.That is unless you believe like the late President Nixon that the law of the land is what the executive says it is. Stopping judicial reviews of this nature would amount to nothing less than an abrogation of the rule of law.
Some of the Unite backed candidates were the best candidates in the field. And it's not that all of them are left wing (in terms of internal Labour dynamics).
Oh I've no default dislike of any of them, sure some are excellent eggs - its that they're Unite Eggs which is the issue.
If BAT were sponsoring Tory candidates, buying the leadership campaign and sat on the CCHQ policy committee - the Guardian would explode along with the BBC.
Until this is ironed out properly - Labour are very vulnerable in a very direct way that every other party isn't.
The US economy has been growing year on year, quarter on quarter. There is just no comparison with what's happening in the UK, except - perhaps - that ordinary voters do not seem to be enjoying many of the benefits. The trick for politicians on both sides of the Atlantic is to change that. God knows how though!
Thanks for the feedback on rail ownership (useful for me as it's something I want to push if I'm selected, so I thought I'd try it out in the bracing pb climate first). I notice not much enthusiasm for the scheme as it works, except for people saying British Rail was worse. The whole idea of customer service has come a long way in the last 20 years, and everything from job centres to hospitals has followed the private sector in being more customer-oriented. Like Go_Away_State I use East Midlands Trains a lot, and I agree they're not bad (whereas Southern Trains are generally awful), but it's not obvious that this because they've got a temporary monopoly.
Similarly,the rise in usage is IMO not much to do with private ownership - it's simply a reaction to overcrowded roads plus public subsidy for rail.I'll drive to Nottingham if I need to, but it's a hassle and doesn't save much money. David H is right that the risk of public accountability is that politicians think short term - but that's not an altogether fair cop, as we wouldn't be discussing HS2 if it was. The HS2 debate is a good example of how it ought to work - people say eek about the cost, local protest about the route, experts and businesses weigh in about the benefits, and we have a proper debate. Where monopolies are involved, there isn't a good private sector alternative.
As for Unite, in many ways the most impressive examination of who would be best as an MP in my current selection round was the Unite interview, complete with hypothetical MP situations to consider and both oral and written components. The left-right political angle was minor - mainly they wanted to know who would do the job well and be helpful to unions on issues like dismissals and discrimination in the workplace.I didn't get the nomination but felt I'd had an interesting and thought-provoking session. If there were more affiliates doing this sort of thing for all parties from different angles, IMO it'd be a good thing.
I'm not suggesting Mr Justice Silber is in the slightest way partisan - I have no idea who he is - but your description is one of those irregular verbs.
I am utterly neutral You are hardly an activist He isn't as impartial as he thinks She has extreme views They are LibDems
I'm not suggesting Mr Justice Silber is in the slightest way partisan - I have no idea who he is - but your description is one of those irregular verbs.
I am utterly neutral You are hardly an activist He isn't as impartial as he thinks She has extreme views They are LibDems
why don't you all find the announcement of Tory Euro lists so exciting??
I do, and I am very grateful for you doing this. Very important in my part of the world. Our MEPs are in the local paper every week and have a high profile here. Thanks Andrea.
NickP, just looking at that Labour strategy yet again reinforces the sheer complacency within your party right now. Despite three years of Labour attacking the Government, they have failed to win the arguments on the big issues such as the economy and welfare as can be seen in the polls. Labour have made plenty of 'carefully-funded' populist commitments over the last decade, and look where they got the UK economy in the end. Also, how can the Labour party suddenly be seen to suddenly go 'centrist' with any credibility after attacking every single cut or reform this government has implemented over the five previous years?
Lynton Crosby suggested the Conservatives biggest mistake in the 2005 GE was that they tried to 'fatten the pig on market day'. I am becoming more convinced that the Labour party are going to make exactly the same strategy mistakes in 2015. You don't have an oil snake salesman like Tony Blair in charge, you have Ed Miliband.
The Tory strategy, as I understand it, has three stages:
1. 2013 - shore up the Tory vote. Get the frothy UKIP defectors back. 2. 2014 - undermine Labour. Attack Miliband and claim Labour not ready for government. Claim huge credit for any economic improvements. 3. 2015 - go centrist, claim to be government for all the people. Win.
The Labour strategy is broadly:
1. 2013 - rubbish the Government. Not that they're evil, just that they're useless. Solidify the left LD vote. Avoid commitments. 2. 2014 - make carefully-funded populist policy commitments to win some centrist ex-Tories and floating voters. Win the spring conference and build image of steady determination. Attack falling living standards. 3. 2015 - go centrist, claim to be government-in-waiting for all the people. Win.
Both 2013 strategies are working fairly well. In particular, as Mike notes, the Tory strategy is both recovering the UKIP vote and reinforcing the ex-LD Labour vote. Because the UKIP defections were larger and frothier, that effect is larger so the overall lead is narrowing. Strategically, though, the Tory problem is harder - they've had to move right for stage 1, and a lot of centre-left voters now won't give them a hearing at all. Yet if the centre-left bloc isn't eroded, Labour wins.
I meant that some of the Unite's 43% won because they were the best/strongest (for ex in areas where their candidate was the council leader or the former MP) candidate in the field regardless of their support.
To be fair, the same is true in the opposite direction: some of their backed candidates could have lost because they were so crap that even buying 100 members couldn't be enough!
At first glance, their supported selected candidates have the similar profile of the usual Labour (and not just Labour) candidate nowadays. Add some Union officers instead of SpAds, but the rest is pretty similar: councillors, former MPs, people working for MPs. So all the talk about working class candidates is mainly bogus.
I meant that some of the Unite's 43% won because they were the best/strongest (for ex in areas where their candidate was the council leader or the former MP) candidate in the field regardless of their support.
To be fair, the same is true in the opposite direction: some of their backed candidates could have lost because they were so crap that even buying 100 members couldn't be enough!
At first glance, their supported selected candidates have the similar profile of the usual Labour (and not just Labour) candidate nowadays. Add some Union officers instead of SpAds, but the rest is pretty similar: councillors, former MPs, people working for MPs. So all the talk about working class candidates is mainly bogus.
Thanks for that - the issue remains like Tory A listers are all crap and pretty when they weren't. Only Labour's belong rather too much to Unite.
It's all very unfair but like being a Blair Babe - the meme sticks.
PS Your grasp of idiomatic English is very impressive.
I think we have now full lists from North West, South West, South East and East. Top 3 for London and top 2 in Yorkshire (which are the winnable spots. The rest doesn't stand a chance). Nothing from East Midlands, West Midlands and North East (but in NE with just 3 seats overall, it's just the sitting MEP at the top who stands a chance).
Lynton Crosby suggested the Conservatives biggest mistake in the 2005 GE was that they tried to 'fatten the pig on market day'. I am becoming more convinced that the Labour party are going to make exactly the same strategy mistakes in 2015. You don't have an oil snake salesman like Tony Blair in charge, you have Ed Miliband.
No. no, Labour should just Chillax...
Miliband is an interesting politicians and a radical one as well. He has much more potential than his detractors suggest. But if he thought he had earned the room to lie low and read books over the summer he is very much mistaken. Labour has the chance to own the news headlines during a dead period for news. It's troubling for their prospects that they have chosen not to.
Mr Justice Silber is hardly an activist, and Lord Justice Laws' obiter dicta are not relevant to this case in any way. Can I suggest that you read the judgment? The Secretary of State acted unlawfully by purporting to exercise powers in relation to Lewisham that had not been conferred on him by Parliament ([74]-[96] of the judgment of Silber J). That was an issue of statutory construction and the powers of the executive, which manifestly falls within the jurisdiction of the courts.That is unless you believe like the late President Nixon that the law of the land is what the executive says it is. Stopping judicial reviews of this nature would amount to nothing less than an abrogation of the rule of law.
The more interesting part of the judgement for me is at para 173ff. Essentially, the SoS did have the power by the statute to reorganise hospital services in south London by s8. This required a consultation process. There was a consultation process albeit not in the name of s8 but on the recommendation of the administrator. Justice Silber states that he is not persuaded that the result of a consultation under s8 would necessarily have reached the same decision. He expresses the opinion, probably correctly, that the fact it was very likely to reach the same decision is not enough.
I suspect any appeal will focus on this point. In the meantime, in accordance with the undertaking given by Hunt, we have a trust continuing to lose £1m a week of taxpayer's money to fund inefficient and expensive services. Funding this will cause problems for the Heath service budget. I remain to be persuaded that it is useful for the courts to get involved in this way. The Act authorised the SoS to reorganise health services. That is what he has proposed to do. We simply cannot afford to keep paying the extra costs that delaying decisions of this type cause.
I'm not suggesting Mr Justice Silber is in the slightest way partisan - I have no idea who he is - but your description is one of those irregular verbs.
I am utterly neutral You are hardly an activist He isn't as impartial as he thinks She has extreme views They are LibDems
Very witty, but with respect you miss the point. By "activist", I was referring to the judicial attitude of type that Laws LJ was castigating (whether fairly or not) yesterday, namely someone who takes an overly expansive view of the proper rôle of the courts in reviewing executive decisions. As a matter of fact, it could be argued that Silber J has handed down some inexcusably pro-executive judgments in the past, including in Al Rawi at first instance, which was shredded in the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court. The court held in this case that the the Trust Special Administrator and the Secretary of State acted ultra vires the powers conferred on them by Parliament. Whether you agree with the court's conclusion on the legal point, it is an issue which undeniably falls within the proper province of a claim for judicial review. This judgment cannot be used as an argument for limiting the availability of judicial review. If anything, it supports the reverse.
I'm not suggesting Mr Justice Silber is in the slightest way partisan - I have no idea who he is - but your description is one of those irregular verbs.
I am utterly neutral You are hardly an activist He isn't as impartial as he thinks She has extreme views They are LibDems
Very witty, but with respect you miss the point. By "activist", I was referring to the judicial attitude of type that Laws LJ was castigating (whether fairly or not) yesterday, namely someone who takes an overly expansive view of the proper rôle of the courts in reviewing executive decisions. As a matter of fact, it could be argued that Silber J has handed down some inexcusably pro-executive judgments in the past, including in Al Rawi at first instance, which was shredded in the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court. The court held in this case that the the Trust Special Administrator and the Secretary of State acted ultra vires the powers conferred on them by Parliament. Whether you agree with the court's conclusion on the legal point, it is an issue which undeniably falls within the proper province of a claim for judicial review. This judgment cannot be used as an argument for limiting the availability of judicial review. If anything, it supports the reverse.
Business for Britain @forbritain ONS put the UK's trade deficit with the EU for 2011 at £46 billion. Figures released today show it nearly doubled in 2012 to £83 billion
Rob Shorthouse @Bobbybungalow so @YesScotland defence of @labourforindy #sham is that pics are of peeps from all parties campaigning. erm. #IndyRef pic.twitter.com/HhahwRnefG
Comments
Is that a joke post,what about this sentence - tim's empty anti tory posturing is to detract from the labour opposition having no policies and are useless.
That sounds about right ;-)
You have a point but you have to wonder why advances in technology in the private sector haven't been matched by similar ones on the track side.
The best railway franchise is said to be Chiltern, where the private train operator is allowed (in an experiment) to work more closely with the track people. That's happening on SWT too.
Which brings me on to another point. Rail nationalisation will make an enemyfor labour of every single train operating company, and rightly or wrongly that includes some people with very deep pockets.
And changes it to this https://twitter.com/BBCPropaganda/status/362549803814629376/photo/1
The Tories are on a war footing.
*waits for the Labour response as EdM has his phone turned off abroad*
Youch.
Straight from the Crosby playbook.
The US economy grew at an annualised pace of 1.7% in the second quarter of the year, official figures show http://bbc.in/1aWtTFW
So that would be the UK economy growing faster than the US in the last 3 months...
Squawking is now the baseline. Squirrels are poor blustering in the absence of anything substantial to say.
When Labour actually has something to say re policy rather than here-today-gone -tomorrow fauxrage, I'll pay attention.
The more insults Labourites and Lefty LDs dish out - the more the Tories have them on the run.
Not sure about war footing, but much more aggressive, absolutely. Pugnacious.
The role of the courts is not to get involved in micro management of government decisions or to make value judgements that are properly political decisions. Every time a court does this another wave of these cases is encouraged and triggered. This was a problem for the last government as much as this. It encourages delay, additional public cost and paralysis. It really needs to be stopped.
Sports governing bodies shouldn't have responsibility for dope testing. Too big a conflict of interests. Needs to be independent.
Whatever the truth, the politics is clear. The tories intend to put Ed and other labour MPs in concrete Unite overshoes.
1. Vicky Ford MEP
2. Geoffrey Van Orden MEP
3. David Campbell Bannerman MEP
4. John Flack
5. Tom Hunt
6. Margaret Simons
7. Jonathan Collett
It would have been interesting to see a ballot with DCB vs Ford and Van Orden. Top 2 places are safe, third can be at risk. Not automatically reselecting him, they deprived him the chance to push one of 2 other MEPs down into the dangerous spot.
If it was just one organisation, sane conversations (sh/w)ould take place to schedule maintenance. Instead, Network Rail has to pay operators money when lines are not available and this leads to a clash between NR and the operators. There is also allegedly a great deal of blame-giving going on, and operators have an incentive to over-claim for delays.
This would have happened however we split the infrastructure from the operators.
As someone said below, the co-operation between Chiltern and NR appears to be working so far.
Labour are terribly vulnerable for at least the next 9 months. And them saying LOOK LOOK TORIES doesn't change the fact that Tory donors have NO VOTES about who is Party leader or any of their MPs or have an official NEC type role in policy setting.
there's nothing wrong about Unite to back candidates in PPC selections. If they do in a perfectly legal way. Progess has done that for years through training and logistical help.
But Unions are a bit crap (and that's probably why some thought it was necessery to overstep the mark in Falkirk) and they are losing more PPC contests than those they are winning so far.
But there's nothing surprising about Tories throwing the mud around (to all PPCs who are members of a Union..given they are Labour, 90% are probably members of some unions. And it's more likely to be a Unite, Unison or GMB member than a Musicians Union member). Labour would have done the same.
There are two complications here for Cameron. The first is that the right are never satisfied with whatever concession they get, so you just end up back where you started, but further away from the centre. The other is that Cameron starts out with the branding problem that he was originally elected to solve, so he's going to have a hard time persuading centrists that the pivot is genuine.
That said Mitt Romney left his pivot until the first debate and still managed to close the gap, despite a year spent shamelessly pandering to a party that was obviously as mad as a box of frogs and a notorious reputation for saying whatever was convenient at the time, so it's not hard to see Cameron getting a decent chunk of the right back and still turning around in time to get at least _some_ 2010 LibDems to vote for him.
1 Hannan MEP
2 Deva MEP
3 Ashworth MEP
4 Andreasen MEP
5 Robinson
etc
Much ado about nothing!
He also quashed rumours that he had been seen pulling a trolley around WC1 crying out 'Penny for the guy!'.
Labour Deputy Chairman (name to be inserted) could be seen crying into a pint on the Terrace Bar whilst listening to Drenge."
http://order-order.com/2011/10/17/pred-ed-milibands-shady-dinner-with-lobbyists-and-predators/
Shooting may not look an obvious one for drugs, but I'd imagine beta blockers would be of a big boost in well not only shooting, probably archery, snooker, golf and other 'accuracy' sports.
Does the chart only refer to human drugs/testing ? - the recent Al Zarooni scandals would indicate horses in equestrianism should probably be tested too.
I have to say that the debate I heard on R5 this morning whilst driving in about fracking was immensely depressing. One would have thought that what was being proposed was something completely untested instead of the fastest growing source of energy in the world. How many billions a year does the fracking industry of the US have to turn over before we stop insisting on reinventing the wheel and exploring potential problems that have not materialised?
The mood of the debate was the government was pushing ahead too far, too fast with this. The reality is that we are already years behind with serious adverse implications for manufacturing, balance of payments and growth. For goodness sake, lets get on with it.
Some of the Unite backed candidates were the best candidates in the field. And it's not that all of them are left wing (in terms of internal Labour dynamics. They are surely on the Left of you though).
R5 is just incredibly tiresome - your review of the recent car journey rang very true and I haven't listened bar a few hours in weeks.
If BAT were sponsoring Tory candidates, buying the leadership campaign and sat on the CCHQ policy committee - the Guardian would explode along with the BBC.
Until this is ironed out properly - Labour are very vulnerable in a very direct way that every other party isn't.
Oops. Classic party/Govt cock-up. Clegg under fire for handing out Lib Dem 'Record of Delivery' booklet at DPM press event
Similarly,the rise in usage is IMO not much to do with private ownership - it's simply a reaction to overcrowded roads plus public subsidy for rail.I'll drive to Nottingham if I need to, but it's a hassle and doesn't save much money. David H is right that the risk of public accountability is that politicians think short term - but that's not an altogether fair cop, as we wouldn't be discussing HS2 if it was. The HS2 debate is a good example of how it ought to work - people say eek about the cost, local protest about the route, experts and businesses weigh in about the benefits, and we have a proper debate. Where monopolies are involved, there isn't a good private sector alternative.
As for Unite, in many ways the most impressive examination of who would be best as an MP in my current selection round was the Unite interview, complete with hypothetical MP situations to consider and both oral and written components. The left-right political angle was minor - mainly they wanted to know who would do the job well and be helpful to unions on issues like dismissals and discrimination in the workplace.I didn't get the nomination but felt I'd had an interesting and thought-provoking session. If there were more affiliates doing this sort of thing for all parties from different angles, IMO it'd be a good thing.
I hear that former rower and Wakefield candidate Alex Story got second spot in Yorkshire.
And don't forget that Friday is Labour's turn....
I'm not suggesting Mr Justice Silber is in the slightest way partisan - I have no idea who he is - but your description is one of those irregular verbs.
I am utterly neutral
You are hardly an activist
He isn't as impartial as he thinks
She has extreme views
They are LibDems
Lynton Crosby suggested the Conservatives biggest mistake in the 2005 GE was that they tried to 'fatten the pig on market day'. I am becoming more convinced that the Labour party are going to make exactly the same strategy mistakes in 2015. You don't have an oil snake salesman like Tony Blair in charge, you have Ed Miliband.
I meant that some of the Unite's 43% won because they were the best/strongest (for ex in areas where their candidate was the council leader or the former MP) candidate in the field regardless of their support.
To be fair, the same is true in the opposite direction: some of their backed candidates could have lost because they were so crap that even buying 100 members couldn't be enough!
At first glance, their supported selected candidates have the similar profile of the usual Labour (and not just Labour) candidate nowadays. Add some Union officers instead of SpAds, but the rest is pretty similar: councillors, former MPs, people working for MPs. So all the talk about working class candidates is mainly bogus.
Well said, after 3yrs as leader - EdM still doesn't have a position on anything bar calling for Judge Led Inquiries.
It's all very unfair but like being a Blair Babe - the meme sticks.
PS Your grasp of idiomatic English is very impressive.
Thanks. Has your region already been announced?
I think we have now full lists from North West, South West, South East and East. Top 3 for London and top 2 in Yorkshire (which are the winnable spots. The rest doesn't stand a chance). Nothing from East Midlands, West Midlands and North East (but in NE with just 3 seats overall, it's just the sitting MEP at the top who stands a chance).
I suspect any appeal will focus on this point. In the meantime, in accordance with the undertaking given by Hunt, we have a trust continuing to lose £1m a week of taxpayer's money to fund inefficient and expensive services. Funding this will cause problems for the Heath service budget. I remain to be persuaded that it is useful for the courts to get involved in this way. The Act authorised the SoS to reorganise health services. That is what he has proposed to do. We simply cannot afford to keep paying the extra costs that delaying decisions of this type cause.
1. Syed Kamall MEP
2. Charles Tannock MEP
3. Marina Yannakoudakis MEP
4. Caroline Attfield
5. Lynne Hack
6. Sheila Lawlor
7. Glyn Chambers
8. Annesley Abercorn
North East (1)
1. Martin Callanan MEP
2. Ben Houchen
3. Andrew Lee
East Midlands (2)
1. Emma McClarkin MEP
2. Andrew Lewer
3. Rupert Matthews
4. Stephen Castens
5. Brendan Clarke-Smith
7m
Business for Britain @forbritain
ONS put the UK's trade deficit with the EU for 2011 at £46 billion. Figures released today show it nearly doubled in 2012 to £83 billion
Rob Shorthouse
@Bobbybungalow
so @YesScotland defence of @labourforindy #sham is that pics are of peeps from all parties campaigning. erm. #IndyRef pic.twitter.com/HhahwRnefG
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BQgckIOCIAEq9xS.jpg:small
1. Dr Kay Swinburne MEP
2. Aled Davies
3. Dr Dan Boucher
4. Richard Hopkin
West Midlands (3)
1. Philip Bradbourne MEP
2. Anthea McIntyre MEP
3. Daniel Dalton
4. Michael Burnett
5. Sibby Buckle
6. David Price
7. Dan Sames
Yorkshire and the Humber (2)
1. Timothy Kirkhope MEP
2. Alex Story
3. John Procter
4. Carolyn Abbott
5. Michael Naughton
6. ??