"... 12 boys in the room and for very understandable reasons the windows were always open."
Sorry, Mr. L., but I don't understand why the windows had to be open. I admit I was a South London grammar-school grunt, but what was it about you posh chaps that meant you you had to have a constant supply of fresh-air?
Smiley-face thing.
Seriously? 12 boys going through puberty in the same room. Let us just say it was a little aromatic at times despite the regular showers. And of course the fresh air was healthy and manly and character building etc etc etc
Incidentally, I've been watching Borgen. It's pleasant enuff but how anyone can compare it to the inspired genius of the Killing (Denmark, series 1) is beyond me.
You might as well compare Hamlet with Home & Away.
Very different market. The Killing is dark and obsessive, so was The Bridge to some extent (I found the detectives more interesting there, but that's a matter of taste), Borgen is more a straight drama about the difficulties of people with genuine good intentions and flaws getting into politics - as such it resonates with political people as we know a lot of flawed but likeable politicians, not so many murderers. Worth persisting until you see the spin doctor's background (series 2 or 3) - takes it to a different level of intensity.
Mark Walsh (South Tyneside Cllr. Ward within the constituency) Emma Lewell-Buck (South Tyneside Cllr. Ward in Jarrow) Lewis Atkinson (from Gateshead CLP. Former local election candidate in South Tyneside and Sunderland. Stood for the NEC in 2012) Paul Williams (GP doctor from Stockton)
I've seen references to Downton in THREE other US series in the last month - Suits made several and did a plot spoiler.
If you haven't seen Elementary - give it a try - IMO it wipes the floor with the BBC's version of Sherlock and I say that as someone who has listened to the R4 Clive Merrison/Michael Williams plays literally hundreds of times on CD.
I bow to your superior knowledge, Mr. P.. However, though I know you don't like it, let me say I am damn glad that the flat is getting under way soon. Probably even more room for skullduggery than the National Hunt but I feel more comfortable with it.
I have to admit, Hurst, that the cheating is a lot more obvious on the flat!
Downton appeals internationally because it's such a familiar British format, like Agatha Christie - for those who fancy a drama about aristocrats, servants and castles, we are universally accepted as the go-to people. I quite like it (and don't see it as especially Tory), but the class stuff is a bit painted-by-numbers: real people are more nuanced. Upstairs, Downstairs did it better IMO.
I think I've seen this leaflet on PB or another blog before: it was reputed to be a phony, liable to cause damage to Ukip. It certainly looks less than professional.
Peter Lilley, eh? What a laugh he was back then. And how the conference delegates loved it. Absolute charmers, one and all. Gawd love 'em, as Georgie O would say.
Sorry david, but as so often when talking about internal labour matters you are wrong (maybe not surprising for a tory).
the nec does not select the candidate, the nec creates the shortlist and the clp then selects a candidate from this shortlist.
this is completely different from the process during a general election period, when the nec can select a candidate. the comparision is lazy at best.
i would suggest that if you are going to provide 'betting advice' you should consider actually knowing what you are talking about.. yo could even ask the peoplee at labour list, thy would most likely tell you (naturally however, yif your point is to 'score' points, you would not wish to do this). You coulld alternatively just not create articles about topics you have no knowledge about.
If someone could do The Cedar Tree or the House of Elliot nowadays - they'd make a killing in the international tv market. I can't stand Downton as its so derivative of Gosford Park which was a total masterpiece of the genre.
Anyone unfamiliar with his back catalogue may be surprised that he's been in all sorts including Fantasy Island!
Wiki "Fellowes moved to Los Angeles in 1981 and played a number of small TV roles for the next two years. He believed his breakthrough had come when he was considered to replace Hervé Villechaize as the butler on the TV series Fantasy Island, but the role was given to a much older British actor.[6]
After returning to Britain, Fellowes played the part of Kilwillie in the television series Monarch of the Glen. Other notable acting roles included the part of "Claud Seabrook" in the acclaimed 1996 BBC drama serial Our Friends in the North and the "2nd Duke of Richmond" in the BBC drama serial Aristocrats.
In 1991, he played "Neville Marsham" in For the Greater Good, again for the BBC, directed by Danny Boyle. He portrayed George IV as the Prince Regent for the second time (the first was in the 1982 film The Scarlet Pimpernel) in the 1996 adaptation of Bernard Cornwell's novel Sharpe's Regiment & Major Dunnett in Sharpe's Rifles. He launched a new series on BBC One in 2004, Julian Fellowes Investigates: A Most Mysterious Murder, which he wrote and introduced onscreen. He was the presenter of Never Mind the Full Stops, a panel-based gameshow broadcast on BBC Four from 2006 to 2007. He created the hugely successful and critically acclaimed period drama Downton Abbey for ITV1 in 2010.[7] He also wrote a new Titanic mini-series that was shown on ITV1 in March/April 2012.[8]
Well, looks like it's finally getting a little warmer, at least during the day. Went for a little circular walk taking in the surprisingly rural NE corner of Ilford North. Part of the constituency I had not actually visited previously, despite living here for 35 years. Basically, east of Barkingside tube station is the southern edge of Fairlop Plain, and to the south of there lies some farm land. All within 20 minutes walk of my place, which is prettily heavily suburban.
My real goal was trying to spot the northern end of Cran Brook (Ilford's equivalent of River Fleet, for those inclined), but it seems it's disappeared under Barkingside FC and Redbridge FC's joint ground next to the tube station. I was, however, glad to see a section of the river is clearly visible to the south of there, east of the Central line near Oaks Park school.
Anyway, a pleasant change from the bone-chilling weather of late! Oh, and before I forget, hope PB punters did well on the horses this afternoon!
Downton appeals internationally because it's such a familiar British format, like Agatha Christie - for those who fancy a drama about aristocrats, servants and castles, we are universally accepted as the go-to people. I quite like it (and don't see it as especially Tory), but the class stuff is a bit painted-by-numbers: real people are more nuanced. Upstairs, Downstairs did it better IMO.
Ignorant nonsense. If making a nationally and internationally appealing TV drama about the Edwardian class system was that easy, everyone would be doing it. They're not. Cause its hard. Note that the BBC tried with their remake of Upstairs Downstairs, and it was a disaster.
Julian Fellowes clearly has an unusual narrative gift for kinetic, complex, high quality soap opera. And the programme was very cleverly cast and very nicely costumed and edited.
All this stuff passes you by. Basically, you don't know what the F you are talking about. Sorry.
I'm not trying to be mean! Just stating the facts. If we were arguing about hamster welfare in Paraguay I would yield to your greater knowledge, natch.
Wasn't it Fellowes who wrote that 'Titanic' drama/series not so long ago? That was dire.
One problem about US outputs and comparing them with Bristish outputs is how large is the target they are supposed to aim to.
BBC1 and ITV1 series should aim to a wide audience. Many US show you have mentioned are from cable networks and their targets is much lower (allowing for the difference in terms of total population between US and an European country). Even if Walking Dead or the recent The Bible showed cable networks can pull out as many viewers as free to air networks and even more.
I believe this also reflects into the quality and complexity of a series. It's more difficult to do good stuff that should be watched by many people rather than good stuffs that just 3 people watch.
Downton appeals internationally because it's such a familiar British format, like Agatha Christie - for those who fancy a drama about aristocrats, servants and castles, we are universally accepted as the go-to people. I quite like it (and don't see it as especially Tory), but the class stuff is a bit painted-by-numbers: real people are more nuanced. Upstairs, Downstairs did it better IMO.
Julian Fellowes clearly has an unusual narrative gift for kinetic, complex, high quality soap opera. And the programme was very cleverly cast and very nicely costumed and edited.
All this stuff passes you by. Basically, you don't know what the F you are talking about. Sorry.
I'm not trying to be mean! Just stating the facts. If we were arguing about hamster welfare in Paraguay I would yield to your greater knowledge, natch.
I dunno, Sean - parts of my family are Downton types and the series doesn't quite ring true to me, but let's agree to differ. In return I concede you might well have seen more Paraguayan hamsters.
You are of course right that we can't sell any old tripe about castles and Downton is hugely successful. It's good stuff and I enjoy it too. It's just a bit simplistic, in rather the same way that Borgen is about politics.
I'm with NickP. My friend is lead director on it (a Liverpudlian Pinko who dedicated his Emmy to the Hillsborough victims) and after watching a couple out of loyalty I just had to bow out. As Plato says Altman got it right with Gosford Park. This was just very well presented cliched treacle.
So Ms Plato. Who first tipped you off about Suits? Cash in a plain brown envelope as my commission is acceptable.
Of course nothing on tv comes even close to the total genius of series 3-5 of Fringe. All other Sci Fi is but Teletubbies in comparison.. JJ Abrams is a God!
The campaign for full blown PR starts here! Con+UKIP=45%, Lefty rubbish=46%. Wait 'til the Labour welfare policy bs fully sinks into their working class core vote. Lib Dems heading for wipeout.
And the PB Tories who were in denial about the Tories/Cameron's women problem try and persuade themselves that UKiP damage other parties as much as they damage the Tories.
Par for the course
Clearly, Opinium is picking up the Tory surge after Osborne's Phillpot=Welfare or was it because finally understood Gideon when he became Dick Van Dyke in Mary Poppins.
GIN. I heard about your health problems the other day. Glad to hear it wasn't what you feared. If it should ever rear its head in the future comfort yourself with the knowledge that it only takes about five weeks to come to terms with your own mortality!
MS - So UKIP are now DOUBLE the LDs score, I think we can safely say we have a new third party, at least for now!
This is of course bad news for the Tories - and has no impact at all on the LDs...
Didn't UKIP get roughly the same no. of switchers from the LDs as they did from the Tories in Eastleigh?
LD gained some LAB switchers for sure.
Our analysis was that there was a roughly equal two-way traffic between Lab and LD in Eastleigh - the appeal of keeping the Tories out was balanced by people disliking the coalition. Both parties lost some votes to UKIP and we picked up a few Tories (thus coming out slightly ahead overall) but there isn't really any doubt that UKIP mainly took Tory votes in Eastleigh. The main interest in South Shields is to see if they do the same to us in a safe Labour seat - perhaps with a following wind after the County election.
@NickPalmer "The main interest in South Shields is to see if they do the same to us in a safe Labour seat - perhaps with a following wind after the County election."
I do believe you are getting a soft spot for Ukip, Nick. You are aways welcome to join us.
Well, looks like it's finally getting a little warmer, at least during the day. Went for a little circular walk taking in the surprisingly rural NE corner of Ilford North. Part of the constituency I had not actually visited previously, despite living here for 35 years. Basically, east of Barkingside tube station is the southern edge of Fairlop Plain, and to the south of there lies some farm land. All within 20 minutes walk of my place, which is prettily heavily suburban.
My real goal was trying to spot the northern end of Cran Brook (Ilford's equivalent of River Fleet, for those inclined), but it seems it's disappeared under Barkingside FC and Redbridge FC's joint ground next to the tube station. I was, however, glad to see a section of the river is clearly visible to the south of there, east of the Central line near Oaks Park school.
Anyway, a pleasant change from the bone-chilling weather of late! Oh, and before I forget, hope PB punters did well on the horses this afternoon!
Cap'n Doc, I wonder if you realise how, on so many levels, that post is so good, so, damn it, English. There is probably only one person in the world who could have written that and I am so pleased that you did. I am off to make Herself a cup of tea but I do so with a smile on my face and a spring in my step, thank you.
An unusually weak blog article by Fraser Nelson, evidenced by his two updates which show him retreating under pressure from tweets and comments:
In disowning this agenda, Labour are making what Janan Ganesh calls “a truly strategic mistake that will hang over it for years.” Osborne agrees – hence his excitement. His missteps are usually made when he feels he has Labour on the run. But as missteps go, it will be a popular one. While I find his relish unseemly, many of Labour’s target voters will think he is spot on.
Osborne is absolutely right to claim that the Philpott case raises questions which need answering about welfare provision. What is truly offensive is the attempt to to shut down legitimate debate by claiming Osborne is "hijacking" the deaths of six children "for political purpose".
We need to start from the facts of the case. Philipott is not a serial child murderer. He was not charged with murder nor has there been any suggestion from the Police, CPS or prosecution that Philpott and his accomplices had an intent to kill the children.
Philpott's crime was to set a fire in his house with reckless disregard for the safety of its inhabitants. This crime, which caused the deaths of his children, amounted to the manslaughter for which Philpott and his accomplices were rightfully convicted and sentenced.
We must therefore ask why Philpott set the fire. We cannot prove his motives but two suggestions have been made:
1. He set a fire with the intent of blaming it on 'Lisa' his 'second wife' and father of five of his children, who had left Philpott's house and 'extended' family taken 'her' children with her. By incriminating Lisa, Philpott hoped to strengthen his claim for custody of the five children.
2. He set a fire in order to destroy his property and force the local council to rehouse him and his families in a larger property.
If we accept the accounts of Philpott's motives are reasonable - and I have seen no press source arguing against - then it is also reasonable to examine the connection between the fire and its motives with the provision of welfare benefit.
The key question is would Philpott have set the fire if there had been no financial benefit available to him? It seems clear to me and many others that increasing his income by claiming benefits for a larger number of children and using the larger number to justify improved housing provision was Philpott's primary motive.
Philpott didn't intend to kill his children. He intended to game the state benefit, child support and local council housing provision services. The deaths of his children were an accident, albeit a culpable one for which he was criminally liable.
To try to claim that Philpott is an exceptional violent murderer who is totally unrepresentative of other benefit claimants is wrong. Essentially he was one of many benefit fraudsters and social services chancers. What sets him apart was his stupidity and recklessness in setting a fire which led to the criminal deaths of six of his children.
Osborne is absolutely right to question what role the benefits culture and system played in the Philpott case and to seek a public debate on these issues.
So in Eastleigh, UKIP took more votes from the LDs than the Conservatives.
Yet strangely enough the lib dems don't appear to be panicking about the kipper vote. While the incompetent fops master strategy of banging on about the EU and immigration doesn't appear to be doing them any good at all, quite the opposite.
And to think Richard Nabavi said it was all a media storm in a tea cup.
I think the 'collapse' is an unwinding of the 'vetogasm' boost the Conservatives got, once it became clear that HMG was not in fact standing up for the UK after all.
If you look at the Conservatives' trend line, the only distortion is a brief positive bubble, November 2011-Feb/March 2012.
Cap'n Doc, I wonder if you realise how, on so many levels, that post is so good, so, damn it, English. There is probably only one person in the world who could have written that and I am so pleased that you did. I am off to make Herself a cup of tea but I do so with a smile on my face and a spring in my step, thank you.
Ahoy, Mr Llama! I'm glad you enjoyed it! Hopefully tomorrow will be equally nice, Sunday's my usual volunteering day on the Epping-Ongar! Belike and all that!
To try to claim that Philpott is an exceptional violent murderer who is totally unrepresentative of other benefit claimants is wrong. Essentially he was one of many benefit fraudsters and social services chancers
This is a tough one. Who should we believe?
An inept tory spnner who tipped that Lansley would be PM or the Judge in the Philpott case.
Thirlwall issued a judgement so razor-sharp that when I read the full transcript I felt like punching the air. Because while the nation bickered about Philpott’s access to housing benefit, Thirlwall spelled out the true matter at hand about Philpott’s systematic campaigns reaching back over 40 years of violence, mental abuse, manipulation and blackmail against vulnerable women. She spelled out why many men like Philpott – regardless of class – have multitudes of children. Thirlwall was determined there would be no neat summations of Philpott’s unfortunate “mistake” in 2012, because this was a far longer, detailed story that needed telling.
Before examining the night in question – the petrol, the plot, the screaming 999 calls, the dead children – Thirlwall said: “It is necessary to look at the history of your relationship with women.” I’ve rarely heard a judge say such a thing, although in the judicial system there aren’t that many female judges, so there’s more chance this take on events is overlooked. Across Europe, the average gender balance among judges is 52 per cent men and 48 per cent women. At 23 per cent, England and Wales is fourth from the bottom, followed only by Azerbaijan, Scotland and Armenia. The higher up the court system, the more male-dominated the bench becomes. Only 15.5 per cent of High Court judges are women. The odds were against Philpott meeting a female judge this week – one woman he had no chance of controlling, striking, or impregnating – but I’m quietly joyous he did.
Thirlwall recounted that Mick Philpott almost killed two women when he was a soldier in his twenties – employed, you might note, not remotely on benefits. Philpott was a violent and jealous boyfriend, at one point breaking his young girlfriend’s arm, another time smashing her leg with a sledgehammer.
Eventually his jealousy led to him breaking into her house, stabbing her repeatedly in a ferocious attack and then turning the knife on her mother. “You have, I am rightly reminded, served your sentence for that, but it is clear from the evidence that I excluded from the trial that you have used that conviction as a means of controlling women, terrifying them in what you might do."
The LDs just have many more things to panic about.
My current pet-LD-disaster is their bank balance.
Quite. Though that is more of a symptom of their base getting smashed year on year at the local elections and the scottish elections as well. And that sure ain't because they are losing all their voters to UKIP. It's toxicity by Clegg and association with the tories.
An unusually weak blog article by Fraser Nelson, evidenced by his two updates which show him retreating under pressure from tweets and comments:
In disowning this agenda, Labour are making what Janan Ganesh calls “a truly strategic mistake that will hang over it for years.” Osborne agrees – hence his excitement. His missteps are usually made when he feels he has Labour on the run. But as missteps go, it will be a popular one. While I find his relish unseemly, many of Labour’s target voters will think he is spot on.
Osborne is absolutely right to claim that the Philpott case raises questions which need answering about welfare provision. What is truly offensive is the attempt to to shut down legitimate debate by claiming Osborne is "hijacking" the deaths of six children "for political purpose".
We need to start from the facts of the case. Philipott is not a serial child murderer. He was not charged with murder nor has there been any suggestion from the Police, CPS or prosecution that Philpott and his accomplices had an intent to kill the children.
Philpott's crime was to set a fire in his house with reckless disregard for the safety of its inhabitants. This crime amounted to the manslaughter for which he was rightfully convicted and sentenced.
We must therefore ask why Philpott set the fire. We cannot prove his motives but two suggestions have been made:
1. He set a fire with the intent of blaming it on 'Lisa' his 'second wife' and father of five of his children, who had left Philpott's house and 'extended' family taken 'her' children with her. By incriminating Lisa, Philpott hoped to strengthen his claim for custody of the five children.
2. He set a fire in order to destroy his property and force the local council to rehouse him and his families in a larger property.
If we accept the accounts of Philpott's motives are reasonable - and I have seen no press source arguing against - then it is also reasonable to examine the connection between the fire and its motives with the provision of welfare benefit.
The key question is would Philpott have set the fire if there had been no financial benefit available to him? It seems clear to me and many others that increasing his income by claiming benefits for a larger number of children and using the larger number to justify improved housing provision was Philpott's primary motive.
Philpott didn't intend to kill his children. He intended to game the state benefit, child support and local council housing provision services. The deaths of his children were an accident, albeit a culpable one for which he was criminally liable.
To try to claim that Philpott is an exceptional violent murderer who is totally unrepresentative of other benefit claimants is wrong. Essentially he was one of many benefit fraudsters and social services chancers. What sets him apart was his stupidity and recklessness in setting a fire which led to the criminal deaths of six of his children.
Osborne is absolutely right to question what role the benefits culture and system played in the Philpott case and to seek a public debate on these issues.
Philpott is a fairly classic narcissistic sociopath.
To try to claim that Philpott is an exceptional violent murderer who is totally unrepresentative of other benefit claimants is wrong. Essentially he was one of many benefit fraudsters and social services chancers
This is a tough one. Who should we believe?
An inept tory spnner who tipped that Lansley would be PM or the Judge in the Philpott case.
Thirlwall issued a judgement so razor-sharp that when I read the full transcript I felt like punching the air. Because while the nation bickered about Philpott’s access to housing benefit, Thirlwall spelled out the true matter at hand about Philpott’s systematic campaigns reaching back over 40 years of violence, mental abuse, manipulation and blackmail against vulnerable women. She spelled out why many men like Philpott – regardless of class – have multitudes of children. Thirlwall was determined there would be no neat summations of Philpott’s unfortunate “mistake” in 2012, because this was a far longer, detailed story that needed telling.
Before examining the night in question – the petrol, the plot, the screaming 999 calls, the dead children – Thirlwall said: “It is necessary to look at the history of your relationship with women.” I’ve rarely heard a judge say such a thing, although in the judicial system there aren’t that many female judges, so there’s more chance this take on events is overlooked. Across Europe, the average gender balance among judges is 52 per cent men and 48 per cent women. At 23 per cent, England and Wales is fourth from the bottom, followed only by Azerbaijan, Scotland and Armenia. The higher up the court system, the more male-dominated the bench becomes. Only 15.5 per cent of High Court judges are women. The odds were against Philpott meeting a female judge this week – one woman he had no chance of controlling, striking, or impregnating – but I’m quietly joyous he did.
Thirlwall recounted that Mick Philpott almost killed two women when he was a soldier in his twenties – employed, you might note, not remotely on benefits. Philpott was a violent and jealous boyfriend, at one point breaking his young girlfriend’s arm, another time smashing her leg with a sledgehammer.
Eventually his jealousy led to him breaking into her house, stabbing her repeatedly in a ferocious attack and then turning the knife on her mother. “You have, I am rightly reminded, served your sentence for that, but it is clear from the evidence that I excluded from the trial that you have used that conviction as a means of controlling women, terrifying them in what you might do."
The Judge is the Philpott case was trying criminal charges of manslaughter.
It was not her locus to investigate or comment on the welfare system or the extent to which welfare incentives might have contributed to Philpott's motives.
As to Philpott's past record of criminal violence, this was taken into account by the Judge when sentencing but excluded from admission as evidence into the case being tried ("evidence that I excluded from the trial").
Both you and the Independent journalist who wrote the article you quoted demonstrate a fundamental misunderstanding of the criminal justice system and court process. The conclusions both of you have drawn are utterly unmerited.
The LD finances whilst not brilliant are in fact rather healthier than those of both Conservatives and Labour see their graphs on the same electoral commission page .
I've been consumed with concern that you were among the Shepherd's Bush precariat.
Could you please reassure me that you're at least among the 'emergent service workers' ?
I have indeed, ar, and commented upon it on pb.
You really must pay more attention.
I managed to trick the BBC into granting me elevated status. The clue is to admit to listening to classical music and to socialising with one's cleaner.
Try it yourself. You are bound to succeed, but whatever you do don't give the postcode of your principal residence. Any postcode North of Hemel Hempstead will bar you from high office.
The LD finances whilst not brilliant are in fact rather healthier than those of both Conservatives and Labour see their graphs on the same electoral commission page .
The Conservatives and Labour are paying off their debts, the LDs are increasing their debt.
Quite. Though that is more of a symptom of their base getting smashed year on year at the local elections and the scottish elections as well.
That's clearly the bigger part of their falling income, but their overspending goes back to 2007.
They're like a mini-EU government, spending out of control and falling income.
That is simply untrue . The biggest fall in income has been the loss of Short money through being in government . Despite the massive increase in Labour Party income from Short money they remain over £ 7 million in debt .
Both you and the Independent journalist who wrote the article you quoted demonstrate a fundamental misunderstanding of the criminal justice system and court process. The conclusions both of you have drawn are utterly unmerited.
*chortle*
We'll be taking no lessons for a tory spinner so out of touch and incompetent that you tipped that Lansley would be PM, Seth O Logue.
The Judge looked at ALL his background and quite rightly highlighted it ensuring vapid nasty party idiots do not mistake this case somehow being all about the welfare system when it was self-evidently all about Philpott.
Thirlwall recounted that Mick Philpott almost killed two women when he was a soldier in his twenties – employed, you might note, not remotely on benefits. Philpott was a violent and jealous boyfriend, at one point breaking his young girlfriend’s arm, another time smashing her leg with a sledgehammer.
Eventually his jealousy led to him breaking into her house, stabbing her repeatedly in a ferocious attack and then turning the knife on her mother. “You have, I am rightly reminded, served your sentence for that, but it is clear from the evidence that I excluded from the trial that you have used that conviction as a means of controlling women, terrifying them in what you might do."
The facts highlighting precisley what kind of sociopath Philpott quite clearly was simply do not accord with your always inept spin, Seth O Logue, but then they rarely ever do.
The LD finances whilst not brilliant are in fact rather healthier than those of both Conservatives and Labour see their graphs on the same electoral commission page .
The Conservatives and Labour are paying off their debts, the LDs are increasing their debt.
The Conservatives are £ 8.7 million in debt almost exactly the same as in 2006 . How is that paying it off . Perhaps you are comparing it with Osborne's performance . The Lib Dems debt is less than 1/10th of that .
The facts highlighting precisley what kind of sociopath Philpott quite clearly was simply do not accord with your always inept spin, Seth O Logue, but then they rarely ever do.
Hang on a second. Did the court hear any expert evidence from psychiatrists that Philpott was a sociopath, and did the court even reach that conclusion? No. You are doing exactly what you are accusing @AveryLP of, viz. speculating about matters which were never raised and never determined by the court.
Game of Throne is watched by 4.5m people Homeland get around 2m viewers Spartcus is around 1m Killing US is around 1.5m Mad Men usually get 2.5m
and the majority of them are successful for their respective cable channels.
The new Hannibal TV series could well be pretty successful though NBC have a habit of making it as difficult as possible for their own shows.
Breaking Bad can get about 2.6m for AMC.
The Hannibal premiere got 4.36 million viewers and a 1.6 rating in the 18-49 demo....which is kind weak for a Big 4 series...but as you said, over half of NBC schedule have weak performances!
Interesting last para: When asked for their views on the need for further welfare cuts, just 10% of people said they believed more should be made. Only 14% of Tory supporters backed further welfare reductions compared with 10% of Lib Dems and 5% of Labour supporters.
@Avery. "Osborne is absolutely right to claim that the Philpott case raises questions"
The question it raises is whether the state should finance a family of eleven children to the tune of £53,000 P.A. To link it to the killing of the children because each one therefore has a cash value and so incentivises killing takes Tory free market thinking to an altogether ludicrous new level!
Politically I think both parties would do well to forget about Philpott and instead concentrate on the insanity of rewarding child bearing with such largesse.
Hang on a second. Did the court hear any expert evidence from psychiatrists that Philpott was a sociopath, and did the court even reach that conclusion?
It was my opinion based on his actions but if you prefer terms like 'evil manipulative bastard' then I have no problem using them either.
The Conservatives are £ 8.7 million in debt almost exactly the same as in 2006 . How is that paying it off . Perhaps you are comparing it with Osborne's performance . The Lib Dems debt is less than 1/10th of that .
The Conservatives pay down their debt between elections. It peaks in 2005, then falls until 2010. After 2010 it starts to fall again. (I think the 2012 accounts are published in August 2013).
The Conservatives are £ 8.7 million in debt almost exactly the same as in 2006 . How is that paying it off . Perhaps you are comparing it with Osborne's performance . The Lib Dems debt is less than 1/10th of that .
The Conservatives pay down their debt between elections. It peaks in 2005, then falls until 2010. After 2010 it starts to fall again. (I think the 2012 accounts are published in August 2013).
Well that is one way of interpreting the graph but not one that would get any marks in an A Level Maths exam .
@NickPalmer "The main interest in South Shields is to see if they do the same to us in a safe Labour seat - perhaps with a following wind after the County election."
I do believe you are getting a soft spot for Ukip, Nick. You are aways welcome to join us.
Gosh, thanks. :-) I try to be objective about trends. But it's true that I've not disliked most of the UKIP candidates and activists that I've met, even though we don't agree on anything that I can think of. The guy in Broxtowe was an affable buffer, and his most prominent supporter wa a magnificently indomitable 96-year-old who had recently done a parachute jump for charity. Even though I think UKIP does appeal to some homeless BNP voters, the candidates and activists are very different - I've rarely met a BNP activist who didn't live down to their thuggish reputation.
It doesn't hurt that I think you're making a Tory re-election even more unlikely!
Interesting last para: When asked for their views on the need for further welfare cuts, just 10% of people said they believed more should be made. Only 14% of Tory supporters backed further welfare reductions compared with 10% of Lib Dems and 5% of Labour supporters.
To link it to the killing of the children because each one therefore has a cash value and so incentivises killing takes Tory free market thinking to an altogether ludicrous new level!
I have been very careful not to make that link. There was no determined intent to kill the children. So the idea of "incentivising killing" simply doesn't apply.
It is however reasonable to assumption that Philpott, in his actions, was motivated by a desire to increase his earnings from benefits and housing provision.
As Life in a Market Town has quite correctly pointed out on thread, this assumption is not one considered n Court as it was irrelevant to the determination of the case.
The issues which need debating are whether, as you point out, it is reasonable for UK taxpayers to subsidise a 'family' with multiple children to the extent the Philpotts were subsidised.
If we rule out sterilisation as a sanction, then the state's main concern will be in protecting and supporting the children. Limiting the payment of benefits to, say, two or three children would not be acting in the additional children's interest. Another solution needs to found.
As the number of families of this size claiming benefits is relatively small then linking the payments of benefits for four or more children could be linked to a requirement that the parents, if they are unable to find work, enroll in a qualifying workfare scheme if they wish to continue to receive in work additional child benefits.
Real consideration should also be given to the circumstances and point at which social services might take children into care when such requirements are not met. This measure would be controversial but without the sanction of removing children from parental care any attempt to limit the payment of benefit or make it conditional upon work commitment would be unenforceable.
"Only 14% of Tory supporters backed further welfare reductions compared with 10% of Lib Dems and 5% of Labour supporters."
The question is a bit blunt. I'd imagine most people are like me and have no idea what welfare benefits are in the first place. Like me most would probably support disability benefit to almost any level and for me anyway a generous unemployment benefit is also fair (on the basis that most are trying to get a job and those that aren't won't be getting rich on their unemployment). As for paying for children over perhaps two or three I just don't get it. It's a lifestyle choice.
.It is however reasonable to assumption that Philpott, in his actions, was motivated by a desire to increase his earnings from benefits and housing provision.
Wrong. Your spin is facile nasty party nonsense.
Philpott was motivated by the same forces that motivated his earlier crimes when he was employed. He was a violent sadistic control freak. On welfare or in employment it simply did not matter.
Eventually his jealousy led to him breaking into her house, stabbing her repeatedly in a ferocious attack and then turning the knife on her mother. “You have, I am rightly reminded, served your sentence for that, but it is clear from the evidence that I excluded from the trial that you have used that conviction as a means of controlling women, terrifying them in what you might do."
Thirlwall recounted that Mick Philpott almost killed two women when he was a soldier in his twenties – employed, you might note, not remotely on benefits. Philpott was a violent and jealous boyfriend, at one point breaking his young girlfriend’s arm, another time smashing her leg with a sledgehammer.
Nigel Farage, the leader of Ukip, has said he would be prepared to work with Labour if Ed Miliband’s party wins the next General Election.
Mr Farage also identified Boris Johnson as a future Tory leader he would be willing to work with, raising the prospect of a so-called “Borage” partnership.
The Ukip frontman has previously ruled out any deal with the Conservatives while they are led by David Cameron.
Asked in an interview with The Telegraph if his eurosceptic party could work with Labour, Mr Farage said: “If we found ourselves in the position post 2015 where we could do a deal that could usher this country’s exit from political union in Brussels, we’d do a deal with the devil.”
The novel alliance would depend on Ukip winning its first seats in Westminster at the election in two years’ time. It could also raise eyebrows amongst the party’s supporters — many of whom are disaffected Conservatives.
One scenario being talked about by senior Ukip figures would see the party’s MPs abstain from key parliamentary votes if Labour was in power — but only if Mr Miliband’s party had committed to holding a referendum on Britain’s membership of the EU.
Comments
Seriously? 12 boys going through puberty in the same room. Let us just say it was a little aromatic at times despite the regular showers. And of course the fresh air was healthy and manly and character building etc etc etc
Mark Walsh (South Tyneside Cllr. Ward within the constituency)
Emma Lewell-Buck (South Tyneside Cllr. Ward in Jarrow)
Lewis Atkinson (from Gateshead CLP. Former local election candidate in South Tyneside and Sunderland. Stood for the NEC in 2012)
Paul Williams (GP doctor from Stockton)
https://twitter.com/GABaines/status/320577051448995841/photo/1
Did they ignore immigration? Not, judging by the countless Western movies made...
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BHLFbNQCEAAyfl4.jpg:large
The Council Leader decided not to apply in the end*. The CLP "grandees" moved their weight behind Mark Walsh who was asked to apply.
* I wouldn't be surprised if they have been moves behind the scenes.
RT @GuidoFawkes: Over the years how many millions has @PollyToynbee made out of writing about poverty?
Ha! So true.
I've seen references to Downton in THREE other US series in the last month - Suits made several and did a plot spoiler.
If you haven't seen Elementary - give it a try - IMO it wipes the floor with the BBC's version of Sherlock and I say that as someone who has listened to the R4 Clive Merrison/Michael Williams plays literally hundreds of times on CD.
Downton appeals internationally because it's such a familiar British format, like Agatha Christie - for those who fancy a drama about aristocrats, servants and castles, we are universally accepted as the go-to people. I quite like it (and don't see it as especially Tory), but the class stuff is a bit painted-by-numbers: real people are more nuanced. Upstairs, Downstairs did it better IMO.
*cough* it was in the bar and I was looking for the racing *cough*.
Luckily the 30 I got back with Cappa Bleu in the pub sweepstake (they gave 4 places) dented my losses elsewhere today.
the nec does not select the candidate, the nec creates the shortlist and the clp then selects a candidate from this shortlist.
this is completely different from the process during a general election period, when the nec can select a candidate. the comparision is lazy at best.
i would suggest that if you are going to provide 'betting advice' you should consider actually knowing what you are talking about.. yo could even ask the peoplee at labour list, thy would most likely tell you (naturally however, yif your point is to 'score' points, you would not wish to do this). You coulld alternatively just not create articles about topics you have no knowledge about.
If someone could do The Cedar Tree or the House of Elliot nowadays - they'd make a killing in the international tv market. I can't stand Downton as its so derivative of Gosford Park which was a total masterpiece of the genre.
Anyone unfamiliar with his back catalogue may be surprised that he's been in all sorts including Fantasy Island!
Wiki "Fellowes moved to Los Angeles in 1981 and played a number of small TV roles for the next two years. He believed his breakthrough had come when he was considered to replace Hervé Villechaize as the butler on the TV series Fantasy Island, but the role was given to a much older British actor.[6]
After returning to Britain, Fellowes played the part of Kilwillie in the television series Monarch of the Glen. Other notable acting roles included the part of "Claud Seabrook" in the acclaimed 1996 BBC drama serial Our Friends in the North and the "2nd Duke of Richmond" in the BBC drama serial Aristocrats.
In 1991, he played "Neville Marsham" in For the Greater Good, again for the BBC, directed by Danny Boyle. He portrayed George IV as the Prince Regent for the second time (the first was in the 1982 film The Scarlet Pimpernel) in the 1996 adaptation of Bernard Cornwell's novel Sharpe's Regiment & Major Dunnett in Sharpe's Rifles. He launched a new series on BBC One in 2004, Julian Fellowes Investigates: A Most Mysterious Murder, which he wrote and introduced onscreen. He was the presenter of Never Mind the Full Stops, a panel-based gameshow broadcast on BBC Four from 2006 to 2007. He created the hugely successful and critically acclaimed period drama Downton Abbey for ITV1 in 2010.[7] He also wrote a new Titanic mini-series that was shown on ITV1 in March/April 2012.[8]
My real goal was trying to spot the northern end of Cran Brook (Ilford's equivalent of River Fleet, for those inclined), but it seems it's disappeared under Barkingside FC and Redbridge FC's joint ground next to the tube station. I was, however, glad to see a section of the river is clearly visible to the south of there, east of the Central line near Oaks Park school.
Anyway, a pleasant change from the bone-chilling weather of late! Oh, and before I forget, hope PB punters did well on the horses this afternoon!
BBC1 and ITV1 series should aim to a wide audience. Many US show you have mentioned are from cable networks and their targets is much lower (allowing for the difference in terms of total population between US and an European country). Even if Walking Dead or the recent The Bible showed cable networks can pull out as many viewers as free to air networks and even more.
I believe this also reflects into the quality and complexity of a series. It's more difficult to do good stuff that should be watched by many people rather than good stuffs that just 3 people watch.
"Anyone unfamiliar with his back catalogue may be surprised that he's been in all sorts including Fantasy Island!"
And a commercial for me. Wiki must have overlooked it!!
Game of Throne is watched by 4.5m people
Homeland get around 2m viewers
Spartcus is around 1m
Killing US is around 1.5m
Mad Men usually get 2.5m
and the majority of them are successful for their respective cable channels.
It was a gardening product. I think the client was Bayer.
You are of course right that we can't sell any old tripe about castles and Downton is hugely successful. It's good stuff and I enjoy it too. It's just a bit simplistic, in rather the same way that Borgen is about politics.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election#Graphical_summary
Of course nothing on tv comes even close to the total genius of series 3-5 of Fringe. All other Sci Fi is but Teletubbies in comparison.. JJ Abrams is a God!
The campaign for full blown PR starts here! Con+UKIP=45%, Lefty rubbish=46%. Wait 'til the Labour welfare policy bs fully sinks into their working class core vote. Lib Dems heading for wipeout.
"The main interest in South Shields is to see if they do the same to us in a safe Labour seat - perhaps with a following wind after the County election."
I do believe you are getting a soft spot for Ukip, Nick. You are aways welcome to join us.
Breaking Bad can get about 2.6m for AMC.
When my specialist confirmed it was pre cancer last week he said I was the happiest person he'd ever delivered such news to.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Masters-Command-Alexander-Hannibal-Leadership/dp/1439164487/ref=sr_1_4?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1365273857&sr=1-4&keywords=hannibal
Edited extra bit: I misread the date, it's actually out now.
Cap'n Doc, I wonder if you realise how, on so many levels, that post is so good, so, damn it, English. There is probably only one person in the world who could have written that and I am so pleased that you did. I am off to make Herself a cup of tea but I do so with a smile on my face and a spring in my step, thank you.
One thing that comes out loud and clear from the graph you posted is that the 2012 Budget shambles was a key point in this Parliament.
Look how the Tory vote collapses from April 12;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election#Graphical_summary
And to think Richard Nabavi said it was all a media storm in a tea cup.
However, the same poll shows that the Government is losing the battle for public opinion on the "bedroom tax".
So something for everyone there.
http://lordashcroftpolls.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Eastleigh-callback-poll-summary.pdf
If you add in the 2010 vote shares you get: Con (39 x .22) 8.58, LD (46 x .19) 8.74
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/2015guide/eastleigh/
So in Eastleigh, UKIP took more votes from the LDs than the Conservatives.
In disowning this agenda, Labour are making what Janan Ganesh calls “a truly strategic mistake that will hang over it for years.” Osborne agrees – hence his excitement. His missteps are usually made when he feels he has Labour on the run. But as missteps go, it will be a popular one. While I find his relish unseemly, many of Labour’s target voters will think he is spot on.
Osborne is absolutely right to claim that the Philpott case raises questions which need answering about welfare provision. What is truly offensive is the attempt to to shut down legitimate debate by claiming Osborne is "hijacking" the deaths of six children "for political purpose".
We need to start from the facts of the case. Philipott is not a serial child murderer. He was not charged with murder nor has there been any suggestion from the Police, CPS or prosecution that Philpott and his accomplices had an intent to kill the children.
Philpott's crime was to set a fire in his house with reckless disregard for the safety of its inhabitants. This crime, which caused the deaths of his children, amounted to the manslaughter for which Philpott and his accomplices were rightfully convicted and sentenced.
We must therefore ask why Philpott set the fire. We cannot prove his motives but two suggestions have been made:
1. He set a fire with the intent of blaming it on 'Lisa' his 'second wife' and father of five of his children, who had left Philpott's house and 'extended' family taken 'her' children with her. By incriminating Lisa, Philpott hoped to strengthen his claim for custody of the five children.
2. He set a fire in order to destroy his property and force the local council to rehouse him and his families in a larger property.
If we accept the accounts of Philpott's motives are reasonable - and I have seen no press source arguing against - then it is also reasonable to examine the connection between the fire and its motives with the provision of welfare benefit.
The key question is would Philpott have set the fire if there had been no financial benefit available to him? It seems clear to me and many others that increasing his income by claiming benefits for a larger number of children and using the larger number to justify improved housing provision was Philpott's primary motive.
Philpott didn't intend to kill his children. He intended to game the state benefit, child support and local council housing provision services. The deaths of his children were an accident, albeit a culpable one for which he was criminally liable.
To try to claim that Philpott is an exceptional violent murderer who is totally unrepresentative of other benefit claimants is wrong. Essentially he was one of many benefit fraudsters and social services chancers. What sets him apart was his stupidity and recklessness in setting a fire which led to the criminal deaths of six of his children.
Osborne is absolutely right to question what role the benefits culture and system played in the Philpott case and to seek a public debate on these issues.
Yet strangely enough the lib dems don't appear to be panicking about the kipper vote. While the incompetent fops master strategy of banging on about the EU and immigration doesn't appear to be doing them any good at all, quite the opposite.
Perhaps banging on about welfare can save them?
LOL
If you look at the Conservatives' trend line, the only distortion is a brief positive bubble, November 2011-Feb/March 2012.
Have you done the new class calculator test ?
I've been consumed with concern that you were among the Shepherd's Bush precariat.
Could you please reassure me that you're at least among the 'emergent service workers' ?
My current pet-LD-disaster is their bank balance.
http://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/party-finance/party-finance-analysis/party-finance-analysis-accounts#LD
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/40-per-cent-drop-in-donations-piles-pain-on-lib-dems-8503895.html
An inept tory spnner who tipped that Lansley would be PM or the Judge in the Philpott case.
Just as it was the Budget of 2008 which produced the big Conservative leads.
And for similar but opposite reasons:
In 2008 it was Labour dumping on the working poor, in 2012 it was Osborne giving the super-rich a tax cut.
We can argue about the rights and wrongs of those decisions but its the images that they created which matter.
Images of unfairness.
Now sometimes governments have to make unfair decisions - but the clever ones try to do it with as little publicity as possible.
It was not her locus to investigate or comment on the welfare system or the extent to which welfare incentives might have contributed to Philpott's motives.
As to Philpott's past record of criminal violence, this was taken into account by the Judge when sentencing but excluded from admission as evidence into the case being tried ("evidence that I excluded from the trial").
Both you and the Independent journalist who wrote the article you quoted demonstrate a fundamental misunderstanding of the criminal justice system and court process. The conclusions both of you have drawn are utterly unmerited.
They're like a mini-EU government, spending out of control and falling income.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2013/apr/06/ukip-maintains-strong-poll-showing
You really must pay more attention.
I managed to trick the BBC into granting me elevated status. The clue is to admit to listening to classical music and to socialising with one's cleaner.
Try it yourself. You are bound to succeed, but whatever you do don't give the postcode of your principal residence. Any postcode North of Hemel Hempstead will bar you from high office.
https://twitter.com/suttonnick/status/320616397673754625/photo/1
That is simply untrue . The biggest fall in income has been the loss of Short money through being in government . Despite the massive increase in Labour Party income from Short money they remain over £ 7 million in debt .
We'll be taking no lessons for a tory spinner so out of touch and incompetent that you tipped that Lansley would be PM, Seth O Logue.
The Judge looked at ALL his background and quite rightly highlighted it ensuring vapid nasty party idiots do not mistake this case somehow being all about the welfare system when it was self-evidently all about Philpott. The facts highlighting precisley what kind of sociopath Philpott quite clearly was simply do not accord with your always inept spin, Seth O Logue, but then they rarely ever do.
When asked for their views on the need for further welfare cuts, just 10% of people said they believed more should be made. Only 14% of Tory supporters backed further welfare reductions compared with 10% of Lib Dems and 5% of Labour supporters.
The question it raises is whether the state should finance a family of eleven children to the tune of £53,000 P.A. To link it to the killing of the children because each one therefore has a cash value and so incentivises killing takes Tory free market thinking to an altogether ludicrous new level!
Politically I think both parties would do well to forget about Philpott and instead concentrate on the insanity of rewarding child bearing with such largesse.
Thank you Avery, you will never know how much that reassures me.
I had been dreading an invitation to the next Notting Hill dinner party.
I can now stand with the elite on the top of the nearest slagheap without fear of the Cameroon call.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2305047/Stop-pulling-wool-peoples-eyes-Clegg-hits-Labour-criticism-tax-reforms.html
The LDs problems seem to date back to 2007. Is that when Mr Clegg took over?
It doesn't hurt that I think you're making a Tory re-election even more unlikely!
@SkyNews: OBSERVER FRONT PAGE: "Labour plans radical shift over welfare state payouts" #skypapers http://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/320627643181588480/photo/1
To link it to the killing of the children because each one therefore has a cash value and so incentivises killing takes Tory free market thinking to an altogether ludicrous new level!
I have been very careful not to make that link. There was no determined intent to kill the children. So the idea of "incentivising killing" simply doesn't apply.
It is however reasonable to assumption that Philpott, in his actions, was motivated by a desire to increase his earnings from benefits and housing provision.
As Life in a Market Town has quite correctly pointed out on thread, this assumption is not one considered n Court as it was irrelevant to the determination of the case.
The issues which need debating are whether, as you point out, it is reasonable for UK taxpayers to subsidise a 'family' with multiple children to the extent the Philpotts were subsidised.
If we rule out sterilisation as a sanction, then the state's main concern will be in protecting and supporting the children. Limiting the payment of benefits to, say, two or three children would not be acting in the additional children's interest. Another solution needs to found.
As the number of families of this size claiming benefits is relatively small then linking the payments of benefits for four or more children could be linked to a requirement that the parents, if they are unable to find work, enroll in a qualifying workfare scheme if they wish to continue to receive in work additional child benefits.
Real consideration should also be given to the circumstances and point at which social services might take children into care when such requirements are not met. This measure would be controversial but without the sanction of removing children from parental care any attempt to limit the payment of benefit or make it conditional upon work commitment would be unenforceable.
The question is a bit blunt. I'd imagine most people are like me and have no idea what welfare benefits are in the first place. Like me most would probably support disability benefit to almost any level and for me anyway a generous unemployment benefit is also fair (on the basis that most are trying to get a job and those that aren't won't be getting rich on their unemployment). As for paying for children over perhaps two or three I just don't get it. It's a lifestyle choice.
Philpott was motivated by the same forces that motivated his earlier crimes when he was employed. He was a violent sadistic control freak. On welfare or in employment it simply did not matter.
Which particular section would you like to direct me to?
I am in a small minority. Most people feel the same as you about Downton and as I said it was perfectly cooked.
Incidentally I was often asked to do drama but couldn't face being on the same project for more than a few days (And they paid about a tenth as much!)
Nigel Farage, the leader of Ukip, has said he would be prepared to work with Labour if Ed Miliband’s party wins the next General Election.
Mr Farage also identified Boris Johnson as a future Tory leader he would be willing to work with, raising the prospect of a so-called “Borage” partnership.
The Ukip frontman has previously ruled out any deal with the Conservatives while they are led by David Cameron.
Asked in an interview with The Telegraph if his eurosceptic party could work with Labour, Mr Farage said: “If we found ourselves in the position post 2015 where we could do a deal that could usher this country’s exit from political union in Brussels, we’d do a deal with the devil.”
The novel alliance would depend on Ukip winning its first seats in Westminster at the election in two years’ time. It could also raise eyebrows amongst the party’s supporters — many of whom are disaffected Conservatives.
One scenario being talked about by senior Ukip figures would see the party’s MPs abstain from key parliamentary votes if Labour was in power — but only if Mr Miliband’s party had committed to holding a referendum on Britain’s membership of the EU.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/ukip/9976619/Nigel-Farage-I-could-work-with-Labour-or-Boris.html