The idea that Primrose Hill has only recently gentrified is hilarious.
Did the Milibands really grow up in a slum?
Delancey Street specifically is a main road through which the buses trundle on their way to the heart of London's West End. That's why it's cheaper than almost every other street in the area. The streets off Delancey are full of huge Victorian and Edwardian town houses. Jonathan Millet, Alan Bennett, etc have been there for years.
It was sold for £1.5m in 1999 and the country house sector has tracked the general housing market being less influenced by dubious foreign money etc.
Doubt it: came with a massive repairing liability. If Alex Hesketh managed to sell Easton Neston for £40m, then WW in good state is probably north of £50.
It probably had a negative value when it was bought.
But it looks like the owners have come up with a good money making scheme:
I quite like Andy Burnham, and have a few quid on him for next Labour leader. So I hope that he plays this well. EdM rightly got some sympathy, but this is not a similar story,
Sure, he has wanted to kick a health scandal into touch, but which health minister doesn't?
And he wants me to have a pay rise, unlike that Anna Soubry.
I assume from his threats that Andy Burnham is quite happy to see the Telegraph or some other newspaper print the emails at the centre of this row, in full. I watched Burnham earlier claiming that the emails had been taken out of context. Isn't that confirmation that the emails say what they say and he just wishes he hadn't sent them in the first place?
Agreed with this and foxinsoxuk - Burnham had better be sure of his ground or this could backfire horribly. Either way, it raises the profile of Hunt's accusations and will presumably get some more people thinking that maybe Labour aren't the saviours of the NHS. So much for 90 days (if memory serves) to save the NHS...
The BBC clearly hasn't done Labour or Miliband any favours with its over-the-top and relentless coverage of this trivial spat. Although Miliband got some sympathy initially, the BBC's ludicrous obsession has made him look like a man on the make. Giving air time to hooligans like Alistair Campbell also cemented the notion that this was a spin operation and nothing more.
Alistair Campbell on Newsnight complaining about "bullying" of people within the media will surely rank as one of the most fatuously, surreally inverted ten minutes of recent British TV news.
That was priceless!
Almost as funny as tim, Roger et al the following morning crowing about how he'd stuffed the Mail guy.....
'Self Awareness R Us'? Not......
After five days calling it wrong the polling is in, you know the routine. There will now be two days of PB Tories ignoring the polling or describing it as irrelevant.
How much has it shifted VI?
And as for 'calling it wrong'.....'Falkirk'.......
I quite like Andy Burnham, and have a few quid on him for next Labour leader. So I hope that he plays this well. EdM rightly got some sympathy, but this is not a similar story,
Sure, he has wanted to kick a health scandal into touch, but which health minister doesn't?
And he wants me to have a pay rise, unlike that Anna Soubry.
I assume from his threats that Andy Burnham is quite happy to see the Telegraph or some other newspaper print the emails at the centre of this row, in full. I watched Burnham earlier claiming that the emails had been taken out of context. Isn't that confirmation that the emails say what they say and he just wishes he hadn't sent them in the first place?
Agreed with this and foxinsoxuk - Burnham had better be sure of his ground or this could backfire horribly. Either way, it raises the profile of Hunt's accusations and will presumably get some more people thinking that maybe Labour aren't the saviours of the NHS. So much for 90 days (if memory serves) to save the NHS...
It was sold for £1.5m in 1999 and the country house sector has tracked the general housing market being less influenced by dubious foreign money etc.
Doubt it: came with a massive repairing liability. If Alex Hesketh managed to sell Easton Neston for £40m, then WW in good state is probably north of £50.
It probably had a negative value when it was bought.
But it looks like the owners have come up with a good money making scheme:
Last night Hunt made it clear he will not remove the tweet, insisting there is compelling evidence of a cover-up.
He's supposed to be the Health Secretary. Launch an official inquiry immediately and bring this compelling evidence to light for the victims then. Instead of this somewhat less important and noble use of it to merely justify one of his own tweets. He really is a silly Hunt.
"The irony of Campbell using the row to accuse a newspaper editor of bullying has not been lost on many."
"But so far not one advertiser has pulled its business from the paper and DMGT's share price has hardly budged. Indeed DMGT, valued at almost £3bn, is in rude health. Group revenues were up 2% in the 11 months to the end of August. Monthly unique web browsers of its Mail Online website are up 30% year-on-year to 138 million. DMGT's newspaper operations, of which the two titles form the bulk, produced profits of £101m last year."
Not sure why anyone expected the Mail attack on Miliband to shift the polls. Labour needs to keep the support it has to win in 2015. If all this has made it more likely current Labour leaners stay with Labour it's job done.
The BBC clearly hasn't done Labour or Miliband any favours with its over-the-top and relentless coverage of this trivial spat. Although Miliband got some sympathy initially, the BBC's ludicrous obsession has made him look like a man on the make. Giving air time to hooligans like Alistair Campbell also cemented the notion that this was a spin operation and nothing more.
Alistair Campbell on Newsnight complaining about "bullying" of people within the media will surely rank as one of the most fatuously, surreally inverted ten minutes of recent British TV news.
That was priceless!
Almost as funny as tim, Roger et al the following morning crowing about how he'd stuffed the Mail guy.....
'Self Awareness R Us'? Not......
After five days calling it wrong the polling is in, you know the routine. There will now be two days of PB Tories ignoring the polling or describing it as irrelevant.
How much has it shifted VI?
And as for 'calling it wrong'.....'Falkirk'.......
I haven't seen anyone claim it would shift VI, that's obviously not the relevance of the Mail chopping off one of its testicles and derailing Lynton Crosby's "weak" strategy in one swift move.
As was pointed out upthread the only significant VI shifting event this parliament was Osbornes omnishambles,which alongside his hapless election campaign places him third in the league of politicians who damage their own parties, behind Powell and Benn
The most significant event, by no means not the only significant shift.
UKIPs rise and the lib dems crashing are the other two.
As for events with direct influence on the next election result, Cammie's backbenchers humiliating him on boundary changes probably wins that one so far.
Burnham when asked by BBC this afternoon, seemed to be certain that he had been smeared re 'pressure' on CQC but so far Steven Barclay MP has still to have a reply to FOI requests for emails covering period from late January 2010.
Is an element of hubris in his response, or he just demob happy?.lf the emails show that undue pressure was put on the CQC then he might be looking for other uses for his talent.
As for Campbell does he have a ACHD? Was wondering if any PBer has read Alistair Campbell's Happy Depressive. He does appear to be on a bit of a upward climb at the moment.
Labour's polling shows the Tory attacks on Labour's NHS record is damaging Labour.
Compares it to when the Tories lost their reputation for Law and Order in the 90s.
A few months ago I said it was amazing how health was actually becoming a poisonous issue for Labour - something that had previously been inconceivable throughout the decades I've been following politics. Of course I was ridiculed by Labour supporters on here. But now this is dawning (no pun intended) on Labour themselves! No wonder Burnham is throwing writs about like they're going out of fashion. Smacks of panic.
The idea that Primrose Hill has only recently gentrified is hilarious.
Did the Milibands really grow up in a slum?
Delancey Street specifically is a main road through which the buses trundle on their way to the heart of London's West End. That's why it's cheaper than almost every other street in the area. The streets off Delancey are full of huge Victorian and Edwardian town houses. Jonathan Millet, Alan Bennett, etc have been there for years.
Primrose Hill was cheap until the 70s (that's why Ted and Sylvia could afford to live there). It was called Smoke City until the 60s because of the railways all around.
Of course it ascended thereafter.
But Delancey St is is a different kettle of realty fish. This was downmarket until - I venture - ten or even five years ago. Same goes for Jamestown Road and environs.
Now? £12m for a house on my road. £12m! How many people in the UK live on a street where a house can cost £12m? Admittedly, it has exceptional bookshelves (and a private cinema). And Terry Jones played the piano nude therein.
Delancey Street is a through-way, that's why it's cheaper. But the houses themselves are really nice, so one that is whole rather than flats is bound to be ridiculously priced given the market these days. I grew up in Kentish Town in the late 60s/70s/80s and Camden Town was not a slum. It was like most of that part of North London - lots of council houses (now purchased and in private hands), very Irish, but with a Greek Cypriot accent, and a fair smattering of Miliband-like people and artsy BBCers. It has changed so much, that is definitely true. I miss how it used to be.
Burnham is making a huge mistake. Politicians should never sue other politicians for libel. On a practical level if you do it you have to win unequivocally. And even then you are going to end up looking tetchy and weak. Has politics ever been so febrile? They're all so utterly removed from real life it's just ridiculous. I mean, how many people know anything about this story? Thanks to Andy probably a few million more than did yesterday.
Burnham is making a huge mistake. Politicians should never sue other politicians for libel. On a practical level if you do it you have to win unequivocally. And even then you are going to end up looking tetchy and weak. Has politics ever been so febrile? They're all so utterly removed from real life it's just ridiculous. I mean, how many people know anything about this story? Thanks to Andy probably a few million more than did yesterday.
It is going to get very very very messy, especially if Hunt repeats those allegations in Parliament, and perhaps goes even further.
Camden's a dreadful place, crawling with crack dealers and dogs on string. £12 million in Delancey Street?!!! You'd have to be of unsound mind not to want to live somewhere, anywhere, far nicer, and preferably to the south of Hyde Park for that amount of cash.
Burnham is making a huge mistake. Politicians should never sue other politicians for libel. On a practical level if you do it you have to win unequivocally. And even then you are going to end up looking tetchy and weak. Has politics ever been so febrile? They're all so utterly removed from real life it's just ridiculous. I mean, how many people know anything about this story? Thanks to Andy probably a few million more than did yesterday.
Precisely - it's like voluntarily going down the path Mitchell was forced down - his career takes a massive hit even if he 'wins'.
Burnham is making a huge mistake. Politicians should never sue other politicians for libel. On a practical level if you do it you have to win unequivocally. And even then you are going to end up looking tetchy and weak. Has politics ever been so febrile? They're all so utterly removed from real life it's just ridiculous. I mean, how many people know anything about this story? Thanks to Andy probably a few million more than did yesterday.
Yep.
I also think Miliband should have dismissed his father's traducement in the Mail with 'its the Mail, what do you expect?'
The story grew arms & legs because of his reaction, he would have been much better off letting it die quietly.....it was a surprisingly emotional, rather than calculating reaction......
Burnham is making a huge mistake. Politicians should never sue other politicians for libel. On a practical level if you do it you have to win unequivocally. And even then you are going to end up looking tetchy and weak. Has politics ever been so febrile? They're all so utterly removed from real life it's just ridiculous. I mean, how many people know anything about this story? Thanks to Andy probably a few million more than did yesterday.
SO
Very few people would expect this spat to proceed to litigation.
It looks like a clumsy attempt to suppress publication of the emails which has had the opposite effect, as you say, of drawing the public's attention to them.
Burnham's argument appears to be that the content of the emails, if taken out of context, misrepresent his position and actions on failing hospitals. The warning is to the press who may be in possession of the emails but not the background context.
My guess is that Hunt's next step will be to take advantage of parliamentary privilege by quoting extracts from the emails in the House.
This will leave the press free to publish the extracts and put pressure on Burnham to release the conflicting 'context' evidence.
In yesterday's Daily Mail Comment - Time for an inquiry into the culture and practices of Labour When I read this last night, it struck that the Daily Mail was making it plain that all prominent members of the Shadow Cabinet were going to now be under intense scrutiny. Especially those that might harbour ambitions to succeed Ed Miliband if he fell on his political sword. Is Miliband on a mission to pick so many fights, and on so many fronts, that what little support or good will he does have within his Cabinet is going to evaporate?
There may be more to the 'Burnham sues Hunt' story than is currently being discussed.
It is customary for Government and Shadow Ministers who take civil action for defamation to step down from their office until the matter is resolved by the Courts.
Perhaps we should anticipate an exchange of letters between Miliband and Burnham each expressing their regret at the unfortunate events which gave rise to such an unexpected resignation.
With the education and the economy already abandoned, Labour know they cannot afford to lose their banker issue of health under any circumstances. Hence the willingness to take even seemingly suicidal steps to thwart Hunt's audacious raid on their territory. Terribly risky though - Burnham is essentially putting the Labour Party on trial.
The Millibands bought their house when Primrose Hill when it was this sort of place, then it turned gentrified around them. The sort of place where pulp historical fiction writers and movie stars live alongside Russian "businessmen". Then they gentrified themselves, with their two Oxford PPE educated sons becoming government ministers, marrying well. One to a wealthy barrister who makes a living out of supporting Establishment principles, for nothing is more establishment than the rule of law.
The Mail described Ralph as a man who hated Britain because of what he wrote when young. How much more he must have been uncomfortable in the Primrose Hill of the Noughties. Everywhere he looked he would have seen the triumph of capitalism. The Socialism he loved not only defeated, but even more hurtful, it was forgotton. That is why the Daily Mail got it wrong. To call someone a Marxist nowadays is no more relevant than calling someone a Jacobite. Both are irrelevant in the modern world.
The idea that Primrose Hill has only recently gentrified is hilarious.
Did the Milibands really grow up in a slum?
Delancey Street specifically is a main road through which the buses trundle on their way to the heart of London's West End. That's why it's cheaper than almost every other street in the area. The streets off Delancey are full of huge Victorian and Edwardian town houses. Jonathan Millet, Alan Bennett, etc have been there for years.
Delancey Street is a through-way, that's why it's cheaper. But the houses themselves are really nice, so one that is whole rather than flats is bound to be ridiculously priced given the market these days. I grew up in Kentish Town in the late 60s/70s/80s and Camden Town was not a slum. It was like most of that part of North London - lots of council houses (now purchased and in private hands), very Irish, but with a Greek Cypriot accent, and a fair smattering of Miliband-like people and artsy BBCers. It has changed so much, that is definitely true. I miss how it used to be.
"The Mail described Ralph as a man who hated Britain because of what he wrote when young. How much more he must have been uncomfortable in the Primrose Hill of the Noughties. Everywhere he looked he would have seen the triumph of capitalism."
Not sure how much time he spent in Primrose Hill in the noughties, he died in 1994
Very few people would expect this spat to proceed to litigation.
It looks like a clumsy attempt to suppress publication of the emails which has had the opposite effect, as you say, of drawing the public's attention to them.
Burnham's argument appears to be that the content of the emails, if taken out of context, misrepresent his position and actions on failing hospitals. The warning is to the press who may be in possession of the emails but not the background context.
My guess is that Hunt's next step will be to take advantage of parliamentary privilege by quoting extracts from the emails in the House.
This will leave the press free to publish the extracts and put pressure on Burnham to release the conflicting 'context' evidence.
It's pathetic. Grow some Andy. The truth will out. It's not your dead Dad being attacked by the Mail. It's the ridiculous Jeremy Hunt having a pop. To respond in this way to such a pup is just ridiculous.
I look forward to Gove bringing forward legislation to help fix the disgusting cover-up of the last government sacking teachers because they were tories. Of which he has compelling evidence that sadly he can't be bothered to produce.
See how this works?
If this is real then stop the party political idiocy and bring the evidence forward with an official inquiry. Finding out the truth about covering up the deaths of people in hospital is slightly more important than either Hunt or Burnham's pathetic Egos and twitter twattery.
In yesterday's Daily Mail Comment - Time for an inquiry into the culture and practices of Labour When I read this last night, it struck that the Daily Mail was making it plain that all prominent members of the Shadow Cabinet were going to now be under intense scrutiny. Especially those that might harbour ambitions to succeed Ed Miliband if he fell on his political sword. Is Miliband on a mission to pick so many fights, and on so many fronts, that what little support or good will he does have within his Cabinet is going to evaporate?
There may be more to the 'Burnham sues Hunt' story than is currently being discussed.
It is customary for Government and Shadow Ministers who take civil action for defamation to step down from their office until the matter is resolved by the Courts.
Perhaps we should anticipate an exchange of letters between Miliband and Burnham each expressing their regret at the unfortunate events which gave rise to such an unexpected resignation.
In your parallel universe Miliband weakened his position by taking on the Mail. It's quite a universe that.
Labour's polling shows the Tory attacks on Labour's NHS record is damaging Labour.
Compares it to when the Tories lost their reputation for Law and Order in the 90s.
The comparison is apposite. Of course, it was Tony Blair who neutralized the law-and-order issue, which had been a Tory stronghold for ever. We must seriously ask ourselves: is history repeating itself and will Hunt go on to be the Tories' Blair?
Eoin Clarke has been priceless this last week on the issue of the Miliban/Mail row, his lack of self awareness almost makes you wonder if he is a spoof account. In amongst all his outrage at the behaviour of the Mail to Ed Miliband's father, he managed to squeeze in an attack on Cameron by smearing his wife.
. It's the ridiculous Jeremy Hunt having a pop. To respond in this way to such a pup is just ridiculous.
Jeremy Hunt is massively under estimated. He got done over like a kipper at DCMS and could have been consigned to the backbenches. But no, he has shown himself to be pretty adept as health secretary.
He has made it difficult for Labour to attack the NHS with success. He has successfully managed the debate to be about Labour's time in office rather than his own.
With the education and the economy already abandoned, Labour know they cannot afford to lose their banker issue of health under any circumstances. Hence the willingness to take even seemingly suicidal steps to thwart Hunt's audacious raid on their territory. Terribly risky though - Burnham is essentially putting the Labour Party on trial.
I dont follow the bbc, but i hear many on the twitter thingie claiming that the whole story of the nhs and what labour did up to the 2010 election has been non existent on their airwaves.
Burnham is making a huge mistake. Politicians should never sue other politicians for libel. On a practical level if you do it you have to win unequivocally. And even then you are going to end up looking tetchy and weak. Has politics ever been so febrile? They're all so utterly removed from real life it's just ridiculous. I mean, how many people know anything about this story? Thanks to Andy probably a few million more than did yesterday.
Yep.
I also think Miliband should have dismissed his father's traducement in the Mail with 'its the Mail, what do you expect?'
The story grew arms & legs because of his reaction, he would have been much better off letting it die quietly.....it was a surprisingly emotional, rather than calculating reaction......
What Miliband did was straight from the Campbel playbook. The Mail clearly over stepped a line in the sand of decency, never to waste such a good opportunity he skewered the daily mail. Milband is a sharp opportunist he spots a weakness and throws himself all in.
I dont say this is a negative way, it is a good and necessary quality for a politician. Blair would have had Dacre over the chequers and ask why we cant all just play nice.
Burnham is making a huge mistake. Politicians should never sue other politicians for libel. On a practical level if you do it you have to win unequivocally. And even then you are going to end up looking tetchy and weak. Has politics ever been so febrile? They're all so utterly removed from real life it's just ridiculous. I mean, how many people know anything about this story? Thanks to Andy probably a few million more than did yesterday.
Yep.
I also think Miliband should have dismissed his father's traducement in the Mail with 'its the Mail, what do you expect?'
The story grew arms & legs because of his reaction, he would have been much better off letting it die quietly.....it was a surprisingly emotional, rather than calculating reaction......
Blair would have had Dacre over the chequers and ask why we cant all just play nice.
Blair won three General Elections....which is quite possibly three more than Ed will......
Be interesting to see the figures for traffic to the Daily Mail site during the last week, if I was an advertiser it would seem crazy to have removed my custom during this controversy as a result.
"The irony of Campbell using the row to accuse a newspaper editor of bullying has not been lost on many."
"But so far not one advertiser has pulled its business from the paper and DMGT's share price has hardly budged. Indeed DMGT, valued at almost £3bn, is in rude health. Group revenues were up 2% in the 11 months to the end of August. Monthly unique web browsers of its Mail Online website are up 30% year-on-year to 138 million. DMGT's newspaper operations, of which the two titles form the bulk, produced profits of £101m last year."
Not quite, its still one hell of a gamble. If Ed Miliband's attempts to run a 35% strategy to shore up his core vote and hang onto those disillusioned 2010 Libdem voters so they actually turn out for him makes him lurch so far left. Miliband also runs the risk that it will also bring disillusioned Tories who flirted with UKIP back into the Conservative fold without Cameron having to move rightwards, that is why Cameron's promise of an EU Ref might yet pay big dividends.
Not sure why anyone expected the Mail attack on Miliband to shift the polls. Labour needs to keep the support it has to win in 2015. If all this has made it more likely current Labour leaners stay with Labour it's job done.
Despite the earnest tweeting...it appears none of them did......
@MediaGuido: Not one single advertiser has abandoned the #DailyMail. A reminder that the left-wing twitterati are noisy but impotent in the real world.
Be interesting to see the figures for traffic to the Daily Mail site during the last week, if I was an advertiser it would seem crazy to have removed my custom during this controversy as a result.
"The irony of Campbell using the row to accuse a newspaper editor of bullying has not been lost on many."
"But so far not one advertiser has pulled its business from the paper and DMGT's share price has hardly budged. Indeed DMGT, valued at almost £3bn, is in rude health. Group revenues were up 2% in the 11 months to the end of August. Monthly unique web browsers of its Mail Online website are up 30% year-on-year to 138 million. DMGT's newspaper operations, of which the two titles form the bulk, produced profits of £101m last year."
. It's the ridiculous Jeremy Hunt having a pop. To respond in this way to such a pup is just ridiculous.
Jeremy Hunt is massively under estimated. He got done over like a kipper at DCMS and could have been consigned to the backbenches. But no, he has shown himself to be pretty adept as health secretary.
He has made it difficult for Labour to attack the NHS with success. He has successfully managed the debate to be about Labour's time in office rather than his own.
Disagree. Hunt is a joke. A startled rabbit in headlights. Burnham is onto a loser. If he really is suing over the Tweet quoted below he is going to end up humiliated and handing Hunt a huge propaganda victory. From a Labour perspective the hope has to be that the Sunday Times is gilding the lily somewhat. That would not be a huge surprise.
Be interesting to see the figures for traffic to the Daily Mail site during the last week, if I was an advertiser it would seem crazy to have removed my custom during this controversy as a result.
"The irony of Campbell using the row to accuse a newspaper editor of bullying has not been lost on many."
"But so far not one advertiser has pulled its business from the paper and DMGT's share price has hardly budged. Indeed DMGT, valued at almost £3bn, is in rude health. Group revenues were up 2% in the 11 months to the end of August. Monthly unique web browsers of its Mail Online website are up 30% year-on-year to 138 million. DMGT's newspaper operations, of which the two titles form the bulk, produced profits of £101m last year."
. It's the ridiculous Jeremy Hunt having a pop. To respond in this way to such a pup is just ridiculous.
Jeremy Hunt is massively under estimated. He got done over like a kipper at DCMS and could have been consigned to the backbenches. But no, he has shown himself to be pretty adept as health secretary.
He has made it difficult for Labour to attack the NHS with success. He has successfully managed the debate to be about Labour's time in office rather than his own.
From a Labour perspective the hope has to be that the Sunday Times is gilding the lily somewhat. That would not be a huge surprise.
That would appear to be the case - Hunt had until Friday to withdraw, thereafter Burnham might take further steps.....of course, possibly as former Shadow Secretary for Health.....
""I therefore ask you, by the end of today, to provide me with evidence to substantiate your assertion.
"If you fail to provide such evidence, I will require a full retraction and public apology. If that is not forthcoming I will consider further action."
. It's the ridiculous Jeremy Hunt having a pop. To respond in this way to such a pup is just ridiculous.
Jeremy Hunt is massively under estimated. He got done over like a kipper at DCMS and could have been consigned to the backbenches. But no, he has shown himself to be pretty adept as health secretary.
He has made it difficult for Labour to attack the NHS with success. He has successfully managed the debate to be about Labour's time in office rather than his own.
From a Labour perspective the hope has to be that the Sunday Times is gilding the lily somewhat. That would not be a huge surprise.
That would appear to be the case - Hunt had until Friday to withdraw, thereafter Burnham might take further steps.....of course, possibly as former Shadow Secretary for Health.....
""I therefore ask you, by the end of today, to provide me with evidence to substantiate your assertion.
"If you fail to provide such evidence, I will require a full retraction and public apology. If that is not forthcoming I will consider further action."
From the Sunday Times, a letter from m'learned friends has been sent
Burnham instructed Labour’s lawyers, Steel & Shamash, to write to Hunt yesterday.
The legal letter, signed by Gerald Shamash, repeats the demand for evidence that Burnham personally orchestrated or was involved in a cover-up; or for a retraction of the tweet and public apology. It adds that if Hunt fails to act, Burnham will “consider his remedies” — a clear threat to sue.
I expect that Hunt is praying for a mild winter, but God helps those who prepare themselves.
Last winter the Leicester Royal Infirmary's Emergency Dept figures were some of the worst in the country. This year we have a lot of money to prevent the same:
. It's the ridiculous Jeremy Hunt having a pop. To respond in this way to such a pup is just ridiculous.
Jeremy Hunt is massively under estimated. He got done over like a kipper at DCMS and could have been consigned to the backbenches. But no, he has shown himself to be pretty adept as health secretary.
He has made it difficult for Labour to attack the NHS with success. He has successfully managed the debate to be about Labour's time in office rather than his own.
111 Hunt will be praying for two mild winters.
As for the rest of your post well Labour has a massive 32% lead on the NHS in its target seats according to the Ashcroft polling so I'm not entirely sure who you think Hunt is appealing to.
. It's the ridiculous Jeremy Hunt having a pop. To respond in this way to such a pup is just ridiculous.
Jeremy Hunt is massively under estimated. He got done over like a kipper at DCMS and could have been consigned to the backbenches. But no, he has shown himself to be pretty adept as health secretary.
He has made it difficult for Labour to attack the NHS with success. He has successfully managed the debate to be about Labour's time in office rather than his own.
111 Hunt will be praying for two mild winters.
As for the rest of your post well Labour has a massive 32% lead on the NHS in its target seats according to the Ashcroft polling so I'm not entirely sure who you think Hunt is appealing to.
All health secretaries pray for mild winters. The Conservatives could be managing the NHS better than Tescos manages its stores and it wouldnt get good ratings in opinion polls.
Jeremy Hunt gave a good speech at the Tory Conference, much enhanced by the fact that he rolls his sleeves up and works on the very wards being flagged up to him. Andy Burnham on the other hand......sent emails
. It's the ridiculous Jeremy Hunt having a pop. To respond in this way to such a pup is just ridiculous.
Jeremy Hunt is massively under estimated. He got done over like a kipper at DCMS and could have been consigned to the backbenches. But no, he has shown himself to be pretty adept as health secretary.
He has made it difficult for Labour to attack the NHS with success. He has successfully managed the debate to be about Labour's time in office rather than his own.
A very good point. Back in the winter of 1989/1990 there was a really nasty flu outbreak at the hospital where I was working in the Renal Unit as a staff nurse. On one particular day we had so many nurses call in sick that I finished my normal shift, and then I immediately volunteered to go work on one of the medical wards to help cover the staff shortage due to what I saw was an unforeseen crisis.
On another occasion when I was a student doing my stint in paediatrics, I had to special a young child who had suffered burns, but who wouldn't be parted from me when it came to the end of my shift because Mum had to briefly go home. I never hesitated to volunteer until Mum could get back to take over with a new nurse.
. It's the ridiculous Jeremy Hunt having a pop. To respond in this way to such a pup is just ridiculous.
Jeremy Hunt is massively under estimated. He got done over like a kipper at DCMS and could have been consigned to the backbenches. But no, he has shown himself to be pretty adept as health secretary.
He has made it difficult for Labour to attack the NHS with success. He has successfully managed the debate to be about Labour's time in office rather than his own.
111 Hunt will be praying for two mild winters.
As for the rest of your post well Labour has a massive 32% lead on the NHS in its target seats according to the Ashcroft polling so I'm not entirely sure who you think Hunt is appealing to.
All health secretaries pray for mild winters. The Conservatives could be managing the NHS better than Tescos manages its stores and it wouldnt get good ratings in opinion polls.
Jeremy Hunt gave a good speech at the Tory Conference, much enhanced by the fact that he rolls his sleeves up and works on the very wards being flagged up to him. Andy Burnham on the other hand......sent emails
. It's the ridiculous Jeremy Hunt having a pop. To respond in this way to such a pup is just ridiculous.
Jeremy Hunt is massively under estimated. He got done over like a kipper at DCMS and could have been consigned to the backbenches. But no, he has shown himself to be pretty adept as health secretary.
He has made it difficult for Labour to attack the NHS with success. He has successfully managed the debate to be about Labour's time in office rather than his own.
Jeremy Hunt gave a good speech at the Tory Conference, much enhanced by the fact that he rolls his sleeves up and works on the very wards being flagged up to him. Andy Burnham on the other hand......sent emails
. It's the ridiculous Jeremy Hunt having a pop. To respond in this way to such a pup is just ridiculous.
Jeremy Hunt is massively under estimated. He got done over like a kipper at DCMS and could have been consigned to the backbenches. But no, he has shown himself to be pretty adept as health secretary.
He has made it difficult for Labour to attack the NHS with success. He has successfully managed the debate to be about Labour's time in office rather than his own.
When my Dad was ill in a Scottish Hospital he asked me to go through to the bathroom area to show me how dirty it was, I also had to get on a chair with a duster to clean the ward television for the patients.
But worst of all, a couple of years later when he was dying, I had to go through to the desk where the nurses were hanging around to ask for an oral kit. They were not even embarrassed when they handed it to me and left me to open it and use it. My dad squeezed my hand after I had used it to make him more comfortable. I think that is unforgiveable and caused both my dad and I great distress. It wouldn't have ever happened on a shift on ward when I used to work in the NHS back in the 80's or 90's. Back in those days a dying patient was given a nurse to special them, and an oral pack would have been an automatic part of the their care to make them more comfortable.
Jeremy Hunt gave a good speech at the Tory Conference, much enhanced by the fact that he rolls his sleeves up and works on the very wards being flagged up to him. Andy Burnham on the other hand......sent emails
. It's the ridiculous Jeremy Hunt having a pop. To respond in this way to such a pup is just ridiculous.
Jeremy Hunt is massively under estimated. He got done over like a kipper at DCMS and could have been consigned to the backbenches. But no, he has shown himself to be pretty adept as health secretary.
He has made it difficult for Labour to attack the NHS with success. He has successfully managed the debate to be about Labour's time in office rather than his own.
Jeremy Hunt gave a good speech at the Tory Conference, much enhanced by the fact that he rolls his sleeves up and works on the very wards being flagged up to him. Andy Burnham on the other hand......sent emails
72% of the voters think the Daily Mail's description of Ralph Miliband as “the man who hated Britain” was unacceptable and 69% believe the Mail should apologise.
57% of Mail readers think it should apologise for its headline
Which of course translates to 'Triumph for Dacre!' in the imagination of the swivel-eyed loons and hilarious anti-tipsters.
So are you predicting a fall in the Daily Mail's readership or advertising, or will those that took part in this poll end up being filed under 'shy Daily Mail readers'? Having seen the most popular Sunday newspaper closed, do you think the public are now gunning for the Daily Mail to close so we are left with the Guardian, Mirror or BBC as our media outlets? Something tells me that the Mail will triumph here, and simple because it refuses to be boxed into any straight jacket by any of the political parties or the liberal left.
72% of the voters think the Daily Mail's description of Ralph Miliband as “the man who hated Britain” was unacceptable and 69% believe the Mail should apologise.
57% of Mail readers think it should apologise for its headline
Which of course translates to 'Triumph for Dacre!' in the imagination of the swivel-eyed loons and hilarious anti-tipsters.
. It's the ridiculous Jeremy Hunt having a pop. To respond in this way to such a pup is just ridiculous.
Jeremy Hunt is massively under estimated. He got done over like a kipper at DCMS and could have been consigned to the backbenches. But no, he has shown himself to be pretty adept as health secretary.
He has made it difficult for Labour to attack the NHS with success. He has successfully managed the debate to be about Labour's time in office rather than his own.
Disagree. Hunt is a joke. A startled rabbit in headlights. Burnham is onto a loser. If he really is suing over the Tweet quoted below he is going to end up humiliated and handing Hunt a huge propaganda victory. From a Labour perspective the hope has to be that the Sunday Times is gilding the lily somewhat. That would not be a huge surprise.
Very difficult to prove Andy Burnham initated a cover-up.Hunt must be rather surprised by this sudden move.Coud be very good for politics in this country.
On topic, the Con-UKIP-floating voters Cameron needs to worry about are by definition not strongly committed to UKIP. He's better keeping Farage out of the debates and hoping they forget UKIP exists.
That doesn't mean Labour and UKIP shouldn't make a lot of noise over the issue, though. If UKIP put in a creditable performance in the Euros Labour should demand that they be included, and let Cameron carry the can for either blocking UKIP or chickening out of the debates.
About the debates,Skynews chief talked about starting them at fortnightly intervals from April 4,2015.
Cameron gave the impression that he wanted them much earlier but their value and worth to the networks is much less if they are held months before the election.
An excellent article on the Mail debacle. The best i've read. The paragraph you've used to introduce it is so misleading as to its content I can only think you've spent too much time watching how the mail do it!
I am sorry to hear it. My grandfather had similar experiences when admitted in his final illness. Mouth care was terrible, and diet unsuitable. We had to bring food in from home and have a family rota to feed him. I was a junior doctor at the time, and scales fell from my idealistic view of the NHS.
When my Dad was ill in a Scottish Hospital he asked me to go through to the bathroom area to show me how dirty it was, I also had to get on a chair with a duster to clean the ward television for the patients.
But worst of all, a couple of years later when he was dying, I had to go through to the desk where the nurses were hanging around to ask for an oral kit. They were not even embarrassed when they handed it to me and left me to open it and use it. My dad squeezed my hand after I had used it to make him more comfortable. I think that is unforgiveable and caused both my dad and I great distress. It wouldn't have ever happened on a shift on ward when I used to work in the NHS back in the 80's or 90's. Back in those days a dying patient was given a nurse to special them, and an oral pack would have been an automatic part of the their care to make them more comfortable.
Jeremy Hunt gave a good speech at the Tory Conference, much enhanced by the fact that he rolls his sleeves up and works on the very wards being flagged up to him. Andy Burnham on the other hand......sent emails
Jeremy Hunt gave a good speech at the Tory Conference, much enhanced by the fact that he rolls his sleeves up and works on the very wards being flagged up to him. Andy Burnham on the other hand......sent emails
Comments
Did the Milibands really grow up in a slum?
Delancey Street specifically is a main road through which the buses trundle on their way to the heart of London's West End. That's why it's cheaper than almost every other street in the area. The streets off Delancey are full of huge Victorian and Edwardian town houses. Jonathan Millet, Alan Bennett, etc have been there for years.
I'd be happy with a couple of spare bedrooms, a study and a nice bit of garden.
Last night Hunt made it clear he will not remove the tweet, insisting there is compelling evidence of a cover-up.
@Eoin Clarke tweets: 72% of UK Voters (that's 33 million + people) say the #DailyMail was wrong to #smear Ralph Miliband. [source: yougov].
I have to confess I am shocked.
http://www.theguardian.com/media/2013/oct/05/daily-mail-poor-example-says-headteacher?CMP=twt_gu
Anthony Seldon, writing in the Daily Mail:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/search.html?authornamef=Anthony Seldon
Mind you, his most recent article was 12 days ago......
And as for 'calling it wrong'.....'Falkirk'.......
My fondness for Andy Burnham is obviously completely unrelated to his attempt to bribe me.
"One a day" as the local cabbies say.
http://www.theguardian.com/media/2013/oct/05/daily-mail-battle-labour-lord-rothermere?CMP=twt_gu
"The irony of Campbell using the row to accuse a newspaper editor of bullying has not been lost on many."
"But so far not one advertiser has pulled its business from the paper and DMGT's share price has hardly budged. Indeed DMGT, valued at almost £3bn, is in rude health. Group revenues were up 2% in the 11 months to the end of August. Monthly unique web browsers of its Mail Online website are up 30% year-on-year to 138 million. DMGT's newspaper operations, of which the two titles form the bulk, produced profits of £101m last year."
I agree.
The strong must apologise to the weak.
The Tories think they can get 9 out of 10 current Kippers to vote Tory in 2015, when push comes to shove.
Labour's polling shows the Tory attacks on Labour's NHS record is damaging Labour.
Compares it to when the Tories lost their reputation for Law and Order in the 90s.
UKIPs rise and the lib dems crashing are the other two.
As for events with direct influence on the next election result, Cammie's backbenchers humiliating him on boundary changes probably wins that one so far.
I don't think that's going to happen
His response is half way through the clip.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-24409965
Is an element of hubris in his response, or he just demob happy?.lf the emails show that undue pressure was put on the CQC then he might be looking for other uses for his talent.
As for Campbell does he have a ACHD? Was wondering if any PBer has read Alistair Campbell's Happy Depressive. He does appear to be on a bit of a upward climb at the moment.
http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/comment/columns/adamboulton/article1323533.ece
"Shocking revelations on @andyburnhammp’s attempts to cover-up failing hospitals. We’re legislating to make sure this can never happen again."
Is it Andy Burnham's case that Hunt is not legislating to avoid a repeat occurrence?
His firm gave Hunt until this Friday gone, to either prove the allegations or retract the tweet and apologise.
Which means he's secure.
I also think Miliband should have dismissed his father's traducement in the Mail with 'its the Mail, what do you expect?'
The story grew arms & legs because of his reaction, he would have been much better off letting it die quietly.....it was a surprisingly emotional, rather than calculating reaction......
Very few people would expect this spat to proceed to litigation.
It looks like a clumsy attempt to suppress publication of the emails which has had the opposite effect, as you say, of drawing the public's attention to them.
Burnham's argument appears to be that the content of the emails, if taken out of context, misrepresent his position and actions on failing hospitals. The warning is to the press who may be in possession of the emails but not the background context.
My guess is that Hunt's next step will be to take advantage of parliamentary privilege by quoting extracts from the emails in the House.
This will leave the press free to publish the extracts and put pressure on Burnham to release the conflicting 'context' evidence.
When I read this last night, it struck that the Daily Mail was making it plain that all prominent members of the Shadow Cabinet were going to now be under intense scrutiny. Especially those that might harbour ambitions to succeed Ed Miliband if he fell on his political sword. Is Miliband on a mission to pick so many fights, and on so many fronts, that what little support or good will he does have within his Cabinet is going to evaporate?
The Mail described Ralph as a man who hated Britain because of what he wrote when young. How much more he must have been uncomfortable in the Primrose Hill of the Noughties. Everywhere he looked he would have seen the triumph of capitalism. The Socialism he loved not only defeated, but even more hurtful, it was forgotton. That is why the Daily Mail got it wrong. To call someone a Marxist nowadays is no more relevant than calling someone a Jacobite. Both are irrelevant in the modern world.
Very few people would expect this spat to proceed to litigation.
It looks like a clumsy attempt to suppress publication of the emails which has had the opposite effect, as you say, of drawing the public's attention to them.
Burnham's argument appears to be that the content of the emails, if taken out of context, misrepresent his position and actions on failing hospitals. The warning is to the press who may be in possession of the emails but not the background context.
My guess is that Hunt's next step will be to take advantage of parliamentary privilege by quoting extracts from the emails in the House.
This will leave the press free to publish the extracts and put pressure on Burnham to release the conflicting 'context' evidence.
It's pathetic. Grow some Andy. The truth will out. It's not your dead Dad being attacked by the Mail. It's the ridiculous Jeremy Hunt having a pop. To respond in this way to such a pup is just ridiculous.
Everyone agress that social mobility has stalled and that education is the answer. They’re wrong."
http://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/magazine/the-social-mobility-myth-education-philip-colllins/
See how this works?
If this is real then stop the party political idiocy and bring the evidence forward with an official inquiry. Finding out the truth about covering up the deaths of people in hospital is slightly more important than either Hunt or Burnham's pathetic Egos and twitter twattery.
The PB Dacres never learn.
He has made it difficult for Labour to attack the NHS with success. He has successfully managed the debate to be about Labour's time in office rather than his own.
I dont say this is a negative way, it is a good and necessary quality for a politician. Blair would have had Dacre over the chequers and ask why we cant all just play nice.
@MediaGuido: Not one single advertiser has abandoned the #DailyMail. A reminder that the left-wing twitterati are noisy but impotent in the real world.
http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/dailymail.co.uk
""I therefore ask you, by the end of today, to provide me with evidence to substantiate your assertion.
"If you fail to provide such evidence, I will require a full retraction and public apology. If that is not forthcoming I will consider further action."
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/10/05/jeremy-hunt-andy-burnham_n_4048090.html
From the Sunday Times, a letter from m'learned friends has been sent
Burnham instructed Labour’s lawyers, Steel & Shamash, to write to Hunt yesterday.
The legal letter, signed by Gerald Shamash, repeats the demand for evidence that Burnham personally orchestrated or was involved in a cover-up; or for a retraction of the tweet and public apology. It adds that if Hunt fails to act, Burnham will “consider his remedies” — a clear threat to sue.
Last winter the Leicester Royal Infirmary's Emergency Dept figures were some of the worst in the country. This year we have a lot of money to prevent the same:
http://www.thisisleicestershire.co.uk/pound-10m-boost-help-hospitals-cope-winter/story-19783771-detail/story.html#axzz2gzM4wxTg
No fool that Mr Hunt.
On another occasion when I was a student doing my stint in paediatrics, I had to special a young child who had suffered burns, but who wouldn't be parted from me when it came to the end of my shift because Mum had to briefly go home. I never hesitated to volunteer until Mum could get back to take over with a new nurse.
Well, wouldn't it be useful to commission some proper academic research into how extensive the problem was?
Just as well that someone did in 2010:
http://qualitysafety.bmj.com/content/early/2013/08/28/bmjqs-2013-001947.full
But worst of all, a couple of years later when he was dying, I had to go through to the desk where the nurses were hanging around to ask for an oral kit. They were not even embarrassed when they handed it to me and left me to open it and use it. My dad squeezed my hand after I had used it to make him more comfortable. I think that is unforgiveable and caused both my dad and I great distress. It wouldn't have ever happened on a shift on ward when I used to work in the NHS back in the 80's or 90's. Back in those days a dying patient was given a nurse to special them, and an oral pack would have been an automatic part of the their care to make them more comfortable.
That doesn't mean Labour and UKIP shouldn't make a lot of noise over the issue, though. If UKIP put in a creditable performance in the Euros Labour should demand that they be included, and let Cameron carry the can for either blocking UKIP or chickening out of the debates.
Cameron gave the impression that he wanted them much earlier but their value and worth to the networks is much less if they are held months before the election.
http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-14227539.html
"The Guardian, possibly unwisely.....gets into Daily Mail offshore share holding:
"The irony of Campbell using the row to accuse a newspaper editor of bullying has not been lost on many."
http://www.theguardian.com/media/2013/oct/05/daily-mail-battle-labour-lord-rothermere?CMP=twt_gu"
An excellent article on the Mail debacle. The best i've read. The paragraph you've used to introduce it is so misleading as to its content I can only think you've spent too much time watching how the mail do it!
Govt app +1
Cam NC
Miliband +15
Clegg +5
Miliband with voting groups:
Lab +55
L10 +32
LD10 +26
http://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/5gddupegm8/YG-Archive-Pol-Sunday-Times-results-130913.pdf
http://cdn.yougov.com/cumulus_uploads/document/r4r40d1fp0/YG-Archive-Pol-Sunday-Times-results-041013.pdf
Well/Badly (net)
Cameron: -12 (+7)
Miliband: -31 (-1)
If you could choose, which prefer at next GE:
Maj Con: 30 (+3)
Con-LD: 9 (-3)
Lab-LD: 12 (-2)
Maj Lab: 31 (+1)
Most likely result: (vs May)
Maj Con: 15 (+2)
Con-LD: 17 (+7)
Lab-LD: 17 (-2)
Maj Lab: 23 (-7)
http://cdn.yougov.com/cumulus_uploads/document/r4r40d1fp0/YG-Archive-Pol-Sunday-Times-results-041013.pdf
Cons: 55; LAB: 19; LD: 5; UKIP: 20 (weighted sample size is 273)
Would be interesting to see the same poll for other newspapers as well as those who do not read a paper but rely on BBC, ITV, C4, SKY etc news.