Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The main impact of the energy cap issue will be to firm up

24

Comments

  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,146

    SeanT said:

    So he doesn't mention green taxes. Instead he calls it an "energy fairness plan" or a "Conservative hypothermia subsidy" - who cares.

    Just steal Miliband's idea, dress it up as something else, and get the bills down. No one will give a hoot about the political origin of the concept.

    The word from Avery is that Osborne is going to come in considerably under the OBR deficit forecast for this year. In the real world you might expect this to be banked to make up for the missed forecasts in previous years, but in our wonderful political world it gives Osborne headroom to throw a few sweeties around. He could take the green and social levies off energy bills and pay for those policies through general taxation.

    This reduces energy bills, keeps the Lib Dems happy, does not contradict Cameron's green positioning, and it will come up as fairly redistributive in the distributional analysis. Job done.

    I'm sure Osborne would be narked by it, as he would have wanted to use the money for other electoral bribes, but given the kicking Cameron is taking there's not much option.
    Lol No - Osbourne will love it - the man will be grinning from ear to ear when he announces a REDUCTION in everyone's energy bills (All else being equal)
  • Options
    welshowlwelshowl Posts: 4,460
    taffys said:

    Do Countries where there is an absolute bucket of sunshine use it to the full?

    Do they use gas in Saudi, coal in Morocco and nuclear in Egypt? We should be told.



    I reckon we should frack like hell and hand out condoms. Fewer people is way more of an answer than solar, wind, biomass etc etc. and they could all drive Porsche 911 turbos all day every day.
  • Options

    PMQs sketch: Cameron is a buffoon who might as well eat his own manifesto

    http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2013/10/pmqs-sketch-cameron-is-a-buffoon-who-might-as-well-eat-his-own-manifesto/

    Bloody hell,Mr evans as really gone after Cameron ;-)

    A big part of wobbly Dave's problem is that he saw clearly the need to 'detox' the Tory brand - but catastrophically decided that one good way to achieve this was to become a treehugger. Cunto di tutti cunti. He should have stood up for the working poor and against rent seekers (at the top and bottom of society). Unfortunately he had a few too many Notting Hill dinners with chums and their wives and decided, over his guinea fowl and polenta with a nice Languedoc, that going all Jonathan Porritt was a sound plan. Should've listened to a few taxi drivers instead.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,674
    As an aside, I think the Con/LD green taxes 'spat' is good for both parties. It allows the Conservatives to win back 'kippers, while allowing the LDs to differentiate themselves and hold on in places like Twickenham.
  • Options
    RogerRoger Posts: 19,233
    @RichardN

    "And he also talked a lot about deficit reduction, and sound public finances, and reducing net immigration, and helping the dreaded hard-working families, and many other issues. Your point is what, exactly?"

    This was Martin Rowson's first significant cartoon and as so often he hit the bulls eye. Any focus group choosing an image that represented what Cameron's Conservatives stood for would have chosen this. "Nonsense" my ass!!

    http://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/martin_rowson/2006/10/01/cartoon.jpg
  • Options
    OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143
    R0berts said:

    Oh my goodness, PMQs was astonishing.

    Cameron looked like a tired shell of a Prime Minister. He received the kind of battering that Brown used to receive in his dog days.

    I wonder if it was one of those small, but pivotal political moments that we will remember in a few years time, when it became clearer that the times were changing. You were the future once.

    There are a few lines from PMQs that survive to go down the ages. There was Blair's "weak, weak, weak" directed towards Major. Cameron had a couple that stick in the mind, as you note, and also the "analogue Prime Minister for a digital age" that he dissed Brown with.

    Sometimes these lines are particularly poor one's, rather than being amazing put-downs, such as Brown's mis-spoken claim to have "saved the world", that brought the House down in the wrong way.

    Miliband was good today, but even his best line "Can he tell the House how does he feel now that the red peril has claimed Sir John Major?" is unlikely to stay long in the political memory.
  • Options
    AveryLP said:

    They also need to subject the energy supply industry to a rigorous inquiry on competition grounds through referral to the Competition Commission.

    Looks like you might have been on to something with that prediction:

    1.44 pm Downing Street said that details of the competition review will be set out next week in the annual energy statement to the House of Commons by energy secretary Ed Davey.

    An annual review of competition in the energy sector will be conducted by regulator Ofgem, the Office of Fair Trading and the new Competition and Markets Authority. The first review is expected to begin within weeks and report next year, said the prime minister's official spokesman.

    It will look at issues affecting competition and consumers, ranging from prices and profit levels to barriers to new entrants in the market, as well as how companies engage with customers.


    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/oct/23/mps-question-police-over-plebgate-politics-live-blog
  • Options
    @Roger - Ah yes, Guardianista looks at particularly bad cartoon in the Guardian and agrees that the Guardian has it right.
  • Options
    taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    edited October 2013
    ''When I was in Tunisia I heard something about Solar arrays planned for the Sahara.

    I think I heard Paddy Ashdown say on QT that the Moroccans had offered us a solar deal.

    To snorts of derision, of course.
  • Options
    surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549

    AveryLP said:

    They also need to subject the energy supply industry to a rigorous inquiry on competition grounds through referral to the Competition Commission.

    Looks like you might have been on to something with that prediction:

    1.44 pm Downing Street said that details of the competition review will be set out next week in the annual energy statement to the House of Commons by energy secretary Ed Davey.

    An annual review of competition in the energy sector will be conducted by regulator Ofgem, the Office of Fair Trading and the new Competition and Markets Authority. The first review is expected to begin within weeks and report next year, said the prime minister's official spokesman.

    It will look at issues affecting competition and consumers, ranging from prices and profit levels to barriers to new entrants in the market, as well as how companies engage with customers.


    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/oct/23/mps-question-police-over-plebgate-politics-live-blog
    No.10 is shi**ing bricks !
  • Options
    SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    "Dame Anne Owers, the IPCC chair, and Deborah Glass, the IPCC deputy chair, are giving evidence now.

    Glass says she thinks the report should have found the three guilty of gross misconduct.

    Q: Do you think they lied?

    Glass reads from the statement she put out last week. A misconduct should have determined that, she says.

    Q: You have been doing this for 13 years. Is there any precedent for a draft report saying misconduct, your advising gross misconduct, and then the final report being even weaker.

    Glass says it is not unusual for reports to change from draft to final version.

    But in this case she could not see how the conclusion was justified.

    Q: Do you think the IPCC should have carried out the investigation itself?

    Glass says she had no problem with the way the inquiry was carried out. It was just the conclusion she could not accept. She took legal advice on what she could do. That led to her putting out her statement."

    So IPCC deputy chair has no doubts that they lied - Thank christ Mitchell had the forethought to tape the conversation.
  • Options
    AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815

    AveryLP said:

    They also need to subject the energy supply industry to a rigorous inquiry on competition grounds through referral to the Competition Commission.

    Looks like you might have been on to something with that prediction:

    1.44 pm Downing Street said that details of the competition review will be set out next week in the annual energy statement to the House of Commons by energy secretary Ed Davey.

    An annual review of competition in the energy sector will be conducted by regulator Ofgem, the Office of Fair Trading and the new Competition and Markets Authority. The first review is expected to begin within weeks and report next year, said the prime minister's official spokesman.

    It will look at issues affecting competition and consumers, ranging from prices and profit levels to barriers to new entrants in the market, as well as how companies engage with customers.


    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/oct/23/mps-question-police-over-plebgate-politics-live-blog
    I think Ed can definitely claim the credit for the referral though.

    Even though it is clearly the 'right thing to do', I am not sure it would have been done, had he not proposed his price freeze.

    I wouldn't want to prejudge the outcome of any inquiry but I do feel that, while it may be necessary to ensure a competitive market, lack of competition in household supply is not the primary cause of the current problems.

  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,973
    The truth is that green taxes worked reasonably well (from a political perspective at least) when energy costs were relatively low. As prices have gone higher and higher they become less acceptable to people.

    I would go further and say that they were always a bad idea. They are highly regressive hitting the poor hardest for an essential. They are yet another category of taxes paid on taxed income. And they risk people being cold or going hungry. Only someone like Ed Miliband would believe that was a price worth paying.

    If politicians such as Ed Miliband, Chris Huhne or Ed Davey thought that improving insulation was a good idea then they should have the courage to raise taxes to pay for it, not hide it in people's bills. Ditto subsidising bird whisks.

    Osborne spent a lot of his limited cash getting us off the fuel duty escalator that the last government had set up. He got little thanks for doing so because people don't notice so much when taxes don't go up. He now needs to find money to stop the artificially high rate we pay for energy. Gradually and slowly the stealth taxes are being identified and resented. It doesn't make reducing the deficit any easier.
  • Options
    fitalassfitalass Posts: 4,289
    On the issue of Labour going on the cost of living, the Gov have a good story to tell on trying to keep those costs down for the electorate over this Parliament. Freezing council tax, fuel duty, and most importantly taking poorest earners out of tax altogether. That is why Ed Miliband is left to try and proffer the price fix energy bill con after the GE.
  • Options
    taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    From Guido, Norman Tebbitt has just fired an exocet at HMS John Major.

  • Options
    PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    Toby James @TobySJames
    Over a third of registered voters in Cambridge (36.7%) could be removed in 2015/6 tobysjames.com/blog_9.html @BBCLookEast @EADT24
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,146
    AveryLP said:

    AveryLP said:

    They also need to subject the energy supply industry to a rigorous inquiry on competition grounds through referral to the Competition Commission.

    Looks like you might have been on to something with that prediction:

    1.44 pm Downing Street said that details of the competition review will be set out next week in the annual energy statement to the House of Commons by energy secretary Ed Davey.

    An annual review of competition in the energy sector will be conducted by regulator Ofgem, the Office of Fair Trading and the new Competition and Markets Authority. The first review is expected to begin within weeks and report next year, said the prime minister's official spokesman.

    It will look at issues affecting competition and consumers, ranging from prices and profit levels to barriers to new entrants in the market, as well as how companies engage with customers.


    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/oct/23/mps-question-police-over-plebgate-politics-live-blog
    I think Ed can definitely claim the credit for the referral though.

    Even though it is clearly the 'right thing to do', I am not sure it would have been done, had he not proposed his price freeze.

    I wouldn't want to prejudge the outcome of any inquiry but I do feel that, while it may be necessary to ensure a competitive market, lack of competition in household supply is not the primary cause of the current problems.

    No need for an inquiry into what sort of market it is:

    Here - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oligopoly

  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,841
    OK I'll say it:

    regardless of past controversies, Keith Vaz is a very good chairman of the HOSC.
  • Options
    AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815

    SeanT said:

    So he doesn't mention green taxes. Instead he calls it an "energy fairness plan" or a "Conservative hypothermia subsidy" - who cares.

    Just steal Miliband's idea, dress it up as something else, and get the bills down. No one will give a hoot about the political origin of the concept.

    The word from Avery is that Osborne is going to come in considerably under the OBR deficit forecast for this year. In the real world you might expect this to be banked to make up for the missed forecasts in previous years, but in our wonderful political world it gives Osborne headroom to throw a few sweeties around. He could take the green and social levies off energy bills and pay for those policies through general taxation.

    This reduces energy bills, keeps the Lib Dems happy, does not contradict Cameron's green positioning, and it will come up as fairly redistributive in the distributional analysis. Job done.

    I'm sure Osborne would be narked by it, as he would have wanted to use the money for other electoral bribes, but given the kicking Cameron is taking there's not much option.
    Absolutely what I believe George will do and he does have the fiscal flexibility to do it.

    One other option he could consider is doing a deal with the energy companies whereby they take over the "winter fuel subsidy" to qualifying pensioners. This would take this much criticised and expensive social payment out of central government (and public sector) funding; allow the energy suppliers to appear warm and caring rather than cold profiteers; target the subsidy more effectively (it is currently used to fund Granny's christmas presents); and help the Conservatives avoid the accusation that they are gerrymandering by not imposing austerity on their core vote base.

    A step too far perhaps but, if I were George, I would be scribbling on the back of the burger wrappers late into the evening.

  • Options
    surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    fitalass said:

    On the issue of Labour going on the cost of living, the Gov have a good story to tell on trying to keep those costs down for the electorate over this Parliament. Freezing council tax, fuel duty, and most importantly taking poorest earners out of tax altogether. That is why Ed Miliband is left to try and proffer the price fix energy bill con after the GE.

    The world luckily does not think like your blue brain. They look at the relative picture. Prices have reason more than income and you can only blame the government on whose watch this has happened.

  • Options
    AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    edited October 2013
    Pulpstar said:

    AveryLP said:

    AveryLP said:

    They also need to subject the energy supply industry to a rigorous inquiry on competition grounds through referral to the Competition Commission.

    Looks like you might have been on to something with that prediction:

    1.44 pm Downing Street said that details of the competition review will be set out next week in the annual energy statement to the House of Commons by energy secretary Ed Davey.

    An annual review of competition in the energy sector will be conducted by regulator Ofgem, the Office of Fair Trading and the new Competition and Markets Authority. The first review is expected to begin within weeks and report next year, said the prime minister's official spokesman.

    It will look at issues affecting competition and consumers, ranging from prices and profit levels to barriers to new entrants in the market, as well as how companies engage with customers.


    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/oct/23/mps-question-police-over-plebgate-politics-live-blog
    I think Ed can definitely claim the credit for the referral though.

    Even though it is clearly the 'right thing to do', I am not sure it would have been done, had he not proposed his price freeze.

    I wouldn't want to prejudge the outcome of any inquiry but I do feel that, while it may be necessary to ensure a competitive market, lack of competition in household supply is not the primary cause of the current problems.

    No need for an inquiry into what sort of market it is:

    Here - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oligopoly

    Well an private sector oligopoly is a lesser evil than a state monopoly.

    A bit like Yugoslavia under Tito was a better place than the Soviet Union under Stalin.

    We should take what we've got and try to make it better, Pulpstar.
  • Options
    R0bertsR0berts Posts: 391
    One other thing about PMQs. Does anyone else get the feeling that Dave and Ed actually quite like each other personally?

    Even though they're probably further apart politically than any other PM / Opposition Leader pair in many a year.
  • Options
    taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    He now needs to find money to stop the artificially high rate we pay for energy.

    Tim has made the point that the cost of green taxes doesn't amount to all that much on a typical bill. Furthermore, I have read that energy companies don;t typically have higher margins than many other private concerns.

    And so the real culprit for high energy prices must lie elsewhere

    with the wholesale cost and availability of energy....???
  • Options
    Nice to see the BBC has its priorities right.

    While Sky News covers 'Plebgate', the Beeb gives us coverage of The Royal Christening.

    You can always rely on it.

  • Options
    R0bertsR0berts Posts: 391
    DavidL said:



    They are highly regressive hitting the poor hardest for an essential. They are yet another category of taxes paid on taxed income.

    Is that true? Doesn't much of the money subsidise energy efficiency etc for the poorest?

    Genuine question, don't know if there's a clear answer, perhaps it depends on how you define "green taxes"?
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,146
    R0berts said:

    One other thing about PMQs. Does anyone else get the feeling that Dave and Ed actually quite like each other personally?

    Even though they're probably further apart politically than any other PM / Opposition Leader pair in many a year.

    More than Dave loved Tony ?
  • Options
    JonnyJimmyJonnyJimmy Posts: 2,548
    surbiton said:

    fitalass said:

    On the issue of Labour going on the cost of living, the Gov have a good story to tell on trying to keep those costs down for the electorate over this Parliament. Freezing council tax, fuel duty, and most importantly taking poorest earners out of tax altogether. That is why Ed Miliband is left to try and proffer the price fix energy bill con after the GE.

    The world luckily does not think like your blue brain. They look at the relative picture. Prices have reason more than income and you can only blame the government on whose watch this has happened.

    Haven't prices been rising faster than incomes for about 10 years? Can't all be the current government's fault...
  • Options
    OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143
    R0berts said:

    One other thing about PMQs. Does anyone else get the feeling that Dave and Ed actually quite like each other personally?

    Even though they're probably further apart politically than any other PM / Opposition Leader pair in many a year.

    Like many things, it is relative. Cameron loathes Ed Balls, and so by contrast Miliband must seem quite likeable.
  • Options
    TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262
    edited October 2013
    R0berts said:

    Does anyone else get the feeling that Dave and Ed actually quite like each other personally?

    I think they loathe each other, even more so after the Syrian vote.

  • Options
    david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,496
    surbiton said:

    fitalass said:

    On the issue of Labour going on the cost of living, the Gov have a good story to tell on trying to keep those costs down for the electorate over this Parliament. Freezing council tax, fuel duty, and most importantly taking poorest earners out of tax altogether. That is why Ed Miliband is left to try and proffer the price fix energy bill con after the GE.

    The world luckily does not think like your blue brain. They look at the relative picture. Prices have reason more than income and you can only blame the government on whose watch this has happened.

    Or you could blame the last government which spent today's money yesterday, which is what borrowing is.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,146
    R0berts said:

    DavidL said:



    They are highly regressive hitting the poor hardest for an essential. They are yet another category of taxes paid on taxed income.

    Is that true? Doesn't much of the money subsidise energy efficiency etc for the poorest?

    Genuine question, don't know if there's a clear answer, perhaps it depends on how you define "green taxes"?
    Subsidises it for people on benefits/council/affordable housing I think. Like the prescriptions and dentistry own your own home and working you're getting zilch.
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,841
    R0berts said:

    One other thing about PMQs. Does anyone else get the feeling that Dave and Ed actually quite like each other personally?

    No.

    I will say however that whoever EdM's laughter coach is has earned their money. He looked, dare I say it, non-android-like, when he was laughing today.

    That said, and it is most unfortunate, and there is nothing that he can do about it and I feel for him greatly, but whatever his nasal operation was designed to do, its unintended consequences were probably not worth the attempt.
  • Options
    taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    edited October 2013
    Is that true? Doesn't much of the money subsidise energy efficiency etc for the poorest?

    Tim's point is that even if we stripped green taxes away completely, it wouldn't have much of an effect on a typical bill and we'd have to pay some other way. It's hard not to agree

    Which leaves two culprits

    1. the energy companies
    2. the cost of energy to the energy companies.

    I've argued that we can't turn our backs on coal completely and expect the wholesale price to stay cheap. The fact is the coal is a pretty good and cheap way of making leccy, dirty though it may be.
  • Options
    AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    Roger said:

    @RichardN

    "And he also talked a lot about deficit reduction, and sound public finances, and reducing net immigration, and helping the dreaded hard-working families, and many other issues. Your point is what, exactly?"

    This was Martin Rowson's first significant cartoon and as so often he hit the bulls eye. Any focus group choosing an image that represented what Cameron's Conservatives stood for would have chosen this. "Nonsense" my ass!!

    http://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/martin_rowson/2006/10/01/cartoon.jpg

    Roger

    As any fule know, It is pure plagiarism.

    Geoffrey Willans and Ronald Searle are owed royalty payments.

    Fotherington-Thomas is reported to bear a certain resemblance to Little Lord Fauntleroy; whilst he is also a student at St. Custard's school, he is regularly dismissed as a being a 'gurl' and a sissy by Molesworth due to his curly blond locks and his questionable tendency to skip around the school saying such things as "hullo clouds, hullo sky".
  • Options
    ojcorbs said:

    It's actually sickening that in suggesting a populist policy that basic economic literacy shows is unworkable, Miliband has somehow come to be seen as stronger and more capable. His is almost certainly directly responsible for at least a portion of the huge prices hikes we have seen recently, and the public are rewarding him for it. Depressing.

    Labour appealing to thick people and succeeding. Welcome to British politics.
  • Options
    SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    IPCC evidence - Summary

    "Deborah Glass, the IPCC deputy chair, has said that she thought the three officers should have been found guilty of gross misconduct. She said she was surprised when the final report dropped the conclusion that they were guilty of misconduct and instead said there was no case to answer.

    • She said that she would consider whether there were legal grounds for the IPCC to reopen the inquiry."

    Courtesy of Mr Sparrow.
  • Options
    PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    My the plod are now 30ft down and still digging...
  • Options
    taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-24567287

    Another open goal the tories are failing to put the ball into.

    A recent report showing the utter catastrophe that is education in Wales under labour, and how it is destroying the life chances of the poorest in particular.

    Ed's spin machine has done well to keep that one quiet, though it has now been picked up on Conhome.
  • Options
    BobajobBobajob Posts: 1,536

    R0berts said:

    One other thing about PMQs. Does anyone else get the feeling that Dave and Ed actually quite like each other personally?

    Even though they're probably further apart politically than any other PM / Opposition Leader pair in many a year.

    Like many things, it is relative. Cameron loathes Ed Balls, and so by contrast Miliband must seem quite likeable.
    I always got the impression that they like each other on a personal level – they seem to get on pretty well outside the bearpit.

    http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/59191000/jpg/_59191501_014307732-1.jpg
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,146
    edited October 2013
    taffys said:

    Is that true? Doesn't much of the money subsidise energy efficiency etc for the poorest?

    Tim's point is that even if we stripped green taxes away completely, it wouldn't have much of an effect on a typical bill and we'd have to pay some other way. It's hard not to agree

    Which leaves two culprits

    1. the energy companies
    2. the cost of energy to the energy companies.

    I've argued that we can't turn our backs on coal completely and expect the wholesale price to stay cheap. The fact is the coal is a pretty good and cheap way of making leccy, dirty though it may be.

    All the energy companies have some big (And very profitable) interests in production. SSE is accounting wise the 'simplest' of the lot I think http://www.sse.com/uploadedFiles/Controls/Lists/Reports_and_Results/SSEplcAnnualReport2013.pdf Page 136 - 50% share of Scotia Gas Networks. £101.4 million quid Thank-you very much :)
    Probably SSE has the least production interests of the lot, I'd imagine Centrica (British Gas) and the two big German (RWE, French and Spanish (Iberico) ones have more...
  • Options
    BobajobBobajob Posts: 1,536
    R0berts said:

    Tell you what though. Whoever it was, in the bowels of the Labour machine, that identified this cost of living thing, and fashion Labour's approach to it, deserves a pay rise.

    I was just thinking that. Do we know who came up with the policy? Absolute masterstroke.

  • Options
    taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    All the energy companies have some big (And very profitable) interests in production

    Interesting. I wonder, would it make sense to separate energy generation and energy supply? break the market up that way?
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,841
    edited October 2013
    Bobajob said:

    R0berts said:

    Tell you what though. Whoever it was, in the bowels of the Labour machine, that identified this cost of living thing, and fashion Labour's approach to it, deserves a pay rise.

    I was just thinking that. Do we know who came up with the policy? Absolute masterstroke.

    I think it was the General Public that came up with it. It was transparently obvious early on. The issue was (cf "energy") that for a while the Cons ignored it or declined to formulate a strategy.

    They didn't appreciate that the recovery would require some interim pain which would become manifest and real to real people.

    It wasn't and isn't enough for people to read about improving economic aggregates in the media. The reality is that jobs have been scarce, pay has been falling behind inflation and people are suffering a rebalance.

    They are on the case now and I'm sure they will be on the case with energy.

    I put it down to lack of experience of being in Govt and governing practice.
  • Options
    BobajobBobajob Posts: 1,536
    There's no fight like an old fight. The 1990s revival continues.

    Tebbit: “I have been struggling for almost 24 hours to understand what was behind Sir John Major’s outburst of yesterday and still find it difficult to understand. Of course the poor fellow is still sore that the “bastards” in the Tory Party who prevented him from involving the United Kingdon in the great euro single currency disaster have been proven overwhelmingly right. However, he has made a great reputation as a loyal supporter of the Prime Minister, ever willing to fly a kite on behalf of No 10.

    So why on earth did he spend so much time offering comfort to Mr Miliband and why did he suggest that a windfall tax on energy companies would reduce prices? Exactly was sort of windfall does he propose should be taxed?

    It is 16 years now since John Major’s self-induced recession saw him bundled out of office by Mr Blair’s New Labour. It is a pity that he is now giving so much comfort to Mr Miliband’s Old Labour Party, even to the extent of his sneers at Iain Duncan Smith’s brave and necessary efforts to deal with the pernicious evil of professional welfarism.

    I cannot help wondering if his intervention was really more of a warning to the Prime Minister, not to raise hopes that there could be any worthwhile outcome to the proposed renegotiation of the European Treaties. It would be hard for Sir John to see the bastards who rightly opposed the Maastricht Treaty dominating the referendum debate in 2017.”

  • Options
    RogerRoger Posts: 19,233
    @Avery

    "Geoffrey Willans and Ronald Searle are owed royalty payments."

    As any 'fule' know there is nothing new under the sun (even this line ) particularly among cartoonists. It's the appropriateness of the plagiarize that separates the Vicky's from the boys. Talking of which a satisfied client recently gave me a book of his cartoons (in order that he could write a witty caption inside ) and it's difficult to find any that haven't at some later date appeared in modified form under someone else's name
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,146
    taffys said:

    All the energy companies have some big (And very profitable) interests in production

    Interesting. I wonder, would it make sense to separate energy generation and energy supply? break the market up that way?

    Not sure how you could do that - Might be able to with SSE, possibly Centrica but the other 4 aren't even vaguely British. You'd need some sort of pan-European deal which the French would laugh off the table I am guessing.
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,395
    R0berts said:

    One other thing about PMQs. Does anyone else get the feeling that Dave and Ed actually quite like each other personally?

    Even though they're probably further apart politically than any other PM / Opposition Leader pair in many a year.

    I think most politicians quite like each other - they have a lot in common, good and not so good.

    On topic, IMO it's not entirely like that. Labour supporters aren't necessarily totally sold on the price freeze (cf. EiT here) but they do like seeing Labour on the offensive for all kinds of other reasons and it makes them like Ed much more. (Conversely there are non-Labour supporters who quite fancy the price freeze but aren't yet sold on Labour more generally.)

    Posting this from Moscow airport on the way back from a day trip (more or less) to Shanghai. Aeroflot exactly like every other international line - was expecting inefficient retro charm, but it's just the usual Aerobuses and standard food and movies.

  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,101
    In contrast to Salmond & the Coalition in avoiding apportioning blame so talks might re-start - Lamont has given up & is trying to get the blame in:

    "Scottish Labour leader slams 'Dickensian' owner

    Scottish Labour leader Johann Lamont has urged Grangemouth oil refinery owners to return to the negotiation table with their workers instead of behaving in a "Dickensian" way that "cannot be tolerated."


    "cannot be tolerated" - well, that'll get INEOS back to the negotiating table.....

    http://www.itv.com/news/update/2013-10-23/scottish-labour-leader-slams-dickensian-refinery-owner/
  • Options
    Roger said:

    @Avery

    "Geoffrey Willans and Ronald Searle are owed royalty payments."

    As any 'fule' know there is nothing new under the sun (even this line ) particularly among cartoonists. It's the appropriateness of the plagiarize that separates the Vicky's from the boys. Talking of which a satisfied client recently gave me a book of his cartoons (in order that he could write a witty caption inside ) and it's difficult to find any that haven't at some later date appeared in modified form under someone else's name

    PB's house cartoonist has told me, Roger, that plagiarism is common in the world of cartooning, and it is not always innocent or 'acceptable'. If she's along later, try asking her yourself.

    Sometimes of course it is entirely accidental. Her recent cartoon showing a policeman being doubted when giving the time was closely echoed by Matt the next day, but I think we can safely say the The Telegraph's star was not plagiarising PB's.

    And in any case, Marf's toon was funnier.
  • Options
    fitalassfitalass Posts: 4,289
    The sight of Ed Miliband laughing at PMQ's while totally avoiding the grim news at Grangemouth was pretty unedifying. That Ed Miliband didn't feel able to raise the issue of the Grangemouth situation today other than as an afterthought in a tweet long after he left the HoC's speaks for itself. But once Miliband decided not to touch the issue, he then effectively prevented any other Scottish Labour MP from raising it at PMQ's as it would further highlight his refusal to do so. Miliband had SIX occasions at PMQ's where he could have raised his concerns and made that demand directly to the Leader of one of those Government's, but no, he thought he would just take chance Salmond & Cameron follow him on twitter. This is a mess for the Labour party and Unite right now, and it really shows Miliband's lack of Leadership skills where it matters.
    Twitter
    Ed Miliband ‏@Ed_Miliband 2h
    UK and Scottish Governments need to do everything they can to protect jobs and an important national asset at Grangemouth
    TOPPING said:

    R0berts said:

    One other thing about PMQs. Does anyone else get the feeling that Dave and Ed actually quite like each other personally?

    No.

    I will say however that whoever EdM's laughter coach is has earned their money. He looked, dare I say it, non-android-like, when he was laughing today.
  • Options

    GeoffM said:

    Paul Waugh ‏@paulwaugh 1m
    Senior LibDem source:"Evbody knows Tories getting cold feet on environment. They've put no properly worked up policies in front of us." #war

    Global average temperatures have been steady for the last 15 years.
    How much of a "properly worked out policy" to continue that do they want?
    Saying something is true, does not make it true.
    http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:1998/to:2013/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:1998/to:2013/trend
    Oh yes isn't that funny Mr Me.

    The Hadcrut temperature data was showing a drop in global temperatures over the last 15 years as seen in the Hadcrut 3 data

    http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut3gl/from:1998/to:2013/plot/hadcrut3gl/from:1998/to:2013/trend

    So what do they do? decide that data needs modifying as it is clearly not accurate and what happens after modification? Oh yes, where we had a drop we now have a rise.

    http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:1998/to:2013/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:1998/to:2013/trend

    Utter unscientific bullshit and it is a shame you fall for it.
  • Options
    BobajobBobajob Posts: 1,536
    fitalass said:

    The sight of Ed Miliband laughing at PMQ's while totally avoiding the grim news at Grangemouth was pretty unedifying.

    Get over yourself. It wasn't discussed, he was laughing at your government's absolutely risible response to the cost of living crisis. Nothing to do with Grangemouth.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,101
    And before we get carried away with Ed's ratings boost.....

    Doing Well/Badly Ed, Labour VI, Aug 10 2012: +39

    So, he's only back to where he was a year ago, when Labour was on 42 (Con 34, UKIP 8)
  • Options
    taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    edited October 2013
    "cannot be tolerated" - 'well, that'll get INEOS back to the negotiating table.'

    And I'm sure that any prospective buyers of these assets would look upon those comments favourably....
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,841
    edited October 2013
    fitalass said:

    The sight of Ed Miliband laughing at PMQ's while totally avoiding the grim news at Grangemouth was pretty unedifying. That Ed Miliband didn't feel able to raise the issue of the Grangemouth situation today other than as an afterthought in a tweet long after he left the HoC's speaks for itself. But once Miliband decided not to touch the issue, he then effectively prevented any other Scottish Labour MP from raising it at PMQ's as it would further highlight his refusal to do so. Miliband had SIX occasions at PMQ's where he could have raised his concerns and made that demand directly to the Leader of one of those Government's, but no, he thought he would just take chance Salmond & Cameron follow him on twitter. This is a mess for the Labour party and Unite right now, and it really shows Miliband's lack of Leadership skills where it matters.
    Twitter
    Ed Miliband ‏@Ed_Miliband 2h
    UK and Scottish Governments need to do everything they can to protect jobs and an important national asset at Grangemouth


    TOPPING said:

    R0berts said:

    One other thing about PMQs. Does anyone else get the feeling that Dave and Ed actually quite like each other personally?

    No.

    I will say however that whoever EdM's laughter coach is has earned their money. He looked, dare I say it, non-android-like, when he was laughing today.
    Listen, I'm not doing a Sunil here but Ed had an unambiguously good PMQs and in particular, when a common and justified charge has been that he often appears less than human, for him to appear closer to a normal person (still work to do) is a big step forward for him.

    This is aside I appreciate from his various policy failures which a nice smile will do nothing to diminish.
  • Options


    At last, a Committee Member tells it like it is

    Michael Ellis (MP: Conservative, Northampton North) nails it. These Officers were acting in concert to get a Cabinet Officer removed.

  • Options
    PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    If any of theses officers is still in a job by the end of the week bar filing cabinet duties...
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,101
    Bobajob said:

    fitalass said:

    The sight of Ed Miliband laughing at PMQ's while totally avoiding the grim news at Grangemouth was pretty unedifying.

    It wasn't discussed,
    Why wasn't it discussed? When 2% of Scotland's GDP is shut down, doesn't it merit more than a tweet?

  • Options
    PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724



    At last, a Committee Member tells it like it is

    Michael Ellis (MP: Conservative, Northampton North) nails it. These Officers were acting in concert to get a Cabinet Officer removed.

    They're on the ropes - an excellent piece of cornering.
  • Options
    TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262
    edited October 2013

    In contrast to Salmond & the Coalition in avoiding apportioning blame so talks might re-start - Lamont has given up & is trying to get the blame in:

    "Scottish Labour leader slams 'Dickensian' owner

    Scottish Labour leader Johann Lamont has urged Grangemouth oil refinery owners to return to the negotiation table with their workers instead of behaving in a "Dickensian" way that "cannot be tolerated."


    "cannot be tolerated" - well, that'll get INEOS back to the negotiating table.....

    http://www.itv.com/news/update/2013-10-23/scottish-labour-leader-slams-dickensian-refinery-owner/

    The photograph of the visibly upset, and now soon to be unemployed worker that accompanies that article, says it all.

    Ineos were looking for an excuse, and it was gifted to them. Unite could not have picked a worse constituency in which to play silly games. I can guess what they told their members - 'Hold out for more lads (and lasses), they'll cave in to our demands eventually. You'll see'. Hollow words.
  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    There can't be much doubt that Bercow is hoping his wife will be impressed every time he has a go at Cameron in the chamber.
  • Options
    BobajobBobajob Posts: 1,536
    TOPPING said:

    fitalass said:

    The sight of Ed Miliband laughing at PMQ's while totally avoiding the grim news at Grangemouth was pretty unedifying. That Ed Miliband didn't feel able to raise the issue of the Grangemouth situation today other than as an afterthought in a tweet long after he left the HoC's speaks for itself. But once Miliband decided not to touch the issue, he then effectively prevented any other Scottish Labour MP from raising it at PMQ's as it would further highlight his refusal to do so. Miliband had SIX occasions at PMQ's where he could have raised his concerns and made that demand directly to the Leader of one of those Government's, but no, he thought he would just take chance Salmond & Cameron follow him on twitter. This is a mess for the Labour party and Unite right now, and it really shows Miliband's lack of Leadership skills where it matters.
    Twitter
    Ed Miliband ‏@Ed_Miliband 2h
    UK and Scottish Governments need to do everything they can to protect jobs and an important national asset at Grangemouth


    TOPPING said:

    R0berts said:

    One other thing about PMQs. Does anyone else get the feeling that Dave and Ed actually quite like each other personally?

    No.

    I will say however that whoever EdM's laughter coach is has earned their money. He looked, dare I say it, non-android-like, when he was laughing today.
    Listen, I'm not doing a Sunil here but Ed had an unambiguously good PMQs and in particular, when a common and justified charge has been that he often appears less than human, for him to appear closer to a normal person (still work to do) is a big step forward for him.
    Quite right – Fitalass needs to bin her ultra-partisan hat for just a minute, graciously concede this one and chalk it up to experience.


  • Options
    BobajobBobajob Posts: 1,536

    Bobajob said:

    fitalass said:

    The sight of Ed Miliband laughing at PMQ's while totally avoiding the grim news at Grangemouth was pretty unedifying.

    It wasn't discussed,
    Why wasn't it discussed? When 2% of Scotland's GDP is shut down, doesn't it merit more than a tweet?

    There are only 15 minutes and the whole thing was on energy prices. Why didn't the sole Scottish Tory MP not raise it?

  • Options
    Plato said:



    At last, a Committee Member tells it like it is

    Michael Ellis (MP: Conservative, Northampton North) nails it. These Officers were acting in concert to get a Cabinet Officer removed.

    They're on the ropes - an excellent piece of cornering.

    Yes, I think we can safely say now that they're in above their pay grade, Plato.
  • Options
    BobajobBobajob Posts: 1,536

    And before we get carried away with Ed's ratings boost.....

    Doing Well/Badly Ed, Labour VI, Aug 10 2012: +39

    So, he's only back to where he was a year ago, when Labour was on 42 (Con 34, UKIP 8)

    Carlotta – can I gently ask whether you are a man or a woman? – I worry about using the wrong pronoun and so far you haven't told me.
  • Options
    saddenedsaddened Posts: 2,245
    Bobajob said:

    And before we get carried away with Ed's ratings boost.....

    Doing Well/Badly Ed, Labour VI, Aug 10 2012: +39

    So, he's only back to where he was a year ago, when Labour was on 42 (Con 34, UKIP 8)

    Carlotta – can I gently ask whether you are a man or a woman? – I worry about using the wrong pronoun and so far you haven't told me.
    Did you ever reply to my question about the reduction in top rate tax? I may have missed it.
  • Options
    MrJonesMrJones Posts: 3,523
    I think any direct brand damage to Cameron from the public over back-tracking on husky-hugging would be proportional to how much they believed it in the first place i.e. not much. I'd also guess the indirect damage from how the BBC will report it will probably be reverse proportional to both how broke people are and how much they believe or disbelieve in the global warming scam - so very variable with non-broke believers being the only group likely to be very negative imo.
  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    It'll be interesting to see Salmond attempt to keep a loss-making plant open.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,101
    Bobajob - I am sublimely indifferent to whichever pronoun you choose to use....
  • Options
    BobajobBobajob Posts: 1,536
    tim said:

    And before we get carried away with Ed's ratings boost.....

    Doing Well/Badly Ed, Labour VI, Aug 10 2012: +39

    So, he's only back to where he was a year ago, when Labour was on 42 (Con 34, UKIP 8)

    Miliband has led Cameron on approval ratings for fifteen months out of the last eighteen.
    Looks increasingly like Cameron's three month lead in the summer was a blip

    "Instead, Cameron had his worst quarter of an hour on the floor of the House of Commons, in which he failed completely to hold the attention of MPs as he read from a boring Labour briefing document. It will have done him no harm to have been told off by the Speaker for the use of the phrase “con man”, but for the first time he looked like a prime minister at bay, and his side knew it"

    That's from John Rentoul a big Cameron fan and I think he's right, Ed destroyed him, and both sets of backbenchers sensed it.
    Miliband looks energised from having a proper summer holiday. Were it that more politicians took his lead. I can't see the point of barking about frantically in August when everyone is away and nobody cares about politics.
  • Options
    SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    "Q: You had a PR person with you. He drove to the meeting with you. He was receiving calls from the media. And he told you to finish the meeting before the 6pm news. You were acting with a view to discredit a senior minister.

    MacKaill says he refutes that.

    Q: When you spoke to BBC Midlands you were not telling the truth.

    Hinton says he does not accept that.

    Q: You said Mitchell spoke with candour. Then you said he had not given a full account.

    Hinton says the reference to "candour" was a reference to the way Mitchell made it clear he had not used the word "pleb".

    Q: How did the media find out about the location of the meeting? Mitchell would not have told them.

    Hinton says the Police Federation's PR adviser, John Gaunt, was under orders not to tell the media about the location of the meeting."


    Mitchell taped the conversation. - No wonder the IPCC deputy chair thinks them guilty of gross misconduct.
  • Options
    AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    Roger said:

    @Avery

    "Geoffrey Willans and Ronald Searle are owed royalty payments."

    As any 'fule' know there is nothing new under the sun (even this line ) particularly among cartoonists. It's the appropriateness of the plagiarize that separates the Vicky's from the boys. Talking of which a satisfied client recently gave me a book of his cartoons (in order that he could write a witty caption inside ) and it's difficult to find any that haven't at some later date appeared in modified form under someone else's name

    Of course.

    One man's plagiarism is another man's tribute, pastiche, allusion or parody.

  • Options
    OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143

    GeoffM said:

    Paul Waugh ‏@paulwaugh 1m
    Senior LibDem source:"Evbody knows Tories getting cold feet on environment. They've put no properly worked up policies in front of us." #war

    Global average temperatures have been steady for the last 15 years.
    How much of a "properly worked out policy" to continue that do they want?
    Saying something is true, does not make it true.
    http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:1998/to:2013/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:1998/to:2013/trend
    Oh yes isn't that funny Mr Me.

    The Hadcrut temperature data was showing a drop in global temperatures over the last 15 years as seen in the Hadcrut 3 data

    http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut3gl/from:1998/to:2013/plot/hadcrut3gl/from:1998/to:2013/trend

    So what do they do? decide that data needs modifying as it is clearly not accurate and what happens after modification? Oh yes, where we had a drop we now have a rise.

    http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:1998/to:2013/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:1998/to:2013/trend

    Utter unscientific bullshit and it is a shame you fall for it.
    So you are going for the conspiracy theory line, then?

    As with many things in life, there are always improvements that can be made. I would be surprised if there is not a HadCRUT5 in due course. But for you, it must all be due to a conspiracy. Of course.

    You used to be one of the more rational people when it came to disagreeing with the consensus, but this is simply lame.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,101
    If you're not watching it - the police car crash in front of the HoC Home Affairs Select Ctte...

    http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Main/Player.aspx?meetingId=14006
  • Options
    BobajobBobajob Posts: 1,536

    Bobajob - I am sublimely indifferent to whichever pronoun you choose to use....

    I would prefer to be accurate.
  • Options
    BobajobBobajob Posts: 1,536
    tim said:

    Bobajob said:

    Bobajob said:

    fitalass said:

    The sight of Ed Miliband laughing at PMQ's while totally avoiding the grim news at Grangemouth was pretty unedifying.

    It wasn't discussed,
    Why wasn't it discussed? When 2% of Scotland's GDP is shut down, doesn't it merit more than a tweet?

    There are only 15 minutes and the whole thing was on energy prices. Why didn't the sole Scottish Tory MP not raise it?

    There was an urgent question on Grangemouth immediately following PMQs and a ministerial statement, of course no one raised it.
    Miliband stayed to listen, Cameron disappeared straight after his humiliation at PMQs which the fools on here seem to be ignoring
    What a surprise.

  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @adamboultonSKY: Nicola Blackwood MP asks Police Federation for 4th time why they told Mitchell one thing and went outside and said another.
  • Options
    MrJonesMrJones Posts: 3,523

    GeoffM said:

    Paul Waugh ‏@paulwaugh 1m
    Senior LibDem source:"Evbody knows Tories getting cold feet on environment. They've put no properly worked up policies in front of us." #war

    Global average temperatures have been steady for the last 15 years.
    How much of a "properly worked out policy" to continue that do they want?
    Saying something is true, does not make it true.
    http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:1998/to:2013/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:1998/to:2013/trend
    Oh yes isn't that funny Mr Me.

    The Hadcrut temperature data was showing a drop in global temperatures over the last 15 years as seen in the Hadcrut 3 data

    http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut3gl/from:1998/to:2013/plot/hadcrut3gl/from:1998/to:2013/trend

    So what do they do? decide that data needs modifying as it is clearly not accurate and what happens after modification? Oh yes, where we had a drop we now have a rise.

    http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:1998/to:2013/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:1998/to:2013/trend

    Utter unscientific bullshit and it is a shame you fall for it.
    So you are going for the conspiracy theory line, then?

    As with many things in life, there are always improvements that can be made. I would be surprised if there is not a HadCRUT5 in due course. But for you, it must all be due to a conspiracy. Of course.

    You used to be one of the more rational people when it came to disagreeing with the consensus, but this is simply lame.
    The climategate emails are full of discussions about how to fiddle the base data to hide the flat-lining - as everyone would know if the BBC had reported it properly.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,101
    The Davey statement on Grangemouth - one of his responses:

    I understand the hon. Lady’s concern, and indeed anger, and am sure that in that regard she speaks for many local people. As the Government working with the Scottish Government, we have been, and must remain, balanced in our approach, because our job is to try to get both sides to negotiate. That is the most effective role we can play, so we will continue to do that in as balanced a way as we can.

    Tom Watson:

    .......I am sure that the Secretary of State will be as saddened as many of the workers were to hear that the negotiations that he managed to secure around the table at ACAS were slightly thwarted because the billionaire hedge fund manger who runs INEOS, Mr Jim Ratcliffe, was on his yacht in the Mediterranean, so the negotiating team had to phone him. I think that shows a lack of seriousness. One of the big concerns people have is that tax avoidance disguises the profitability of the site. Will the Secretary of State consider conducting an independent financial assessment of the site to see what options future buyers might have?

    http://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/hansard/commons/todays-commons-debates/read/unknown/185/
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,973
    Pulpstar said:

    taffys said:

    All the energy companies have some big (And very profitable) interests in production

    Interesting. I wonder, would it make sense to separate energy generation and energy supply? break the market up that way?

    Not sure how you could do that - Might be able to with SSE, possibly Centrica but the other 4 aren't even vaguely British. You'd need some sort of pan-European deal which the French would laugh off the table I am guessing.
    I was commenting on this earlier today. If there is room for a windfall tax it is for the lucky producers who now find what they are taking out of the ground is worth considerably more than they expected, not the distributors who pay the international rate and then add a pretty modest percentage on this.

    Of course when the producers and the distributors overlap it is very easy to ensure that the profits in the UK subject to UK tax are pretty modest. I just don't know what John Major thinks we can do about this.

    And is there really anyone on this planet who still believes that in the long run taxes are not paid by the customers rather than the businesses themselves? Not one of Sir John's more helpful contributions tbh.


  • Options
    dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,292
    Of course few on PB noticed that Cameron wasn't there, thanks to the BBC ending the effing coverage and returning to the studio. It is good to have 20-20 hindsight 5 hours later.
  • Options
    taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    ''One of the big concerns people have is that tax avoidance disguises the profitability of the site. ''

    If Ratcliffe was making money out of Grangemouth, disguised or not, why would he want to close it down?

  • Options
    Scott_P said:

    @adamboultonSKY: Nicola Blackwood MP asks Police Federation for 4th time why they told Mitchell one thing and went outside and said another.

    They absolutely fell apart at that point, Scott, no?

    Credibilty shot, imo.

  • Options
    PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724

    If you're not watching it - the police car crash in front of the HoC Home Affairs Select Ctte...

    http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Main/Player.aspx?meetingId=14006

    I've been watching through my fingers - its appalling. Julian Huppert asked a very pertinent question "What do you think your colleagues would say about your performance today?"

    CLANG

    Police Fed - shuffles feet and wibbles.

    Vaz accuses Hinton of treating HASC as a *gameshow* and that their collective evidence is most unsatisfactory - and reminds them of being in contempt of Parly if they're found to be have less than honest. Very clear what he and the rest of the Committee thinks.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,101
    Eric Joyce on Grangemouth (Hansard, earlier link):

    Is the Secretary of State aware—I am sure he is—that people who work for big powerful multinationals need effective, intelligent trade union representation? Sadly, that is the last thing that people in Grangemouth have had for the past few months.

    Today we have heard a lot of personalising—who owns INEOS and so forth—but at the root of all this is Unite’s placing a petty party political issue at the very top of its priorities and ignoring the looming train running along the track. Will the Secretary of State be aware of that in the coming weeks, when he will do what he can to help people at Grangemouth? Is he also aware that INEOS continues to be the main income driver for thousands of families across the Falkirk area?
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453



    They absolutely fell apart at that point, Scott, no?

    Credibilty shot, imo.

    It was painful.
  • Options
    currystarcurrystar Posts: 1,171
    tim said:

    Bobajob said:

    Bobajob said:

    fitalass said:

    The sight of Ed Miliband laughing at PMQ's while totally avoiding the grim news at Grangemouth was pretty unedifying.

    It wasn't discussed,
    Why wasn't it discussed? When 2% of Scotland's GDP is shut down, doesn't it merit more than a tweet?

    There are only 15 minutes and the whole thing was on energy prices. Why didn't the sole Scottish Tory MP not raise it?

    There was an urgent question on Grangemouth immediately following PMQs and a ministerial statement, of course no one raised it.
    Miliband stayed to listen, Cameron disappeared straight after his humiliation at PMQs which the fools on here seem to be ignoring
    Tim when Miliband has a bad PMQs you totally ignore it and spin about something else. Dont you think you are going a little bit over the top over Milibands performance, we all have good days at work and we all have bad. You are spinning like this is some life changing moment for us all. Miliband had a good one today, last week he was his normal terrible self, who knows how he will perform next week. If Miliband did this every week then it might be a game changer, but he simply doesn't.
  • Options
    AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    DavidL said:

    Pulpstar said:

    taffys said:

    All the energy companies have some big (And very profitable) interests in production

    Interesting. I wonder, would it make sense to separate energy generation and energy supply? break the market up that way?

    Not sure how you could do that - Might be able to with SSE, possibly Centrica but the other 4 aren't even vaguely British. You'd need some sort of pan-European deal which the French would laugh off the table I am guessing.
    I was commenting on this earlier today. If there is room for a windfall tax it is for the lucky producers who now find what they are taking out of the ground is worth considerably more than they expected, not the distributors who pay the international rate and then add a pretty modest percentage on this.

    Of course when the producers and the distributors overlap it is very easy to ensure that the profits in the UK subject to UK tax are pretty modest. I just don't know what John Major thinks we can do about this.

    And is there really anyone on this planet who still believes that in the long run taxes are not paid by the customers rather than the businesses themselves? Not one of Sir John's more helpful contributions tbh.


    David

    The lefties are deliberately misunderstanding what Sir John said.

    I was at the lunch and sober and not too distant from Sir John.

    I distinctly heard him call for a "windfarm" tax NOT a "windfall" tax.

  • Options
    SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    MrJones said:

    GeoffM said:

    Paul Waugh ‏@paulwaugh 1m
    Senior LibDem source:"Evbody knows Tories getting cold feet on environment. They've put no properly worked up policies in front of us." #war

    Global average temperatures have been steady for the last 15 years.
    How much of a "properly worked out policy" to continue that do they want?
    Saying something is true, does not make it true.
    http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:1998/to:2013/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:1998/to:2013/trend
    Oh yes isn't that funny Mr Me.

    The Hadcrut temperature data was showing a drop in global temperatures over the last 15 years as seen in the Hadcrut 3 data

    http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut3gl/from:1998/to:2013/plot/hadcrut3gl/from:1998/to:2013/trend

    So what do they do? decide that data needs modifying as it is clearly not accurate and what happens after modification? Oh yes, where we had a drop we now have a rise.

    http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:1998/to:2013/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:1998/to:2013/trend

    Utter unscientific bullshit and it is a shame you fall for it.
    So you are going for the conspiracy theory line, then?

    As with many things in life, there are always improvements that can be made. I would be surprised if there is not a HadCRUT5 in due course. But for you, it must all be due to a conspiracy. Of course.

    You used to be one of the more rational people when it came to disagreeing with the consensus, but this is simply lame.
    The climategate emails are full of discussions about how to fiddle the base data to hide the flat-lining - as everyone would know if the BBC had reported it properly.
    As I recall, Aunty decided to concentrate entirely on how the E-Mails entered the public domain, without a single reference to the contents of said E-mails.

    Investigative journalism at its best – if you worship Gaia that is..!
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,101
    "Ineos was investigating whether a shop steward used company resources to engage in internal Labour Party politics. Justifiably so. The Unite union retaliated by threatening a two-day strike. Ineos mothballed the plant and issued a series of demands. These included acquiescence to the closure of the final salary pension scheme, a reduction in overtime and a no-strike deal."

    http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/bf9b2542-3bc2-11e3-b85f-00144feab7de.html#ixzz2iYzOG8u0
  • Options
    SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    Police Federation evidence - Summary

    • The three Police Federation officers refused to issue a personal apology to Andrew Mitchell. They would not go beyond the generalised apology they offered earlier this week.

    • They rejected claims that they lied about their meeting with Mitchell.

    • Keith Vaz said their evidence was "most unsatisfactory".

    ________________________

    West Mercia's Chief Constable David Shaw's evidence

    David Shaw, the West Mercia chief constable, starts with an apology to Andrew Mitchell.

    It is a "profound, unreserved apology", he says.

    He wrote to Mitchell on Monday to offer his apology, he says.

    Courtesy of Mr Sparrow.
  • Options
    PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    Scott_P said:



    They absolutely fell apart at that point, Scott, no?

    Credibilty shot, imo.

    It was painful.
    Or when Vaz was asking if Mitchell was being apologised to because he was included in the Fed meaningless apology because he was " a member of the human race "
  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    I find it difficult to understand how a plant which produces 80% of Scotland's petrol and diesel is losing £50 million a year...
  • Options
    taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    Is he also aware that INEOS continues to be the main income driver for thousands of families across the Falkirk area?

    When you look at things in that light, the comments of Lamont and Watson look...well....I'll leave it to you to find a word.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,101
    AndyJS said:

    I find it difficult to understand how a plant which produces 80% of Scotland's petrol and diesel is losing £50 million a year...

    It's available cheaper from elsewhere?

  • Options
    dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,292
    @tim But it still took you almost an hour to catch up...
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @BBCNormanS: New #plebgate inquiry into three officers to be carried out by another police force to be chosen by HMIC
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,973

    Police Federation evidence - Summary

    • The three Police Federation officers refused to issue a personal apology to Andrew Mitchell. They would not go beyond the generalised apology they offered earlier this week.

    • They rejected claims that they lied about their meeting with Mitchell.

    • Keith Vaz said their evidence was "most unsatisfactory".

    ________________________

    West Mercia's Chief Constable David Shaw's evidence

    David Shaw, the West Mercia chief constable, starts with an apology to Andrew Mitchell.

    It is a "profound, unreserved apology", he says.

    He wrote to Mitchell on Monday to offer his apology, he says.

    Courtesy of Mr Sparrow.

    I would be so angry with these buffoons if I was a member of the Police Federation. The damage that organisation has sustained from this is almost beyond belief.

    The Chief Constables also look weak and scared of the Federation. Very poor management and leadership.

    Hillsborough and other scandals are far greater in scale and scope but I struggle to recall anything that has damaged the reputation of the Police quite like this and it is so self-inflicted.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,101
    taffys said:

    Is he also aware that INEOS continues to be the main income driver for thousands of families across the Falkirk area?

    When you look at things in that light, the comments of Lamont and Watson look...well....I'll leave it to you to find a word.

    I'm not sure how high the families of Falkirk rank in their priorities....

  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,101
    @tim - Gold Medal for chutzpah for commenting on the fallout of your 'non-story'!
This discussion has been closed.