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?
? If Scotland is * buying * the product I can only presume that the Grangemouth gear is the cheaper stuff, not that of its competitors. Perhaps they need to, erm, hike their prices?
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?
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.
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..!
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.
A preposterous claim Avery.
You can't really expect us to believe you were sober.
@bobajob Two hours after Ed Miliband stood at the despatch with six opportunities to question the PM on the issues of the day he tweeted this. 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
Ed Miliband describes Grangemouth as an important national asset, but not one he deemed important enough to raise at PMQ's, just in a tweet as an afterthought. Andrew Neil's first comment at the end of PMQ's was to comment on the complete lack of any mention of Grangemouth. He gets it, you don't, Miliband getting his priorities wrong yet again.
• 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.
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.
Avery your attempts to defend what might be slightly less than defensible are truly admirable at times but today is stretching even you. Bring on Friday when hopefully the news will be better.
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?
Perhaps they need to, erm, hike their prices?
Then no one would buy it?
The issue is feedstock - with fracking US stuff is cheaper and there is over capacity around the world, and newer, more efficient plant nearer the supplies. Grangemouth was becoming progressively uneconomic - but INEOS had a plan to invest & fix that.
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?
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.
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..!
british raindance corporation
Christ, I hope not - Mr S.O. did that last March - and it pissed it down all year! : )
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.
A preposterous claim Avery.
You can't really expect us to believe you were sober.
@bobajob Two hours after Ed Miliband stood at the despatch with six opportunities to question the PM on the issues of the day he tweeted this. 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
Ed Miliband describes Grangemouth as an important national asset, but not one he deemed important enough to raise at PMQ's, just in a tweet as an afterthought. Andrew Neil's first comment at the end of PMQ's was to comment on the complete lack of any mention of Grangemouth. He gets it, you don't, Miliband getting his priorities wrong yet again.
There was an urgent question on the issue immediately after PMQs I am reliably informed so why on earth would he raise it? Just concede this one and move on.
Is Edmund's widget the thingy that can block a particular poster? (Makes me wonder whether anyone blocks my comments).
Andy – the widget is for wimps who like to talk only to people who agree with them in a locked room. Why they come on a cross-partisan politics forum if this is their preference is beyond me.
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?
? If Scotland is * buying * the product I can only presume that the Grangemouth gear is the cheaper stuff, not that of its competitors. Perhaps they need to, erm, hike their prices?
That's a good point. You don't dominate 80% of a market by being more expensive than your competitors. If there are any competitors. This implies Scotland was getting it's petrol and diesel too cheap ?
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.
It was the worst I have ever seen Cameron perform in PMQ's but don't make too much of it, he has won most of them in the past and will in the future.
When this Energy ceases to be the main topic of the day, which opportunity will Miliband pounce on next.
A whole thread and not a single mention by tim of PB Tory spinners being useless.
But Avery you have missed how Tim regrets Ed's economic illiteracy and hypocrisy; regrets the role played by UNITE in closing Grangemouth and the utter disgust at the thugs in the Police Federation lying their pants off before Parliament.
I don't understand how you would want to go without such insight.
Mr. JS, indeed, though you're a pleasant chap. Can't see why anyone would block you.
Miss Plato, I saw that survey on the news last night. 82% trusted the police. Makes me wonder what the police have to do to lose trust.
I'm glad 82% do to be frank. It is why it is all the more heinous when they tell lies and misinformation, they are damaging the very good reputation that exists still despite their failings in the past.
@bobajob Two hours after Ed Miliband stood at the despatch with six opportunities to question the PM on the issues of the day he tweeted this. 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
Ed Miliband describes Grangemouth as an important national asset, but not one he deemed important enough to raise at PMQ's, just in a tweet as an afterthought. Andrew Neil's first comment at the end of PMQ's was to comment on the complete lack of any mention of Grangemouth. He gets it, you don't, Miliband getting his priorities wrong yet again.
There was an urgent question on the issue immediately after PMQs I am reliably informed so why on earth would he raise it? Just concede this one and move on.
Probably because it shows what Miliband thinks is most important - a fake promise on a price freeze that's temporarily making him look a little better politically.
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?
? If Scotland is * buying * the product I can only presume that the Grangemouth gear is the cheaper stuff, not that of its competitors. Perhaps they need to, erm, hike their prices?
That's a good point. You don't dominate 80% of a market by being more expensive than your competitors. If there are any competitors. This implies Scotland was getting it's petrol and diesel too cheap ?
So one would assume Pulpstar – as I have said before it's an unwise man who seeks economics analysis from the PB Tories.
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.
It was the worst I have ever seen Cameron perform in PMQ's but don't make too much of it, he has won most of them in the past and will in the future.
When this Energy ceases to be the main topic of the day, which opportunity will Miliband pounce on next.
Not sure - he can't stay running on Energy forever, and it could particularly bite him in the ass in Scotland.
Other variations on the cost of living theme I suspect. Can't think what right now...
@bobajob Two hours after Ed Miliband stood at the despatch with six opportunities to question the PM on the issues of the day he tweeted this. 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
Ed Miliband describes Grangemouth as an important national asset, but not one he deemed important enough to raise at PMQ's, just in a tweet as an afterthought. Andrew Neil's first comment at the end of PMQ's was to comment on the complete lack of any mention of Grangemouth. He gets it, you don't, Miliband getting his priorities wrong yet again.
There was an urgent question on the issue immediately after PMQs I am reliably informed so why on earth would he raise it? Just concede this one and move on
No need to concede. Miliband had a choice, and he made it.
He could have mentioned Grangemouth en passent, ("I know the Prime Minister will join me in encouraging all sides to work to a solution that keeps Grangemouth open") but didn't, presumably because that would open up the whole 'Unite' question.
The question voters in Scotland will ask is 'how important is Scotland to Labour?'
Listening to Salmond on WATO he's preparing the ground to giving Labour the thrashing of their lives when Grangemouth closes - he was at pains to be even handed and praise the 'workforce' and encourage INEOS to get back round the table with them.
The word 'Union' did not cross his lips once......
Hmm, so I was reading elsewhere that Unite bigwigs had a bust up with the owners of the plant before this all went down, surely that would be a conflict of interest on the part of Unite when informing their members on how to vote on deals proposed by plant management.
Honestly, if 750 jobs have been lost because of a personal beef between the union bosses at Unite and INEOS that would be very disappointing.
Cameron was available to take questions for 30 minutes at PMQ's on the issue, so its worthy of comment that neither Miliband or a Scottish Labour MP took the opportunity to raise it. Ed Miliband had six opportunities at his disposal, instead he decided to avoid issue and only mentioned it on twitter as an afterthought.
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
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.
@bobajob Two hours after Ed Miliband stood at the despatch with six opportunities to question the PM on the issues of the day he tweeted this. 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
Ed Miliband describes Grangemouth as an important national asset, but not one he deemed important enough to raise at PMQ's, just in a tweet as an afterthought. Andrew Neil's first comment at the end of PMQ's was to comment on the complete lack of any mention of Grangemouth. He gets it, you don't, Miliband getting his priorities wrong yet again.
There was an urgent question on the issue immediately after PMQs I am reliably informed so why on earth would he raise it? Just concede this one and move on.
(a) because he might want to show he cares? (b) are we allowed to make jokes involving monkeys/organ grinders these days? (c) Because the PM might be best placed to apply pressure (d) Because this is a nationally important site in an area where he has a staggering number of MPs? (e) To try and head off criticism by Joyce of the role played by a Labour party official?
Actually you are right. Given the background why on earth would he want to mention it?
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.
It was the worst I have ever seen Cameron perform in PMQ's but don't make too much of it, he has won most of them in the past and will in the future.
When this Energy ceases to be the main topic of the day, which opportunity will Miliband pounce on next.
Not sure - he can't stay running on Energy forever, and it could particularly bite him in the ass in Scotland.
Other variations on the cost of living theme I suspect. Can't think what right now...
Ridiculously complex train ticketing structures that see passengers paying vastly different sums for the same journey, on the same train, at the same time. And getting fined for not understanding the Byzantine system.
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?
? If Scotland is * buying * the product I can only presume that the Grangemouth gear is the cheaper stuff, not that of its competitors. Perhaps they need to, erm, hike their prices?
That's a good point. You don't dominate 80% of a market by being more expensive than your competitors. If there are any competitors. This implies Scotland was getting it's petrol and diesel too cheap ?
Plonker, it is 80% due to being the only refinery in Scotland. Once out the central belt Scotland has the highest petrol prices in UK.
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.
Yes, masterstroke of populism but frankly zero sense on how to fix the problem.
Ridiculously complex train ticketing structures that see passengers paying vastly different sums for the same journey, on the same train, at the same time. And getting fined for not understanding the Byzantine system.
He might have a crack at that.
Basically ensuring everyone is on the lowest fare? Sounds oddly familiar ;-)
The Grangemouth crisis is just the sort of thing which could make a big impact on the independence referendum debate, although which way it might go is difficult to say at the moment.
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?
? If Scotland is * buying * the product I can only presume that the Grangemouth gear is the cheaper stuff, not that of its competitors. Perhaps they need to, erm, hike their prices?
That's a good point. You don't dominate 80% of a market by being more expensive than your competitors. If there are any competitors. This implies Scotland was getting it's petrol and diesel too cheap ?
So one would assume Pulpstar – as I have said before it's an unwise man who seeks economics analysis from the PB Tories.
So you think INEOS has a free hand in setting:
i) the price of its feedstock and ii) the price of petrol?
Okay......
In any case, the plant that's currently closing is the chemical plant - not the refinery - so you may wish to be better informed before commenting on the short comings of others....
Is Edmund's widget the thingy that can block a particular poster? (Makes me wonder whether anyone blocks my comments).
Andy – the widget is for wimps who like to talk only to people who agree with them in a locked room. Why they come on a cross-partisan politics forum if this is their preference is beyond me.
Ridiculously complex train ticketing structures that see passengers paying vastly different sums for the same journey, on the same train, at the same time. And getting fined for not understanding the Byzantine system.
He might have a crack at that.
Basically ensuring everyone is on the lowest fare? Sounds oddly familiar ;-)
I'd smash the whole thing to bits, were it me. They should only be able to charge one price for each journey at each time (okay two, First Class and Standard) and that price should be reasonable. I understand that people have to pay more for, say Friday nights, as that's clearly were the peak demand is. But there should be only one price on that train whenever you book. Booking early gets you a reserved seat, nothing more.
What is amazing is that union officials persuaded staff to block a defined contribution scheme - staff that by all accounts were averaging £30k - not a fortune, not a pittance. 99% of other £30k peoples in the private sector are most likely on Defined contribution. And the deal was for NEW starters. That is not so unreasonable from an employer.
I suppose when your union plays hardball it can either win big a la Bob Crow/Tubes or lose big - like it appears to have done here. I'm sorry for the workers who didn't want to strike. Completely FUCKED OVER.
Hmm, so I was reading elsewhere that Unite bigwigs had a bust up with the owners of the plant before this all went down, surely that would be a conflict of interest on the part of Unite when informing their members on how to vote on deals proposed by plant management.
Honestly, if 750 jobs have been lost because of a personal beef between the union bosses at Unite and INEOS that would be very disappointing.
Cameron was available to take questions for 30 minutes at PMQ's on the issue, so its worthy of comment that neither Miliband or a Scottish Labour MP took the opportunity to raise it. Ed Miliband had six opportunities at his disposal, instead he decided to avoid issue and only mentioned it on twitter as an afterthought.
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
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.
Oh good God, what is wrong with you?!
Miliband didn't mention Grangemouth because he was on good ground battering a hapless Cameron around the place on energy, and handing Cameron a "Union" card would have been stupid.
Also because it's not a big thing politically, at least compared to the cost of living. Also because there was a big Grangemouth thing immediately afterwards.
Ridiculously complex train ticketing structures that see passengers paying vastly different sums for the same journey, on the same train, at the same time. And getting fined for not understanding the Byzantine system.
He might have a crack at that.
Basically ensuring everyone is on the lowest fare? Sounds oddly familiar ;-)
And could feed nicely into a renationalisation theme too. (Just like the Energy Co's. Shhh.)
I'd smash the whole thing to bits, were it me. They should only be able to charge one price for each journey at each time (okay two, First Class and Standard) and that price should be reasonable. I understand that people have to pay more for, say Friday nights, as that's clearly were the peak demand is. But there should be only one price on that train whenever you book. Booking early gets you a reserved seat, nothing more.
Wouldn't that be basically abolishing the lowest fares, making it less affordable? I'm sure the TOCs make a lot of their revenue from the more expensive fares, which subsides everyone else.
Ridiculously complex train ticketing structures that see passengers paying vastly different sums for the same journey, on the same train, at the same time. And getting fined for not understanding the Byzantine system.
He might have a crack at that.
Basically ensuring everyone is on the lowest fare? Sounds oddly familiar ;-)
I'd smash the whole thing to bits, were it me. They should only be able to charge one price for each journey at each time (okay two, First Class and Standard) and that price should be reasonable. I understand that people have to pay more for, say Friday nights, as that's clearly were the peak demand is. But there should be only one price on that train whenever you book. Booking early gets you a reserved seat, nothing more.
This is getting ridiculous. Please don't post anything else I completely agree with today.
Hmm, so I was reading elsewhere that Unite bigwigs had a bust up with the owners of the plant before this all went down, surely that would be a conflict of interest on the part of Unite when informing their members on how to vote on deals proposed by plant management.
Honestly, if 750 jobs have been lost because of a personal beef between the union bosses at Unite and INEOS that would be very disappointing.
Ridiculously complex train ticketing structures that see passengers paying vastly different sums for the same journey, on the same train, at the same time. And getting fined for not understanding the Byzantine system.
He might have a crack at that.
Basically ensuring everyone is on the lowest fare? Sounds oddly familiar ;-)
Booking early gets you a reserved seat, nothing more.
So you're happy for anyone with the foresight to book their journey far enough in advance to save a wad of cash to pay more?
At Grangemouth there's going to be about 1,000 people on the dole instead of being employed, albeit on lower pensions, etc. Imigrants from poor countries desperate for work must be must be looking on with amazement.
I'd smash the whole thing to bits, were it me. They should only be able to charge one price for each journey at each time (okay two, First Class and Standard) and that price should be reasonable. I understand that people have to pay more for, say Friday nights, as that's clearly were the peak demand is. But there should be only one price on that train whenever you book. Booking early gets you a reserved seat, nothing more.
Wouldn't that be basically abolishing the lowest fares, making it less affordable? I'm sure the TOCs make a lot of their revenue from the more expensive fares, which subsides everyone else.
Price cap them. We pay four times the subsidy to the railways than we ever did under BR so if we are going to continue to pump private companies with public money then we need to make the 'privatised' system work for consumers. Most expensive rail fares in Europe.
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.
It was the worst I have ever seen Cameron perform in PMQ's but don't make too much of it, he has won most of them in the past and will in the future.
When this Energy ceases to be the main topic of the day, which opportunity will Miliband pounce on next.
Not sure - he can't stay running on Energy forever, and it could particularly bite him in the ass in Scotland.
Other variations on the cost of living theme I suspect. Can't think what right now...
Ridiculously complex train ticketing structures that see passengers paying vastly different sums for the same journey, on the same train, at the same time. And getting fined for not understanding the Byzantine system.
He might have a crack at that.
Hope so. Taking on another vested interest. The train companies and Tory media would howl, Fitalass would post about Grangemouth, the public would say "good on you, Ed", the Tories would panic and struggle to come up with a response.
Ridiculously complex train ticketing structures that see passengers paying vastly different sums for the same journey, on the same train, at the same time. And getting fined for not understanding the Byzantine system.
He might have a crack at that.
Basically ensuring everyone is on the lowest fare? Sounds oddly familiar ;-)
I'd smash the whole thing to bits, were it me. They should only be able to charge one price for each journey at each time (okay two, First Class and Standard) and that price should be reasonable. I understand that people have to pay more for, say Friday nights, as that's clearly were the peak demand is. But there should be only one price on that train whenever you book. Booking early gets you a reserved seat, nothing more.
This is getting ridiculous. Please don't post anything else I completely agree with today.
I'd smash the whole thing to bits, were it me. They should only be able to charge one price for each journey at each time (okay two, First Class and Standard) and that price should be reasonable. I understand that people have to pay more for, say Friday nights, as that's clearly were the peak demand is. But there should be only one price on that train whenever you book. Booking early gets you a reserved seat, nothing more.
Wouldn't that be basically abolishing the lowest fares, making it less affordable? I'm sure the TOCs make a lot of their revenue from the more expensive fares, which subsides everyone else.
Yep......but I'm not sure 'sums' are our Labour friends strongest suit.....next thing they'll be suggesting flat fares on Easyjet & RyanAir.....
Ridiculously complex train ticketing structures that see passengers paying vastly different sums for the same journey, on the same train, at the same time. And getting fined for not understanding the Byzantine system.
He might have a crack at that.
Basically ensuring everyone is on the lowest fare? Sounds oddly familiar ;-)
Booking early gets you a reserved seat, nothing more.
So you're happy for anyone with the foresight to book their journey far enough in advance to save a wad of cash to pay more?
So you're happy for anyone who cannot be flexible and only knows their journeys last minute to pay more?
At Grangemouth there's going to be about 1,000 people on the dole instead of being employed, albeit on lower pensions, etc. Imigrants from poor countries desperate for work must be must be looking on with amazement.
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.
A preposterous claim Avery.
You can't really expect us to believe you were sober.
Price cap them. We pay four times the subsidy to the railways than we ever did under BR so if we are going to continue to pump private companies with public money then we need to make the 'privatised' system work for consumers. Most expensive rail fares in Europe.
Have a pop at them.
If we are already subsidising them with fares uncapped, what do you think is going to happen if fares are capped. It will be Beeching mark 2, no doubt.
Ridiculously complex train ticketing structures that see passengers paying vastly different sums for the same journey, on the same train, at the same time. And getting fined for not understanding the Byzantine system.
He might have a crack at that.
Basically ensuring everyone is on the lowest fare? Sounds oddly familiar ;-)
I'd smash the whole thing to bits, were it me. They should only be able to charge one price for each journey at each time (okay two, First Class and Standard) and that price should be reasonable. I understand that people have to pay more for, say Friday nights, as that's clearly were the peak demand is. But there should be only one price on that train whenever you book. Booking early gets you a reserved seat, nothing more.
This is a system I could get behind. Train fares are unbelievably complicated.
Ridiculously complex train ticketing structures that see passengers paying vastly different sums for the same journey, on the same train, at the same time. And getting fined for not understanding the Byzantine system.
He might have a crack at that.
Basically ensuring everyone is on the lowest fare? Sounds oddly familiar ;-)
Booking early gets you a reserved seat, nothing more.
So you're happy for anyone with the foresight to book their journey far enough in advance to save a wad of cash to pay more?
So you're happy for anyone who cannot be flexible and only knows their journeys last minute to pay more?
Hmm, so I was reading elsewhere that Unite bigwigs had a bust up with the owners of the plant before this all went down, surely that would be a conflict of interest on the part of Unite when informing their members on how to vote on deals proposed by plant management.
Honestly, if 750 jobs have been lost because of a personal beef between the union bosses at Unite and INEOS that would be very disappointing.
That is awful. I do hope the story gets national prominence because that kind of personal beef possibly clouding the judgement of the union is unacceptable.
Sometimes I wonder why the Royal Mail wasn't kept nationalised but the price of delivering a piece of mail allowed to float (inevitably upwards) to the real market value. It'll probably happen in a few years anyway. Could have bought in even more coffers for the Gov't...
Renationalise the railways, and let the price of a ticket float to the actual market value (Probably higher than now on commuter routes)...
Yep......but I'm not sure 'sums' are our Labour friends strongest suit.....next thing they'll be suggesting flat fares on Easyjet & RyanAir.....
There probably wouldn't have been Easyjet & RyanAir if flat fees had been in operation. Still, it would have helped preserve jobs for the other airlines that were there before.
A whole thread and not a single mention by tim of PB Tory spinners being useless.
But Avery you have missed how Tim regrets Ed's economic illiteracy and hypocrisy; regrets the role played by UNITE in closing Grangemouth and the utter disgust at the thugs in the Police Federation lying their pants off before Parliament.
I don't understand how you would want to go without such insight.
David
tim expressing regret is as likely as members of the Police Federation offering individual apologies to Andrew Mitchell.
The best we can hope for is a collective apology from Marx, Engels and Miliband.
"The man at the centre of Britain's fuel crisis is a reclusive billionaire known as "Dr No". Jim Ratcliffe, 55, earned the Bond villain nickname from union chiefs at the Grangemouth refinery in Scotland because of his constant refusal to compromise. In just nine years, Mr Ratcliffe has built up his company, Ineos, from nothing to become the third-largest chemicals firm in the world ? yet he remains a largely secretive figure. Experts say his group, which is valued at £5billion, has transformed the energy sector by buying up unwanted plants from industrial giants such as BP, then slashing costs to maximise profits. Mr Ratcliffe owns two-thirds of the company's shares, giving him a personal fortune of around £3.5billion and making him the 25th richest man in Britain."
"Britain is not an attractive place to manufacture, says Ineos chief Jim Ratcliffe Jim Ratcliffe may not be a household name. But it’s hard to find another British industrialist who, in 15 whirlwind years, has built a business from scratch into a global $43bn (£27.5bn) sales machine."
At Grangemouth there's going to be about 1,000 people on the dole instead of being employed, albeit on lower pensions, etc. Imigrants from poor countries desperate for work must be must be looking on with amazement.
Will be many thousands that supported it all in trouble as well
At Grangemouth there's going to be about 1,000 people on the dole instead of being employed, albeit on lower pensions, etc. Imigrants from poor countries desperate for work must be must be looking on with amazement.
Will be many thousands that supported it all in trouble as well
What sort of coverage is it getting in Scotland Malcolm?
Price cap them. We pay four times the subsidy to the railways than we ever did under BR so if we are going to continue to pump private companies with public money then we need to make the 'privatised' system work for consumers. Most expensive rail fares in Europe.
Have a pop at them.
If you can book far enough in advance on a competitive route, I would be doing that. Your only solution would then be to run the thing in 'the public interest', i.e. a monopoly.
At Grangemouth there's going to be about 1,000 people on the dole instead of being employed, albeit on lower pensions, etc. Imigrants from poor countries desperate for work must be must be looking on with amazement.
Absolutely,this is what globalisation does.... I have worked with some amazingly protected companies,but when they were faced with global competition,they fell apart. One made 30% of the workforce redundant,and no one noticed the difference. On rail fares ,nobody subsidises my gas guzzler,why do I subsidise the rail users,let the fares rise to their true economic cost. No doubt some wise PB er will tell me my gas guzzler is being subsidised by the state. I also have a bus pass and enjoy using it just for the sport,but can't help but notice that almost everyone on board is on a free pass after 10.00am,so the bus companies are also being hugely subsidised.
Carlotta, worth catching BBC Scotland news on Iplayer when available later on. They just spent 10 mins covering the whole story, and are going back to reaction to the news here in Scotland after a report on other news. They also just announced that there would be a special extended Newsnight Scotland tonight on Grangemouth.
At Grangemouth there's going to be about 1,000 people on the dole instead of being employed, albeit on lower pensions, etc. Imigrants from poor countries desperate for work must be must be looking on with amazement.
Will be many thousands that supported it all in trouble as well
What sort of coverage is it getting in Scotland Malcolm?
At Grangemouth there's going to be about 1,000 people on the dole instead of being employed, albeit on lower pensions, etc. Imigrants from poor countries desperate for work must be must be looking on with amazement.
Will be many thousands that supported it all in trouble as well
What sort of coverage is it getting in Scotland Malcolm?
Any potential impact on Dunfermline tomorrow?
Amidst the riots against Miliband at PMQs there'll be a surge to the Tories in Dunfermline. This is the PB Truth
it's more Labour - expected to romp home - that should worry - hence my question about the coverage.....
Falkirk is certainly a much bigger non - story than "man cries at funeral"!
BBC - Chemical sales drive export growth "Refined petrol and chemicals were among the stronger sectors of the Scottish economy, according to the latest manufactured export figures.
According to the Scottish government, total overseas sales grew 3.5% in the second quarter of this year.
Engineering also proved to be a strong factor.
The strength of refining and chemicals underlined the importance of the closure-threatened Grangemouth complex for the economy.
The data shows that refined petrol and chemicals account for nearly a quarter of manufactured goods sold to the rest of the world."
In other news from Scotland tonight. BBC - Several Irish-linked 'terror arrests' made in Scotland "A number of people have been arrested in Scotland under the Terrorism Act during an operation focused on dissident Irish Republicans.
Police Scotland said they were arrested at several locations under section 41 of the Act "on suspicion of committing various offences".
It is believed that those who were arrested are being held at Glasgow's high-security Govan Police Station."
Is Edmund's widget the thingy that can block a particular poster? (Makes me wonder whether anyone blocks my comments).
Andy – the widget is for wimps who like to talk only to people who agree with them in a locked room. Why they come on a cross-partisan politics forum if this is their preference is beyond me.
The trick when using the widget is only to put tim on Ignore; nobody else.
That way one gets all sides of the interesting debates and it nicely cuts the threads down to half-length - thus saving on the mobile dataplan cost and eventual arthritis of the scrolling finger..
If you feel the need to follow tim's comments then (seek professional help and) you'll see more than enough of them when people inexplicably rise to the trolling and quote The Tim Team. I'd never block other people despite not agreeing with them at all. Laughing at the parody account that is 'Roger', for example is one of the comedy highlights of the site.
Siobhán Dowling @SiobhanDowling 22m Yes, Roma can have blonde children: DNA test proves girl (7) belongs to Roma family in Ireland. http://shar.es/IarwE via
By the logic of the tabloids thats "bad news for the parents of Maddie and Ben"
Jesus Christ.
they received a tip-off that she didn't look like her parents? Well she could have been adopted, or a product of a previous marriage. Totally barmy to swoop in and take the child away to be tested on such flimsy evidence. If I were them I'd be talking to my lawyer about suing whoever did this.
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
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.
At Grangemouth there's going to be about 1,000 people on the dole instead of being employed, albeit on lower pensions, etc. Imigrants from poor countries desperate for work must be must be looking on with amazement.
Absolutely,this is what globalisation does.... I have worked with some amazingly protected companies,but when they were faced with global competition,they fell apart. One made 30% of the workforce redundant,and no one noticed the difference. On rail fares ,nobody subsidises my gas guzzler,why do I subsidise the rail users,let the fares rise to their true economic cost. No doubt some wise PB er will tell me my gas guzzler is being subsidised by the state. I also have a bus pass and enjoy using it just for the sport,but can't help but notice that almost everyone on board is on a free pass after 10.00am,so the bus companies are also being hugely subsidised.
That sort of statement falls apart on the intangibles. Say you had your wish, and that prices went up, and as a result rail travel halved. Say half of those journeys were necessary and could not be put off. Think of the extra congestion on the roads that would arise.
Then add in other factors such as the fact rail and bus travel can give people without access to cars the ability to travel. Or the amount of HGVs rail freight takes off the roads.
How do you quantify these? Is the cost of the rail subsidies (massive, especially to Network Rail, and largely hidden due to Labour keeping it off the books) less than the economic harm of extra congestion, people not being able to travel, the lack of rail freight, the harm to business etcetera?
I totally agree with the free bus passes thing. A stupid thing, ill-thought scheme by the politicians who put it forward (hi, Nick). Unless they saw it solely as a vote-winner without care for the consequences.
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?
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.
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.
So do explain to me why using the same raw material two successive iterations of historic data produce such stunningly different results? The HadCRUT data under the first three revisions - each of which added in new data sets - was apparently good enough until it started to show the temperatures plateauing. Then revision 4 comes out which does not include any new data sets but simply a new way of digitising the data combined with new bias adjustments and error models.
Funnily enough the raw data - which the Hadley Centre do not provide in a unified form - still shows the same drop as seen in previous iterations. It is only the newly 'corrected' data which now shows a rise.
At Grangemouth there's going to be about 1,000 people on the dole instead of being employed, albeit on lower pensions, etc. Imigrants from poor countries desperate for work must be must be looking on with amazement.
Absolutely,this is what globalisation does.... I have worked with some amazingly protected companies,but when they were faced with global competition,they fell apart. One made 30% of the workforce redundant,and no one noticed the difference. On rail fares ,nobody subsidises my gas guzzler,why do I subsidise the rail users,let the fares rise to their true economic cost. No doubt some wise PB er will tell me my gas guzzler is being subsidised by the state. I also have a bus pass and enjoy using it just for the sport,but can't help but notice that almost everyone on board is on a free pass after 10.00am,so the bus companies are also being hugely subsidised.
Off the top of my head roads are paid for by general taxation.
At Grangemouth there's going to be about 1,000 people on the dole instead of being employed, albeit on lower pensions, etc. Imigrants from poor countries desperate for work must be must be looking on with amazement.
Absolutely,this is what globalisation does.... I have worked with some amazingly protected companies,but when they were faced with global competition,they fell apart. One made 30% of the workforce redundant,and no one noticed the difference. On rail fares ,nobody subsidises my gas guzzler,why do I subsidise the rail users,let the fares rise to their true economic cost. No doubt some wise PB er will tell me my gas guzzler is being subsidised by the state. I also have a bus pass and enjoy using it just for the sport,but can't help but notice that almost everyone on board is on a free pass after 10.00am,so the bus companies are also being hugely subsidised.
Off the top of my head roads are paid for by general taxation.
Isn't there some theoretical hypothecation with Road Tax?
Siobhán Dowling @SiobhanDowling 22m Yes, Roma can have blonde children: DNA test proves girl (7) belongs to Roma family in Ireland. http://shar.es/IarwE via
By the logic of the tabloids thats "bad news for the parents of Maddie and Ben"
Siobhán Dowling @SiobhanDowling 22m Yes, Roma can have blonde children: DNA test proves girl (7) belongs to Roma family in Ireland. http://shar.es/IarwE via
By the logic of the tabloids thats "bad news for the parents of Maddie and Ben"
Jesus Christ.
they received a tip-off that she didn't look like her parents? Well she could have been adopted, or a product of a previous marriage. Totally barmy to swoop in and take the child away to be tested on such flimsy evidence. If I were them I'd be talking to my lawyer about suing whoever did this.
Sorry, can't talk now I'm on the phone to the LAPD
No. I'm with you on that. I particularly like cranes. I've always fancied working at a busy docks, wearing a high-viz vest and pointing at containers. And stuff.
At Grangemouth there's going to be about 1,000 people on the dole instead of being employed, albeit on lower pensions, etc. Imigrants from poor countries desperate for work must be must be looking on with amazement.
Absolutely,this is what globalisation does.... I have worked with some amazingly protected companies,but when they were faced with global competition,they fell apart. One made 30% of the workforce redundant,and no one noticed the difference. On rail fares ,nobody subsidises my gas guzzler,why do I subsidise the rail users,let the fares rise to their true economic cost. No doubt some wise PB er will tell me my gas guzzler is being subsidised by the state. I also have a bus pass and enjoy using it just for the sport,but can't help but notice that almost everyone on board is on a free pass after 10.00am,so the bus companies are also being hugely subsidised.
Off the top of my head roads are paid for by general taxation.
Isn't there some theoretical hypothecation with Road Tax?
Off the top of my head roads are paid for by general taxation.
Isn't there some theoretical hypothecation with Road Tax?
Yes I think Road Tax is the wrong expression,it is an excise duty levied on car owners,so the cost of the roads is out of general taxation,but rail users do not pay excise duty on their tickets. Not sure about hypothecation.
At Grangemouth there's going to be about 1,000 people on the dole instead of being employed, albeit on lower pensions, etc. Imigrants from poor countries desperate for work must be must be looking on with amazement.
Absolutely,this is what globalisation does.... I have worked with some amazingly protected companies,but when they were faced with global competition,they fell apart. One made 30% of the workforce redundant,and no one noticed the difference. On rail fares ,nobody subsidises my gas guzzler,why do I subsidise the rail users,let the fares rise to their true economic cost. No doubt some wise PB er will tell me my gas guzzler is being subsidised by the state. I also have a bus pass and enjoy using it just for the sport,but can't help but notice that almost everyone on board is on a free pass after 10.00am,so the bus companies are also being hugely subsidised.
Off the top of my head roads are paid for by general taxation.
Isn't there some theoretical hypothecation with Road Tax?
Not since the 30s I think.
I'll take your word for that with thanks. Actually I'll look it up just out of random interest. It was abolished over here about 10 years ago as part of a tax simplification effort.
EDIT: You are on the money tonight with the pub trivia. Spot on - 1937 to be precise. Thanks again. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vehicle_Excise_Duty
No. I'm with you on that. I particularly like cranes. I've always fancied working at a busy docks, wearing a high-viz vest and pointing at containers. And stuff.
Comments
A whole thread and not a single mention by tim of PB Tory spinners being useless.
You can't really expect us to believe you were sober.
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
Ed Miliband describes Grangemouth as an important national asset, but not one he deemed important enough to raise at PMQ's, just in a tweet as an afterthought. Andrew Neil's first comment at the end of PMQ's was to comment on the complete lack of any mention of Grangemouth. He gets it, you don't, Miliband getting his priorities wrong yet again.
That's a pretty big slab of people.
The issue is feedstock - with fracking US stuff is cheaper and there is over capacity around the world, and newer, more efficient plant nearer the supplies. Grangemouth was becoming progressively uneconomic - but INEOS had a plan to invest & fix that.
Then, all over a 'non story' (©tim), Unite pick a fight and threaten a strike and INEOS lose patience....the rest is history....
Miss Plato, I saw that survey on the news last night. 82% trusted the police. Makes me wonder what the police have to do to lose trust.
When this Energy ceases to be the main topic of the day, which opportunity will Miliband pounce on next.
I don't understand how you would want to go without such insight.
Other variations on the cost of living theme I suspect. Can't think what right now...
He could have mentioned Grangemouth en passent, ("I know the Prime Minister will join me in encouraging all sides to work to a solution that keeps Grangemouth open") but didn't, presumably because that would open up the whole 'Unite' question.
The question voters in Scotland will ask is 'how important is Scotland to Labour?'
Listening to Salmond on WATO he's preparing the ground to giving Labour the thrashing of their lives when Grangemouth closes - he was at pains to be even handed and praise the 'workforce' and encourage INEOS to get back round the table with them.
The word 'Union' did not cross his lips once......
Honestly, if 750 jobs have been lost because of a personal beef between the union bosses at Unite and INEOS that would be very disappointing.
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
(b) are we allowed to make jokes involving monkeys/organ grinders these days?
(c) Because the PM might be best placed to apply pressure
(d) Because this is a nationally important site in an area where he has a staggering number of MPs?
(e) To try and head off criticism by Joyce of the role played by a Labour party official?
Actually you are right. Given the background why on earth would he want to mention it?
He might have a crack at that.
i) the price of its feedstock and
ii) the price of petrol?
Okay......
In any case, the plant that's currently closing is the chemical plant - not the refinery - so you may wish to be better informed before commenting on the short comings of others....
I suppose when your union plays hardball it can either win big a la Bob Crow/Tubes or lose big - like it appears to have done here. I'm sorry for the workers who didn't want to strike. Completely FUCKED OVER.
Miliband didn't mention Grangemouth because he was on good ground battering a hapless Cameron around the place on energy, and handing Cameron a "Union" card would have been stupid.
Also because it's not a big thing politically, at least compared to the cost of living. Also because there was a big Grangemouth thing immediately afterwards.
What are you struggling to understand exactly?
That's where it all started? What a mess. Unite were very silly to try to play chicken when the plant was already losing money.
Have a pop at them.
A familiar pattern.
Love this word: @OED: Scoteinography is a rare word, derived from ancient Greek, meaning 'Illegible writing'. #brilliant
Renationalise the railways, and let the price of a ticket float to the actual market value (Probably higher than now on commuter routes)...
tim expressing regret is as likely as members of the Police Federation offering individual apologies to Andrew Mitchell.
The best we can hope for is a collective apology from Marx, Engels and Miliband.
"The man at the centre of Britain's fuel crisis is a reclusive billionaire known as "Dr No".
Jim Ratcliffe, 55, earned the Bond villain nickname from union chiefs at the Grangemouth refinery in Scotland because of his constant refusal to compromise.
In just nine years, Mr Ratcliffe has built up his company, Ineos, from nothing to become the third-largest chemicals firm in the world ? yet he remains a largely secretive figure.
Experts say his group, which is valued at £5billion, has transformed the energy sector by buying up unwanted plants from industrial giants such as BP, then slashing costs to maximise profits.
Mr Ratcliffe owns two-thirds of the company's shares, giving him a personal fortune of around £3.5billion and making him the 25th richest man in Britain."
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-562289/Meet-Britains-25th-richest-man-lawnmower-collector-reclusive-figure-latest-fuel-crisis.html
Jim Ratcliffe may not be a household name. But it’s hard to find another British industrialist who, in 15 whirlwind years, has built a business from scratch into a global $43bn (£27.5bn) sales machine."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/industry/10292664/Britain-is-not-an-attractive-place-to-manufacture-says-Ineos-chief-Jim-Ratcliffe.html
It is yet another example of the Milibands hating Britain.
As Miliband 1 might have said to Roger of his younger brother: "uterly wet and a weed it panes me to think i am of the same blud".
http://www.superyachtfan.com/superyacht/superyacht_hampshire_ii.html
Any potential impact on Dunfermline tomorrow?
I have worked with some amazingly protected companies,but when they were faced with global competition,they fell apart. One made 30% of the workforce redundant,and no one noticed the difference.
On rail fares ,nobody subsidises my gas guzzler,why do I subsidise the rail users,let the fares rise to their true economic cost.
No doubt some wise PB er will tell me my gas guzzler is being subsidised by the state.
I also have a bus pass and enjoy using it just for the sport,but can't help but notice that almost everyone on board is on a free pass after 10.00am,so the bus companies are also being hugely subsidised.
Whether I or anyone else will ever be able to read it, however...
Feckin' f'ick Oirish twunts. It is beyond the joke....
Two kids suffer: A broken system of social care carries on. No doubt "Lessons will be learnt"!
Falkirk is certainly a much bigger non - story than "man cries at funeral"!
"Refined petrol and chemicals were among the stronger sectors of the Scottish economy, according to the latest manufactured export figures.
According to the Scottish government, total overseas sales grew 3.5% in the second quarter of this year.
Engineering also proved to be a strong factor.
The strength of refining and chemicals underlined the importance of the closure-threatened Grangemouth complex for the economy.
The data shows that refined petrol and chemicals account for nearly a quarter of manufactured goods sold to the rest of the world."
In other news from Scotland tonight.
BBC - Several Irish-linked 'terror arrests' made in Scotland
"A number of people have been arrested in Scotland under the Terrorism Act during an operation focused on dissident Irish Republicans.
Police Scotland said they were arrested at several locations under section 41 of the Act "on suspicion of committing various offences".
It is believed that those who were arrested are being held at Glasgow's high-security Govan Police Station."
That way one gets all sides of the interesting debates and it nicely cuts the threads down to half-length - thus saving on the mobile dataplan cost and eventual arthritis of the scrolling finger..
If you feel the need to follow tim's comments then (seek professional help and) you'll see more than enough of them when people inexplicably rise to the trolling and quote The Tim Team. I'd never block other people despite not agreeing with them at all. Laughing at the parody account that is 'Roger', for example is one of the comedy highlights of the site.
And I must say I was surprised you didn't reply to my criticism of your 'knowledge' of the trade balance.
I was hoping for at least one yellow box.
Am I the only person who admires the 'Grangemouth at night' pictures ?
Such as the one here:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-24542903
http://www.unitetheunion.org/news/grangemouth-petrochemical-plant-closure-is-catastrophic-says-unite/
Then add in other factors such as the fact rail and bus travel can give people without access to cars the ability to travel. Or the amount of HGVs rail freight takes off the roads.
How do you quantify these? Is the cost of the rail subsidies (massive, especially to Network Rail, and largely hidden due to Labour keeping it off the books) less than the economic harm of extra congestion, people not being able to travel, the lack of rail freight, the harm to business etcetera?
I totally agree with the free bus passes thing. A stupid thing, ill-thought scheme by the politicians who put it forward (hi, Nick). Unless they saw it solely as a vote-winner without care for the consequences.
Funnily enough the raw data - which the Hadley Centre do not provide in a unified form - still shows the same drop as seen in previous iterations. It is only the newly 'corrected' data which now shows a rise.
Who the hell goes to a TV station first, unless they were looking for a payment?
Moggster. Lol.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-24647268
US listening in on her mobile phone.
Off the top of my head roads are paid for by general taxation.
Isn't there some theoretical hypothecation with Road Tax?
Yes I think Road Tax is the wrong expression,it is an excise duty levied on car owners,so the cost of the roads is out of general taxation,but rail users do not pay excise duty on their tickets.
Not sure about hypothecation.
EDIT: You are on the money tonight with the pub trivia. Spot on - 1937 to be precise. Thanks again. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vehicle_Excise_Duty