David Cameron and George Osborne suddenly becoming champions of an institution they had previously derided must have seemed extraordinary and very dishonest to many, many people.
Cameron in particular looked particularly stupid going from his "we might leave if I get a bad deal" to staunch defender of the EU in a matter of months. There are a lot of people who voted Conservative in 2015 who would never vote for either of that pair ever again.
That's very good. Doubling down on the media strategy that led to Trump in the first place, just helps him and his supporters. But they don't get it, and show no signs of wanting or trying to understand either.
There is a simple answer, bake up into smaller units, Privatise, and deregulate. The Railways first, and then the NHS.
The railways were privatised and it didn't make a vast difference and there is unlikely to ever be popular support for privatising the NHS. A more effective long-term solution for healthcare and social care is for those who can afford it to be encouraged to take out insurance or else to increase NI
A bit of both carrot and stick is required.
Reversal of the benefit-in-kind taxation on company-provided health insurance is long overdue - we should be encouraging all those who can to cover their own healthcare. On the other hand, charges for GP appointments and a severe curtailing of elective and cosmetic surgery have to happen too - even if it only saves a drop in the ocean it's as much about the signal it sends that the NHS is a scarce resource. The biggest savings are to be found in getting elderly out of hospitals and into residential care in a timely fashion, but we all know that.
Railways, maybe allow franchises to run track, train and service - but most importantly put the risk of failure on the operator's shareholders not the government.
The problem with banning "elective" surgery is that it includes things like knee replacements. If a condition is stopping people working, it needs to be fixed as a matter of priority. We need a healthcare system that does what it says on the tin.
I see the campaign to put Brexit at the feet of Tories far and wide continues apace. Despite Lisbon being signed under Brown, the failure of Blair to bring in transitional immigration controls and the whole of New Labour determined to recast this country in their own third way image - despite huge downsides and widespread unpopularity of the European project.
Hilariously, Brexit has united the Tory party like never before and divided the other GB wide parties quite royally. The incompeteance of the left makes it likely that even, worst case scenario, a party who preside over disorderly exit would still be the most electable.
David Cameron and George Osborne suddenly becoming champions of an institution they had previously derided must have seemed extraordinary and very dishonest to many, many people.
Cameron in particular looked particularly stupid going from his "we might leave if I get a bad deal" to staunch defender of the EU in a matter of months. There are a lot of people who voted Conservative in 2015 who would never vote for either of that pair ever again.
The PM, the Chancellor, the Home Secretary and other prominent Tory Remainers spent six years helping to create the environment in which Leave lies about hordes of Turks coming over to live here seemed credible. If you hear your country's leaders continually talk about immigration as a problem, the EU as the enemy and so on, you can't be blamed for believing them. Most voters listen only sporadically to political debate. David Cameron and George Osborne suddenly becoming champions of an institution they had previously derided must have seemed extraordinary and very dishonest to many, many people. The leaders of the Leave campaign knew they were lying (just as the leaders of Remain did, too), but you can't blame voters for believing them.
I think New Labour's policy of " rubbing people's noses in it " was the cause of Brexit. The heir to Blair and his side kick were given a hospital pass.
David Cameron and George Osborne suddenly becoming champions of an institution they had previously derided must have seemed extraordinary and very dishonest to many, many people.
Cameron in particular looked particularly stupid going from his "we might leave if I get a bad deal" to staunch defender of the EU in a matter of months. There are a lot of people who voted Conservative in 2015 who would never vote for either of that pair ever again.
The waiting list numbers are heading back to the bad old days of the mid noughties with nearly four million waiting for procedures. This is in spite of investment and more people being treated than ever before.
You can be as lean and efficient as you like but if the demand is unrelenting and increasing, you are fighting a losing battle. Strangely,I was listening to a rail expert on Sky debating the view that the rail franchise system was no longer fit for purpose. The problem, according to said expert, wasn't the service providers (more people travelling than ever before - 1.6 billion journeys per year) but the infrastructure which simply lacked the capacity to deal with the relentlessly increasing demand.
That's the problem whether it be the railways, NHS or adult social care - the infrastructures can no longer cope however effectively and efficiently they are used or managed. Instead of overhauling organisational structures, the problem is simply one of increasing capacity to meet demand. The problem is new railways, like new care homes and new hospitals, can't be produced overnight. Rather like 1 million new homes, it will take time.
The problem is, we should have started this years ago and for that all parties are responsible and at fault.
There is a simple answer, bake up into smaller units, Privatise, and deregulate. The Railways first, and then the NHS.
The railways were NI
A bit of both carrot and stick is required.
Reversal of the benefit-in-kind taxation on company-provided health insurance is long overdue - we should be encouraging all those who can to cover their own healthcare. On the other hand, charges for GP
Railways, maybe allow franchises to run track, train and service - but most importantly put the risk of failure on the operator's shareholders not the government.
Reversal of benefit-in-kind tax on company-provided health insurance, some charges for GP appointments for minor complaints and limiting cosmetic and elective surgery to those willing to pay for it would all be sensible yes. Getting the elderly into residential care and encouraging them to take out annuities and insurance for it if they can would also be helpful.
Getting rail companies to be more responsible for their own failure and ensuring they lose their franchise more rapidly of they perform poorly would be another step in the right direction
The PM, the Chancellor, the Home Secretary and other prominent Tory Remainers spent six years helping to create the environment in which Leave lies about hordes of Turks coming over to live here seemed credible. If you hear your country's leaders continually talk about immigration as a problem, the EU as the enemy and so on, you can't be blamed for believing them. Most voters listen only sporadically to political debate. David Cameron and George Osborne suddenly becoming champions of an institution they had previously derided must have seemed extraordinary and very dishonest to many, many people. The leaders of the Leave campaign knew they were lying (just as the leaders of Remain did, too), but you can't blame voters for believing them.
Of course in your strange world the mere voter is no where near bright enough to actually make up their own minds about such issues and can only possibly have reached their decisions because they were lied to by their betters.
It is no wonder you and your kind lost. The scorn and distaste you display every day for the average member of the public is quite nauseating.
There is a simple answer, bake up into smaller units, Privatise, and deregulate. The Railways first, and then the NHS.
The railways were privatised and it didn't make a vast difference and there is unlikely to ever be popular support for privatising the NHS. A more effective long-term solution for healthcare and social care is for those who can afford it to be encouraged to take out insurance or else to increase NI
A bit of both carrot and stick is required.
Reversal of the benefit-in-kind taxation on company-provided health insurance is long overdue - we should be encouraging all those who can to cover their own healthcare. On the other hand, charges for GP appointments and a severe curtailing of elective and cosmetic surgery have to happen too - even if it only saves a drop in the ocean it's as much about the signal it sends that the NHS is a scarce resource. The biggest savings are to be found in getting elderly out of hospitals and into residential care in a timely fashion, but we all know that.
Railways, maybe allow franchises to run track, train and service - but most importantly put the risk of failure on the operator's shareholders not the government.
The problem with banning "elective" surgery is that it includes things like knee replacements. If a condition is stopping people working, it needs to be fixed as a matter of priority. We need a healthcare system that does what it says on the tin.
IMO if an injury or condition stops you working then it's not elective any more as to whether it gets fixed. Would be better if your work's private health insurance paid for this sort of thing though, and there should be tax incentives rather than the current disincentives for them to provide it to their staff.
David Cameron and George Osborne suddenly becoming champions of an institution they had previously derided must have seemed extraordinary and very dishonest to many, many people.
Cameron in particular looked particularly stupid going from his "we might leave if I get a bad deal" to staunch defender of the EU in a matter of months. There are a lot of people who voted Conservative in 2015 who would never vote for either of that pair ever again.
He is a fucking genius. I really hope the left start listening to him. We need balance and the world is so unbalanced right now because the left have screwed up their message so badly that it allows people like Trump to gain power.
Quite accurate too. I wouldn't want to leave Eastern Europe at the mercy of Russia but if the EU try and punish the UK, it ultimately UK and American troops protecting the European border from Russian incursion.
It's American troops. The UK makes next to no difference in terms of feet on the ground.
Ask an actual Estonian what they think matters. I have.
The PM, the Chancellor, the Home Secretary and other prominent Tory Remainers spent six years helping to create the environment in which Leave lies about hordes of Turks coming over to live here seemed credible. If you hear your country's leaders continually talk about immigration as a problem, the EU as the enemy and so on, you can't be blamed for believing them. Most voters listen only sporadically to political debate. David Cameron and George Osborne suddenly becoming champions of an institution they had previously derided must have seemed extraordinary and very dishonest to many, many people. The leaders of the Leave campaign knew they were lying (just as the leaders of Remain did, too), but you can't blame voters for believing them.
Of course in your strange world the mere voter is no where near bright enough to actually make up their own minds about such issues and can only possibly have reached their decisions because they were lied to by their betters.
It is no wonder you and your kind lost. The scorn and distaste you display every day for the average member of the public is quite nauseating.
One thing that is not discussed enough here is the extent to which the EU undermined it's own cause. Had they not been so keen on grabbing powers from member States, had they not admitted countries to Euro membership who were plainly unsuitable, had they shown less arrogance for the voters, the outcome would have been different.
Railways, maybe allow franchises to run track, train and service - but most importantly put the risk of failure on the operator's shareholders not the government.
The problem is that with the exception of the South West Main Line out of Waterloo, all of the other railways rely on subsidy to survive, so there has to be government intervention of some kind.
So unless we completely deregulated the rail industry, there would be no railways outside of London. The only way you could make lines oop north profitable would be to charge a lot more for usage. So poor TSE would have to pay £10,000 a year to commute from Sheffield to Manchester.
There is a simple answer, bake up into smaller units, Privatise, and deregulate. The Railways first, and then the NHS.
The railways were privatised and it didn't make a vast difference and there is unlikely to ever be popular support for privatising the NHS. A more effective long-term solution for healthcare and social care is for those who can afford it to be encouraged to take out insurance or else to increase NI
A bit of both carrot and stick is required.
Reversal of the benefit-in-kind taxation on company-provided health insurance is long overdue - we should be encouraging all those who can to cover their own healthcare. On the other hand, charges for GP appointments and a severe curtailing of elective and cosmetic surgery have to happen too - even if it only saves a drop in the ocean it's as much about the signal it sends that the NHS is a scarce resource. The biggest savings are to be found in getting elderly out of hospitals and into residential care in a timely fashion, but we all know that.
Railways, maybe allow franchises to run track, train and service - but most importantly put the risk of failure on the operator's shareholders not the government.
The problem with banning "elective" surgery is that it includes things like knee replacements. If a condition is stopping people working, it needs to be fixed as a matter of priority. We need a healthcare system that does what it says on the tin.
IMO if an injury or condition stops you working then it's not elective any more as to whether it gets fixed. Would be better if your work's private health insurance paid for this sort of thing though, and there should be tax incentives rather than the current disincentives for them to provide it to their staff.
Alot of minor stuff is indeed covered by private health care - precisely because "elective' medical treatment often takes months to schedule on the NHS. So it is in the companies interest to get a result, quickly.
Ingrown toenails for instance - good for a joke, excruciating to live with.
There is a simple answer, bake up into smaller units, Privatise, and deregulate. The Railways first, and then the NHS.
The railways were privatised and it didn't make a vast difference and there is unlikely to ever be popular support for privatising the NHS. A more effective long-term solution for healthcare and social care is for those who can afford it to be encouraged to take out insurance or else to increase NI
A bit of both carrot and stick is required.
Reversal of the benefit-in-kind taxation on company-provided health insurance is long overdue - we should be encouraging all those who can to cover their own healthcare. On the other hand, charges for GP appointments and a severe curtailing of elective and cosmetic surgery have to happen too - even if it only saves a drop in the ocean it's as much about the signal it sends that the NHS is a scarce resource. The biggest savings are to be found in getting elderly out of hospitals and into residential care in a timely fashion, but we all know that.
Railways, maybe allow franchises to run track, train and service - but most importantly put the risk of failure on the operator's shareholders not the government.
The problem with banning "elective" surgery is that it includes things like knee replacements. If a condition is stopping people working, it needs to be fixed as a matter of priority. We need a healthcare system that does what it says on the tin.
IMO if an injury or condition stops you working then it's not elective any more as to whether it gets fixed. Would be better if your work's private health insurance paid for this sort of thing though, and there should be tax incentives rather than the current disincentives for them to provide it to their staff.
Doesn't help public sector employees, or the self-employed (although you could probably design a fairly cheap insurance product just aimed at things that could stop you working long term). And in any case, I pay quite a lot of tax to the NHS on the grounds it is going to fix me when I am broken. The Government needs to start behaving as if it has a contractual obligation to me.
One thing I would do is proper triage at A&E, anyone who turns up with a self-limiting condition or something that can wait a few days should be told to piss off, or charged a private consulting fee.
David Cameron and George Osborne suddenly becoming champions of an institution they had previously derided must have seemed extraordinary and very dishonest to many, many people.
Cameron in particular looked particularly stupid going from his "we might leave if I get a bad deal" to staunch defender of the EU in a matter of months. There are a lot of people who voted Conservative in 2015 who would never vote for either of that pair ever again.
The PM, the Chancellor, the Home Secretary and other prominent Tory Remainers spent six years helping to create the environment in which Leave lies about hordes of Turks coming over to live here seemed credible. If you hear your country's leaders continually talk about immigration as a problem, the EU as the enemy and so on, you can't be blamed for believing them. Most voters listen only sporadically to political debate. David Cameron and George Osborne suddenly becoming champions of an institution they had previously derided must have seemed extraordinary and very dishonest to many, many people. The leaders of the Leave campaign knew they were lying (just as the leaders of Remain did, too), but you can't blame voters for believing them.
Of course in your strange world the mere voter is no where near bright enough to actually make up their own minds about such issues and can only possibly have reached their decisions because they were lied to by their betters.
It is no wonder you and your kind lost. The scorn and distaste you display every day for the average member of the public is quite nauseating.
No, Richard - I have scorn for people who lie to the electorate knowing most people's lives do not revolve around politics. I do not consider people who lie to be better than anyone. Presumably, you must think most people believe man made global warming is real and is a significant danger because they have looked at all the evidence and believe that to be the case. If not, if you believe they have been duped, you are a hypocrite.
Seeking to paint me as part of a kind, an other, an enemy, merely because I do not hold the views you do is quite nauseating. And rather hysterical. Go and have a lie down.
The PM, the Chancellor, the Home Secretary and other prominent Tory Remainers spent six years helping to create the environment in which Leave lies about hordes of Turks coming over to live here seemed credible. If you hear your country's leaders continually talk about immigration as a problem, the EU as the enemy and so on, you can't be blamed for believing them. Most voters listen only sporadically to political debate. David Cameron and George Osborne suddenly becoming champions of an institution they had previously derided must have seemed extraordinary and very dishonest to many, many people. The leaders of the Leave campaign knew they were lying (just as the leaders of Remain did, too), but you can't blame voters for believing them.
Of course in your strange world the mere voter is no where near bright enough to actually make up their own minds about such issues and can only possibly have reached their decisions because they were lied to by their betters.
It is no wonder you and your kind lost. The scorn and distaste you display every day for the average member of the public is quite nauseating.
One thing that is not discussed enough here is the extent to which the EU undermined it's own cause. Had they not been so keen on grabbing powers from member States, had they not admitted countries to Euro membership who were plainly unsuitable, had they shown less arrogance for the voters, the outcome would have been different.
Completely agree. And I don't often say that about your posts :-)
27% for the Conservatives in Scotland probably overstates their position a little , 23-24% is more likely but the May local elections will give a better idea . Unless their vote becomes less flat they will only end up with 5/6 Parliamentary seats at best .
Based on this poll the Tories would win Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk, Dumfries and Galloway and Aberdeenshire West and Kincardine from the SNP and have a shot at Perth and North Perthshire and Moray and Edinburgh South would be neck and neck with Labour. However those seat gains could offset any losses to the LDs in South West London and seats like Lewes and Bath. If they then gain some seats from Labour in England and Wales May could increase her majority overall
On the basisof today's Opinium poll the Tories could lose 14 seats to Labour in England & Wales.
Yet you still think the Tories won't have the mother of all three line whips - and deselection threats - to get the new boundaries though?
There has been no suggestion that they will threaten their MPs with deselection.
The PM, the Chancellor, the Home Secretary and other prominent Tory Remainers spent six years helping to create the environment in which Leave lies about hordes of Turks coming over to live here seemed credible. If you hear your country's leaders continually talk about immigration as a problem, the EU as the enemy and so on, you can't be blamed for believing them. Most voters listen only sporadically to political debate. David Cameron and George Osborne suddenly becoming champions of an institution they had previously derided must have seemed extraordinary and very dishonest to many, many people. The leaders of the Leave campaign knew they were lying (just as the leaders of Remain did, too), but you can't blame voters for believing them.
Of course in your strange world the mere voter is no where near bright enough to actually make up their own minds about such issues and can only possibly have reached their decisions because they were lied to by their betters.
It is no wonder you and your kind lost. The scorn and distaste you display every day for the average member of the public is quite nauseating.
No, Richard - I have scorn for people who lie to the electorate knowing most people's lives do not revolve around politics. I do not consider people who lie to be better than anyone. Presumably, you must think most people believe man made global warming is real and is a significant danger because they have looked at all the evidence and believe that to be the case. If not, if you believe they have been duped, you are a hypocrite.
Seeking to paint me as part of a kind, an other, an enemy, merely because I do not hold the views you do is quite nauseating. And rather hysterical. Go and have a lie down.
No idea what you ravings about AGW have to do with the topic at hand. Mind you logic has never been your strong point as evidenced by your ramblings on here.
The bottom line is that people vote based on their own personal experiences and informed by a wider set of inputs from a wide variety of sources. But they tend to choose those sources based upon what gels with their own world experience. Everyone suffers from selective reinforcement of their views through their media choices. You think people are stupid and are led by the nose by politicians. It is clear from all your postings on here that you have nothing but disdain for people who make choices you don't agree with and you think they must somehow have been misled into taking that position. It is a stupid, arrogant and facile argument and one that just about sums you up.
Railways, maybe allow franchises to run track, train and service - but most importantly put the risk of failure on the operator's shareholders not the government.
The problem is that with the exception of the South West Main Line out of Waterloo, all of the other railways rely on subsidy to survive, so there has to be government intervention of some kind.
So unless we completely deregulated the rail industry, there would be no railways outside of London. The only way you could make lines oop north profitable would be to charge a lot more for usage. So poor TSE would have to pay £10,000 a year to commute from Sheffield to Manchester.
The whole thing is not fit for purpose, the problem as always is how to change what's there already into something serviceable. The fare structure is completely undecipherable, needs to be thrown in the bin and done again from scratch with simple bands that mean my mum can't be charged double by going to the wrong kiosk at the station and I can't save £100 by buying ten different tickets for the same journey.
The main lines and major commuter routes really don't need subsidies, maybe in exchange we can strangle some of the more militant unions.
TSE is many things but he isn't poor. Charge people like him whatever the market will bear for his intercity first class peak time season ticket.
The PM, the Chancellor, the Home Secretary and other prominent Tory Remainers spent six years helping to create the environment in which Leave lies about hordes of Turks coming over to live here seemed credible. If you hear your country's leaders continually talk about immigration as a problem, the EU as the enemy and so on, you can't be blamed for believing them. Most voters listen only sporadically to political debate. David Cameron and George Osborne suddenly becoming champions of an institution they had previously derided must have seemed extraordinary and very dishonest to many, many people. The leaders of the Leave campaign knew they were lying (just as the leaders of Remain did, too), but you can't blame voters for believing them.
Of course in your strange world the mere voter is no where near bright enough to actually make up their own minds about such issues and can only possibly have reached their decisions because they were lied to by their betters.
It is no wonder you and your kind lost. The scorn and distaste you display every day for the average member of the public is quite nauseating.
No, Richard - I have scorn for people who lie to the electorate knowing most people's lives do not revolve around politics. I do not consider people who lie to be better than anyone. Presumably, you must think most people believe man made global warming is real and is a significant danger because they have looked at all the evidence and believe that to be the case. If not, if you believe they have been duped, you are a hypocrite.
Seeking to paint me as part of a kind, an other, an enemy, merely because I do not hold the views you do is quite nauseating. And rather hysterical. Go and have a lie down.
Wow, this is especially hilarious given your frequent posts (including that facile line chart you insisted on reposting ScottP-like for weeks) seeking to paint politicians from parties you disagree with in a harsh light
One thing I would do is proper triage at A&E, anyone who turns up with a self-limiting condition or something that can wait a few days should be told to piss off, or charged a private consulting fee.
True story.
Broke my leg on holiday. Went to hospital. Advised urgent surgery needed and given the option of having it done there. Called insurance company who agreed to immediate repatriation so surgery can be done in UK. Took 2x commercial flights to get back to Gatwick. Taxi straight to St Georges Hospital in Tooting. Had to wait in a queue, explained situation to the nurse on Triage and told that I should go away and see my GP and get a referral to hospital.
I had to literally force my way in to the hospital and hang around like a bad smell for eight plus hours before finally I was seen by a doctor and then admitted to the hospital so the operation could take place.
Railways, maybe allow franchises to run track, train and service - but most importantly put the risk of failure on the operator's shareholders not the government.
The problem is that with the exception of the South West Main Line out of Waterloo, all of the other railways rely on subsidy to survive, so there has to be government intervention of some kind.
So unless we completely deregulated the rail industry, there would be no railways outside of London. The only way you could make lines oop north profitable would be to charge a lot more for usage. So poor TSE would have to pay £10,000 a year to commute from Sheffield to Manchester.
The whole thing is not fit for purpose, the problem as always is how to change what's there already into something serviceable. The fare structure is completely undecipherable, needs to be thrown in the bin and done again from scratch with simple bands that mean my mum can't be charged double by going to the wrong kiosk at the station and I can't save £100 by buying ten different tickets for the same journey.
The main lines and major commuter routes really don't need subsidies, maybe in exchange we can strangle some of the more militant unions.
TSE is many things but he isn't poor. Charge people like him whatever the market will bear for his intercity first class peak time season ticket.
I'm a cynic about unregulated fares. I suspect this business of simplifying ticket prices will simply end split ticketing and make everyone pay the highest rate. It's a bit like Martin Lewis arguing against the simplifying of the energy markets - it just makes the savvy pay more.
As for regulated commuting fares, it would be interesting to see what the TOCs would do if they could charge what they want. I pay £3,100 a year for my (standard class) annual season ticket from Woking to Waterloo. I reckon they could charge £5,000 and it wouldn't make a huge difference to ridership. For me, however, it would result in me looking for a job outside of London given that the £3,100 I pay is about 12% of my take home pay.
27% for the Conservatives in Scotland probably overstates their position a little , 23-24% is more likely but the May local elections will give a better idea . Unless their vote becomes less flat they will only end up with 5/6 Parliamentary seats at best .
Based on this poll the Tories would win Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk, Dumfries and Galloway and Aberdeenshire West and Kincardine from the SNP and have a shot at Perth and North Perthshire and Moray and Edinburgh South would be neck and neck with Labour. However those seat gains could offset any losses to the LDs in South West London and seats like Lewes and Bath. If they then gain some seats from Labour in England and Wales May could increase her majority overall
On the basisof today's Opinium poll the Tories could lose 14 seats to Labour in England & Wales.
Yet you still think the Tories won't have the mother of all three line whips - and deselection threats - to get the new boundaries though?
There has been no suggestion that they will threaten their MPs with deselection.
The boundary revisions are said to be worth as many as 25-30 seats to the Tories, in a 600 seat Parliament. It's massive for them as the current boundaries are already a decade and a half old.
The whips are already working very hard behind the scenes, lining up retirements, knighthoods, cushy staff jobs and trying to nudge a few upstairs to the Red Benches - while at the same time making sure that everyone who wants to stand again can defend a notionally Conservative seat in their local area. Well organised big carrots.
If, after all those machinations over two years, a few MPs decide to throw the party under a bus by voting the new boundaries down, there's going to be a very big stick indeed used on them.
The PM, the Chancellor, the Home Secretary and other prominent Tory Remainers spent six years helping to create the environment in which Leave lies about hordes of Turks coming over to live here seemed credible. If you hear your country's leaders continually talk about immigration as a problem, the EU as the enemy and so on, you can't be blamed for believing them. Most voters listen only sporadically to political debate. David Cameron and George Osborne suddenly becoming champions of an institution they had previously derided must have seemed extraordinary and very dishonest to many, many people. The leaders of the Leave campaign knew they were lying (just as the leaders of Remain did, too), but you can't blame voters for believing them.
I don't understand the claim that Leave lied about Turkey. Turkey's accession to the EU (which would have been subject to FOM) was the subject of years of negotiation; negotiations are now on hold for reasons unforeseeable at the time. There is a claim made (and I think it's bollocks) that this was all a charade and never really going to happen; in which case serve the EU right for playing charades.
One thing I would do is proper triage at A&E, anyone who turns up with a self-limiting condition or something that can wait a few days should be told to piss off, or charged a private consulting fee.
True story.
Broke my leg on holiday. Went to hospital. Advised urgent surgery needed and given the option of having it done there. Called insurance company who agreed to immediate repatriation so surgery can be done in UK. Took 2x commercial flights to get back to Gatwick. Taxi straight to St Georges Hospital in Tooting. Had to wait in a queue, explained situation to the nurse on Triage and told that I should go away and see my GP and get a referral to hospital.
I had to literally force my way in to the hospital and hang around like a bad smell for eight plus hours before finally I was seen by a doctor and then admitted to the hospital so the operation could take place.
A friend of mine came off his motorcycle on the Nürburgring many years ago and the German doctors advised him to have surgery on his thumb which he'd injured. He said he's sort it out back home and, of course, our doctors said "nah, it'll heal on it's own." It's never properly healed.
The PM, the Chancellor, the Home Secretary and other prominent Tory Remainers spent six years helping to create the environment in which Leave lies about hordes of Turks coming over to live here seemed credible. If you hear your country's leaders continually talk about immigration as a problem, the EU as the enemy and so on, you can't be blamed for believing them. Most voters listen only sporadically to political debate. David Cameron and George Osborne suddenly becoming champions of an institution they had previously derided must have seemed extraordinary and very dishonest to many, many people. The leaders of the Leave campaign knew they were lying (just as the leaders of Remain did, too), but you can't blame voters for believing them.
Of course in your strange world the mere voter is no where near bright enough to actually make up their own minds about such issues and can only possibly have reached their decisions because they were lied to by their betters.
It is no wonder you and your kind lost. The scorn and distaste you display every day for the average member of the public is quite nauseating.
No, hypocrite.
Seeking to paint me as part of a kind, an other, an enemy, merely because I do not hold the views you do is quite nauseating. And rather hysterical. Go and have a lie down.
No idea what you ravings about AGW have to do with the topic at hand. Mind you logic has never been your strong point as evidenced by your ramblings on here.
The bottom line is that people vote based on their own personal experiences and informed by a wider set of inputs from a wide variety of sources. But they tend to choose those sources based upon what gels with their own world experience. Everyone suffers from selective reinforcement of their views through their media choices. You think people are stupid and are led by the nose by politicians. It is clear from all your postings on here that you have nothing but disdain for people who make choices you don't agree with and you think they must somehow have been misled into taking that position. It is a stupid, arrogant and facile argument and one that just about sums you up.
I get it. You don't like my views - thus they are illogical and I am wicked. That says more about you than me, of course.
I do think people were lied to during the referendum campaign and by both sides. Turkey was not going to become a member state of the EU by 2020, the government was not going to trigger Article 50 on 24th June. As I said, I do not blame people for believing those lies. I am sorry if that upsets you.
If you don't get the AGW point, you are clearly not as smart as either you or I think you are.
The PM, the Chancellor, the Home Secretary and other prominent Tory Remainers spent six years helping to create the environment in which Leave lies about hordes of Turks coming over to live here seemed credible. If you hear your country's leaders continually talk about immigration as a problem, the EU as the enemy and so on, you can't be blamed for believing them. Most voters listen only sporadically to political debate. David Cameron and George Osborne suddenly becoming champions of an institution they had previously derided must have seemed extraordinary and very dishonest to many, many people. The leaders of the Leave campaign knew they were lying (just as the leaders of Remain did, too), but you can't blame voters for believing them.
Of course in your strange world the mere voter is no where near bright enough to actually make up their own minds about such issues and can only possibly have reached their decisions because they were lied to by their betters.
It is no wonder you and your kind lost. The scorn and distaste you display every day for the average member of the public is quite nauseating.
No, Richard - I have scorn for people who lie to the electorate knowing most people's lives do not revolve around politics. I do not consider people who lie to be better than anyone. Presumably, you must think most people believe man made global warming is real and is a significant danger because they have looked at all the evidence and believe that to be the case. If not, if you believe they have been duped, you are a hypocrite.
Seeking to paint me as part of a kind, an other, an enemy, merely because I do not hold the views you do is quite nauseating. And rather hysterical. Go and have a lie down.
Wow, this is especially hilarious given your frequent posts (including that facile line chart you insisted on reposting ScottP-like for weeks) seeking to paint politicians from parties you disagree with in a harsh light
Yes, I do distinguish between politicians and voters. I judge the former much more harshly than the latter.
Given there are no other numbers it is a moot point , it matters not a jot , once you take of all the punitive repayments , paying for Trident , paying for London infraastructure the numbers are garbage. In an independent Scotland they would remain garbage and be of no consequence. Every other small country in the world can be independent and run deficits etc , why would it be a concern for Scotland.
Malcolm here explains clearly why Ruth has been successful. The middle class scots are not convinced that the SNP are trustworthy to run the economy on their own.
Politics in Scotland which for many years has been a mess has had an outbreak on sense recently. Many of the SNPs questions of TM annoy the English but are mostly fair questions. Ruth has been notable in not opposing the SNP asking them.
Labour since it lost its MPs has become even less relevant to Scottish issues. Corbyn may bang on about the NHS but only from an English perspective. The Scottish NHS is run by Holyrood and Corbyn is not standing for a seat here as far as I know.
Ruth will not stand to be an MP as she is leader of the Tories in Scotland. When she hands over that role then she may stand and will probably be elected. She is not a list MSP but won Edinburgh Central on her own. Maybe Edinburgh West would be her best bet.
She won Central due to the incumbent stepping down and the Greens putting up vanity candidate.
There is no Central constituency equivalent for Westminster - the Leith part of North and Leith would swamp her out if she stood there, as would Edinburgh East.
One thing I would do is proper triage at A&E, anyone who turns up with a self-limiting condition or something that can wait a few days should be told to piss off, or charged a private consulting fee.
True story.
Broke my leg on holiday. Went to hospital. Advised urgent surgery needed and given the option of having it done there. Called insurance company who agreed to immediate repatriation so surgery can be done in UK. Took 2x commercial flights to get back to Gatwick. Taxi straight to St Georges Hospital in Tooting. Had to wait in a queue, explained situation to the nurse on Triage and told that I should go away and see my GP and get a referral to hospital.
I had to literally force my way in to the hospital and hang around like a bad smell for eight plus hours before finally I was seen by a doctor and then admitted to the hospital so the operation could take place.
It sounds entirely credible to me.
The system is set up to meet targets, not provide correct care.
This worries me more. I have been saying for years that Mid Staffs was not unique:
The PM, the Chancellor, the Home Secretary and other prominent Tory Remainers spent six years helping to create the environment in which Leave lies about hordes of Turks coming over to live here seemed credible. If you hear your country's leaders continually talk about immigration as a problem, the EU as the enemy and so on, you can't be blamed for believing them. Most voters listen only sporadically to political debate. David Cameron and George Osborne suddenly becoming champions of an institution they had previously derided must have seemed extraordinary and very dishonest to many, many people. The leaders of the Leave campaign knew they were lying (just as the leaders of Remain did, too), but you can't blame voters for believing them.
Of course in your strange world the mere voter is no where near bright enough to actually make up their own minds about such issues and can only possibly have reached their decisions because they were lied to by their betters.
It is no wonder you and your kind lost. The scorn and distaste you display every day for the average member of the public is quite nauseating.
No, Richard - I have scorn for people who lie to the electorate knowing most people's lives do not revolve around politics. I do not consider people who lie to be better than anyone. Presumably, you must think most people believe man made global warming is real and is a significant danger because they have looked at all the evidence and believe that to be the case. If not, if you believe they have been duped, you are a hypocrite.
Seeking to paint me as part of a kind, an other, an enemy, merely because I do not hold the views you do is quite nauseating. And rather hysterical. Go and have a lie down.
Wow, this is especially hilarious given your frequent posts (including that facile line chart you insisted on reposting ScottP-like for weeks) seeking to paint politicians from parties you disagree with in a harsh light
Yes, I do distinguish between politicians and voters. I judge the former much more harshly than the latter.
One thing I would do is proper triage at A&E, anyone who turns up with a self-limiting condition or something that can wait a few days should be told to piss off, or charged a private consulting fee.
True story.
Broke my leg on holiday. Went to hospital. Advised urgent surgery needed and given the option of having it done there. Called insurance company who agreed to immediate repatriation so surgery can be done in UK. Took 2x commercial flights to get back to Gatwick. Taxi straight to St Georges Hospital in Tooting. Had to wait in a queue, explained situation to the nurse on Triage and told that I should go away and see my GP and get a referral to hospital.
I had to literally force my way in to the hospital and hang around like a bad smell for eight plus hours before finally I was seen by a doctor and then admitted to the hospital so the operation could take place.
A friend of mine came off his motorcycle on the Nürburgring many years ago and the German doctors advised him to have surgery on his thumb which he'd injured. He said he's sort it out back home and, of course, our doctors said "nah, it'll heal on it's own." It's never properly healed.
Thats fee for service for you.
My brother had an ultrasound in Germany that found gallstones, and he was recommended for cholecystectomy. He came back to Britain for a second opinion. They recommended leaving them alone. 20 years on and they have never bothered him.
The PM, the Chancellor, the Home Secretary and other prominent Tory Remainers spent six years helping to create the environment in which Leave lies about hordes of Turks coming over to live here seemed credible. If you hear your country's leaders continually talk about immigration as a problem, the EU as the enemy and so on, you can't be blamed for believing them. Most voters listen only sporadically to political debate. David Cameron and George Osborne suddenly becoming champions of an institution they had previously derided must have seemed extraordinary and very dishonest to many, many people. The leaders of the Leave campaign knew they were lying (just as the leaders of Remain did, too), but you can't blame voters for believing them.
Of course in your strange world the mere voter is no where near bright enough to actually make up their own minds about such issues and can only possibly have reached their decisions because they were lied to by their betters.
It is no wonder you and your kind lost. The scorn and distaste you display every day for the average member of the public is quite nauseating.
No, Richard - I have scorn for people who lie to the electorate knowing most people's lives do not revolve around politics. I do not consider people who lie to be better than anyone. Presumably, you must think most people believe man made global warming is real and is a significant danger because they have looked at all the evidence and believe that to be the case. If not, if you believe they have been duped, you are a hypocrite.
Seeking to paint me as part of a kind, an other, an enemy, merely because I do not hold the views you do is quite nauseating. And rather hysterical. Go and have a lie down.
Wow, this is especially hilarious given your frequent posts (including that facile line chart you insisted on reposting ScottP-like for weeks) seeking to paint politicians from parties you disagree with in a harsh light
Yes, I do distinguish between politicians and voters. I judge the former much more harshly than the latter.
And PB posters you disagree with, it seems...
Some, yes. Others, no. Having been called all the names under the sun on here and been accused of every kind of treachery, I have concluded this is no place for snowflakes.
Looking at old threads is a hoot. If this Mail on Sunday poll was correct at the time, then it means that during the campaign, Leave won ALL of the 19% of Don't Knows!
The PM, the Chancellor, the Home Secretary and other prominent Tory Remainers spent six years helping to create the environment in which Leave lies about hordes of Turks coming over to live here seemed credible. If you hear your country's leaders continually talk about immigration as a problem, the EU as the enemy and so on, you can't be blamed for believing them. Most voters listen only sporadically to political debate. David Cameron and George Osborne suddenly becoming champions of an institution they had previously derided must have seemed extraordinary and very dishonest to many, many people. The leaders of the Leave campaign knew they were lying (just as the leaders of Remain did, too), but you can't blame voters for believing them.
Of course in your strange world the mere voter is no where near bright enough to actually make up their own minds about such issues and can only possibly have reached their decisions because they were lied to by their betters.
It is no wonder you and your kind lost. The scorn and distaste you display every day for the average member of the public is quite nauseating.
No, Richard - I have scorn for people who lie to the electorate knowing most people's lives do not revolve around politics. I do not consider people who lie to be better than anyone. Presumably, you must think most people believe man made global warming is real and is a significant danger because they have looked at all the evidence and believe that to be the case. If not, if you believe they have been duped, you are a hypocrite.
Seeking to paint me as part of a kind, an other, an enemy, merely because I do not hold the views you do is quite nauseating. And rather hysterical. Go and have a lie down.
Wow, this is especially hilarious given your frequent posts (including that facile line chart you insisted on reposting ScottP-like for weeks) seeking to paint politicians from parties you disagree with in a harsh light
Yes, I do distinguish between politicians and voters. I judge the former much more harshly than the latter.
And PB posters you disagree with, it seems...
Some, yes. Others, no. Having been called all the names under the sun on here and been accused of every kind of treachery, I have concluded this is no place for snowflakes.
One thing I would do is proper triage at A&E, anyone who turns up with a self-limiting condition or something that can wait a few days should be told to piss off, or charged a private consulting fee.
True story.
Broke my leg on holiday. Went to hospital. Advised urgent surgery needed and given the option of having it done there. Called insurance company who agreed to immediate repatriation so surgery can be done in UK. Took 2x commercial flights to get back to Gatwick. Taxi straight to St Georges Hospital in Tooting. Had to wait in a queue, explained situation to the nurse on Triage and told that I should go away and see my GP and get a referral to hospital.
I had to literally force my way in to the hospital and hang around like a bad smell for eight plus hours before finally I was seen by a doctor and then admitted to the hospital so the operation could take place.
A friend of mine came off his motorcycle on the Nürburgring many years ago and the German doctors advised him to have surgery on his thumb which he'd injured. He said he's sort it out back home and, of course, our doctors said "nah, it'll heal on it's own." It's never properly healed.
Thats fee for service for you.
My brother had an ultrasound in Germany that found gallstones, and he was recommended for cholecystectomy. He came back to Britain for a second opinion. They recommended leaving them alone. 20 years on and they have never bothered him.
Yes, you don't want doctors encouraging procedures simply to earn some money. In my friend's case I think he probably should have had it done in Germany, but the easy thing to do is to come home and sort it out later.
Given there are no other numbers it is a moot point , it matters not a jot , once you take of all the punitive repayments , paying for Trident , paying for London infraastructure the numbers are garbage. In an independent Scotland they would remain garbage and be of no consequence. Every other small country in the world can be independent and run deficits etc , why would it be a concern for Scotland.
Malcolm here explains clearly why Ruth has been successful. The middle class scots are not convinced that the SNP are trustworthy to run the economy on their own.
Politics in Scotland which for many years has been a mess has had an outbreak on sense recently. Many of the SNPs questions of TM annoy the English but are mostly fair questions. Ruth has been notable in not opposing the SNP asking them.
Labour since it lost its MPs has become even less relevant to Scottish issues. Corbyn may bang on about the NHS but only from an English perspective. The Scottish NHS is run by Holyrood and Corbyn is not standing for a seat here as far as I know.
Ruth will not stand to be an MP as she is leader of the Tories in Scotland. When she hands over that role then she may stand and will probably be elected. She is not a list MSP but won Edinburgh Central on her own. Maybe Edinburgh West would be her best bet.
She won Central due to the incumbent stepping down and the Greens putting up vanity candidate.
There is no Central constituency equivalent for Westminster - the Leith part of North and Leith would swamp her out if she stood there, as would Edinburgh East.
I do wonder if it is the Tories polling well in Scotland, or just Ruth.
One thing I would do is proper triage at A&E, anyone who turns up with a self-limiting condition or something that can wait a few days should be told to piss off, or charged a private consulting fee.
True story.
Broke my leg on holiday. Went to hospital. Advised urgent surgery needed and given the option of having it done there. Called insurance company who agreed to immediate repatriation so surgery can be done in UK. Took 2x commercial flights to get back to Gatwick. Taxi straight to St Georges Hospital in Tooting. Had to wait in a queue, explained situation to the nurse on Triage and told that I should go away and see my GP and get a referral to hospital.
I had to literally force my way in to the hospital and hang around like a bad smell for eight plus hours before finally I was seen by a doctor and then admitted to the hospital so the operation could take place.
A friend of mine came off his motorcycle on the Nürburgring many years ago and the German doctors advised him to have surgery on his thumb which he'd injured. He said he's sort it out back home and, of course, our doctors said "nah, it'll heal on it's own." It's never properly healed.
Thats fee for service for you.
My brother had an ultrasound in Germany that found gallstones, and he was recommended for cholecystectomy. He came back to Britain for a second opinion. They recommended leaving them alone. 20 years on and they have never bothered him.
Yes, you don't want doctors encouraging procedures simply to earn some money. In my friend's case I think he probably should have had it done in Germany, but the easy thing to do is to come home and sort it out later.
Railways, maybe allow franchises to run track, train and service - but most importantly put the risk of failure on the operator's shareholders not the government.
.
The whole thing is not fit for purpose, the problem as always is how to change what's there already into something serviceable. The fare structure is completely undecipherable, needs to be thrown in the bin and done again from scratch with simple bands that mean my mum can't be charged double by going to the wrong kiosk at the station and I can't save £100 by buying ten different tickets for the same journey.
The main lines and major commuter routes really don't need subsidies, maybe in exchange we can strangle some of the more militant unions.
TSE is many things but he isn't poor. Charge people like him whatever the market will bear for his intercity first class peak time season ticket.
I'm a cynic about unregulated fares. I suspect this business of simplifying ticket prices will simply end split ticketing and make everyone pay the highest rate. It's a bit like Martin Lewis arguing against the simplifying of the energy markets - it just makes the savvy pay more.
As for regulated commuting fares, it would be interesting to see what the TOCs would do if they could charge what they want. I pay £3,100 a year for my (standard class) annual season ticket from Woking to Waterloo. I reckon they could charge £5,000 and it wouldn't make a huge difference to ridership. For me, however, it would result in me looking for a job outside of London given that the £3,100 I pay is about 12% of my take home pay.
Buying a train ticket shouldn't need half a day of research to avoid being ripped off, which is the current situation for most people. That split ticketing exists just shows that there's no joined up thinking on how fares are set, such that a small minority get the best fares that should be universal.
The regulated fares I'm not too sure where I stand, although I've stood many times from as far away as Basingstoke to Waterloo in the morning. Paying so much and not getting a seat really grates, but I guess from Woking you'll be well used to that? When I last went from Salisbury the day return was around £50, that was a decade ago. God knows how much it is now. With modern technology it should be possible to allow flexible payment plans for annual tickets which would help with the finances a little, do they do that yet?
Given there are no other numbers it is a moot point , it matters not a jot , once you take of all the punitive repayments , paying for Trident , paying for London infraastructure the numbers are garbage. In an independent Scotland they would remain garbage and be of no consequence. Every other small country in the world can be independent and run deficits etc , why would it be a concern for Scotland.
Malcolm here explains clearly why Ruth has been successful. The middle class scots are not convinced that the SNP are trustworthy to run the economy on their own.
Politics in Scotland which for many years has been a mess has had an outbreak on sense recently. Many of the SNPs questions of TM annoy the English but are mostly fair questions. Ruth has been notable in not opposing the SNP asking them.
Labour since it lost its MPs has become even less relevant to Scottish issues. Corbyn may bang on about the NHS but only from an English perspective. The Scottish NHS is run by Holyrood and Corbyn is not standing for a seat here as far as I know.
Ruth will not stand to be an MP as she is leader of the Tories in Scotland. When she hands over that role then she may stand and will probably be elected. She is not a list MSP but won Edinburgh Central on her own. Maybe Edinburgh West would be her best bet.
She won Central due to the incumbent stepping down and the Greens putting up vanity candidate.
There is no Central constituency equivalent for Westminster - the Leith part of North and Leith would swamp her out if she stood there, as would Edinburgh East.
I do wonder if it is the Tories polling well in Scotland, or just Ruth.
Are there any other popular Scottish Tories?
'Cos you got Gove Gove Gove on your side 'Cos you got Gove Gove Gove on your side 'Cos you got Gove Gove Gove on your side 'Cos you got Gove Gove Gove on your side
Given there are no other numbers it is a moot point , it matters not a jot , once you take of all the punitive repayments , paying for Trident , paying for London infraastructure the numbers are garbage. In an independent Scotland they would remain garbage and be of no consequence. Every other small country in the world can be independent and run deficits etc , why would it be a concern for Scotland.
Malcolm here explains clearly why Ruth has been successful. The middle class scots are not convinced that the SNP are trustworthy to run the economy on their own.
Politics in Scotland which for many years has been a mess has had an outbreak on sense recently. Many of the SNPs questions of TM annoy the English but are mostly fair questions. Ruth has been notable in not opposing the SNP asking them.
Labour since it lost its MPs has become even less relevant to Scottish issues. Corbyn may bang on about the NHS but only from an English perspective. The Scottish NHS is run by Holyrood and Corbyn is not standing for a seat here as far as I know.
Ruth will not stand to be an MP as she is leader of the Tories in Scotland. When she hands over that role then she may stand and will probably be elected. She is not a list MSP but won Edinburgh Central on her own. Maybe Edinburgh West would be her best bet.
She won Central due to the incumbent stepping down and the Greens putting up vanity candidate.
There is no Central constituency equivalent for Westminster - the Leith part of North and Leith would swamp her out if she stood there, as would Edinburgh East.
I do wonder if it is the Tories polling well in Scotland, or just Ruth.
Are there any other popular Scottish Tories?
It's Ruth. She is a skilled media operative.
Conservative election literature asked for people's list vote to be for Ruth Davidson - not the conservatives. National leaflets mentioned Ruth double digit number of times and Conservatives twice (that's including the legally obligated printers note).
Buying a train ticket shouldn't need half a day of research to avoid being ripped off, which is the current situation for most people. That split ticketing exists just shows that there's no joined up thinking on how fares are set, such that a small minority get the best fares that should be universal.
The regulated fares I'm not too sure where I stand, although I've stood many times from as far away as Basingstoke to Waterloo in the morning. Paying so much and not getting a seat really grates, but I guess from Woking you'll be well used to that? When I last went from Salisbury the day return was around £50, that was a decade ago. God knows how much it is now. With modern technology it should be possible to allow flexible payment plans for annual tickets which would help with the finances a little, do they do that yet?
I don't get a seat in the morning but generally do in the evening (I'm usually on the 16:30 which is nice). To be honest, it doesn't bother me much as we get such a good service from Woking. If I wanted to I could get a loan from work and have it deducted from my pay but I live with my parents so it's not an issue for me. What will be interesting is to see if demands for part-time season tickets gather momentum. If you work three or more days a week, it's worth getting an annual ticket. But there is no benefit to be had from working at home one day a week.
Conservative election literature asked for people's list vote to be for Ruth Davidson - not the conservatives. National leaflets mentioned Ruth double digit number of times and Conservatives twice (that's including the legally obligated printers note).
She stopped short of flying round the country in a helicopter with her face plastered on the side...
The rather sorry figure that is Francois Hollande berating the Eastern Europeans:
"Europe isn't a cash-box, not a self-service restaurant, a Europe where you come and take what you need, where you take your structural funds or get access to the internal market and then show no solidarity at all in return," he told reporters.
Given there are no other numbers it is a moot point , it matters not a jot , once you take of all the punitive repayments , paying for Trident , paying for London infraastructure the numbers are garbage. In an independent Scotland they would remain garbage and be of no consequence. Every other small country in the world can be independent and run deficits etc , why would it be a concern for Scotland.
Malcolm here explains clearly why Ruth has been successful. The middle class scots are not convinced that the SNP are trustworthy to run the economy on their own.
Politics in Scotland which for many years has been a mess has had an outbreak on sense recently. Many of the SNPs questions of TM annoy the English but are mostly fair questions. Ruth has been notable in not opposing the SNP asking them.
Labour since it lost its MPs has become even less relevant to Scottish issues. Corbyn may bang on about the NHS but only from an English perspective. The Scottish NHS is run by Holyrood and Corbyn is not standing for a seat here as far as I know.
Ruth will not stand to be an MP as she is leader of the Tories in Scotland. When she hands over that role then she may stand and will probably be elected. She is not a list MSP but won Edinburgh Central on her own. Maybe Edinburgh West would be her best bet.
She won Central due to the incumbent stepping down and the Greens putting up vanity candidate.
There is no Central constituency equivalent for Westminster - the Leith part of North and Leith would swamp her out if she stood there, as would Edinburgh East.
I do wonder if it is the Tories polling well in Scotland, or just Ruth.
Are there any other popular Scottish Tories?
It's Ruth. She is a skilled media operative.
Conservative election literature asked for people's list vote to be for Ruth Davidson - not the conservatives. National leaflets mentioned Ruth double digit number of times and Conservatives twice (that's including the legally obligated printers note).
That is my impression too. Heck, if she on the ballot South of the border then I would consider it. She represents a strand of One Nation, centrist tolerant politics that is becoming extinct here.
Buying a train ticket shouldn't need half a day of research to avoid being ripped off, which is the current situation for most people. That split ticketing exists just shows that there's no joined up thinking on how fares are set, such that a small minority get the best fares that should be universal.
The regulated fares I'm not too sure where I stand, although I've stood many times from as far away as Basingstoke to Waterloo in the morning. Paying so much and not getting a seat really grates, but I guess from Woking you'll be well used to that? When I last went from Salisbury the day return was around £50, that was a decade ago. God knows how much it is now. With modern technology it should be possible to allow flexible payment plans for annual tickets which would help with the finances a little, do they do that yet?
I don't get a seat in the morning but generally do in the evening (I'm usually on the 16:30 which is nice). To be honest, it doesn't bother me much as we get such a good service from Woking. If I wanted to I could get a loan from work and have it deducted from my pay but I live with my parents so it's not an issue for me. What will be interesting is to see if demands for part-time season tickets gather momentum. If you work three or more days a week, it's worth getting an annual ticket. But there is no benefit to be had from working at home one day a week.
That's a really good point about flexible season tickets, the availability of something like a 4 day a week season ticket might encourage companies to allow homeworking for commuters. Modern IT allows you to have an office 'desk phone' and computer at home, that work identically as if they were in the office.
Service from Woking is indeed excellent, something like 20 trains an hour in the morning peak I believe. Miss one or find it overcrowded, and the next one is right behind it or on the opposite platform.
I've stood from Coventry to London a couple of times, though the journey time is only 59 minutes.
Then there were the two journeys from Brum to Bristol and back where I stood all the way, 90 minutes each way, but that was so I could look out the window (albeit the door window )
Looking at old threads is a hoot. If this Mail on Sunday poll was correct at the time, then it means that during the campaign, Leave won ALL of the 19% of Don't Knows!
His complaint about Macron... that he opened libraries on Sundays, forcing librarians to work at the weekend. This may, or may not, be a winning strategy.
Malcolm here explains clearly why Ruth has been successful. The middle class scots are not convinced that the SNP are trustworthy to run the economy on their own.
Politics in Scotland which for many years has been a mess has had an outbreak on sense recently. Many of the SNPs questions of TM annoy the English but are mostly fair questions. Ruth has been notable in not opposing the SNP asking them.
Labour since it lost its MPs has become even less relevant to Scottish issues. Corbyn may bang on about the NHS but only from an English perspective. The Scottish NHS is run by Holyrood and Corbyn is not standing for a seat here as far as I know.
Ruth will not stand to be an MP as she is leader of the Tories in Scotland. When she hands over that role then she may stand and will probably be elected. She is not a list MSP but won Edinburgh Central on her own. Maybe Edinburgh West would be her best bet.
She won Central due to the incumbent stepping down and the Greens putting up vanity candidate.
There is no Central constituency equivalent for Westminster - the Leith part of North and Leith would swamp her out if she stood there, as would Edinburgh East.
I do wonder if it is the Tories polling well in Scotland, or just Ruth.
Are there any other popular Scottish Tories?
It's Ruth. She is a skilled media operative.
Conservative election literature asked for people's list vote to be for Ruth Davidson - not the conservatives. National leaflets mentioned Ruth double digit number of times and Conservatives twice (that's including the legally obligated printers note).
That is my impression too. Heck, if she on the ballot South of the border then I would consider it. She represents a strand of One Nation, centrist tolerant politics that is becoming extinct here.
The tories are going for the same strategy to get Andy Street elected as the west midlands mayor. Their election literature goes hard on the John lewis connection and barely even mentions that he's the conservative candidate.
Basically the conservative brand is toxic outside of the home counties, but people will (they hope) elect a decent candidate who happens to be a conservative.
That's not the sign of a party with confidence in itself.
Given there are no other numbers it is a moot point , it matters not a jot , once you take of all the punitive repayments , paying for Trident , paying for London infraastructure the numbers are garbage. In an independent Scotland they would remain garbage and be of no consequence. Every other small country in the world can be independent and run deficits etc , why would it be a concern for Scotland.
Malcolm here explains clearly why Ruth has been successful. The middle class scots are not convinced that the SNP are trustworthy to run the economy on their own.
Politics in Scotland which for many years has been a mess has had an outbreak on sense recently. Many of the SNPs questions of TM annoy the English but are mostly fair questions. Ruth has been notable in not opposing the SNP asking them.
Labour since it lost its MPs has become even less relevant to Scottish issues. Corbyn may bang on about the NHS but only from an English perspective. The Scottish NHS is run by Holyrood and Corbyn is not standing for a seat here as far as I know.
Ruth will not stand to be an MP as she is leader of the Tories in Scotland. When she hands over that role then she may stand and will probably be elected. She is not a list MSP but won Edinburgh Central on her own. Maybe Edinburgh West would be her best bet.
She won Central due to the incumbent stepping down and the Greens putting up vanity candidate.
There is no Central constituency equivalent for Westminster - the Leith part of North and Leith would swamp her out if she stood there, as would Edinburgh East.
Tory leaders in Scotland in the past tended to be Upper Class with 18th Century polciies. Ruthie is down to earth, charismatic and liberal leftie, so liked.
Malcolm here explains clearly why Ruth has been successful. The middle class scots are not convinced that the SNP are trustworthy to run the economy on their own.
Politics in Scotland which for many years has been a mess has had an outbreak on sense recently. Many of the SNPs questions of TM annoy the English but are mostly fair questions. Ruth has been notable in not opposing the SNP asking them.
Labour since it lost its MPs has become even less relevant to Scottish issues. Corbyn may bang on about the NHS but only from an English perspective. The Scottish NHS is run by Holyrood and Corbyn is not standing for a seat here as far as I know.
Ruth will not stand to be an MP as she is leader of the Tories in Scotland. When she hands over that role then she may stand and will probably be elected. She is not a list MSP but won Edinburgh Central on her own. Maybe Edinburgh West would be her best bet.
She won Central due to the incumbent stepping down and the Greens putting up vanity candidate.
There is no Central constituency equivalent for Westminster - the Leith part of North and Leith would swamp her out if she stood there, as would Edinburgh East.
I do wonder if it is the Tories polling well in Scotland, or just Ruth.
Are there any other popular Scottish Tories?
It's Ruth. She is a skilled media operative.
Conservative election literature asked for people's list vote to be for Ruth Davidson - not the conservatives. National leaflets mentioned Ruth double digit number of times and Conservatives twice (that's including the legally obligated printers note).
That is my impression too. Heck, if she on the ballot South of the border then I would consider it. She represents a strand of One Nation, centrist tolerant politics that is becoming extinct here.
The tories are going for the same strategy to get Andy Street elected as the west midlands mayor. Their election literature goes hard on the John lewis connection and barely even mentions that he's the conservative candidate.
Basically the conservative brand is toxic outside of the home counties, but people will (they hope) elect a decent candidate who happens to be a conservative.
That's not the sign of a party with confidence in itself.
Absolute rot re the brand. Look at the polling. Look at the last election. Tories won urban and rural seats across and length and breadth of England and Wales.
She won Central due to the incumbent stepping down and the Greens putting up vanity candidate.
There is no Central constituency equivalent for Westminster - the Leith part of North and Leith would swamp her out if she stood there, as would Edinburgh East.
That's a mighty sense of entitlement for the SNP to claim other parties standing against the SNP are "vanity candidates" and their only role is to ensure the SNP candidate wins. Did Ruth Davidson complain about Labour and Lib Dem "vanity candidates"?
One thing I would do is proper triage at A&E, anyone who turns up with a self-limiting condition or something that can wait a few days should be told to piss off, or charged a private consulting fee.
True story.
Broke my leg on holiday. Went to hospital. Advised urgent surgery needed and given the option of having it done there. Called insurance company who agreed to immediate repatriation so surgery can be done in UK. Took 2x commercial flights to get back to Gatwick. Taxi straight to St Georges Hospital in Tooting. Had to wait in a queue, explained situation to the nurse on Triage and told that I should go away and see my GP and get a referral to hospital.
I had to literally force my way in to the hospital and hang around like a bad smell for eight plus hours before finally I was seen by a doctor and then admitted to the hospital so the operation could take place.
A friend of mine came off his motorcycle on the Nürburgring many years ago and the German doctors advised him to have surgery on his thumb which he'd injured. He said he's sort it out back home and, of course, our doctors said "nah, it'll heal on it's own." It's never properly healed.
I broke my thumb in 8 places and St Georges, Tooting said unfixable. I went private and it was only the exact same bloody doctor. He then said, oooh, bad break. I will operate tonight after 12 hours without food. Fixed it, although a bit wonky with screws and plates etc, but what a bastard, and what a system
One thing I would do is proper triage at A&E, anyone who turns up with a self-limiting condition or something that can wait a few days should be told to piss off, or charged a private consulting fee.
True story.
Broke my leg on holiday. Went to hospital. Advised urgent surgery needed and given the option of having it done there. Called insurance company who agreed to immediate repatriation so surgery can be done in UK. Took 2x commercial flights to get back to Gatwick. Taxi straight to St Georges Hospital in Tooting. Had to wait in a queue, explained situation to the nurse on Triage and told that I should go away and see my GP and get a referral to hospital.
I had to literally force my way in to the hospital and hang around like a bad smell for eight plus hours before finally I was seen by a doctor and then admitted to the hospital so the operation could take place.
It sounds entirely credible to me.
The system is set up to meet targets, not provide correct care.
This worries me more. I have been saying for years that Mid Staffs was not unique:
I must say I'm on my second cancer and generally speaking everything's been fine. Only real 'down' was septacemia after prostate biopsy, which happens occasionally and is no-ones 'fault'. Or so I've read. First cancer was bowel, about 6 years ago.
One thing I would do is proper triage at A&E, anyone who turns up with a self-limiting condition or something that can wait a few days should be told to piss off, or charged a private consulting fee.
True story.
Broke my leg on holiday. Went to hospital. Advised urgent surgery needed and given the option of having it done there. Called insurance company who agreed to immediate repatriation so surgery can be done in UK. Took 2x commercial flights to get back to Gatwick. Taxi straight to St Georges Hospital in Tooting. Had to wait in a queue, explained situation to the nurse on Triage and told that I should go away and see my GP and get a referral to hospital.
I had to literally force my way in to the hospital and hang around like a bad smell for eight plus hours before finally I was seen by a doctor and then admitted to the hospital so the operation could take place.
A friend of mine came off his motorcycle on the Nürburgring many years ago and the German doctors advised him to have surgery on his thumb which he'd injured. He said he's sort it out back home and, of course, our doctors said "nah, it'll heal on it's own." It's never properly healed.
I broke my thumb in 8 places and St Georges, Tooting said unfixable. I went private and it was only the exact same bloody doctor. He then said, oooh, bad break. I will operate tonight after 12 hours without food. Fixed it, although a bit wonky with screws and plates etc, but what a bastard, and what a system
Thought you were going to say they said "don't go to those 8 places"
She won Central due to the incumbent stepping down and the Greens putting up vanity candidate.
There is no Central constituency equivalent for Westminster - the Leith part of North and Leith would swamp her out if she stood there, as would Edinburgh East.
That's a mighty sense of entitlement for the SNP to claim other parties standing against the SNP are "vanity candidates" and their only role is to ensure the SNP candidate wins. Did Ruth Davidson complain about Labour and Lib Dem "vanity candidates"?
If the greens had stood nation wide in constituency seats there would have been no complaints. But they didn't, they put up a scant handful of constituency candidates here and there with no logic to where they were competing.
Alison Johnstone had no hope of gaining the seat and was going to get in on the list vote anyways.
you scared to name these hardcore SNPrs that prefer London Tory government to independence.
They know who they are! I think you might be the only person on here who genuinely wants Scottish independence
There are only me and TUD on here as far as I am aware and I don't think he supports the Tories.
Puir, wee Sammy's got a thistle up his bum 'cos I said I would vote against independence if it meant being dependent on support from his hero (after Enoch) Nigel Farage. He seems to have taken it very personally.
Not at all. I am genuinely puzzled. Nothing for me to take personally about it.
I am wondering who would have to have supported Leave for me to rather we had remained, or even voted Remain, but there isn't anyone. SWP? Corbyn? No, if it got us over the line I dont care
If Farage campaigned in Scotland and got non voters last time to vote for Independence, Scottish people voting to leave the UK, you would rather stay ruled by us than have those votes set you free, amazing.
So essentially you'd have been happy to campaign alongside Nick Griffin, EDL, Britain First and all the other scum to achieve Brexit?
It's entirely hypothetical since Farage & UKIP have precisely FA influence either way, but you'll just have to stop being amazed that some people don't want to attain things on the backs of racists and xenophobes.
My sense is that you're getting a teensy bit tepid on independence. And why shouldn't you? Scotland has substantial devolved powers, and an incredibly popular party dedicated to fighting its corner. It's ideal.
"US President Donald Trump has defended Vladimir Putin when questioned over allegations of murders carried out by the Russian state. In an interview with Fox News, he said: "There are a lot of killers. We've got a lot of killers. What do you think? Our country's so innocent?""
One thing I would do is proper triage at A&E, anyone who turns up with a self-limiting condition or something that can wait a few days should be told to piss off, or charged a private consulting fee.
True story.
Broke my leg on holiday. Went to hospital. Advised urgent surgery needed and given the option of having it done there. Called insurance company who agreed to immediate repatriation so surgery can be done in UK. Took 2x commercial flights to get back to Gatwick. Taxi straight to St Georges Hospital in Tooting. Had to wait in a queue, explained situation to the nurse on Triage and told that I should go away and see my GP and get a referral to hospital.
I had to literally force my way in to the hospital and hang around like a bad smell for eight plus hours before finally I was seen by a doctor and then admitted to the hospital so the operation could take place.
A friend of mine came off his motorcycle on the Nürburgring many years ago and the German doctors advised him to have surgery on his thumb which he'd injured. He said he's sort it out back home and, of course, our doctors said "nah, it'll heal on it's own." It's never properly healed.
I broke my thumb in 8 places and St Georges, Tooting said unfixable. I went private and it was only the exact same bloody doctor. He then said, oooh, bad break. I will operate tonight after 12 hours without food. Fixed it, although a bit wonky with screws and plates etc, but what a bastard, and what a system
Thought you were going to say they said "don't go to those 8 places"
My thought, too. Closely followed by no, that's nine, and what made St. Georges stand out ? The alternative is just too ridiculous - the thumb surely doesn't have eight places it can be broken in ?
"US President Donald Trump has defended Vladimir Putin when questioned over allegations of murders carried out by the Russian state. In an interview with Fox News, he said: "There are a lot of killers. We've got a lot of killers. What do you think? Our country's so innocent?""
"US President Donald Trump has defended Vladimir Putin when questioned over allegations of murders carried out by the Russian state. In an interview with Fox News, he said: "There are a lot of killers. We've got a lot of killers. What do you think? Our country's so innocent?""
"US President Donald Trump has defended Vladimir Putin when questioned over allegations of murders carried out by the Russian state. In an interview with Fox News, he said: "There are a lot of killers. We've got a lot of killers. What do you think? Our country's so innocent?""
She won Central due to the incumbent stepping down and the Greens putting up vanity candidate.
There is no Central constituency equivalent for Westminster - the Leith part of North and Leith would swamp her out if she stood there, as would Edinburgh East.
That's a mighty sense of entitlement for the SNP to claim other parties standing against the SNP are "vanity candidates" and their only role is to ensure the SNP candidate wins. Did Ruth Davidson complain about Labour and Lib Dem "vanity candidates"?
If the greens had stood nation wide in constituency seats there would have been no complaints. But they didn't, they put up a scant handful of constituency candidates here and there with no logic to where they were competing.
Alison Johnstone had no hope of gaining the seat and was going to get in on the list vote anyways.
It was a vanity candidacy.
I assume you write from the view of an SNP supporter. Why should the Greens, who are not the SNP, decide stand or not stand just to help the SNP, any more than Labour or the Lib Dems decided not to help the Tories out for their part? If I were a Green supporter, that arrogant and entitled attitude from the SNP would definitely make me more determined to vote for my own party.
The PM, the Chancellor, the Home Secretary and other prominent Tory Remainers spent six years helping to create the environment in which Leave lies about hordes of Turks coming over to live here seemed credible. If you hear your country's leaders continually talk about immigration as a problem, the EU as the enemy and so on, you can't be blamed for believing them. Most voters listen only sporadically to political debate. David Cameron and George Osborne suddenly becoming champions of an institution they had previously derided must have seemed extraordinary and very dishonest to many, many people. The leaders of the Leave campaign knew they were lying (just as the leaders of Remain did, too), but you can't blame voters for believing them.
Of course in your strange world the mere voter is no where near bright enough to actually make up their own minds about such issues and can only possibly have reached their decisions because they were lied to by their betters.
It is no wonder you and your kind lost. The scorn and distaste you display every day for the average member of the public is quite nauseating.
No, Richard - I have scorn for people who lie to the electorate knowing most people's lives do not revolve around politics. I do not consider people who lie to be better than anyone. Presumably, you must think most people believe man made global warming is real and is a significant danger because they have looked at all the evidence and believe that to be the case. If not, if you believe they have been duped, you are a hypocrite.
Seeking to paint me as part of a kind, an other, an enemy, merely because I do not hold the views you do is quite nauseating. And rather hysterical. Go and have a lie down.
If you think of the degree of burdensome European legislation/directives/regulations that has been gold plated in Westminster without even a whisper of 'Brussels', you must surely see that the opposite situation is true. Uk politicians could have whipped the public up against the EU a million times. They chose not to.
"US President Donald Trump has defended Vladimir Putin when questioned over allegations of murders carried out by the Russian state. In an interview with Fox News, he said: "There are a lot of killers. We've got a lot of killers. What do you think? Our country's so innocent?""
"US President Donald Trump has defended Vladimir Putin when questioned over allegations of murders carried out by the Russian state. In an interview with Fox News, he said: "There are a lot of killers. We've got a lot of killers. What do you think? Our country's so innocent?""
The PM, the Chancellor, the Home Secretary and other prominent Tory Remainers spent six years helping to create the environment in which Leave lies about hordes of Turks coming over to live here seemed credible. If you hear your country's leaders continually talk about immigration as a problem, the EU as the enemy and so on, you can't be blamed for believing them. Most voters listen only sporadically to political debate. David Cameron and George Osborne suddenly becoming champions of an institution they had previously derided must have seemed extraordinary and very dishonest to many, many people. The leaders of the Leave campaign knew they were lying (just as the leaders of Remain did, too), but you can't blame voters for believing them.
Of course in your strange world the mere voter is no where near bright enough to actually make up their own minds about such issues and can only possibly have reached their decisions because they were lied to by their betters.
It is no wonder you and your kind lost. The scorn and distaste you display every day for the average member of the public is quite nauseating.
No, Richard - I have scorn for people who lie to the electorate knowing most people's lives do not revolve around politics. I do not consider people who lie to be better than anyone. Presumably, you must think most people believe man made global warming is real and is a significant danger because they have looked at all the evidence and believe that to be the case. If not, if you believe they have been duped, you are a hypocrite.
Seeking to paint me as part of a kind, an other, an enemy, merely because I do not hold the views you do is quite nauseating. And rather hysterical. Go and have a lie down.
If you think of the degree of burdensome European legislation/directives/regulations that has been gold plated in Westminster without even a whisper of 'Brussels', you must surely see that the opposite situation is true. Uk politicians could have whipped the public up against the EU a million times. They chose not to.
Wait.
If the UK politicians are responsible for gold plating, why on earth would they blame the EU? That makes no logical sense.
"US President Donald Trump has defended Vladimir Putin when questioned over allegations of murders carried out by the Russian state. In an interview with Fox News, he said: "There are a lot of killers. We've got a lot of killers. What do you think? Our country's so innocent?""
"US President Donald Trump has defended Vladimir Putin when questioned over allegations of murders carried out by the Russian state. In an interview with Fox News, he said: "There are a lot of killers. We've got a lot of killers. What do you think? Our country's so innocent?""
"US President Donald Trump has defended Vladimir Putin when questioned over allegations of murders carried out by the Russian state. In an interview with Fox News, he said: "There are a lot of killers. We've got a lot of killers. What do you think? Our country's so innocent?""
Interesting interview in the Guardian with Ken Clarke. I picked up a couple of points: That Brexit will make us collectively poorer isn't acknowledged often enough. Something to bear in mind when people go on pompously about nationhood. That Theresa May, God help us, is the best hope we have for an orderly future, so we need to support her.
What is the mind meant to do when boggling becomes a pathetically inadequate response?
That one statement will do a huge amount to enhance the reputation of the USA among the people around the world who think its greatest crime is hypocrisy.
"US President Donald Trump has defended Vladimir Putin when questioned over allegations of murders carried out by the Russian state. In an interview with Fox News, he said: "There are a lot of killers. We've got a lot of killers. What do you think? Our country's so innocent?""
One thing I would do is proper triage at A&E, anyone who turns up with a self-limiting condition or something that can wait a few days should be told to piss off, or charged a private consulting fee.
True story.
Broke my leg on holiday. Went to hospital. Advised urgent surgery needed and given the option of having it done there. Called insurance company who agreed to immediate repatriation so surgery can be done in UK. Took 2x commercial flights to get back to Gatwick. Taxi straight to St Georges Hospital in Tooting. Had to wait in a queue, explained situation to the nurse on Triage and told that I should go away and see my GP and get a referral to hospital.
I had to literally force my way in to the hospital and hang around like a bad smell for eight plus hours before finally I was seen by a doctor and then admitted to the hospital so the operation could take place.
It sounds entirely credible to me.
The system is set up to meet targets, not provide correct care.
This worries me more. I have been saying for years that Mid Staffs was not unique:
I must say I'm on my second cancer and generally speaking everything's been fine. Only real 'down' was septacemia after prostate biopsy, which happens occasionally and is no-ones 'fault'. Or so I've read. First cancer was bowel, about 6 years ago.
Extremely glad you are still with us Mr Cole. I would much rather you were here slating me for everything I say than the possible alternative.
Interesting interview in the Guardian with Ken Clarke. I picked up a couple of points: That Brexit will make us collectively poorer isn't acknowledged often enough. Something to bear in mind when people go on pompously about nationhood. That Theresa May, God help us, is the best hope we have for an orderly future, so we need to support her.
If Brexit were cost free we wouldn't have needed a debate or a referendum.
"US President Donald Trump has defended Vladimir Putin when questioned over allegations of murders carried out by the Russian state. In an interview with Fox News, he said: "There are a lot of killers. We've got a lot of killers. What do you think? Our country's so innocent?""
Comments
Until tomorrow.
Hilariously, Brexit has united the Tory party like never before and divided the other GB wide parties quite royally. The incompeteance of the left makes it likely that even, worst case scenario, a party who preside over disorderly exit would still be the most electable.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2016/feb/19/eu-summit-all-night-negotiations-deal-cameron-live
Getting rail companies to be more responsible for their own failure and ensuring they lose their franchise more rapidly of they perform poorly would be another step in the right direction
It is no wonder you and your kind lost. The scorn and distaste you display every day for the average member of the public is quite nauseating.
The rest will follow in due course .......
So unless we completely deregulated the rail industry, there would be no railways outside of London. The only way you could make lines oop north profitable would be to charge a lot more for usage. So poor TSE would have to pay £10,000 a year to commute from Sheffield to Manchester.
Ingrown toenails for instance - good for a joke, excruciating to live with.
One thing I would do is proper triage at A&E, anyone who turns up with a self-limiting condition or something that can wait a few days should be told to piss off, or charged a private consulting fee.
Seeking to paint me as part of a kind, an other, an enemy, merely because I do not hold the views you do is quite nauseating. And rather hysterical. Go and have a lie down.
The bottom line is that people vote based on their own personal experiences and informed by a wider set of inputs from a wide variety of sources. But they tend to choose those sources based upon what gels with their own world experience. Everyone suffers from selective reinforcement of their views through their media choices. You think people are stupid and are led by the nose by politicians. It is clear from all your postings on here that you have nothing but disdain for people who make choices you don't agree with and you think they must somehow have been misled into taking that position. It is a stupid, arrogant and facile argument and one that just about sums you up.
The main lines and major commuter routes really don't need subsidies, maybe in exchange we can strangle some of the more militant unions.
TSE is many things but he isn't poor. Charge people like him whatever the market will bear for his intercity first class peak time season ticket.
Broke my leg on holiday. Went to hospital. Advised urgent surgery needed and given the option of having it done there. Called insurance company who agreed to immediate repatriation so surgery can be done in UK. Took 2x commercial flights to get back to Gatwick. Taxi straight to St Georges Hospital in Tooting. Had to wait in a queue, explained situation to the nurse on Triage and told that I should go away and see my GP and get a referral to hospital.
I had to literally force my way in to the hospital and hang around like a bad smell for eight plus hours before finally I was seen by a doctor and then admitted to the hospital so the operation could take place.
As for regulated commuting fares, it would be interesting to see what the TOCs would do if they could charge what they want. I pay £3,100 a year for my (standard class) annual season ticket from Woking to Waterloo. I reckon they could charge £5,000 and it wouldn't make a huge difference to ridership. For me, however, it would result in me looking for a job outside of London given that the £3,100 I pay is about 12% of my take home pay.
The whips are already working very hard behind the scenes, lining up retirements, knighthoods, cushy staff jobs and trying to nudge a few upstairs to the Red Benches - while at the same time making sure that everyone who wants to stand again can defend a notionally Conservative seat in their local area. Well organised big carrots.
If, after all those machinations over two years, a few MPs decide to throw the party under a bus by voting the new boundaries down, there's going to be a very big stick indeed used on them.
I do think people were lied to during the referendum campaign and by both sides. Turkey was not going to become a member state of the EU by 2020, the government was not going to trigger Article 50 on 24th June. As I said, I do not blame people for believing those lies. I am sorry if that upsets you.
If you don't get the AGW point, you are clearly not as smart as either you or I think you are.
http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-germany-politics-poll-idUKKBN15K0BD?il=0
There is no Central constituency equivalent for Westminster - the Leith part of North and Leith would swamp her out if she stood there, as would Edinburgh East.
The system is set up to meet targets, not provide correct care.
This worries me more. I have been saying for years that Mid Staffs was not unique:
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/deadly-serious-shocking-high-hospital-9758306.amp?client=ms-android-sonymobile
My brother had an ultrasound in Germany that found gallstones, and he was recommended for cholecystectomy. He came back to Britain for a second opinion. They recommended leaving them alone. 20 years on and they have never bothered him.
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2016/02/20/first-post-eu-deal-referendum-poll-has-remain-with-15-lead/
Are there any other popular Scottish Tories?
The regulated fares I'm not too sure where I stand, although I've stood many times from as far away as Basingstoke to Waterloo in the morning. Paying so much and not getting a seat really grates, but I guess from Woking you'll be well used to that? When I last went from Salisbury the day return was around £50, that was a decade ago. God knows how much it is now. With modern technology it should be possible to allow flexible payment plans for annual tickets which would help with the finances a little, do they do that yet?
Gove
Gove on your side
'Cos you got Gove
Gove
Gove on your side
'Cos you got Gove
Gove
Gove on your side
'Cos you got Gove
Gove
Gove on your side
Conservative election literature asked for people's list vote to be for Ruth Davidson - not the conservatives. National leaflets mentioned Ruth double digit number of times and Conservatives twice (that's including the legally obligated printers note).
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/156857834926/sam-harris-induces-cognitive-dissonance-in-ben
And video it refers to
https://youtu.be/vln9D81eO60
"Europe isn't a cash-box, not a self-service restaurant, a Europe where you come and take what you need, where you take your structural funds or get access to the internal market and then show no solidarity at all in return," he told reporters.
http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-eu-future-idUKKBN15I2WP?il=0
With Merkel seemingly in trouble, how relevant will any of these people be by Christmas?
Service from Woking is indeed excellent, something like 20 trains an hour in the morning peak I believe. Miss one or find it overcrowded, and the next one is right behind it or on the opposite platform.
Someone asked:
Could someone who has been paying attention offer a brief explanation of whats the difference between these three:
http://grassrootsout.co.uk
http://www.voteleavetakecontrol.org
http://leave.eu
I replied:
Barking
Howling
Moaning.
Sorry, I'm a bit depressed this morning.
At that point I was convinced that Cameron would win but I was already pretty unhappy about it.
Then there were the two journeys from Brum to Bristol and back where I stood all the way, 90 minutes each way, but that was so I could look out the window (albeit the door window
His complaint about Macron... that he opened libraries on Sundays, forcing librarians to work at the weekend. This may, or may not, be a winning strategy.
Basically the conservative brand is toxic outside of the home counties, but people will (they hope) elect a decent candidate who happens to be a conservative.
That's not the sign of a party with confidence in itself.
I think Pong is only part right.
Or so I've read.
First cancer was bowel, about 6 years ago.
Alison Johnstone had no hope of gaining the seat and was going to get in on the list vote anyways.
It was a vanity candidacy.
"US President Donald Trump has defended Vladimir Putin when questioned over allegations of murders carried out by the Russian state.
In an interview with Fox News, he said: "There are a lot of killers. We've got a lot of killers. What do you think? Our country's so innocent?""
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38872328
What is the mind meant to do when boggling becomes a pathetically inadequate response?
The alternative is just too ridiculous - the thumb surely doesn't have eight places it can be broken in ?
- Pro Putin / Pro Trump / Pro Brexit
- Trump is dangerous / Pro Brexit
- Trump is EVIL / Pro EU
The second group is by far the most intelligent, successful and attractive.
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/828342202174668800
If the UK politicians are responsible for gold plating, why on earth would they blame the EU? That makes no logical sense.
:-)
greatest show on earththe girly version of hand egg finals between Trumpian Patriots and Loser Failing Falcons?