Contrast Eds balls of steel with the cowering posh lads grovelling to the powerful in all areas of British life
(that's the subtext anyway)
I don't want politicians fighting with the press. Nor do I want them toadying to it. I want politicians who accept and understand that in a liberal democracy free speech is essential and that that will mean that the press will write things which they will not like.
What we have now are politicians who - either through appeasement or bullying/regulation - are seeking to control the press and what they say. Neither are good.
Labour became insanely authoritarian during its time in government. It shows no sign - under Milliband - of understanding why that was a bad thing, let alone changing. This, for me anyway, is one reason why I cannot bring myself to vote Labour. A more genuinely liberal Labour party might well get my vote. But we do not have - alas - such a Labour party.
As for John Major, what fun to read his speech. I particularly liked this phrase: "politicians should protect people not institutions". That should be tattoo'ed on the forehead of every actual and aspiring politician.
A post with so much sense I'd suspect I wrote it myself were it not concisely and precisely covering a variety of topics in a short amount of space.
Miliband is clearly going to take on the energy companies, the press and his own big donors while Cameron is in the pocket of all three, that's the message isn't it, good luck to him, the contrast with Cameron is stark if he pulls it off
Hard to carp about legitimate businesses when you are in the pocket of Unite...
Miliband is clearly going to take on the energy companies, the press and his own big donors while Cameron is in the pocket of all three, that's the message isn't it, good luck to him, the contrast with Cameron is stark if he pulls it off
There are certainly points in Ed M's favour - despite the Tory message of weakness prior to the end of the summer switch to 'dangerous', he had shown admirable boldness in some areas.
He has not yet succeeded in making me totally comfortable with the idea of a Labour government getting back in (although I do not particular worry about it), but then he doesn't need to convince the doubters like me to get back in so no worries for him.
Miliband is clearly going to take on the energy companies, the press and his own big donors while Cameron is in the pocket of all three, that's the message isn't it, good luck to him, the contrast with Cameron is stark if he pulls it off
Miliband is clearly going to take on the energy companies, the press and his own big donors while Cameron is in the pocket of all three, that's the message isn't it, good luck to him, the contrast with Cameron is stark if he pulls it off
I suppose that, having lost every single argument about everything, from the economy to welfare, and with wanting to keep as silent as possible about the abysmal record of the last government, on all counts from education to inequality and wage stagnation, yes, he will be reduced to blatant lies and smears. If voters are gullible enough to fall for the line that Cameron is 'in the pocket' of anyone, then God help us.
But as I've pointed out before, even if Miliband does manage to get into No 10 by dishonest class-based ad hominem attacks, then what? There must be people in the Labour Party (I suppose you might call them 'Blairites') who are smart enough to realise that this doesn't all come to an end on 8th May 2015. They must be absolutely tearing their hair out at Ed's hostages to fortune.
UNITE are calling for a new owner with a social conscience, i.e. one which will bow to demands made by UNITE and the Scottish news was reporting at lunchtime that John Swinney is casting around for someone to buy Grangemouth from INEOS.
Why don't UNITE take over the running of the plant.
Pay rises all round !
You may have missed this on the previous thread
"Given you've obviously researched this what % of the costs at Grangemouth are A.Labour costs. B.Final salary pension cost not funded by pension funds"
These are both major problems, hence the condition of closing the final salary pension scheme and the changes in conditions, but they are not the problem.
The problem is that the feed stock from the North sea is running out and the site needs to substantially improve it's harbour access to obtain more base material to work the site at anything like full capacity. There has to be an economic case for that capital investment and at the moment there simply isn't.
Without the new investment the site will die. It does not look good. A government that had Scotland's interests at heart would be moving heaven and earth to involve Westminster on this and try to find a way to subsidise the capital needs without falling foul of EU law. But I can't see that happening either.
LOL , David , you must be joking , Westminster would rather see it shut than help the SNP.
Miliband is clearly going to take on the energy companies, the press and his own big donors while Cameron is in the pocket of all three, that's the message isn't it, good luck to him, the contrast with Cameron is stark if he pulls it off
Hard to carp about legitimate businesses when you are in the pocket of Unite...
Even Dan Hodges has dropped that one, why do you think his pieces haven't been posted so much recently
No idea. Your total postings criticising Unite could be written on the back of a toy postage stamp.
Miliband is clearly going to take on the energy companies, the press and his own big donors while Cameron is in the pocket of all three, that's the message isn't it, good luck to him, the contrast with Cameron is stark if he pulls it off
IF Grangemouth closes, it will be interesting to see if either the SNP or Labour attempt to make political capital out of it in the Dunfermline bye-election
When MG Rover closed in the run up to the 2005 GE, Con & Labour treated it as a 'natural disaster' and neither side sought to apportion blame...
No chance that labour will not try to say it was the SNP that shut it, they are hate the SNP enough and are stupid enough
Miliband is clearly going to take on the energy companies, the press and his own big donors while Cameron is in the pocket of all three, that's the message isn't it, good luck to him, the contrast with Cameron is stark if he pulls it off
You'e missing the point. I have no issue with him taking on the energy companies or Unite. The latter is internal party politics and the former is what an opposition leader should do (though it might have been better if he'd done something about energy when he was the energy minister in government). However, good for him in showing that he understands people's concerns about energy prices.
But I do have a big issue with any politician seeking to control the press by whatever means, whether cuddling up to them or spitting at them. This is bad for democracy, bad for freedom of speech and thought, bad for us. It tells me something important about Milliband: that his instincts are worryingly illiberal and that he does not really value something which it took people in this country hundreds of years to fight for and which those in authority are always seeking to restrain and control.
Incidentally, and rather belatedly, welcome to Mr. U (another Max, who seem to be generally sound sorts). I do think the referendum will be closer than many think.
And still Ed Miliband continues to ignore the escalating dispute at Grangemouth, instead he has announced that he is going to rally the Labour troops and pick another fight with Fleet Street.
And still Ed Miliband continues to ignore the escalating dispute at Grangemouth, instead he has announced that he is going to rally the Labour troops and pick another fight with Fleet Street.
You can have a free press without the PM being on his knees in front of Dacre or Murdoch. Dacre overreached, Ed gave him a good slap, that's healthy in a democracy isn't it?
Is that all he is hoping to achieve though? Labour's record with illiberal tendancies in the past decade (not saying the Tories are pioneers of liberalism mind you) would make me cautious about that, though since he stands such a good chance of becoming PM, I must just hope my caution proves unfounded.
F1: I knew India was being (temporarily) ditched next year for an earlier 2015 slot, but it sounds like the circuit (which is rather shitty) might not come back at all: http://joesaward.wordpress.com/2013/10/22/f1-and-india/
India's bureaucratic ways have made getting parts out there harder than would otherwise be the case, and they apparently demand the teams pay income tax (a much reduced rate as it's 1/19 races, but still), which has just annoyed all the teams. The fans don't get much of a race either, as it's hard to pass on the circuit.
Korea also seems like to drop off the calendar sooner rather than later. With Russia set to join and New Jersey/Mexico possible (albeit unlikely) next year that will at least mean the calendar won't become even more overcrowded.
You can have a free press without the PM being on his knees in front of Dacre or Murdoch. blockquote>
Of course. But he didn't need to react to the Mail article; he could simply have ignored it on the "Publish and Be Damned" principle.
What is much more worrying is his statement - before he had even read the Leveson report - that he would implement it in full and his belief that the state i.e. politicians should regulate the press. I don't agree with this.
I don't agree with the way Blair and Brown sucked up to Murdoch or the way Cameron tried/tries to. I think politicians should simply accept that the press has a job/role to play in a democracy and keep them at a safe distance not become best buddies, knight them or try and silence them.
I also don't like the fact that Milliband seems to reserve his greatest energies for fighting the press rather than fighting for things which matter to voters - though his stance on energy is a change to that. It does sometimes seem that politicians are fighting their own battles rather than fighting to make the world better for us.
Major's speech on the forgotten poor/near-poor was rather eloquent on this point and it is something which has not been heard from our politicians for far too long.
I would just like to see Gordon Brown make more of an effort to turn up regularly in Westminster as a sitting MP. Twitter Tim Shipman (Mail) @ShippersUnbound 32s Cameron, Blair & Major have all addressed press gallery lunch in last 10 months. I wonder when Gordon Brown is going to man up & do the same
I would just like to see Gordon Brown make more of an effort to turn up regularly in Westminster as a sitting MP. Twitter Tim Shipman (Mail) @ShippersUnbound 32s Cameron, Blair & Major have all addressed press gallery lunch in last 10 months. I wonder when Gordon Brown is going to man up & do the same
Andrea noticed he was up and about visiting a hospice.
Could get very interesting if they are activist shareholders, as is their wont.
The link between activist shareholders and "city fat cats" is strained in the public conciousness, one suspects. Throw in the charity angle and it doesn't look like a golden apple for Labour.
Re Grangemouth,many will have never toured a site like this,the sheer scale of investment and technology is mindblowing,it is huge,I did plenty of business up there. By comparison,I have been round several nuclear power stations,and they are relatively boring. I actually bought an old world war 2 Shell oil refinery,most of which was demolished,but even what was left was impresive. Unite have sleepwalked into a disaster,and my betting is INEOS will close the refining side,and keep some of the more profitable sections.
Nice to see Gentleman John back in the news - one of the most vilified politicians of modern times at the hands of Blair, Campbell and their munchkins in the media. He's still a shrewd politician too I see. Miliband would love to twist Major's words at PMQs tomorrow, but Cameron can just approvingly quote the bit about Miliband being well-intentionedly bonkers. Job done.
You can have a free press without the PM being on his knees in front of Dacre or Murdoch. Dacre overreached, Ed gave him a good slap, that's healthy in a democracy isn't it?
Is that all he is hoping to achieve though? Labour's record with illiberal tendancies in the past decade (not saying the Tories are pioneers of liberalism mind you) would make me cautious about that, though since he stands such a good chance of becoming PM, I must just hope my caution proves unfounded.
The Government's proposals in response to Leveson (which little Ed supports) is most definitely not what Leveson recommended. It was a further compromise deal which was hastily cobbled together at the last minute with a quite bizarre focus on the new Royal charter aspect . I know the thinking behind that but the Royals simply do not put the fear of god into the press anymore so it was misplaced and also not particularly conducive to the charter being seen as fully independent and well away from the hands of the establishment as well as the press barons.
The carrot of the arbitration service, the arms length for a totally new PCC independent of the press barons and the code of conduct for Editors set by the press and approved by an independent figure are the main improvements on the old discredited PCC. But just like for Ireland, where the press barons are quite happy to operate under a Leveson style system, it will depend on the press getting on board for it. Desmond signed up to the Irish system after all and he despised the PCC here even though it was a complete joke.
They may not sign up to it. In which case the press will then be putting all their faith in the press barons not making any glaring f***ups for the foreseeable future. Not particularly wise given their track record to date, but it's absolutely their choice if that's what they want to do.
Comments
Mr. kle4, you're right to be outraged. If the media had anything about them they'd be (rightly) hammering the police over this, day after day.
An innocent man appears to have been fitted up, and the police have been caught out blatantly lying.
What happens when parties are in hock to VI.
He has not yet succeeded in making me totally comfortable with the idea of a Labour government getting back in (although I do not particular worry about it), but then he doesn't need to convince the doubters like me to get back in so no worries for him.
But as I've pointed out before, even if Miliband does manage to get into No 10 by dishonest class-based ad hominem attacks, then what? There must be people in the Labour Party (I suppose you might call them 'Blairites') who are smart enough to realise that this doesn't all come to an end on 8th May 2015. They must be absolutely tearing their hair out at Ed's hostages to fortune.
Qui bono ?
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-10-18/weil-on-finance-u-k-s-censorship-diktats.html
How will George explain this to his new best friends who are building our brand new nuclear power stations?
But I do have a big issue with any politician seeking to control the press by whatever means, whether cuddling up to them or spitting at them. This is bad for democracy, bad for freedom of speech and thought, bad for us. It tells me something important about Milliband: that his instincts are worryingly illiberal and that he does not really value something which it took people in this country hundreds of years to fight for and which those in authority are always seeking to restrain and control.
BBC - Grangemouth's economic significance
Ed goes for the latter.
http://joesaward.wordpress.com/2013/10/22/f1-and-india/
India's bureaucratic ways have made getting parts out there harder than would otherwise be the case, and they apparently demand the teams pay income tax (a much reduced rate as it's 1/19 races, but still), which has just annoyed all the teams. The fans don't get much of a race either, as it's hard to pass on the circuit.
Korea also seems like to drop off the calendar sooner rather than later. With Russia set to join and New Jersey/Mexico possible (albeit unlikely) next year that will at least mean the calendar won't become even more overcrowded.
The rest was mine. Can't edit or apparently quote properly!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-24624943
I see that Labour have already trotted out the usual nonsense; however, this particular hedge fund is rather special in a number of ways:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Children's_Investment_Fund_Foundation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Children's_Investment_Fund_Management
Could get very interesting if they are activist shareholders, as is their wont.
Twitter
Tim Shipman (Mail) @ShippersUnbound 32s
Cameron, Blair & Major have all addressed press gallery lunch in last 10 months. I wonder when Gordon Brown is going to man up & do the same
Cammo is trying to copy the Miliband freeze with minor changes.
This is the real `con`.
http://fifelabour.co.uk/?p=274
By comparison,I have been round several nuclear power stations,and they are relatively boring.
I actually bought an old world war 2 Shell oil refinery,most of which was demolished,but even what was left was impresive.
Unite have sleepwalked into a disaster,and my betting is INEOS will close the refining side,and keep some of the more profitable sections.
The carrot of the arbitration service, the arms length for a totally new PCC independent of the press barons and the code of conduct for Editors set by the press and approved by an independent figure are the main improvements on the old discredited PCC. But just like for Ireland, where the press barons are quite happy to operate under a Leveson style system, it will depend on the press getting on board for it. Desmond signed up to the Irish system after all and he despised the PCC here even though it was a complete joke.
They may not sign up to it. In which case the press will then be putting all their faith in the press barons not making any glaring f***ups for the foreseeable future. Not particularly wise given their track record to date, but it's absolutely their choice if that's what they want to do.