Skip to content
Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » David Davis continues to be the favourite to succeed TMay as C

SystemSystem Posts: 12,587
edited June 2017 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » David Davis continues to be the favourite to succeed TMay as CON leader

So TMay got her Queen’s Speech through the Commons with a majority of 14 thanks to the DUP and that probably reduces the immediate pressure on the PM.

Read the full story here


«13

Comments

  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    first like DD
  • alex.alex. Posts: 4,658
    Are there any Labour supporters prepared to tentatively foresee that they have created a bit of a problem for themselves with their pledge abolishing tuition fees (and potentially outstanding student debt)? Does anyone actually believe such a policy is sustainable in the long run, and if not how are the more sensible elements going to climb back from it?
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 14,233
    Third like the SNP.
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143
    FPT, Bobajob "As someone mentioned downthread, it is a geographical nonsense - it isn't even coterminous with the ancient region of Ulster. It was simply drawn up to create a Protestant safe space in the north. That religion is dwindling in adherents, so if the border had to be drawn today it would likely look pretty different."

    Not really. Northern Ireland includes six of the nine Ulster counties, so the border follows county boundaries. As I understand it, if only the Protestant-majority counties had been included the region was thought to be too small to be viable, and Ulster as a whole apparently had a Catholic-majority at the time. Thus six counties as the largest area with a Protestant-majority. This would still be the same today, just about.
  • murali_smurali_s Posts: 3,084
    Spreadsheet Phil is the only sane person on that list. Sad times for the Tory party and this country.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 14,233
    alex. said:

    Are there any Labour supporters prepared to tentatively foresee that they have created a bit of a problem for themselves with their pledge abolishing tuition fees (and potentially outstanding student debt)? Does anyone actually believe such a policy is sustainable in the long run, and if not how are the more sensible elements going to climb back from it?

    It's also one of those nightmare policy that gets hugely more expensive every year that passes...
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,625
    murali_s said:

    Spreadsheet Phil is the only sane person on that list. Sad times for the Tory party and this country.

    Not a fun of Davidson? :p
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,625
    Mortimer said:

    alex. said:

    Are there any Labour supporters prepared to tentatively foresee that they have created a bit of a problem for themselves with their pledge abolishing tuition fees (and potentially outstanding student debt)? Does anyone actually believe such a policy is sustainable in the long run, and if not how are the more sensible elements going to climb back from it?

    It's also one of those nightmare policy that gets hugely more expensive every year that passes...
    The cap should be lowered, maybe to £5k/year, and the interest scheme should revert to what it is for those on plan 1, which is basically at inflation (or base rate if inflation is negative). The rest can be picked up through general taxation. I think that would be a reasonable compromise.
  • nielhnielh Posts: 1,307
    alex. said:

    Are there any Labour supporters prepared to tentatively foresee that they have created a bit of a problem for themselves with their pledge abolishing tuition fees (and potentially outstanding student debt)? Does anyone actually believe such a policy is sustainable in the long run, and if not how are the more sensible elements going to climb back from it?

    It is no different to the triple lock, or the winter fuel allowance.
    You can't just benefit one section of society with free stuff. It needs to be distributed fairly, ie no tuition fees for university students. Free childcare for working famillies. Free adult education, etc etc.
    Everyone's a winner under Labour!
    Can they climb back from it? No way. They will probably extend the policy to forgive all student debt.
  • murali_smurali_s Posts: 3,084
    RobD said:

    murali_s said:

    Spreadsheet Phil is the only sane person on that list. Sad times for the Tory party and this country.

    Not a fun of Davidson? :p
    I would be if she actually split from the Tories. Instead she has to put with the Tory party allying itself with the DUP lunatics.

    As a progressive myself, this is all going to plan...

    You should finally throw the towel in and join in the light!
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    Mortimer said:

    alex. said:

    Are there any Labour supporters prepared to tentatively foresee that they have created a bit of a problem for themselves with their pledge abolishing tuition fees (and potentially outstanding student debt)? Does anyone actually believe such a policy is sustainable in the long run, and if not how are the more sensible elements going to climb back from it?

    It's also one of those nightmare policy that gets hugely more expensive every year that passes...
    Sweden charges no tuition fees and has a high participation rate.

    We could afford it if we were not so penny pinching as a nation.

  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,625
    murali_s said:

    RobD said:

    murali_s said:

    Spreadsheet Phil is the only sane person on that list. Sad times for the Tory party and this country.

    Not a fun of Davidson? :p
    I would be if she actually split from the Tories. Instead she has to put with the Tory party allying itself with the DUP lunatics.

    As a progressive myself, this is all going to plan...

    You should finally throw the towel in and join in the light!
    She's an out and proud Tory, and good for her :D
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,625
    nielh said:

    alex. said:

    Are there any Labour supporters prepared to tentatively foresee that they have created a bit of a problem for themselves with their pledge abolishing tuition fees (and potentially outstanding student debt)? Does anyone actually believe such a policy is sustainable in the long run, and if not how are the more sensible elements going to climb back from it?

    It is no different to the triple lock, or the winter fuel allowance.
    You can't just benefit one section of society with free stuff. It needs to be distributed fairly, ie no tuition fees for university students. Free childcare for working famillies. Free adult education, etc etc.
    Everyone's a winner under Labour!
    Can they climb back from it? No way. They will probably extend the policy to forgive all student debt.
    They were already talking about that during the campaign. What a monumental waste of money, especially as they were not proposing to reverse any of the benefits cuts.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,951
    https://twitter.com/PeterStefanovi2/status/880188222659334146
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,625
    edited June 2017
    bigjohnowls said:

    twitter.com/PeterStefanovi2/status/880188222659334146

    Embarrassing that you should post that. They cheered because the government's majority had been confirmed.
  • isamisam Posts: 42,240
    Mogstagram

    http://m.huffpost.com/uk/entry/uk_5952231ce4b02734df2d2012
  • murali_smurali_s Posts: 3,084
    edited June 2017
    "Young Conservative" is a term I find quite baffling. Any misguided fool brave enough to admit to being one?
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 85,909
    edited June 2017
    RobD said:

    bigjohnowls said:

    twitter.com/PeterStefanovi2/status/880188222659334146

    Embarrassing that you should post that. They cheered because the government's majority had been confirmed.
    Big John has become the Plato of the left. Fake News Tweets left, right and centre.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 14,233
    bigjohnowls said:

    https://twitter.com/PeterStefanovi2/status/880188222659334146

    BJO. Astroturfing here makes no sense. You're not going to change anyone's mind or shame anyone.

    As an aside, I keep seeing these sanctimonious 'Tories voted against nice fluffy things thus they must be NASTY NASTY NASTY'. Doesn't it insult the intelligence of the intended audience, and miss the point that to win an election they need to get Tory switchers...
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,625
    murali_s said:

    "Young Conservative" is a term I find quite baffling. Any misguided fool brave enough to admit to being one?

    Yes, how dare people have views different from my own.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 14,233
    murali_s said:

    "Young Conservative" is a term I find quite baffling. Any misguided fool brave enough to admit to being one?

    They changed the name ages ago. I was a member of Conservative Future back in the day.
  • murali_smurali_s Posts: 3,084
    RobD said:

    murali_s said:

    "Young Conservative" is a term I find quite baffling. Any misguided fool brave enough to admit to being one?

    Yes, how dare people have views different from my own.
    What's wong with you man! :)

    I need to come over and slap you with a wet fish! Do you want to be 30 going on 70?
  • murali_smurali_s Posts: 3,084
    Mortimer said:

    bigjohnowls said:

    https://twitter.com/PeterStefanovi2/status/880188222659334146

    BJO. Astroturfing here makes no sense. You're not going to change anyone's mind or shame anyone.

    As an aside, I keep seeing these sanctimonious 'Tories voted against nice fluffy things thus they must be NASTY NASTY NASTY'. Doesn't it insult the intelligence of the intended audience, and miss the point that to win an election they need to get Tory switchers...
    Tories are nasty! That's old news. Horrible mean people. Next...
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,625
    murali_s said:

    Mortimer said:

    bigjohnowls said:

    twitter.com/PeterStefanovi2/status/880188222659334146

    BJO. Astroturfing here makes no sense. You're not going to change anyone's mind or shame anyone.

    As an aside, I keep seeing these sanctimonious 'Tories voted against nice fluffy things thus they must be NASTY NASTY NASTY'. Doesn't it insult the intelligence of the intended audience, and miss the point that to win an election they need to get Tory switchers...
    Tories are nasty! That's old news. Horrible mean people. Next...
    yawn.

    A step up from calling them ugly mother-f****s though.
  • nielhnielh Posts: 1,307
    RobD said:

    nielh said:

    alex. said:

    Are there any Labour supporters prepared to tentatively foresee that they have created a bit of a problem for themselves with their pledge abolishing tuition fees (and potentially outstanding student debt)? Does anyone actually believe such a policy is sustainable in the long run, and if not how are the more sensible elements going to climb back from it?

    It is no different to the triple lock, or the winter fuel allowance.
    You can't just benefit one section of society with free stuff. It needs to be distributed fairly, ie no tuition fees for university students. Free childcare for working famillies. Free adult education, etc etc.
    Everyone's a winner under Labour!
    Can they climb back from it? No way. They will probably extend the policy to forgive all student debt.
    They were already talking about that during the campaign. What a monumental waste of money, especially as they were not proposing to reverse any of the benefits cuts.
    Yeah but it surely got them over the line in places like Reading and Canterbury. They are essentially playing the tories at their own game.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,625
    nielh said:

    RobD said:

    nielh said:

    alex. said:

    Are there any Labour supporters prepared to tentatively foresee that they have created a bit of a problem for themselves with their pledge abolishing tuition fees (and potentially outstanding student debt)? Does anyone actually believe such a policy is sustainable in the long run, and if not how are the more sensible elements going to climb back from it?

    It is no different to the triple lock, or the winter fuel allowance.
    You can't just benefit one section of society with free stuff. It needs to be distributed fairly, ie no tuition fees for university students. Free childcare for working famillies. Free adult education, etc etc.
    Everyone's a winner under Labour!
    Can they climb back from it? No way. They will probably extend the policy to forgive all student debt.
    They were already talking about that during the campaign. What a monumental waste of money, especially as they were not proposing to reverse any of the benefits cuts.
    Yeah but it surely got them over the line in places like Reading and Canterbury. They are essentially playing the tories at their own game.
    Makes a mockery of the notion that the Labour party are the party that care about the worst off in society.
  • murali_smurali_s Posts: 3,084
    RobD said:

    murali_s said:

    Mortimer said:

    bigjohnowls said:

    twitter.com/PeterStefanovi2/status/880188222659334146

    BJO. Astroturfing here makes no sense. You're not going to change anyone's mind or shame anyone.

    As an aside, I keep seeing these sanctimonious 'Tories voted against nice fluffy things thus they must be NASTY NASTY NASTY'. Doesn't it insult the intelligence of the intended audience, and miss the point that to win an election they need to get Tory switchers...
    Tories are nasty! That's old news. Horrible mean people. Next...
    yawn.

    A step up from calling them ugly mother-f****s though.
    Thanks to the Tory party, this country is on the edge of a precipice!

    You may have been one of the sane Tories who voted to Remain but your party is taking the country down with them.

    The Tory party - we'all put our interest ahead of the national interest every single time.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,625
    murali_s said:

    RobD said:

    murali_s said:

    Mortimer said:

    bigjohnowls said:

    twitter.com/PeterStefanovi2/status/880188222659334146

    BJO. Astroturfing here makes no sense. You're not going to change anyone's mind or shame anyone.

    As an aside, I keep seeing these sanctimonious 'Tories voted against nice fluffy things thus they must be NASTY NASTY NASTY'. Doesn't it insult the intelligence of the intended audience, and miss the point that to win an election they need to get Tory switchers...
    Tories are nasty! That's old news. Horrible mean people. Next...
    yawn.

    A step up from calling them ugly mother-f****s though.
    Thanks to the Tory party, this country is on the edge of a precipice!

    You may have been one of the sane Tories who voted to Remain but your party is taking the country down with them.

    The Tory party - we'all put our interest ahead of the national interest every single time.
    I know.... however will we cope without the EU commission holding our hands through everything. I despair at the thought.
  • murali_smurali_s Posts: 3,084
    bigjohnowls said:

    https://twitter.com/PeterStefanovi2/status/880188222659334146

    If only hardworking firefighters were as homophoic, racist and nutty as the DUP, money would have been found for them...
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 79,845
    bigjohnowls said:

    https://twitter.com/PeterStefanovi2/status/880188222659334146

    Isn't passing an opposition amendment to the Queens Speech a confidence issue though :D ?

    Can probably find "worthy" ones from all parliaments :)
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,422
    Time to hang up his mike?

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/06/28/jon-snow-criticised-mid-interview-panelist-tells-not-everyone/
  • MikeLMikeL Posts: 7,809
    May hasn't got the QS through the Commons yet - the vote is tomorrow.

    Today's vote was on a Lab amendment.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,625
    CarlottaVance said:

    Time to hang up his mike?

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/06/28/jon-snow-criticised-mid-interview-panelist-tells-not-everyone/

    They've deleted the clip from their catch up service... :p
  • ChrisChris Posts: 12,071
    OblitusSumMe said:

    FPT, Bobajob "As someone mentioned downthread, it is a geographical nonsense - it isn't even coterminous with the ancient region of Ulster. It was simply drawn up to create a Protestant safe space in the north. That religion is dwindling in adherents, so if the border had to be drawn today it would likely look pretty different."

    Not really. Northern Ireland includes six of the nine Ulster counties, so the border follows county boundaries. As I understand it, if only the Protestant-majority counties had been included the region was thought to be too small to be viable, and Ulster as a whole apparently had a Catholic-majority at the time. Thus six counties as the largest area with a Protestant-majority. This would still be the same today, just about.

    Hmm. Wikipedia says "Fermanagh is one of four counties of Northern Ireland to have a majority of its population from a Catholic background, according to the 2011 census."
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 56,314
    Chris said:

    OblitusSumMe said:

    FPT, Bobajob "As someone mentioned downthread, it is a geographical nonsense - it isn't even coterminous with the ancient region of Ulster. It was simply drawn up to create a Protestant safe space in the north. That religion is dwindling in adherents, so if the border had to be drawn today it would likely look pretty different."

    Not really. Northern Ireland includes six of the nine Ulster counties, so the border follows county boundaries. As I understand it, if only the Protestant-majority counties had been included the region was thought to be too small to be viable, and Ulster as a whole apparently had a Catholic-majority at the time. Thus six counties as the largest area with a Protestant-majority. This would still be the same today, just about.

    Hmm. Wikipedia says "Fermanagh is one of four counties of Northern Ireland to have a majority of its population from a Catholic background, according to the 2011 census."
    At the height of the Troubles the British government considered redrawing the border to give majority Catholic areas to the Irish republic.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/2601577.stm
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,625
    williamglenn said:

    Chris said:

    OblitusSumMe said:

    FPT, Bobajob "As someone mentioned downthread, it is a geographical nonsense - it isn't even coterminous with the ancient region of Ulster. It was simply drawn up to create a Protestant safe space in the north. That religion is dwindling in adherents, so if the border had to be drawn today it would likely look pretty different."

    Not really. Northern Ireland includes six of the nine Ulster counties, so the border follows county boundaries. As I understand it, if only the Protestant-majority counties had been included the region was thought to be too small to be viable, and Ulster as a whole apparently had a Catholic-majority at the time. Thus six counties as the largest area with a Protestant-majority. This would still be the same today, just about.

    Hmm. Wikipedia says "Fermanagh is one of four counties of Northern Ireland to have a majority of its population from a Catholic background, according to the 2011 census."
    At the height of the Troubles the British government considered redrawing the border to give majority Catholic areas to the Irish republic.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/2601577.stm
    They also considered withdrawing entirely.
  • ChrisChris Posts: 12,071
    williamglenn said:

    Chris said:

    OblitusSumMe said:

    FPT, Bobajob "As someone mentioned downthread, it is a geographical nonsense - it isn't even coterminous with the ancient region of Ulster. It was simply drawn up to create a Protestant safe space in the north. That religion is dwindling in adherents, so if the border had to be drawn today it would likely look pretty different."

    Not really. Northern Ireland includes six of the nine Ulster counties, so the border follows county boundaries. As I understand it, if only the Protestant-majority counties had been included the region was thought to be too small to be viable, and Ulster as a whole apparently had a Catholic-majority at the time. Thus six counties as the largest area with a Protestant-majority. This would still be the same today, just about.

    Hmm. Wikipedia says "Fermanagh is one of four counties of Northern Ireland to have a majority of its population from a Catholic background, according to the 2011 census."
    At the height of the Troubles the British government considered redrawing the border to give majority Catholic areas to the Irish republic.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/2601577.stm
    I find it difficult to believe that the six counties were "the largest area with a Protestant-majority". In the full nine counties the unionists polled 49.8% in the 1918 general election.
    http://www.ark.ac.uk/elections/h1918.htm
  • JetJet Posts: 11
    Dadge said:

    From the BBC. (Whilst not exactly good news, this does sort of tally with the more sensible expectations. Although it was theoretically possible that 300+ people died, as some scaremongers have been claiming, it did seem unlikely.)

    Police said "it would have been impossible for anyone to produce a list before that showed exactly who was in Grenfell Tower that night - that includes those people living there but also those visiting".

    "What I can tell you is there are 129 flats inside Grenfell Tower. We, the police, have spoken to at least one occupant of 106 of those 129 flats," Det Supt McCormack said.

    "These people have been able to tell us not just who lived in those flats, but importantly who was in those flats on the night."

    The officer said 18 people connected to those 106 flats are dead or missing presumed dead but "it is a terrible reality that there are 23 flats where despite huge investigative efforts, we have been unable to trace anyone alive who lived there.

    "At this stage, we must presume, that no-one in those 23 flats survived, that includes anyone who lived there or was visiting them."

    It was always unlikely that 300 people were killed in a block of 129 one-bedroom and two-bedroom flats (mainly two-bedroom) from which 65 people were rescued.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 55,181
    OblitusSumMe said:

    FPT, Bobajob "As someone mentioned downthread, it is a geographical nonsense - it isn't even coterminous with the ancient region of Ulster. It was simply drawn up to create a Protestant safe space in the north. That religion is dwindling in adherents, so if the border had to be drawn today it would likely look pretty different."

    Not really. Northern Ireland includes six of the nine Ulster counties, so the border follows county boundaries. As I understand it, if only the Protestant-majority counties had been included the region was thought to be too small to be viable, and Ulster as a whole apparently had a Catholic-majority at the time. Thus six counties as the largest area with a Protestant-majority. This would still be the same today, just about.

    Only County Antrim (inc. most of Belfast) and County Down (inc. the remainder of Belfast) have Protestant majorities today.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 55,181
    Chris said:

    OblitusSumMe said:

    FPT, Bobajob "As someone mentioned downthread, it is a geographical nonsense - it isn't even coterminous with the ancient region of Ulster. It was simply drawn up to create a Protestant safe space in the north. That religion is dwindling in adherents, so if the border had to be drawn today it would likely look pretty different."

    Not really. Northern Ireland includes six of the nine Ulster counties, so the border follows county boundaries. As I understand it, if only the Protestant-majority counties had been included the region was thought to be too small to be viable, and Ulster as a whole apparently had a Catholic-majority at the time. Thus six counties as the largest area with a Protestant-majority. This would still be the same today, just about.

    Hmm. Wikipedia says "Fermanagh is one of four counties of Northern Ireland to have a majority of its population from a Catholic background, according to the 2011 census."
    Can you guess which PBer wrote that?

    :innocent:
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    OblitusSumMe said:

    FPT, Bobajob "As someone mentioned downthread, it is a geographical nonsense - it isn't even coterminous with the ancient region of Ulster. It was simply drawn up to create a Protestant safe space in the north. That religion is dwindling in adherents, so if the border had to be drawn today it would likely look pretty different."

    Not really. Northern Ireland includes six of the nine Ulster counties, so the border follows county boundaries. As I understand it, if only the Protestant-majority counties had been included the region was thought to be too small to be viable, and Ulster as a whole apparently had a Catholic-majority at the time. Thus six counties as the largest area with a Protestant-majority. This would still be the same today, just about.

    The Six Counties in Northern Ireland are those which voted to remain part of the UK in the referendum that followed the Buckingham Palace Accords.

    While Carson and Craig's strengths were in Protestantanism, Carson's reach was much greater - he came from an old Southern family, had been MP for TCD for many years and served in the UK Cabinet before resigning to found the Ulster Unionists.

    Carson was the Ruth Davidson of his day. Craig the Farage. Unfortunately Craig won out in the internal struggle, and the next 50 years are a stain on the Unionist soul.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 46,315
    'My son was circumcised without my consent'
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-40420511

    This should make for an interesting and potentially useful case.

    "I wrote to MPs and they basically shoved me off. Everybody you speak to it's like speaking to a brick wall."

    She should name and shame the MPs.
  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 4,679
    RobD said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    Time to hang up his mike?

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/06/28/jon-snow-criticised-mid-interview-panelist-tells-not-everyone/

    They've deleted the clip from their catch up service... :p
    I saw it live. The guy he was talking to's only credentials appeared to be having recently mastered the art of shaving.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    JosiasJessop said:

    'My son was circumcised without my consent'
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-40420511

    This should make for an interesting and potentially useful case.

    "I wrote to MPs and they basically shoved me off. Everybody you speak to it's like speaking to a brick wall."

    She should name and shame the MPs.

    It is a troubling case but if she is writing to MPs, plural, surely at least all but one of them will reply by directing her to her own MP? Isn't that how the system works?
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    edited June 2017
    DecrepitJohnL said:

    JosiasJessop said:

    'My son was circumcised without my consent'
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-40420511

    This should make for an interesting and potentially useful case.

    "I wrote to MPs and they basically shoved me off. Everybody you speak to it's like speaking to a brick wall."

    She should name and shame the MPs.

    It is a troubling case but if she is writing to MPs, plural, surely at least all but one of them will reply by directing her to her own MP? Isn't that how the system works?
    It is also slightly puzzling that doctors appear not to have corrected what sounds like a botched circumcision (which itself sounds like it should be barely harder than cutting toenails, so was the operation actually done by a doctor in the first place?).
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    Good Morning To All Complete Pricks Of PB Worldwide :
    JosiasJessop said:

    'My son was circumcised without my consent'
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-40420511

    This should make for an interesting and potentially useful case.

    "I wrote to MPs and they basically shoved me off. Everybody you speak to it's like speaking to a brick wall."

    She should name and shame the MPs.

  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 79,512
    "As long as there are no by-election losses or defections they should just about manage for the short term."

    I like what Mike did with 'just about managing' there.
    The JAM government...
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 46,315
    JackW said:

    Good Morning To All Complete Pricks Of PB Worldwide :

    JosiasJessop said:

    'My son was circumcised without my consent'
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-40420511

    This should make for an interesting and potentially useful case.

    "I wrote to MPs and they basically shoved me off. Everybody you speak to it's like speaking to a brick wall."

    She should name and shame the MPs.

    ;)

    And Good Morning to the demi-pricks and sans-pricks as well.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 46,315
    DecrepitJohnL said:

    JosiasJessop said:

    'My son was circumcised without my consent'
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-40420511

    This should make for an interesting and potentially useful case.

    "I wrote to MPs and they basically shoved me off. Everybody you speak to it's like speaking to a brick wall."

    She should name and shame the MPs.

    It is a troubling case but if she is writing to MPs, plural, surely at least all but one of them will reply by directing her to her own MP? Isn't that how the system works?
    Nick might know more, but I've read stories in the past where an MP will get involved even if the complainant isn't in his/her constituency, especially when they are campaigning on an issue. I suppose it'd be polite to tell the constituent's MP you're getting involved, though.

    It just shows the woman's desperation to get justice.
  • philiphphiliph Posts: 4,705
    As the (likely) youngest party leader I guess her health is a massive issue.

    I would be more concerned with Vince, who may or may not have issues and. Jez, who may or may not be certifiable.
  • daodaodaodao Posts: 821
    murali_s said:

    Spreadsheet Phil is the only sane person on that list. Sad times for the Tory party and this country.

    NOTA is in the lead with 33%, as all the potential leaders named have major flaws. DD & PH might be passable for the short-term if TM has to step down before Brexit is delivered in 2019, but not to fight another GE; the others listed are simply appalling potential candidates. Hopefully (for the Conservative & Unionist party), someone else will emerge by then.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 46,315
    DecrepitJohnL said:

    DecrepitJohnL said:

    JosiasJessop said:

    'My son was circumcised without my consent'
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-40420511

    This should make for an interesting and potentially useful case.

    "I wrote to MPs and they basically shoved me off. Everybody you speak to it's like speaking to a brick wall."

    She should name and shame the MPs.

    It is a troubling case but if she is writing to MPs, plural, surely at least all but one of them will reply by directing her to her own MP? Isn't that how the system works?
    It is also slightly puzzling that doctors appear not to have corrected what sounds like a botched circumcision (which itself sounds like it should be barely harder than cutting toenails, so was the operation actually done by a doctor in the first place?).
    "barely harder than cutting toenails"

    Are you serious? IMO male circumcision for religious reasons is child abuse.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    JosiasJessop said:

    DecrepitJohnL said:

    DecrepitJohnL said:

    JosiasJessop said:

    'My son was circumcised without my consent'
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-40420511

    This should make for an interesting and potentially useful case.

    "I wrote to MPs and they basically shoved me off. Everybody you speak to it's like speaking to a brick wall."

    She should name and shame the MPs.

    It is a troubling case but if she is writing to MPs, plural, surely at least all but one of them will reply by directing her to her own MP? Isn't that how the system works?
    It is also slightly puzzling that doctors appear not to have corrected what sounds like a botched circumcision (which itself sounds like it should be barely harder than cutting toenails, so was the operation actually done by a doctor in the first place?).
    "barely harder than cutting toenails"

    Are you serious? IMO male circumcision for religious reasons is child abuse.
    Leaving that question aside, my comment was that it does not seem (to this non-expert) a technically difficult procedure. If separating conjoined twins is at one end of the scale of surgical complexity, and cutting toenails is at the other, then surely male circumcision is close to the latter end. Yet from the description in the story, it sounds like something went wrong.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 46,315
    DecrepitJohnL said:

    JosiasJessop said:

    DecrepitJohnL said:

    DecrepitJohnL said:

    JosiasJessop said:

    'My son was circumcised without my consent'
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-40420511

    This should make for an interesting and potentially useful case.

    "I wrote to MPs and they basically shoved me off. Everybody you speak to it's like speaking to a brick wall."

    She should name and shame the MPs.

    It is a troubling case but if she is writing to MPs, plural, surely at least all but one of them will reply by directing her to her own MP? Isn't that how the system works?
    It is also slightly puzzling that doctors appear not to have corrected what sounds like a botched circumcision (which itself sounds like it should be barely harder than cutting toenails, so was the operation actually done by a doctor in the first place?).
    "barely harder than cutting toenails"

    Are you serious? IMO male circumcision for religious reasons is child abuse.
    Leaving that question aside, my comment was that it does not seem (to this non-expert) a technically difficult procedure. If separating conjoined twins is at one end of the scale of surgical complexity, and cutting toenails is at the other, then surely male circumcision is close to the latter end. Yet from the description in the story, it sounds like something went wrong.
    I don't know if you're circumcised or not, but if you are not, I would submit you'd be much more concerned about getting a circumcision that you would having your toenails cut.

    And things often go wrong with circumcisions.

    As a Jewish friend of mine at Uni said to me: "What the hell gave my parents the right to do that to me?"
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    daodao said:

    murali_s said:

    Spreadsheet Phil is the only sane person on that list. Sad times for the Tory party and this country.

    NOTA is in the lead with 33%, as all the potential leaders named have major flaws. DD & PH might be passable for the short-term if TM has to step down before Brexit is delivered in 2019, but not to fight another GE; the others listed are simply appalling potential candidates. Hopefully (for the Conservative & Unionist party), someone else will emerge by then.
    Emerge from where? The problem for potential stars on the backbenches is there is no obvious route into government if the prime minister is too weak to sack anyone in order to create a vacancy. The best you can hope for is that one of the junior ministers fancies ermine.
  • BromptonautBromptonaut Posts: 1,113
    edited June 2017
    JosiasJessop said:

    DecrepitJohnL said:

    JosiasJessop said:

    DecrepitJohnL said:

    DecrepitJohnL said:

    JosiasJessop said:

    'My son was circumcised without my consent'
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-40420511

    This should make for an interesting and potentially useful case.

    "I wrote to MPs and they basically shoved me off. Everybody you speak to it's like speaking to a brick wall."

    She should name and shame the MPs.

    It is a troubling case but if she is writing to MPs, plural, surely at least all but one of them will reply by directing her to her own MP? Isn't that how the system works?
    It is also slightly puzzling that doctors appear not to have corrected what sounds like a botched circumcision (which itself sounds like it should be barely harder than cutting toenails, so was the operation actually done by a doctor in the first place?).
    "barely harder than cutting toenails"

    Are you serious? IMO male circumcision for religious reasons is child abuse.
    Leaving that question aside, my comment was that it does not seem (to this non-expert) a technically difficult procedure. If separating conjoined twins is at one end of the scale of surgical complexity, and cutting toenails is at the other, then surely male circumcision is close to the latter end. Yet from the description in the story, it sounds like something went wrong.
    I don't know if you're circumcised or not, but if you are not, I would submit you'd be much more concerned about getting a circumcision that you would having your toenails cut.

    And things often go wrong with circumcisions.

    As a Jewish friend of mine at Uni said to me: "What the hell gave my parents the right to do that to me?"
    It's about time Male Genital Mutilation began to be challenged.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    JosiasJessop said:

    DecrepitJohnL said:

    JosiasJessop said:

    DecrepitJohnL said:

    DecrepitJohnL said:

    JosiasJessop said:

    'My son was circumcised without my consent'
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-40420511

    This should make for an interesting and potentially useful case.

    "I wrote to MPs and they basically shoved me off. Everybody you speak to it's like speaking to a brick wall."

    She should name and shame the MPs.

    It is a troubling case but if she is writing to MPs, plural, surely at least all but one of them will reply by directing her to her own MP? Isn't that how the system works?
    It is also slightly puzzling that doctors appear not to have corrected what sounds like a botched circumcision (which itself sounds like it should be barely harder than cutting toenails, so was the operation actually done by a doctor in the first place?).
    "barely harder than cutting toenails"

    Are you serious? IMO male circumcision for religious reasons is child abuse.
    Leaving that question aside, my comment was that it does not seem (to this non-expert) a technically difficult procedure. If separating conjoined twins is at one end of the scale of surgical complexity, and cutting toenails is at the other, then surely male circumcision is close to the latter end. Yet from the description in the story, it sounds like something went wrong.
    I don't know if you're circumcised or not, but if you are not, I would submit you'd be much more concerned about getting a circumcision that you would having your toenails cut.

    And things often go wrong with circumcisions.

    As a Jewish friend of mine at Uni said to me: "What the hell gave my parents the right to do that to me?"
    You are talking about whether it is desirable or is even abuse. I am not. Putting all moral, religious and aesthetic issues to one side, and even the legal ones about parental consent, it still sounds from the story that this comparatively simple operation was botched (and did not seem to have been corrected afterwards).
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 46,315
    DecrepitJohnL said:

    JosiasJessop said:

    DecrepitJohnL said:

    JosiasJessop said:

    DecrepitJohnL said:

    DecrepitJohnL said:

    JosiasJessop said:

    'My son was circumcised without my consent'
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-40420511

    This should make for an interesting and potentially useful case.

    "I wrote to MPs and they basically shoved me off. Everybody you speak to it's like speaking to a brick wall."

    She should name and shame the MPs.

    It is a troubling case but if she is writing to MPs, plural, surely at least all but one of them will reply by directing her to her own MP? Isn't that how the system works?
    It is also slightly puzzling that doctors appear not to have corrected what sounds like a botched circumcision (which itself sounds like it should be barely harder than cutting toenails, so was the operation actually done by a doctor in the first place?).
    "barely harder than cutting toenails"

    Are you serious? IMO male circumcision for religious reasons is child abuse.
    Leaving that question aside, my comment was that it does not seem (to this non-expert) a technically difficult procedure. If separating conjoined twins is at one end of the scale of surgical complexity, and cutting toenails is at the other, then surely male circumcision is close to the latter end. Yet from the description in the story, it sounds like something went wrong.
    I don't know if you're circumcised or not, but if you are not, I would submit you'd be much more concerned about getting a circumcision that you would having your toenails cut.

    And things often go wrong with circumcisions.

    As a Jewish friend of mine at Uni said to me: "What the hell gave my parents the right to do that to me?"
    You are talking about whether it is desirable or is even abuse. I am not. Putting all moral, religious and aesthetic issues to one side, and even the legal ones about parental consent, it still sounds from the story that this comparatively simple operation was botched (and did not seem to have been corrected afterwards).
    So you're ignoring all the glaring, major issues with this case?

    Okkkay ...

    You made the comparison with cutting toenails. That argument is just so patently ridiculous I'm amazed you're not ashamed to write it.
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 10,082
    DecrepitJohnL said:

    daodao said:

    murali_s said:

    Spreadsheet Phil is the only sane person on that list. Sad times for the Tory party and this country.

    NOTA is in the lead with 33%, as all the potential leaders named have major flaws. DD & PH might be passable for the short-term if TM has to step down before Brexit is delivered in 2019, but not to fight another GE; the others listed are simply appalling potential candidates. Hopefully (for the Conservative & Unionist party), someone else will emerge by then.
    Emerge from where? The problem for potential stars on the backbenches is there is no obvious route into government if the prime minister is too weak to sack anyone in order to create a vacancy. The best you can hope for is that one of the junior ministers fancies ermine.
    ... and cause a by-election? Probably not.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    JosiasJessop said:

    DecrepitJohnL said:

    JosiasJessop said:

    DecrepitJohnL said:

    JosiasJessop said:

    DecrepitJohnL said:

    DecrepitJohnL said:

    JosiasJessop said:

    'My son was circumcised without my consent'
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-40420511

    This should make for an interesting and potentially useful case.

    "I wrote to MPs and they basically shoved me off. Everybody you speak to it's like speaking to a brick wall."

    She should name and shame the MPs.

    It is a troubling case but if she is writing to MPs, plural, surely at least all but one of them will reply by directing her to her own MP? Isn't that how the system works?
    It is also slightly puzzling that doctors appear not to have corrected what sounds like a botched circumcision (which itself sounds like it should be barely harder than cutting toenails, so was the operation actually done by a doctor in the first place?).
    "barely harder than cutting toenails"

    Are you serious? IMO male circumcision for religious reasons is child abuse.
    Leaving that question aside, my comment was that it does not seem (to this non-expert) a technically difficult procedure. If separating conjoined twins is at one end of the scale of surgical complexity, and cutting toenails is at the other, then surely male circumcision is close to the latter end. Yet from the description in the story, it sounds like something went wrong.
    I don't know if you're circumcised or not, but if you are not, I would submit you'd be much more concerned about getting a circumcision that you would having your toenails cut.

    And things often go wrong with circumcisions.

    As a Jewish friend of mine at Uni said to me: "What the hell gave my parents the right to do that to me?"
    You are talking about whether it is desirable or is even abuse. I am not. Putting all moral, religious and aesthetic issues to one side, and even the legal ones about parental consent, it still sounds from the story that this comparatively simple operation was botched (and did not seem to have been corrected afterwards).
    So you're ignoring all the glaring, major issues with this case?

    Okkkay ...

    You made the comparison with cutting toenails. That argument is just so patently ridiculous I'm amazed you're not ashamed to write it.
    Cutting toenails is easy. So is circumcision. For centuries the operation has been carried out by laymen. The comparison stands. Your kneejerk reaction to the most obvious scandal has led you to miss the other point -- that the circumcision seems not even to have been done correctly.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    logical_song said:

    DecrepitJohnL said:

    daodao said:

    murali_s said:

    Spreadsheet Phil is the only sane person on that list. Sad times for the Tory party and this country.

    NOTA is in the lead with 33%, as all the potential leaders named have major flaws. DD & PH might be passable for the short-term if TM has to step down before Brexit is delivered in 2019, but not to fight another GE; the others listed are simply appalling potential candidates. Hopefully (for the Conservative & Unionist party), someone else will emerge by then.
    Emerge from where? The problem for potential stars on the backbenches is there is no obvious route into government if the prime minister is too weak to sack anyone in order to create a vacancy. The best you can hope for is that one of the junior ministers fancies ermine.
    ... and cause a by-election? Probably not.
    Good point. So there will probably be no new talent in the next leadership election.
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 10,082
    Charles said:

    OblitusSumMe said:

    FPT, Bobajob "As someone mentioned downthread, it is a geographical nonsense - it isn't even coterminous with the ancient region of Ulster. It was simply drawn up to create a Protestant safe space in the north. That religion is dwindling in adherents, so if the border had to be drawn today it would likely look pretty different."

    Not really. Northern Ireland includes six of the nine Ulster counties, so the border follows county boundaries. As I understand it, if only the Protestant-majority counties had been included the region was thought to be too small to be viable, and Ulster as a whole apparently had a Catholic-majority at the time. Thus six counties as the largest area with a Protestant-majority. This would still be the same today, just about.

    The Six Counties in Northern Ireland are those which voted to remain part of the UK in the referendum that followed the Buckingham Palace Accords.

    While Carson and Craig's strengths were in Protestantanism, Carson's reach was much greater - he came from an old Southern family, had been MP for TCD for many years and served in the UK Cabinet before resigning to found the Ulster Unionists.

    Carson was the Ruth Davidson of his day. Craig the Farage. Unfortunately Craig won out in the internal struggle, and the next 50 years are a stain on the Unionist soul.
    More recently David Trimble's UUP has been sidelined by Ian Paisley's DUP and these are the guys propping up Theresa's government.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 46,315
    DecrepitJohnL said:

    Cutting toenails is easy. So is circumcision. For centuries the operation has been carried out by laymen. The comparison stands. Your kneejerk reaction to the most obvious scandal has led you to miss the other point -- that the circumcision seems not even to have been done correctly.

    I haven't missed that point (*), but it's not the most important issue here. In fact, you appear to be trying to blame-shift: "Why didn't the mother get it sorted?"

    Circumcision is not easy. I might suggest you look at the following page (warning: NSFW and some images that may distress):

    http://www.senslip-europe.com/circumcision----disasters.html

    Can you show me similar injuries from toenail cutting?

    (*) Ignoring obvious pun.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    DecrepitJohnL said:

    JosiasJessop said:

    DecrepitJohnL said:

    JosiasJessop said:

    DecrepitJohnL said:

    JosiasJessop said:

    DecrepitJohnL said:

    DecrepitJohnL said:

    JosiasJessop said:

    'My son was circumcised without my consent'
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-40420511

    This should make for an interesting and potentially useful case.

    "I wrote to MPs and they basically shoved me off. Everybody you speak to it's like speaking to a brick wall."

    She should name and shame the MPs.

    It is a troubling case but if she is writing to MPs, plural, surely at least all but one of them will reply by directing her to her own MP? Isn't that how the system works?
    It is also slightly puzzlce?).
    "barely harder than cutting toenails"

    Are you serious? IMO male circumcision for religious reasons is child abuse.
    Leaving that question aside, my comment was that it does not seem (to this non-expert) a technically difficult procedure. If separating conjoined twins is at one end of the scale of surgical complexity, and cutting toenails is at the other, then surely male circumcision is close to the latter end. Yet from the description in the story, it sounds like something went wrong.
    I don't know if you're circumcised or not, but if you are not, I would submit you'd be much more concerned about getting a circumcision that you would having your toenails cut.

    And things often go wrong with circumcisions.

    As a Jewish friend of mine at Uni said to me: "What the hell gave my parents the right to do that to me?"
    You are talkin
    So you're ignoring all the glaring, major issues with this case?

    Okkkay ...

    You made the comparison with cutting toenails. That argument is just so patently ridiculous I'm amazed you're not ashamed to write it.
    Cutting toenails is easy. So is circumcision. For centuries the operation has been carried out by laymen. The comparison stands. Your kneejerk reaction to the most obvious scandal has led you to miss the other point -- that the circumcision seems not even to have been done correctly.
    Complications of circumcision are not that unusual, though the really severe ones such as infection, gangrene, amputation and death are all fairly rare. In the USA, where 60% of males are circumcised, there are a number of each of these every year. Significant bleeding occurs in about 1%. What is probably under recorded is long term problems as few studies of circumcision have long term follow up.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 55,955
    Still surprised that Hunt does not figure on that list. He is the nearest thing to a Cameroon left in government.

    Whatever happened to the junior doctor dispute? Was there a settlement that the membership accepted or has it just fizzled out?
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 39,180
    JackW said:

    Good Morning To All Complete Pricks Of PB Worldwide :

    JosiasJessop said:

    'My son was circumcised without my consent'
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-40420511

    This should make for an interesting and potentially useful case.

    "I wrote to MPs and they basically shoved me off. Everybody you speak to it's like speaking to a brick wall."

    She should name and shame the MPs.

    Is it bad of me to find this story funny?
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    edited June 2017
    logical_song said:

    Charles said:

    OblitusSumMe said:

    FPT, Bobajob "As someone mentioned downthread, it is a geographical nonsense - it isn't even coterminous with the ancient region of Ulster. It was simply drawn up to create a Protestant safe space in the north. That religion is dwindling in adherents, so if the border had to be drawn today it would likely look pretty different."

    Not really. Northern Ireland includes six of the nine Ulster counties, so the border follows county boundaries. As I understand it, if only the Protestant-majority counties had been included the region was thought to be too small to be viable, and Ulster as a whole apparently had a Catholic-majority at the time. Thus six counties as the largest area with a Protestant-majority. This would still be the same today, just about.

    The Six Counties in Northern Ireland are those which voted to remain part of the UK in the referendum that followed the Buckingham Palace Accords.

    While Carson and Craig's strengths were in Protestantanism, Carson's reach was much greater - he came from an old Southern family, had been MP for TCD for many years and served in the UK Cabinet before resigning to found the Ulster Unionists.

    Carson was the Ruth Davidson of his day. Craig the Farage. Unfortunately Craig won out in the internal struggle, and the next 50 years are a stain on the Unionist soul.
    More recently David Trimble's UUP has been sidelined by Ian Paisley's DUP and these are the guys propping up Theresa's government.
    Paisley is a moderate compared to Craig. It was Tammany Hall politics on a national scale
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    edited June 2017
    Sean_F said:

    JackW said:

    Good Morning To All Complete Pricks Of PB Worldwide :

    JosiasJessop said:

    'My son was circumcised without my consent'
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-40420511

    This should make for an interesting and potentially useful case.

    "I wrote to MPs and they basically shoved me off. Everybody you speak to it's like speaking to a brick wall."

    She should name and shame the MPs.

    Is it bad of me to find this story funny?
    Do you usually find GBH cases funny?
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    DavidL said:

    Still surprised that Hunt does not figure on that list. He is the nearest thing to a Cameroon left in government.

    Whatever happened to the junior doctor dispute? Was there a settlement that the membership accepted or has it just fizzled out?

    The NHS seems to be in a continuous state of low-level crisis. That there is no political issue, especially after Lansley's reforms, may be a tribute to Hunt but at best he has not found a solution to anything except bad headlines. Hunt needs to swap jobs and hope the next Health Secretary does worse -- otherwise Labour's next election campaign writes itself.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 39,180
    Charles said:

    Sean_F said:

    JackW said:

    Good Morning To All Complete Pricks Of PB Worldwide :

    JosiasJessop said:

    'My son was circumcised without my consent'
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-40420511

    This should make for an interesting and potentially useful case.

    "I wrote to MPs and they basically shoved me off. Everybody you speak to it's like speaking to a brick wall."

    She should name and shame the MPs.

    Is it bad of me to find this story funny?
    Do you usually find GBH cases funny?
    You're right. It's childish.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 14,646
    Charles said:

    Sean_F said:

    JackW said:

    Good Morning To All Complete Pricks Of PB Worldwide :

    JosiasJessop said:

    'My son was circumcised without my consent'
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-40420511

    This should make for an interesting and potentially useful case.

    "I wrote to MPs and they basically shoved me off. Everybody you speak to it's like speaking to a brick wall."

    She should name and shame the MPs.

    Is it bad of me to find this story funny?
    Do you usually find GBH cases funny?
    Charles said:

    Sean_F said:

    JackW said:

    Good Morning To All Complete Pricks Of PB Worldwide :

    JosiasJessop said:

    'My son was circumcised without my consent'
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-40420511

    This should make for an interesting and potentially useful case.

    "I wrote to MPs and they basically shoved me off. Everybody you speak to it's like speaking to a brick wall."

    She should name and shame the MPs.

    Is it bad of me to find this story funny?
    Do you usually find GBH cases funny?
    That time Galloway got the shit kicked out of him was quite amusing.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,926
    Sean_F said:

    Charles said:

    Sean_F said:

    JackW said:

    Good Morning To All Complete Pricks Of PB Worldwide :

    JosiasJessop said:

    'My son was circumcised without my consent'
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-40420511

    This should make for an interesting and potentially useful case.

    "I wrote to MPs and they basically shoved me off. Everybody you speak to it's like speaking to a brick wall."

    She should name and shame the MPs.

    Is it bad of me to find this story funny?
    Do you usually find GBH cases funny?
    You're right. It's childish.
    But why did Theresa May do it ?
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 55,955
    DecrepitJohnL said:

    DavidL said:

    Still surprised that Hunt does not figure on that list. He is the nearest thing to a Cameroon left in government.

    Whatever happened to the junior doctor dispute? Was there a settlement that the membership accepted or has it just fizzled out?

    The NHS seems to be in a continuous state of low-level crisis. That there is no political issue, especially after Lansley's reforms, may be a tribute to Hunt but at best he has not found a solution to anything except bad headlines. Hunt needs to swap jobs and hope the next Health Secretary does worse -- otherwise Labour's next election campaign writes itself.
    That is inevitable given that as an Institution it had got very used to spending rising at 3%+ in real terms. It has now had 7 years of very moderate growth, usually less than 1%.

    Given that it is estimated that demand on NHS services grows about 4% a year it is hardly surprising that there is a low level crisis. In fact I think that Hunt or the NHS generally has done remarkably well in coping as well as they have.

    Compared to the lunacy of Lansley and the very considerable expense that his reforms incurred things have been allowed to carry on. Stress is inevitable and will increase but if the first rule of doctors is to do no harm then it broadly seems to me that Hunt has achieved that and a little bit more.
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 9,178
    DavidL said:

    Still surprised that Hunt does not figure on that list. He is the nearest thing to a Cameroon left in government.

    Whatever happened to the junior doctor dispute? Was there a settlement that the membership accepted or has it just fizzled out?

    Yes, hardly a mention of Hunt in this context. That surprises me too.
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    Pulpstar said:

    bigjohnowls said:

    https://twitter.com/PeterStefanovi2/status/880188222659334146

    Isn't passing an opposition amendment to the Queens Speech a confidence issue though :D ?

    Can probably find "worthy" ones from all parliaments :)
    A firefighter is on the range 29-33k acc to a quick scan on the internet. they pay a lot in pension conts but retire v early. It used to be 55 . not sure if that's still the case. That's not bad pay imho
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,422
    Conservative backbencher Marcus Fysh (Yeovil) asked Theresa May: ‘Is she aware of the crisis in Venezuela and is it an example of how an experiment in socialist revolution can go horribly wrong?'

    Mr Corbyn, from a sedentary position, appeared to mutter: ‘What a complete w*****.’

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4649052/The-PM-calm-Hammond-developed-twitch.html
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 40,054
    Davis is totally winging it ...
    https://twitter.com/JolyonMaugham/status/880312768842407936
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 40,054
    Mortimer said:

    bigjohnowls said:

    https://twitter.com/PeterStefanovi2/status/880188222659334146

    BJO. Astroturfing here makes no sense. You're not going to change anyone's mind or shame anyone.

    As an aside, I keep seeing these sanctimonious 'Tories voted against nice fluffy things thus they must be NASTY NASTY NASTY'. Doesn't it insult the intelligence of the intended audience, and miss the point that to win an election they need to get Tory switchers...

    It's precisely because the vast majority of Tories are good, decent people (just like the vast majority of Labour supporters) that posters such as that one are going to work.

  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 40,054
    It really is a bad look to be voting against giving people like this hero a pay rise. Cheering when you do it is bonkers ...
    https://twitter.com/Channel4News/status/880122717495861256
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,756
    Good morning, everyone.

    Davis would be a mistake. Hammond's clearly the chap to go for.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    DavidL said:

    Still surprised that Hunt does not figure on that list. He is the nearest thing to a Cameroon left in government.

    Whatever happened to the junior doctor dispute? Was there a settlement that the membership accepted or has it just fizzled out?

    The contract was imposed, and started in a few specialities, all the remainder go onto it in August.

    The consequent rotas are a nightmare to get working as extremely inflexible, and not good for continuity of patient care or for training and mentoring.

    The dispute has caused the new Consultant contract to be delayed and significantly watered down.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    DavidL said:

    DecrepitJohnL said:

    DavidL said:

    Still surprised that Hunt does not figure on that list. He is the nearest thing to a Cameroon left in government.

    Whatever happened to the junior doctor dispute? Was there a settlement that the membership accepted or has it just fizzled out?

    The NHS seems to be in a continuous state of low-level crisis. That there is no political issue, especially after Lansley's reforms, may be a tribute to Hunt but at best he has not found a solution to anything except bad headlines. Hunt needs to swap jobs and hope the next Health Secretary does worse -- otherwise Labour's next election campaign writes itself.
    That is inevitable given that as an Institution it had got very used to spending rising at 3%+ in real terms. It has now had 7 years of very moderate growth, usually less than 1%.

    Given that it is estimated that demand on NHS services grows about 4% a year it is hardly surprising that there is a low level crisis. In fact I think that Hunt or the NHS generally has done remarkably well in coping as well as they have.

    Compared to the lunacy of Lansley and the very considerable expense that his reforms incurred things have been allowed to carry on. Stress is inevitable and will increase but if the first rule of doctors is to do no harm then it broadly seems to me that Hunt has achieved that and a little bit more.
    Maybe. The junior hospital dispute was triggered by Hunt's scheme to improve weekend coverage (a good thing) at the expense of weekday coverage (a bad thing) -- or at least by the way Hunt wanted to pay for it. Now the balance of weekend and weekday coverage is a legitimate thing for politicians to decide, but I'm not sure it does no harm. At best Hunt reminds me of Gove in that there can be a level of misdirection -- while the media and even education professionals were most exercised by bureaucratic details of whether schools report to LEAs or not, and attempts to rewrite the history syllabus, Gove was quietly and probably inadvertently building up a massive shortfall in places.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 14,233
    edited June 2017
    SouthamObserver said:

    Mortimer said:

    bigjohnowls said:

    https://twitter.com/PeterStefanovi2/status/880188222659334146

    BJO. Astroturfing here makes no sense. You're not going to change anyone's mind or shame anyone.

    As an aside, I keep seeing these sanctimonious 'Tories voted against nice fluffy things thus they must be NASTY NASTY NASTY'. Doesn't it insult the intelligence of the intended audience, and miss the point that to win an election they need to get Tory switchers...

    It's precisely because the vast majority of Tories are good, decent people (just like the vast majority of Labour supporters) that posters such as that one are going to work.

    Shame on those who reduce confidence motions (for that is what amendments on the QS basically are) to an excuse for virtue signalling.

    Seriously, I expected better of you.
  • RoyalBlueRoyalBlue Posts: 3,223
    SouthamObserver said:

    Davis is totally winging it ...
    https://twitter.com/JolyonMaugham/status/880312768842407936

    This is a nonsense article. Precisely how it will work will not be known until the deal is agreed with the EU. It's not in Davis' power to decide on his own.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    SouthamObserver said:

    Davis is totally winging it ...

    So far he is not up to the task. An ambassador from a senior member state, who has been briefed on how Davis is viewed by the EU now, has a crushing verdict: “He is part of the problem. He doesn’t know the dossiers well. His style is arrogant, he is full of bluster.” A European insider says Davis appears to have an inflated, jingoistic faith in Britain’s influence which is not going to play out well. “He’s going to be humiliated again and again by the EU, as he was in the first week. How will someone as vain as Davis explain that?.” Even a senior Tory peer and Brexiteer is worried by his performance so far: “I am, frankly, scared. I’d be surprised if it all went right now.”

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/comment/davis-is-a-dangerous-driver-of-the-brexit-bus-xshs7h7rj

    AA Gill was a seer...

    Brexit is the fond belief that Britain is worse now than at some point in the foggy past where we achieved peak Blighty We listen to the Brexit lot talk about the trade deals they’re going to make with Europe after we leave, and the blithe insouciance that what they’re offering instead of EU membership is a divorce where you can still have sex with your ex. They reckon they can get out of the marriage, keep the house, not pay alimony, take the kids out of school, stop the in-laws going to the doctor, get strict with the visiting rights, but, you know, still get a shag at the weekend and, obviously, see other people on the side.

    Really, that’s their best offer? That’s the plan? To swagger into Brussels with Union Jack pants on and say: “ ’Ello luv, you’re looking nice today. Would you like some?”

    http://dndlaw.com/aa-gill-on-brexit/
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 7,483
    CarlottaVance said:

    Conservative backbencher Marcus Fysh (Yeovil) asked Theresa May: ‘Is she aware of the crisis in Venezuela and is it an example of how an experiment in socialist revolution can go horribly wrong?'

    Mr Corbyn, from a sedentary position, appeared to mutter: ‘What a complete w*****.’

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4649052/The-PM-calm-Hammond-developed-twitch.html

    That's the same MP that told me that all my expat rights would be protected , in the event of a leave vote, because we would still be in the EEA. There would be no way wewould leave the EEA!
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    RoyalBlue said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    Davis is totally winging it ...
    https://twitter.com/JolyonMaugham/status/880312768842407936

    This is a nonsense article. Precisely how it will work will not be known until the deal is agreed with the EU. It's not in Davis' power to decide on his own.
    Which means 18 months of delay and uncertainty over any sort of investment decision, even discounting long term adverse impacts.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 35,315
    RoyalBlue said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    Davis is totally winging it ...
    https://twitter.com/JolyonMaugham/status/880312768842407936

    This is a nonsense article. Precisely how it will work will not be known until the deal is agreed with the EU. It's not in Davis' power to decide on his own.
    He ought to have some idea, though.
  • GeoffMGeoffM Posts: 6,071
    RoyalBlue said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    Davis is totally winging it ...
    https://twitter.com/JolyonMaugham/status/880312768842407936

    This is a nonsense article. Precisely how it will work will not be known until the deal is agreed with the EU. It's not in Davis' power to decide on his own.
    The "Institute for Government" is a lefty David Sainsbury funded front group, so this is safe to file away as partisan.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 40,054
    RoyalBlue said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    Davis is totally winging it ...
    https://twitter.com/JolyonMaugham/status/880312768842407936

    This is a nonsense article. Precisely how it will work will not be known until the deal is agreed with the EU. It's not in Davis' power to decide on his own.

    The issue is he does not know how it works now. He is winging it.

  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 40,054
    GeoffM said:

    RoyalBlue said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    Davis is totally winging it ...
    https://twitter.com/JolyonMaugham/status/880312768842407936

    This is a nonsense article. Precisely how it will work will not be known until the deal is agreed with the EU. It's not in Davis' power to decide on his own.
    The "Institute for Government" is a lefty David Sainsbury funded front group, so this is safe to file away as partisan.

    Yep - file away under stuff I do not like so will ignore. That does seem to be the David Davis approach. Problem is, the stuff does not go away.

  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 40,054
    Scott_P said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    Davis is totally winging it ...

    So far he is not up to the task. An ambassador from a senior member state, who has been briefed on how Davis is viewed by the EU now, has a crushing verdict: “He is part of the problem. He doesn’t know the dossiers well. His style is arrogant, he is full of bluster.” A European insider says Davis appears to have an inflated, jingoistic faith in Britain’s influence which is not going to play out well. “He’s going to be humiliated again and again by the EU, as he was in the first week. How will someone as vain as Davis explain that?.” Even a senior Tory peer and Brexiteer is worried by his performance so far: “I am, frankly, scared. I’d be surprised if it all went right now.”

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/comment/davis-is-a-dangerous-driver-of-the-brexit-bus-xshs7h7rj

    AA Gill was a seer...

    Brexit is the fond belief that Britain is worse now than at some point in the foggy past where we achieved peak Blighty We listen to the Brexit lot talk about the trade deals they’re going to make with Europe after we leave, and the blithe insouciance that what they’re offering instead of EU membership is a divorce where you can still have sex with your ex. They reckon they can get out of the marriage, keep the house, not pay alimony, take the kids out of school, stop the in-laws going to the doctor, get strict with the visiting rights, but, you know, still get a shag at the weekend and, obviously, see other people on the side.

    Really, that’s their best offer? That’s the plan? To swagger into Brussels with Union Jack pants on and say: “ ’Ello luv, you’re looking nice today. Would you like some?”

    http://dndlaw.com/aa-gill-on-brexit/

    Davis is winging it. He has a religious faith in Brexit and believes nothing else is necessary. On 29th March 2019 the Lord will come down and deliver a promised land, so why bother looking at documents and understanding how things work now?

  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,966
    SquareRoot said:

    Pulpstar said:

    bigjohnowls said:

    https://twitter.com/PeterStefanovi2/status/880188222659334146

    Isn't passing an opposition amendment to the Queens Speech a confidence issue though :D ?

    Can probably find "worthy" ones from all parliaments :)
    A firefighter is on the range 29-33k acc to a quick scan on the internet. they pay a lot in pension conts but retire v early. It used to be 55 . not sure if that's still the case. That's not bad pay imho
    They are also entitled to key worker housing which they can then sell on the open market.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 129,035
    edited June 2017
    SouthamObserver said:

    Davis is totally winging it ...
    https://twitter.com/JolyonMaugham/status/880312768842407936

    Well given 83% voted for parties who wanted to leave the single market and customs union aerospace industry representatives would have been better advised to make their concerns known before the general election
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 40,054
    Mortimer said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    Mortimer said:

    bigjohnowls said:

    https://twitter.com/PeterStefanovi2/status/880188222659334146

    BJO. Astroturfing here makes no sense. You're not going to change anyone's mind or shame anyone.

    As an aside, I keep seeing these sanctimonious 'Tories voted against nice fluffy things thus they must be NASTY NASTY NASTY'. Doesn't it insult the intelligence of the intended audience, and miss the point that to win an election they need to get Tory switchers...

    It's precisely because the vast majority of Tories are good, decent people (just like the vast majority of Labour supporters) that posters such as that one are going to work.

    Shame on those who reduce confidence motions (for that is what amendments on the QS basically are) to an excuse for virtue signalling.

    Seriously, I expected better of you.

    I admire the virtues you are signalling - you are tough, pragmatic and prepared to make the hard calls. Such virtues. I wish I could be as virtuous as you.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 8,748
    GeoffM said:

    RoyalBlue said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    Davis is totally winging it ...
    https://twitter.com/JolyonMaugham/status/880312768842407936

    This is a nonsense article. Precisely how it will work will not be known until the deal is agreed with the EU. It's not in Davis' power to decide on his own.
    The "Institute for Government" is a lefty David Sainsbury funded front group, so this is safe to file away as partisan.
    Front group for what?

    I find they do some excellent research on pretty dry topics like delivery units, how senior civil servants are appointed etc.

    I really recommend their 'Ministers Reflect' series of interviews to politics geeks out there on what it's like to be a Minister.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 14,233
    SouthamObserver said:

    Mortimer said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    Mortimer said:

    bigjohnowls said:

    https://twitter.com/PeterStefanovi2/status/880188222659334146

    BJO. Astroturfing here makes no sense. You're not going to change anyone's mind or shame anyone.

    As an aside, I keep seeing these sanctimonious 'Tories voted against nice fluffy things thus they must be NASTY NASTY NASTY'. Doesn't it insult the intelligence of the intended audience, and miss the point that to win an election they need to get Tory switchers...

    It's precisely because the vast majority of Tories are good, decent people (just like the vast majority of Labour supporters) that posters such as that one are going to work.

    Shame on those who reduce confidence motions (for that is what amendments on the QS basically are) to an excuse for virtue signalling.

    Seriously, I expected better of you.

    I admire the virtues you are signalling - you are tough, pragmatic and prepared to make the hard calls. Such virtues. I wish I could be as virtuous as you.
    Nah. I just understand parliamentary procedure.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,728
    JosiasJessop said:

    DecrepitJohnL said:

    JosiasJessop said:

    'My son was circumcised without my consent'
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-40420511

    This should make for an interesting and potentially useful case.

    "I wrote to MPs and they basically shoved me off. Everybody you speak to it's like speaking to a brick wall."

    She should name and shame the MPs.

    It is a troubling case but if she is writing to MPs, plural, surely at least all but one of them will reply by directing her to her own MP? Isn't that how the system works?
    Nick might know more, but I've read stories in the past where an MP will get involved even if the complainant isn't in his/her constituency, especially when they are campaigning on an issue. I suppose it'd be polite to tell the constituent's MP you're getting involved, though.

    It just shows the woman's desperation to get justice.
    It's possible for other MPs to get involved if they wish to (I once helped a constiuent of George Galloway when he ignored her request for advice and she wrote to me as I was chair of a relevant all-party medical group) but because of workload the default is to say sorry, you need to go to your MP.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    Sean_F said:

    JackW said:

    Good Morning To All Complete Pricks Of PB Worldwide :

    JosiasJessop said:

    'My son was circumcised without my consent'
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-40420511

    This should make for an interesting and potentially useful case.

    "I wrote to MPs and they basically shoved me off. Everybody you speak to it's like speaking to a brick wall."

    She should name and shame the MPs.

    Is it bad of me to find this story funny?
    Yes.

    You're a very bad man and should cleave off your todger in an appropriate mea culpa and send the offending member to the next PB drinks where it will served as a tasty morsel to the assembled court of public opinion.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 79,512
    DecrepitJohnL said:

    JosiasJessop said:

    DecrepitJohnL said:

    JosiasJessop said:

    DecrepitJohnL said:

    DecrepitJohnL said:

    JosiasJessop said:

    'My son was circumcised without my consent'
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-40420511

    This should make for an interesting and potentially useful case.

    "I wrote to MPs and they basically shoved me off. Everybody you speak to it's like speaking to a brick wall."

    She should name and shame the MPs.

    It is a troubling case but if she is writing to MPs, plural, surely at least all but one of them will reply by directing her to her own MP? Isn't that how the system works?
    It is also slightly puzzling that doctors appear not to have corrected what sounds like a botched circumcision (which itself sounds like it should be barely harder than cutting toenails, so was the operation actually done by a doctor in the first place?).
    "barely harder than cutting toenails"

    Are you serious? IMO male circumcision for religious reasons is child abuse.
    Leaving that question aside, my comment was that it does not seem (to this non-expert) a technically difficult procedure. If separating conjoined twins is at one end of the scale of surgical complexity, and cutting toenails is at the other, then surely male circumcision is close to the latter end. Yet from the description in the story, it sounds like something went wrong.
    I don't know if you're circumcised or not, but if you are not, I would submit you'd be much more concerned about getting a circumcision that you would having your toenails cut.

    And things often go wrong with circumcisions.

    As a Jewish friend of mine at Uni said to me: "What the hell gave my parents the right to do that to me?"
    You are talking about whether it is desirable or is even abuse. I am not. Putting all moral, religious and aesthetic issues to one side, and even the legal ones about parental consent, it still sounds from the story that this comparatively simple operation was botched (and did not seem to have been corrected afterwards).
    There is no putting aside those issues. A surgical procedure without consent - as in this case - is blatantly illegal. That the operation was botched is quite possibly linked to its illegality.

    As for the rest of the issues - again, parental consent was not there.
This discussion has been closed.

© Vanilla Keystone Theme 2025