politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Theresa May sends a strong reminder that she’s still in the

WTF?

My sex abuse claim against Lord Brittan started off as just a joke: 'Victim' pressured to complain by two 'well-known' campaigners

Man said he provided a list of names as ‘a joke suggestion to start with’
Claim featured in BBC Panorama documentary on Met's inquiry into alleged Westminster paedophile ring
The man told the programme: ‘I believe it is time that the truth came out'

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3262712/My-sex-abuse-claim-against-Lord-Brittan-started-just-joke-Victim-pressured-complain-two-known-campaigners.html#ixzz3ns7fZnjj

JEO said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

The attacks on Theresa May's speech are quite bizarre. As others have pointed out, the attacks from the likes of the Indy and from Labour are simple absurd: they are attacking stuff which bears no relation to anything she said.

In terms of her leadership chances, the principal complaint one can make of the speech was that it was rather dry and technical. Boring, in fact. She's been a very good Home Secretary and is a safe pair of hands; one can easily see that she would make a decent leader and PM, but I don't think anyone is particularly enthused by her. She's not an inspiring speaker and she's not particularly good at answering questions - she tends to waffle. She's be an OK choice, but I think she won't be the choice which the party eventually makes. For a non-Osborne alternative, look to some of the younger figures.

I think the jury is out on her record as Home Secretary. Even overlooking the failure to reduce immigration - or even stop it rising - she has upset the right by handing powers to the EU and liberals from all wings of the party in things like the snooper's charter and limits on free speech. And I can't think of any major successes she can tout. If your platform is you don't have good interview skills or speechmaking ability but you have a good record, you need something more impressive than that. Perhaps if immigration suddenly falls to under 200k she will have something to tout but I do not see it.

The quietly and competently getting on with the job candidate is Hammond.

Given the record of the Home Office in destroying political careers its some achievement to have lasted there for a whole Parliament without a scandal. As you say though, she is probably a bit bland, but would be a safe pair of hands in the top job and a clear winner against Corbyn.

I guess the key is going to be who stands for the leadership, and how they are eliminated. IDS got the job by default as Clarke beat Portillo in the runoff, Michael P would have beaten IDS easily if his name had been given to the members.

Morning all

As I've been sick for much of the week, I've watched snippets of the Conservative gathering. To be fair, one could certainly not accuse the Conservatives so far of hubristic triumphalism.

It's been about people this week but the mood has been relentlessly downbeat. If you're here, expect to work longer hours for less but it's the only way you'll have any chance to make ends meet. If you want to come here, don't bother unless if you have a skill we need in which case stay for as long as you have value to us and then leave.

It's almost Orwellian - imagine the future "a blue rosette stamping on a human face forever".

It is the politics of insecurity, fear and anxiety - it plays to people's concerns about their economic, cultural and social identity but in a wholly negative way. "Work hard" seems to be all the Conservatives have to offer.

It's not even about "work smart" - where is the spirit of technological innovation that, far from keeping us chained to the workplace, should be liberating us to spend more time in other areas of our lives ? What of the computerised processes designed to release labour, what of progress ? Even the transport infrastructural improvements are predicated on getting more people to travel further to work longer.

The truth is with a potentially unlimited pool of cheap labour, who cares about productivity or innovation ? Well, perhaps, the Living Wage will encourage such thoughts as it becomes more expensive to hire.

The other truth is someone has to be at the bottom - Boris's beloved office cleaners have to come from somewhere. The aspirational message to the cleaner is simple - work hard and you can progress away from the night work to a day job from a bedsit to a nice flat or even a house. If that happens, someone else has to do the cleaning.

Merkel realises this - in a demographically difficult place, she realised bringing in the economic migrants to do the cleaning keeps the aspirational train running. Are we in a place where the replacement cleaners will be the sons and daughters of the current cleaners because there will be no progress - wither aspiration (so to speak) ?

seanf - but notice how some people on here seem to think that post Brexit the rights of British expats in Spain should be a high priority for the British government in any negotiation with the EU. Also notice that the government is changing the laws on expats' voting rights to make them lifelong - presumably in the (not necessarily correct) assumption that most of them are Tories.

Sandpit said:

MaxPB said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Slackbladder, not just the absence of variety, but having one presenter means no bickering. And no challenges/races.

Mr. Sandpit, McNish is a top bloke, ought to be commentating on TV alongside Coulthard.

I share your unimpressed stance on the timing of the F1 calendar, regarding Le Mans.

I think Amazon will have that aspect of Top Gear covered with their new show so the BBC might want an all new formula for the original. Single presenter with weekly guests from the world of motoring is what I have heard. It is going to more serious than Top Gear ever was, a bit more like Fifth Gear.

Well that won't attract a fraction of the audience of the old show. Old TG worked because it was about the only non-PC blokey show on TV, with the dynamic between the three presenters being the USP. 5th Gear but with supercars won't have the same appeal.

I think the BBC know that without Clarkson, May and Hammond they won't be able to recapture the old magic so they need to try for a new formula, one which doesn't have any competition at the moment.

Plato_Says said:

Listen up George! I hear that David Cameron might flesh out what he means by 'serving a full term' when he speaks to #CPC15 today
— Christopher Hope (@christopherhope) October 7, 2015

He'll kill all the talk by saying a full term means a full term IMHO. A stunt Blair tried I seem to recall.

stodge said:

Morning all

As I've been sick for much of the week, I've watched snippets of the Conservative gathering. To be fair, one could certainly not accuse the Conservatives so far of hubristic triumphalism.

It's been about people this week but the mood has been relentlessly downbeat. If you're here, expect to work longer hours for less but it's the only way you'll have any chance to make ends meet. If you want to come here, don't bother unless if you have a skill we need in which case stay for as long as you have value to us and then leave.

It's almost Orwellian - imagine the future "a blue rosette stamping on a human face forever".

It is the politics of insecurity, fear and anxiety - it plays to people's concerns about their economic, cultural and social identity but in a wholly negative way. "Work hard" seems to be all the Conservatives have to offer.

It's not even about "work smart" - where is the spirit of technological innovation that, far from keeping us chained to the workplace, should be liberating us to spend more time in other areas of our lives ? What of the computerised processes designed to release labour, what of progress ? Even the transport infrastructural improvements are predicated on getting more people to travel further to work longer.

The truth is with a potentially unlimited pool of cheap labour, who cares about productivity or innovation ? Well, perhaps, the Living Wage will encourage such thoughts as it becomes more expensive to hire.

The other truth is someone has to be at the bottom - Boris's beloved office cleaners have to come from somewhere. The aspirational message to the cleaner is simple - work hard and you can progress away from the night work to a day job from a bedsit to a nice flat or even a house. If that happens, someone else has to do the cleaning.

Merkel realises this - in a demographically difficult place, she realised bringing in the economic migrants to do the cleaning keeps the aspirational train running. Are we in a place where the replacement cleaners will be the sons and daughters of the current cleaners because there will be no progress - wither aspiration (so to speak) ?

Hope you're feeling better and by the way one of the best pieces I've read on here for a long time. But is this really so different to the coalition you spent 5 years supporting? I know Cable had his admirers but he seldom seemed to get much public support from the 'quad' who were concerned with 'cleaning up Labour's mess' and effectively preparing the ground for the current road to nowhere.

Clegg might have bemoaned fear triumphing over hope at the election but what did he do in his five years to sell a more positive vision of the future than the Tories?

stodge said:

Morning all

As I've been sick for much of the week, I've watched snippets of the Conservative gathering. To be fair, one could certainly not accuse the Conservatives so far of hubristic triumphalism.

It's been about people this week but the mood has been relentlessly downbeat. If you're here, expect to work longer hours for less but it's the only way you'll have any chance to make ends meet. If you want to come here, don't bother unless if you have a skill we need in which case stay for as long as you have value to us and then leave.

It's almost Orwellian - imagine the future "a blue rosette stamping on a human face forever".

It is the politics of insecurity, fear and anxiety - it plays to people's concerns about their economic, cultural and social identity but in a wholly negative way. "Work hard" seems to be all the Conservatives have to offer.

It's not even about "work smart" - where is the spirit of technological innovation that, far from keeping us chained to the workplace, should be liberating us to spend more time in other areas of our lives ? What of the computerised processes designed to release labour, what of progress ? Even the transport infrastructural improvements are predicated on getting more people to travel further to work longer.

The truth is with a potentially unlimited pool of cheap labour, who cares about productivity or innovation ? Well, perhaps, the Living Wage will encourage such thoughts as it becomes more expensive to hire.

The other truth is someone has to be at the bottom - Boris's beloved office cleaners have to come from somewhere. The aspirational message to the cleaner is simple - work hard and you can progress away from the night work to a day job from a bedsit to a nice flat or even a house. If that happens, someone else has to do the cleaning.

Merkel realises this - in a demographically difficult place, she realised bringing in the economic migrants to do the cleaning keeps the aspirational train running. Are we in a place where the replacement cleaners will be the sons and daughters of the current cleaners because there will be no progress - wither aspiration (so to speak) ?

How many cleaners does Merkel think she needs? The Germans must be a very mucky lot.

MarqueeMark said:

It's a "just reward".....

Zimbabwe, here we come....

No, no, no.

As noted upthread, the SNP will dutifuly scrutinise this decision by the SNP, before deciding that the SNP acted enitrely properly in the interest of the SNP Scotland

Nothing to see here, move along...

There was a report of a leaked German Gov docu in Times yesterday - it said that officials expected 7/8 family members to join the migrants Germany had accepted so far.

That'd make about 7m extra people in Germany. Their population is 80m IIRC.

ReggieCide said:

stodge said:

Morning all

As I've been sick for much of the week, I've watched snippets of the Conservative gathering. To be fair, one could certainly not accuse the Conservatives so far of hubristic triumphalism.

It's been about people this week but the mood has been relentlessly downbeat. If you're here, expect to work longer hours for less but it's the only way you'll have any chance to make ends meet. If you want to come here, don't bother unless if you have a skill we need in which case stay for as long as you have value to us and then leave.

It's almost Orwellian - imagine the future "a blue rosette stamping on a human face forever".

It is the politics of insecurity, fear and anxiety - it plays to people's concerns about their economic, cultural and social identity but in a wholly negative way. "Work hard" seems to be all the Conservatives have to offer.

It's not even about "work smart" - where is the spirit of technological innovation that, far from keeping us chained to the workplace, should be liberating us to spend more time in other areas of our lives ? What of the computerised processes designed to release labour, what of progress ? Even the transport infrastructural improvements are predicated on getting more people to travel further to work longer.

The truth is with a potentially unlimited pool of cheap labour, who cares about productivity or innovation ? Well, perhaps, the Living Wage will encourage such thoughts as it becomes more expensive to hire.

The other truth is someone has to be at the bottom - Boris's beloved office cleaners have to come from somewhere. The aspirational message to the cleaner is simple - work hard and you can progress away from the night work to a day job from a bedsit to a nice flat or even a house. If that happens, someone else has to do the cleaning.

Merkel realises this - in a demographically difficult place, she realised bringing in the economic migrants to do the cleaning keeps the aspirational train running. Are we in a place where the replacement cleaners will be the sons and daughters of the current cleaners because there will be no progress - wither aspiration (so to speak) ?

How many cleaners does Merkel think she needs? The Germans must be a very mucky lot.

Plato_Says said:

It was rather funny when Jeremy hosted HIGNFY and someone tried sniggering and was corrected with £165m...

It is possible that Amazon have over paid and will regret the deal, but what it does show is that the internet video services are now as much a part of the TV landscape as the BBC, ITV or Sky. Other programmes and talent are likely to follow the Top Gear team.

rottenborough said:

Plato_Says said:

Listen up George! I hear that David Cameron might flesh out what he means by 'serving a full term' when he speaks to #CPC15 today
— Christopher Hope (@christopherhope) October 7, 2015

He'll kill all the talk by saying a full term means a full term IMHO. A stunt Blair tried I seem to recall.

Except obviously it doesn't. While it is technically possible for him to serve the entire parliament with a PM-designate as party leader for the last few weeks of the election campaign, in practice it'd be ludicrous (though I think India did something similar not too long ago?).

So the new Tory leader has to be in place for the election and - in reality - for long enough in advance to be able to have significant input into the campaign plan and manifesto. That probably means a switch no later than Autumn 2019, with the party conference acting as either the launchpad for the leadership election as in 2005, or - more probably - the coronation of the successful candidate after an election taking place with the MPs rounds in June / July and the members' vote over the summer.

TGOHF said:

Theuniondivvie said:

TGOHF said:

Theuniondivvie said:

TGOHF said:

SNP donor wins big ferry contract...

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CQs8RzpWoAAPPvL.jpg:large

How much has McColl donated to the SNP?

Cash or credibility ? Either way it wasn't enough.

http://www.politics.co.uk/blogs/2014/09/15/the-right-wing-business-tycoons-behind-alex-salmond-s-indepe

https://www.facebook.com/theSNP/posts/10150319230294078

http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/jim-mccoll-considers-scotland-move-after-yes-vote-1-3451197

Is he an SNP donor or not?

He donated his time and gave gravitas to the campaign - you can't buy that.

But feel happy to dance on the head of a pin if you like.

Remarkable how little rope has to be donated to the 'world cup qualifiers' plastic Jock.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/david-cameron/11916178/david-cameron-speech-conservative-conference-live.html

He will vow to transform “generation rent” into “generation buy” by reforming planning rules on affordable housing to include low-cost “starter homes”.

He will say that having a generation of young people “waking up each morning in their childhood bedrooms” is a “wakeup call” for the Government. The reforms will stop developers being forced to build affordable homes for rent, allowing them to build low-cost homes for sale.

TOPPING said:

Charles said:

I'd look at addressing some of the real concerns about Uber - requiring regular vehicle checks, requiring the company to take out insurance on the fleet, establishing that Uber bears the responsibility for the actions of its drivers (ie that there is an employer-employee relationship rather than this "self-employed agent" bullshit). Those would all be reasonable things to address.

Calm down Charles. It's only a taxi; it's not micro-surgery.

The market will sort it out. Or should be able to. Boris is all over the shop on this, but the shop is firmly on the wrong side of everything.

Wrong.

Sometimes bad drives out good.

In this case, with lower protection for consumers, Uber can charge less. Consumers won't realise it's a problem until it's too late - by which time the traditional black cab business model may have been fatally undermined. The answer is simple: put in minimum regulatory standards and require Uber to stand behind its drivers.

And it's not "only a taxi". It's a safe journey home late at night for my wife.

TGOHF said:

Theuniondivvie said:

TGOHF said:

Theuniondivvie said:

TGOHF said:

Theuniondivvie said:

TGOHF said:

SNP donor wins big ferry contract...

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CQs8RzpWoAAPPvL.jpg:large

How much has McColl donated to the SNP?

Cash or credibility ? Either way it wasn't enough.

http://www.politics.co.uk/blogs/2014/09/15/the-right-wing-business-tycoons-behind-alex-salmond-s-indepe

https://www.facebook.com/theSNP/posts/10150319230294078

http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/jim-mccoll-considers-scotland-move-after-yes-vote-1-3451197

Is he an SNP donor or not?

He donated his time and gave gravitas to the campaign - you can't buy that.

But feel happy to dance on the head of a pin if you like.

Remarkable how little rope has to be donated to the 'world cup qualifiers' plastic Jock.

Perhaps as a tax exile in Monaco he was advised that donations wouldn't look good.

I note being a smart chap he's finally seen the light..

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-independence/11453007/Jim-McColl-drops-support-for-Scottish-independence.html

Always a good start to the day visualising SNPouters frenetically & fruitlessly entering various search criteria in Google to support their ill informed guff. Your WATP wallpaper is gash by the way.

Richard_Nabavi said:

The attacks on Theresa May's speech are quite bizarre. As others have pointed out, the attacks from the likes of the Indy and from Labour are simple absurd: they are attacking stuff which bears no relation to anything she said.

It's being interpreted - not unfairly IMO - as a dog-whistle. The Mail thinks it's great because it articulates widespread fears, but they do note that as Home Secretary for 5 years she's not actually addressed the issue that she's complaining about.

A comparison might be if Balls had made a speech in 2009 denouncing bankers' greed - for all I know he may have done. Supporters would have nodded and said yes, good man, but as he hadn't actually done much to tighten control of banking speculation, it would rightly have been interpreted as political positioning.

TGOHF said:

Theuniondivvie said:

TGOHF said:

Theuniondivvie said:

TGOHF said:

SNP donor wins big ferry contract...

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CQs8RzpWoAAPPvL.jpg:large

How much has McColl donated to the SNP?

Cash or credibility ? Either way it wasn't enough.

http://www.politics.co.uk/blogs/2014/09/15/the-right-wing-business-tycoons-behind-alex-salmond-s-indepe

https://www.facebook.com/theSNP/posts/10150319230294078

http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/jim-mccoll-considers-scotland-move-after-yes-vote-1-3451197

Is he an SNP donor or not?

He donated his time and gave gravitas to the campaign - you can't buy that.

But feel happy to dance on the head of a pin if you like.

Gravitas and gravy train sound quite similar....

Morris_Dancer said:

Miss Plato, a conservative estimate, as up to 1.5m are expecting in Germany (before they shove the ones they don't want elsewhere in Schengen).

Saw that HIGNFY. Osman was amusing at first, but he kept on banging on and on about Clarkson's firing. It was a shade obsessive.

Mr. Jessop, aren't Clarkson and May both fairly tall?

I believe so. But that would involve them taking a serious interest in the sorts of cars most people buy, which they don't do (and neither should they - everyday cars are not the program's point).

I do wonder if it's just me, or whether other people have problems. I know a friend of mine who is 6'5" occasionally has trouble with hire cars when he travels on business.

ReggieCide said:

rottenborough said:

ReggieCide said:

Casino_Royale said:

SouthamObserver said:

Casino_Royale said:

SouthamObserver said:

Casino_Royale said:

I got £25 on her on Betfair last night at ~9/1.

I still think that's a steal. If she can get to the final two - her weakness will be her MP base, but Boris has the same problem - she has a good chance against Osborne.

And therein lies hope for Labour.

Why?

Because a Tory party that moves rightwards gives a new Labour leader the opportunity to move back to the centre.

You think the Tory party taking action to fulfil its 2015 manifesto pledge on immigration - the number one issue for voters - would be seen as moving rightwards?

I'm with you CS. A desire for action on immigration is across the board, if anything with a bias to the left, hence UKIP's GE showing in Labour's heartlands.

I don't see how on earth they can meet their manifesto commitment. Wasn't it something like get net migration down to 10s of thousands? Only an opt-out from free movement in EU or leaving EU will get them there.

I agree with you and didn't say it would be easy. However it's a lot easier if you try than if you don't.

Net migration IS in the 10s of thousands - 32 of them.

Charles said:

TOPPING said:

Charles said:

I'd look at addressing some of the real concerns about Uber - requiring regular vehicle checks, requiring the company to take out insurance on the fleet, establishing that Uber bears the responsibility for the actions of its drivers (ie that there is an employer-employee relationship rather than this "self-employed agent" bullshit). Those would all be reasonable things to address.

Calm down Charles. It's only a taxi; it's not micro-surgery.

The market will sort it out. Or should be able to. Boris is all over the shop on this, but the shop is firmly on the wrong side of everything.

Wrong.

Sometimes bad drives out good.

In this case, with lower protection for consumers, Uber can charge less. Consumers won't realise it's a problem until it's too late - by which time the traditional black cab business model may have been fatally undermined. The answer is simple: put in minimum regulatory standards and require Uber to stand behind its drivers.

And it's not "only a taxi". It's a safe journey home late at night for my wife.

No need to over-dramatise things Charles. Other options are available for your wife. It sounds like the market is working perfectly. You don't like this whole Uber malarkey so you can exercise your freedom never to take them and so can your wife.

For you both the world of black cabs and 24-hr mini-cab offices awaits.

I think differently. If I read in the newspapers that Uber cars are flying off the road into buildings because of faulty maintenance or suchlike I might think again. But for the moment, I will continue to use them.

Isn't the market wonderful?

@JournoStephen: "Slashing college places for working-class kids to pay for free university for the wealthy" - @DavidMundellDCT laying into SNP record #cpc15

Charles said:

TOPPING said:

Charles said:

I'd look at addressing some of the real concerns about Uber - requiring regular vehicle checks, requiring the company to take out insurance on the fleet, establishing that Uber bears the responsibility for the actions of its drivers (ie that there is an employer-employee relationship rather than this "self-employed agent" bullshit). Those would all be reasonable things to address.

Calm down Charles. It's only a taxi; it's not micro-surgery.

The market will sort it out. Or should be able to. Boris is all over the shop on this, but the shop is firmly on the wrong side of everything.

Wrong.

Sometimes bad drives out good.

In this case, with lower protection for consumers, Uber can charge less. Consumers won't realise it's a problem until it's too late - by which time the traditional black cab business model may have been fatally undermined. The answer is simple: put in minimum regulatory standards and require Uber to stand behind its drivers.

And it's not "only a taxi". It's a safe journey home late at night for my wife.

Quite right, Mr. Charles, and I hope you would ensure that your good lady never travels by mini-cab at any time of day. The risks involved of getting an unlicensed, uninsured, driver who doesn't actually know where he or she is going are not worth the trivial savings in the fare.

When I worked in London I used cabs extensively - if I couldn't walk there because of time or bad weather I took a cab. Twice the client for whom I was working arranged for an Addsion Lee car to drive me around between meetings etc. The first time I put down to a possible one off, after the second I said never again.

HurstLlama said:

Charles said:

TOPPING said:

Charles said:

I'd look at addressing some of the real concerns about Uber - requiring regular vehicle checks, requiring the company to take out insurance on the fleet, establishing that Uber bears the responsibility for the actions of its drivers (ie that there is an employer-employee relationship rather than this "self-employed agent" bullshit). Those would all be reasonable things to address.

Calm down Charles. It's only a taxi; it's not micro-surgery.

The market will sort it out. Or should be able to. Boris is all over the shop on this, but the shop is firmly on the wrong side of everything.

Wrong.

Sometimes bad drives out good.

In this case, with lower protection for consumers, Uber can charge less. Consumers won't realise it's a problem until it's too late - by which time the traditional black cab business model may have been fatally undermined. The answer is simple: put in minimum regulatory standards and require Uber to stand behind its drivers.

And it's not "only a taxi". It's a safe journey home late at night for my wife.

Quite right, Mr. Charles, and I hope you would ensure that your good lady never travels by mini-cab at any time of day. The risks involved of getting an unlicensed, uninsured, driver who doesn't actually know where he or she is going are not worth the trivial savings in the fare.

When I worked in London I used cabs extensively - if I couldn't walk there because of time or bad weather I took a cab. Twice the client for whom I was working arranged for an Addsion Lee car to drive me around between meetings etc. The first time I put down to a possible one off, after the second I said never again.

The client wasn't @Innocent_Abroad by any chance, was it?

flightpath01 said:

Beverley_C said:

Plato_Says said:

WTF?

My sex abuse claim against Lord Brittan started off as just a joke: 'Victim' pressured to complain by two 'well-known' campaigners

Man said he provided a list of names as ‘a joke suggestion to start with’
Claim featured in BBC Panorama documentary on Met's inquiry into alleged Westminster paedophile ring
The man told the programme: ‘I believe it is time that the truth came out'

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3262712/My-sex-abuse-claim-against-Lord-Brittan-started-just-joke-Victim-pressured-complain-two-known-campaigners.html#ixzz3ns7fZnjj

Surely that has to blow a large hole in the investigation? Perhaps there will be an investigation into why this investigation got as far as it did without uncovering this rather large blooper.

We need an investigation into the deputy leader of the labour party.

the nonce finder General?

HurstLlama said:

Charles said:

TOPPING said:

Charles said:

I'd look at addressing some of the real concerns about Uber - requiring regular vehicle checks, requiring the company to take out insurance on the fleet, establishing that Uber bears the responsibility for the actions of its drivers (ie that there is an employer-employee relationship rather than this "self-employed agent" bullshit). Those would all be reasonable things to address.

Calm down Charles. It's only a taxi; it's not micro-surgery.

The market will sort it out. Or should be able to. Boris is all over the shop on this, but the shop is firmly on the wrong side of everything.

Wrong.

Sometimes bad drives out good.

In this case, with lower protection for consumers, Uber can charge less. Consumers won't realise it's a problem until it's too late - by which time the traditional black cab business model may have been fatally undermined. The answer is simple: put in minimum regulatory standards and require Uber to stand behind its drivers.

And it's not "only a taxi". It's a safe journey home late at night for my wife.

Quite right, Mr. Charles, and I hope you would ensure that your good lady never travels by mini-cab at any time of day. The risks involved of getting an unlicensed, uninsured, driver who doesn't actually know where he or she is going are not worth the trivial savings in the fare.

When I worked in London I used cabs extensively - if I couldn't walk there because of time or bad weather I took a cab. Twice the client for whom I was working arranged for an Addsion Lee car to drive me around between meetings etc. The first time I put down to a possible one off, after the second I said never again.

She tends to use the bus...

ReggieCide said:

richardDodd said:

The one great thing about Tom Watson is...he actually looks the part of a total shit..no makeup needed..Central Casting has excelled itself...

I agree. He actually looks like he should be leaving a slime trail behind him when he moves.

and he does....

felix said:

richardDodd said:

Felix.. It will not make any difference to them...In or Out..just the same.. as it would be for a Spaniard living in the UK..

That is not what people think - they need to be convinced and re-assured and many of the posters on here today would fail to allay their fears one jot.

I would expect that people who were lawfully settled in the UK, or Spain, would retain rights to permanent residence. People who wished to settle in either country in the future would have to apply for permission.

TCPoliticalBetting said:

ReggieCide said:

richardDodd said:

The one great thing about Tom Watson is...he actually looks the part of a total shit..no makeup needed..Central Casting has excelled itself...

I agree. He actually looks like he should be leaving a slime trail behind him when he moves.

and he does....

Now then, now then. You've all heard Jez - no more of the personal attacks on leading gastropods, I mean politicians.

One person I'd like to see stand for the leadership is Ruth Davidson, she's impressive.

Charles said:

TOPPING said:

Charles said:

I'd look at addressing some of the real concerns about Uber - requiring regular vehicle checks, requiring the company to take out insurance on the fleet, establishing that Uber bears the responsibility for the actions of its drivers (ie that there is an employer-employee relationship rather than this "self-employed agent" bullshit). Those would all be reasonable things to address.

Calm down Charles. It's only a taxi; it's not micro-surgery.

The market will sort it out. Or should be able to. Boris is all over the shop on this, but the shop is firmly on the wrong side of everything.

Wrong.

Sometimes bad drives out good.

In this case, with lower protection for consumers, Uber can charge less. Consumers won't realise it's a problem until it's too late - by which time the traditional black cab business model may have been fatally undermined. The answer is simple: put in minimum regulatory standards and require Uber to stand behind its drivers.

And it's not "only a taxi". It's a safe journey home late at night for my wife.

In the United States, Uber provides the insurance. Is it different in the UK?

Ultimately, my view is that the consumer should decide. Not politicians in thrall to vested interests.

Sean_F said:

felix said:

richardDodd said:

Felix.. It will not make any difference to them...In or Out..just the same.. as it would be for a Spaniard living in the UK..

That is not what people think - they need to be convinced and re-assured and many of the posters on here today would fail to allay their fears one jot.

I would expect that people who were lawfully settled in the UK, or Spain, would retain rights to permanent residence. People who wished to settle in either country in the future would have to apply for permission.

Though whether the Brit retirees would still be eligible for the Spanish equivalent of the NHS must be less certain. Indeed if they have lived more than 12 months outside the UK they would not be eligible for the British NHS either!

A big effect on resale values in retirement areas in Spain and Portugal, and increased pressure on house prices on the South coast of England in the medium term too.

When I need a taxi I usually use Penkridge Cabs, of Stone Cross, Penkridge.

Without wanting to wade into the Scottish argument too far, what I would say is that the argument for Holyrood needs to focus on the SNP record, not on unionism, leave that for Westminster. The Tories and Labour need to attract the 10% of unionists who vote for the SNP because they are the only serious party of government in Scotland. The Tories may have realised this and their attacking of the SNP record on student fees, housing and cronyism seems to be bearing fruit in the locals with their vote share up on average. Labour seem to be falling back on scare stories about independence which didn't work last time and given the result of the referendum, also won't work this time. There is still time before the Holyrood election for them to build a proper policy platform, but they are so bereft of any real talent that their campaign will most likely be a rerun of the referendum campaign which saw their most loyal supporters vote for independence.

I seriously think that the Tories have a good chance of coming second to the SNP, what are the odds for that?

FrankBooth said:

Hope you're feeling better and by the way one of the best pieces I've read on here for a long time. But is this really so different to the coalition you spent 5 years supporting? I know Cable had his admirers but he seldom seemed to get much public support from the 'quad' who were concerned with 'cleaning up Labour's mess' and effectively preparing the ground for the current road to nowhere.

Clegg might have bemoaned fear triumphing over hope at the election but what did he do in his five years to sell a more positive vision of the future than the Tories?

Thanks for the kind word, Frank, and thanks also for engaging on this. Apart from a cheap jibe, all the Tories on here want to do, it seems, to talk among themselves and to themselves at present.

I don't know what was said and what wasn't said in the Coalition but I suspect the initial Civil Service briefings painted an overly negative view of the state of the public finances but there was an element of "having to clean up the mess" though the method for doing that has been shown to be questionable and I've never supported QE.

I think in areas such as paternity leave, free school meals and green energy measures there was a genuine attempt to try to improve the lot of the poorest and to address future challenges. It was well-intentioned if not always well-directed but given the balance within the Coalition itself it was about as much as Clegg could expect.

It's hard to blame Nick Clegg for the crisis in Syria or the problems in the Eurozone (although some will no doubt) and these external issues fundamentally impacted on the Coalition's ability to do any more than keep going.

My issue with the deficit management policy has always been the artificial ring-fencing of certain areas, the NHS, pensioners' benefits and a few others as examples as well as the progressive vilification of those on benefits. That the LDs signed up to some of these measures is something with which the Party has to live going forward.

My only other thought was I never heard Ed Miliband come up with anything positive either - even at the very end I could not imagine what a Britain led by Ed Miliband would like and the policies his Government would enact. At least with Corbyn there'll be much less ambiguity.

@JosiasJessop

'One does have to wonder how much Tom Watson's hand is in all of this.

His hands are either deep in the muck, or he's been a very useful idiot. Either way, it does not reflect well on his position as deputy leader of the Labour party.'

When can we expect a public apology from Watson ?

He then needs to stop the grandstanding & shut the f$ck up.

Given we're all talking Uber, can I share an experience I had in San Francisco earlier this year. I had dinner at a friend's house near Candlestick Park (which is a pretty rundown, working class area). Historically, getting a cab there was incredibly difficult, and public transport (the bus) was infrequent.

Anyway: at the end of dinner, I got out my phone and pressed the button for an Uber.

Instead of ordering an UberX, as I normally do, I found myself accidentally ordering an UberPop.

What is UberPop? It's a $7 flat fee service from anywhere in San Francisco to anywhere else. But there's a rub. It's not a direct run. The car probably has a passenger or two in when you get in, and then delivers one of them, and picks up another along the way. In other words, they use complicated algorithims to dynamically route cars.

In the car with me for my journey were two construction workers, who were working on the night shift of some large project. They told me that before UberX they walked to the bus stop, waited for it, then got the bus to the subway stop before transferring. At 11pm at night, this could be an hour and 20 to get to work. Now it took them 20 to 25 minutes, and cost them just $7. (The same price as public transport.)

Uber for me was just a way of saving money and getting a car when I needed it. For these guys, Uber had literally changed their lives.

NickPalmer said:

Plato_Says said:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/david-cameron/11916178/david-cameron-speech-conservative-conference-live.html

He will vow to transform “generation rent” into “generation buy” by reforming planning rules on affordable housing to include low-cost “starter homes”.

He will say that having a generation of young people “waking up each morning in their childhood bedrooms” is a “wakeup call” for the Government. The reforms will stop developers being forced to build affordable homes for rent, allowing them to build low-cost homes for sale.

Good news for BTL landlords - less competition from new build. I know people obsess about owning their homes, so it'll go down well with people worried that they can't manage it, but in practice quite a lot still won't be able to manage it, and they'll find themselves forced to pay even more rent as a result.

Merely squeezing the rental market to fuel the sales market isn't a sensible answer - we need more homes of both kinds, whether by building higher, spreading outwards or any other solution.



The devil is in the detail or, more precisely, what is defined by "affordable" and "low-cost". If it is a percentage of the full market price, that creates a problem because salaries are so out of kilter with house prices in so many parts of the country.

Cyclefree said:

OldKingCole said:

Sean_F said:

malcolmg said:

rcs1000 said:

Casino_Royale said:

rcs1000 said:

I would rate May's chances ahead of Johnson's. Still, I doubt either will be PM.

(Caveat: if she leads the "Out" charge, and "Out" wins, then that could change.)

(To add: since Boris Johnson's article on Uber, I would rather cut my own hand off than vote for him in any capacity.)

London black cabs are a closed shop.

Boris and TFL's actions are utterly disgusting. Uber (and I'm sure other virtual taxi firms in time) is increasing choice and availability for consumers, while lowering prices. It allows flexible working for drivers (who give up a far smaller share of their earnings than they did when they worked for minicab firms).

And it brings quality control: Uber drivers need to keep scoring 4.5/5.0, otherwise they get dropped from the system.

I feel for taxi drivers, I really do. They spent three years educating themselves, and the value of that knowledge has declined. But regulation must always be consumer led. And the existence of Uber is unambiguously good for consumers. Artificial measures (5 minute cooldowns, for example) to try and make Uber less attractive are a travesty.

I could never vote for Boris. I could never vote for a Conservative Party he led.

Black cabs seem to be a real con. I got one from Heathrow recently to a meeting , just a few miles , almost £30 pounds. On the way back I got a private hire cab and it was £11. No wonder they do not like their monopoly being threatened.

Speaking personally, black cabs are by far my preferred method of getting round central London, if I'm not walking.

If black cabs and “the knowledge” are being rendered redundant by sat navs etc, isn’t that just the way of the world? After all, it was their grandfather’s superior technology which allowed them to supercede horse-drawn hansom cabs.

Knowing your way around a place and being able to read maps are not redundant even in the days of satnavs, IMO.

Sat Navs can be very unreliable, in my experience.

Sean_F said:

Cyclefree said:

OldKingCole said:

Sean_F said:

malcolmg said:

rcs1000 said:

Casino_Royale said:

rcs1000 said:

I would rate May's chances ahead of Johnson's. Still, I doubt either will be PM.

(Caveat: if she leads the "Out" charge, and "Out" wins, then that could change.)

(To add: since Boris Johnson's article on Uber, I would rather cut my own hand off than vote for him in any capacity.)

London black cabs are a closed shop.

Boris and TFL's actions are utterly disgusting. Uber (and I'm sure other virtual taxi firms in time) is increasing choice and availability for consumers, while lowering prices. It allows flexible working for drivers (who give up a far smaller share of their earnings than they did when they worked for minicab firms).

And it brings quality control: Uber drivers need to keep scoring 4.5/5.0, otherwise they get dropped from the system.

I feel for taxi drivers, I really do. They spent three years educating themselves, and the value of that knowledge has declined. But regulation must always be consumer led. And the existence of Uber is unambiguously good for consumers. Artificial measures (5 minute cooldowns, for example) to try and make Uber less attractive are a travesty.

I could never vote for Boris. I could never vote for a Conservative Party he led.

Black cabs seem to be a real con. I got one from Heathrow recently to a meeting , just a few miles , almost £30 pounds. On the way back I got a private hire cab and it was £11. No wonder they do not like their monopoly being threatened.

Speaking personally, black cabs are by far my preferred method of getting round central London, if I'm not walking.

If black cabs and “the knowledge” are being rendered redundant by sat navs etc, isn’t that just the way of the world? After all, it was their grandfather’s superior technology which allowed them to supercede horse-drawn hansom cabs.

Knowing your way around a place and being able to read maps are not redundant even in the days of satnavs, IMO.

Sat Navs can be very unreliable, in my experience.

But every day Google gets better. In the long run, technology like Waze brings the knowledge of London cabbies to every driver.

rcs1000 said:

Given we're all talking Uber, can I share an experience I had in San Francisco earlier this year. I had dinner at a friend's house near Candlestick Park (which is a pretty rundown, working class area). Historically, getting a cab there was incredibly difficult, and public transport (the bus) was infrequent.

Anyway: at the end of dinner, I got out my phone and pressed the button for an Uber.

Instead of ordering an UberX, as I normally do, I found myself accidentally ordering an UberPop.

What is UberPop? It's a $7 flat fee service from anywhere in San Francisco to anywhere else. But there's a rub. It's not a direct run. The car probably has a passenger or two in when you get in, and then delivers one of them, and picks up another along the way. In other words, they use complicated algorithims to dynamically route cars.

In the car with me for my journey were two construction workers, who were working on the night shift of some large project. They told me that before UberX they walked to the bus stop, waited for it, then got the bus to the subway stop before transferring. At 11pm at night, this could be an hour and 20 to get to work. Now it took them 20 to 25 minutes, and cost them just $7. (The same price as public transport.)

Uber for me was just a way of saving money and getting a car when I needed it. For these guys, Uber had literally changed their lives.

And when I've used it (in SF) it has been very good.

There is clearly demand for its services.

But that doesn't put it above the law, above taxation, above doing business in a moral and sustainable way.