politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The pressure mounts on Osborne’s tax credit plan

System · October 2015

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The pressure mounts on Osborne’s tax credit plan

Me for @TheTimes: Cameron must choose. His one nation mission or cuts in tax credits http://t.co/cPIc5UzO7M pic.twitter.com/mLxSYFsSPf

Read the full story here

Philip_Thompson · October 2015

Tax credit changes should be tweaked perhaps but they should still happen. They are a punitive cap on aspiration causing a marginal tax rate that would be viewed as unthinkable on anyone else.

Smooth the transition so people don't lose out and the changes in tax credits coincide with the increase in living wage rates would be one solution.

TGOHF · October 2015

Keep pumping him the deflating balloon of a fruitless campaign against government subsidising low wages - I'm sure it'll be as successful as the stop the bedroom tax one.

Dearie me.

bigjohnowls · October 2015

Philip_Thompson said:
Tax credit changes should be tweaked perhaps but they should still happen. They are a punitive cap on aspiration causing a marginal tax rate that would be viewed as unthinkable on anyone else.

Smooth the transition so people don't lose out and the changes in tax credits coincide with the increase in living wage rates would be one solution.

Agreed

SouthamObserver · October 2015

Philip_Thompson said:
Tax credit changes should be tweaked perhaps but they should still happen. They are a punitive cap on aspiration causing a marginal tax rate that would be viewed as unthinkable on anyone else.

Smooth the transition so people don't lose out and the changes in tax credits coincide with the increase in living wage rates would be one solution.

A U-turn, in other words. It's going to happen, for sure.

Osborne does not fear Labour, of course, but he does fear not being the next PM.

GeoffM · October 2015

*yawn*
If the thread headers keep banging this drum it might just make a noise, eh?

Danny565 · October 2015

Danny565 Posts: 3,073
July 8
I suspect this Budget will go down as the biggest mismatch between initial hype and long-term reputation, since Brown's 2007 Budget (the initial hype being people noticing a cut in basic income tax, before everyone noticed the scrapping of the 10p band later on).

DavidL · October 2015

The budget sums are particularly hard this year. Those incompetent managers who run the health service are going to need another couple of billion to balance the books, the tax revenues are looking disappointing, north sea oil is down to next to zero, he has had to find some more for the train sets to keep the Northern Powerhouse on track and he needs to find some money to give his new infrastructure commission a head start.

Even if he wanted to finding an extra couple of billion to smooth the edges of these tax credits is going to be tricky. This is what a structural deficit looks like. Its not pretty. No wonder he is so keen to sell the Lloyds shares.

Richard_Nabavi · October 2015

Hmmm... I don't think an article, even an article backed up by a tweet, by Tim Montgomerie really counts as 'the pressure mounts'.

GeoffM · October 2015

Danny565 said:
Danny565 Posts: 3,073
July 8
I suspect this Budget will go down as the biggest mismatch between initial hype and long-term reputation, since Brown's 2007 Budget (the initial hype being people noticing a cut in basic income tax, before everyone noticed the scrapping of the 10p band later on).

Why are you repeating your post from July?
I'd have thought you'd have wanted it buried at sea instead as it's still complete bollocks.

DavidL · October 2015

SeanT said:
Hold your ground, Gideon.

We need to slash welfare to the bone. We need to see starving northerners and Scots doing weird jigs in the streets of the Home Counties, in the forlorn hope they might earn a sixpence to buy rusks for their children. We need to see RESULTS.

Maybe a new 90% rate on those earning over 400K? What do you think Sean?

chestnut · October 2015

Carry on Osborne.

Higher wages, lower taxes, fewer subsidies is the right way.

TGOHF · October 2015

Richard_Nabavi said:
Hmmm... I don't think an article, even an article backed up by a tweet, by Tim Montgomerie really counts as 'the pressure mounts'.

But what if - gasp ! - Fraser Nelson join in - will there be a sitting of Corbra ?

bigjohnowls · October 2015

DavidL said:
The budget sums are particularly hard this year. Those incompetent managers who run the health service are going to need another couple of billion to balance the books, the tax revenues are looking disappointing, north sea oil is down to next to zero, he has had to find some more for the train sets to keep the Northern Powerhouse on track and he needs to find some money to give his new infrastructure commission a head start.

Even if he wanted to finding an extra couple of billion to smooth the edges of these tax credits is going to be tricky. This is what a structural deficit looks like. Its not pretty. No wonder he is so keen to sell the Lloyds shares.

Every manager in the 95% of Acute hospitals that are significantly overspent must be incompetent.

Clearly nothing to do with Lansley

Scrapheap_as_was · October 2015

The blanchflower of the right... now that is pressure.

JEO · October 2015

I'm hearing a few more rumours down the grapevine that Cameron's going to sack eurosceptic ministers in the coming months so they will have less status when they campaign to leave the EU.

It will be utterly appalling if he does that. The EU is clearly a very heated and important issue within the Conservative Party, and the only way we can overcome it is to have a mature debate and if both sides are treated with respect. If the leadership engages in a dirty tricks campaign to kneecap people on the other side of the debate, then it will cause the eurosceptics to respond in kind (with legitimate reason) and we will descend into civil war.

It will be despicable if Cameron puts stacking the deck in favour of the EU ahead of the unity of the Conservative Party - especially when the Opposition has such dangerous views right now.

DavidL · October 2015

Of course yet another problem for the Treasury is that that damn stupid triple lock and zero inflation means that the cost of pensions in real terms is going up by the full 2.5%. If the BoE were meeting its targets this would be more like 0.5%.

The pressure this puts on the welfare budget is largely being borne by our working poor. We have gone way too far down this road already.

No_Offence_Alan · October 2015

DavidL said:
The budget sums are particularly hard this year. Those incompetent managers who run the health service are going to need another couple of billion to balance the books, the tax revenues are looking disappointing, north sea oil is down to next to zero, he has had to find some more for the train sets to keep the Northern Powerhouse on track and he needs to find some money to give his new infrastructure commission a head start.

Even if he wanted to finding an extra couple of billion to smooth the edges of these tax credits is going to be tricky. This is what a structural deficit looks like. Its not pretty. No wonder he is so keen to sell the Lloyds shares.

The sums would have added up better without the gratuitous cut in corporation tax.

Philip_Thompson · October 2015

SouthamObserver said:

Philip_Thompson said:
Tax credit changes should be tweaked perhaps but they should still happen. They are a punitive cap on aspiration causing a marginal tax rate that would be viewed as unthinkable on anyone else.

Smooth the transition so people don't lose out and the changes in tax credits coincide with the increase in living wage rates would be one solution.

A U-turn, in other words. It's going to happen, for sure.

Osborne does not fear Labour, of course, but he does fear not being the next PM.

A u-turn would be abolishing reforms to tax credits. Tweaking reforms so that they're better implemented should always be the responsibility of a sensible government not something to be avoided for the curse of being accused of a u-turn.

GeoffM · October 2015

bigjohnowls said:

DavidL said:
The budget sums are particularly hard this year. Those incompetent managers who run the health service are going to need another couple of billion to balance the books, the tax revenues are looking disappointing, north sea oil is down to next to zero, he has had to find some more for the train sets to keep the Northern Powerhouse on track and he needs to find some money to give his new infrastructure commission a head start.

Even if he wanted to finding an extra couple of billion to smooth the edges of these tax credits is going to be tricky. This is what a structural deficit looks like. Its not pretty. No wonder he is so keen to sell the Lloyds shares.
Every manager in the 95% of Acute hospitals that are significantly overspent must be incompetent.

Clearly nothing to do with Lansley

Agree with both of those assessments.
The problem is how you get rid of them and replace them with competent managers.
There are plenty in the private sector but you'd be able to hear the howls of lefty anguish from Pluto.

Philip_Thompson · October 2015

No_Offence_Alan said:

DavidL said:
The budget sums are particularly hard this year. Those incompetent managers who run the health service are going to need another couple of billion to balance the books, the tax revenues are looking disappointing, north sea oil is down to next to zero, he has had to find some more for the train sets to keep the Northern Powerhouse on track and he needs to find some money to give his new infrastructure commission a head start.

Even if he wanted to finding an extra couple of billion to smooth the edges of these tax credits is going to be tricky. This is what a structural deficit looks like. Its not pretty. No wonder he is so keen to sell the Lloyds shares.
The sums would have added up better without the gratuitous cut in corporation tax.

How would the sums have added up for businesses if they were expected to increase pay without a cut in tax?

DavidL · October 2015

bigjohnowls said:

DavidL said:
The budget sums are particularly hard this year. Those incompetent managers who run the health service are going to need another couple of billion to balance the books, the tax revenues are looking disappointing, north sea oil is down to next to zero, he has had to find some more for the train sets to keep the Northern Powerhouse on track and he needs to find some money to give his new infrastructure commission a head start.

Even if he wanted to finding an extra couple of billion to smooth the edges of these tax credits is going to be tricky. This is what a structural deficit looks like. Its not pretty. No wonder he is so keen to sell the Lloyds shares.
Every manager in the 95% of Acute hospitals that are significantly overspent must be incompetent.

Clearly nothing to do with Lansley

It may have a lot to do with Lansley and his half baked reforms but it is certainly adding to the pressure. The NHS is going to need more money. It is inevitable.

SouthamObserver · October 2015

Danny565 said:
Danny565 Posts: 3,073
July 8
I suspect this Budget will go down as the biggest mismatch between initial hype and long-term reputation, since Brown's 2007 Budget (the initial hype being people noticing a cut in basic income tax, before everyone noticed the scrapping of the 10p band later on).

There'll be a U-turn because GO wants to be PM. Beyond that, Labour's total unelectability makes even this issue a non-story.

DavidL · October 2015

No_Offence_Alan said:

DavidL said:
The budget sums are particularly hard this year. Those incompetent managers who run the health service are going to need another couple of billion to balance the books, the tax revenues are looking disappointing, north sea oil is down to next to zero, he has had to find some more for the train sets to keep the Northern Powerhouse on track and he needs to find some money to give his new infrastructure commission a head start.

Even if he wanted to finding an extra couple of billion to smooth the edges of these tax credits is going to be tricky. This is what a structural deficit looks like. Its not pretty. No wonder he is so keen to sell the Lloyds shares.
The sums would have added up better without the gratuitous cut in corporation tax.

Do you not believe in the Laffer curve? And the tooth fairy? And Father Christmas? You'll be telling me you don't believe in McDonnell next but that Grinch is all too real.

weejonnie · October 2015

I don't think he'll change. Far better to get the nasty medicine out of the way in 2015 than much later. In 2019 -2020 (if all goes right) he can say "look we balanced the books" - just in time for the general election. This is the Tory trump card (as well as substantially increasing the minimum wage) - Osborne is not going to risk losing it.

chestnut · October 2015

DavidL said:
Of course yet another problem for the Treasury is that that damn stupid triple lock and zero inflation means that the cost of pensions in real terms is going up by the full 2.5%. If the BoE were meeting its targets this would be more like 0.5%.

The pressure this puts on the welfare budget is largely being borne by our working poor. We have gone way too far down this road already.

Doesn't the inflation figure have a very positive income on government debt restructuring whilst suppressing public sector pensions and putting more spending money (real terms) in the hands of the majority, driving consumption, employment and tax revenue?

That said, pensioners do seem to be getting a particularly good deal. I'd imagine that many are informally passing it on to children and grandchildren etc.

SouthamObserver · October 2015

Philip_Thompson said:

SouthamObserver said:

Philip_Thompson said:
Tax credit changes should be tweaked perhaps but they should still happen. They are a punitive cap on aspiration causing a marginal tax rate that would be viewed as unthinkable on anyone else.

Smooth the transition so people don't lose out and the changes in tax credits coincide with the increase in living wage rates would be one solution.

A U-turn, in other words. It's going to happen, for sure.

Osborne does not fear Labour, of course, but he does fear not being the next PM.

A u-turn would be abolishing reforms to tax credits. Tweaking reforms so that they're better implemented should always be the responsibility of a sensible government not something to be avoided for the curse of being accused of a u-turn.

A U-ey is a U-ey, but is usually presented as a tweak. I agree that this is how GO will present this U-turn.

Sunil_Prasannan · October 2015

SeanT said:

JEO said:
I'm hearing a few more rumours down the grapevine that Cameron's going to sack eurosceptic ministers in the coming months so they will have less status when they campaign to leave the EU.

It will be utterly appalling if he does that. The EU is clearly a very heated and important issue within the Conservative Party, and the only way we can overcome it is to have a mature debate and if both sides are treated with respect. If the leadership engages in a dirty tricks campaign to kneecap people on the other side of the debate, then it will cause the eurosceptics to respond in kind (with legitimate reason) and we will descend into civil war.

It will be despicable if Cameron puts stacking the deck in favour of the EU ahead of the unity of the Conservative Party - especially when the Opposition has such dangerous views right now.
Completely agree. If he does that, Cameron will essentially be saying that the cause of the EU is more important than the prosperity of Great Britain (given that the alternative to a violently divided Tory party is a Corbyn-led Labour).

I cannot believe he will be that stupid. And odious. And wrong.

I voted UKIP at the Euro election last year.

ReggieCide · October 2015

DavidL said:
The budget sums are particularly hard this year. Those incompetent managers who run the health service are going to need another couple of billion to balance the books, the tax revenues are looking disappointing, north sea oil is down to next to zero, he has had to find some more for the train sets to keep the Northern Powerhouse on track and he needs to find some money to give his new infrastructure commission a head start.

Even if he wanted to finding an extra couple of billion to smooth the edges of these tax credits is going to be tricky. This is what a structural deficit looks like. Its not pretty. No wonder he is so keen to sell the Lloyds shares.

I agree that GO is in a difficult place but I suspect he consoles himself with the thought that it would have been a lot more difficulter had Labour shown the slightest semblance of competence. I do think however that he will find some kind of rabbit in his hat although it might be a small rabbit in a large hat. He'll still be thinking "5 years is a long time" but it's doubtful whether, if things still aren't working out, he'll then still be able to blame Labour.

Above practically anything else he must kill the tax credit dragon for the long term good of the country. It is truly asinine.

GeoffM · October 2015

JEO said:
I'm hearing a few more rumours down the grapevine that Cameron's going to sack eurosceptic ministers in the coming months so they will have less status when they campaign to leave the EU.

It will be utterly appalling if he does that. The EU is clearly a very heated and important issue within the Conservative Party, and the only way we can overcome it is to have a mature debate and if both sides are treated with respect. If the leadership engages in a dirty tricks campaign to kneecap people on the other side of the debate, then it will cause the eurosceptics to respond in kind (with legitimate reason) and we will descend into civil war.

It will be despicable if Cameron puts stacking the deck in favour of the EU ahead of the unity of the Conservative Party - especially when the Opposition has such dangerous views right now.

Do you not see it as an advantage that those ministers can therefore start speaking freely earlier? Build an independent platform and a public profile before without the shackles of office and collective responsibility?

Not sure about this but I suspect it will cut both ways rather than overly benefiting REMAINS.

Philip_Thompson · October 2015

SouthamObserver said:

Philip_Thompson said:

SouthamObserver said:

Philip_Thompson said:
Tax credit changes should be tweaked perhaps but they should still happen. They are a punitive cap on aspiration causing a marginal tax rate that would be viewed as unthinkable on anyone else.

Smooth the transition so people don't lose out and the changes in tax credits coincide with the increase in living wage rates would be one solution.
A U-turn, in other words. It's going to happen, for sure.

Osborne does not fear Labour, of course, but he does fear not being the next PM.
A u-turn would be abolishing reforms to tax credits. Tweaking reforms so that they're better implemented should always be the responsibility of a sensible government not something to be avoided for the curse of being accused of a u-turn.
A U-ey is a U-ey, but is usually presented as a tweak. I agree that this is how GO will present this U-turn.

It's very juvenile to think that any amendments to a proposal are to be castigated as u-turns and that it is spin to present them as tweaks.

DavidL · October 2015

chestnut said:

DavidL said:
Of course yet another problem for the Treasury is that that damn stupid triple lock and zero inflation means that the cost of pensions in real terms is going up by the full 2.5%. If the BoE were meeting its targets this would be more like 0.5%.

The pressure this puts on the welfare budget is largely being borne by our working poor. We have gone way too far down this road already.
Doesn't the inflation figure have a very positive income on government debt restructuring and suppressing public sector pensions whilst putting more spending money (real terms) in the hands of the majority, driving consumption, employment and tax revenue?

That said, pensioners do seem to be getting a particularly good deal. I'd imagine that many are informally passing it on to children and grandchildren etc.

Zero inflation is a nightmare for government debt. Britain doesn't default officially but we have inflated our debts away more than once. The ratio of public debt to GDP would have been falling for a couple of years now if we had had 2% increases in nominal incomes. As it is it just might fall this year but the very low inflation is making that more difficult.

Zero inflation has accelerated the increase in real wages but people tend to notice the nominal increases much more. 5% is so much better than 2%, even if there is 3% inflation. Of course if you have a large mortgage that is true.

Danny565 · October 2015

Sunil_Prasannan said:

SeanT said:

JEO said:
I'm hearing a few more rumours down the grapevine that Cameron's going to sack eurosceptic ministers in the coming months so they will have less status when they campaign to leave the EU.

It will be utterly appalling if he does that. The EU is clearly a very heated and important issue within the Conservative Party, and the only way we can overcome it is to have a mature debate and if both sides are treated with respect. If the leadership engages in a dirty tricks campaign to kneecap people on the other side of the debate, then it will cause the eurosceptics to respond in kind (with legitimate reason) and we will descend into civil war.

It will be despicable if Cameron puts stacking the deck in favour of the EU ahead of the unity of the Conservative Party - especially when the Opposition has such dangerous views right now.
Completely agree. If he does that, Cameron will essentially be saying that the cause of the EU is more important than the prosperity of Great Britain (given that the alternative to a violently divided Tory party is a Corbyn-led Labour).

I cannot believe he will be that stupid. And odious. And wrong.
I voted UKIP at the Euro election last year.

Tell us about just how shy a Tory you were this year again

bigjohnowls · October 2015

GeoffM said:

bigjohnowls said:

DavidL said:
The budget sums are particularly hard this year. Those incompetent managers who run the health service are going to need another couple of billion to balance the books, the tax revenues are looking disappointing, north sea oil is down to next to zero, he has had to find some more for the train sets to keep the Northern Powerhouse on track and he needs to find some money to give his new infrastructure commission a head start.

Even if he wanted to finding an extra couple of billion to smooth the edges of these tax credits is going to be tricky. This is what a structural deficit looks like. Its not pretty. No wonder he is so keen to sell the Lloyds shares.
Every manager in the 95% of Acute hospitals that are significantly overspent must be incompetent.

Clearly nothing to do with Lansley
Agree with both of those assessments.
The problem is how you get rid of them and replace them with competent managers.
There are plenty in the private sector but you'd be able to hear the howls of lefty anguish from Pluto.

Only a fool would blame overspending by 95% of Hospitals in the Acute sector on incompetent managers.

Of course Circle private sector managers also concluded the market for Acute Healthcare was "unsustainable"

But hey you must have your finger on the pulse from over there.

http://www.hsj.co.uk/newsletter/comment/panic-and-denial-wont-solve-funding-issues/5090395.article?WT.tsrc=email&WT.mc_id=Newsletter170#.ViQUm36rQol

SouthamObserver · October 2015

SeanT said:

JEO said:
I'm hearing a few more rumours down the grapevine that Cameron's going to sack eurosceptic ministers in the coming months so they will have less status when they campaign to leave the EU.

It will be utterly appalling if he does that. The EU is clearly a very heated and important issue within the Conservative Party, and the only way we can overcome it is to have a mature debate and if both sides are treated with respect. If the leadership engages in a dirty tricks campaign to kneecap people on the other side of the debate, then it will cause the eurosceptics to respond in kind (with legitimate reason) and we will descend into civil war.

It will be despicable if Cameron puts stacking the deck in favour of the EU ahead of the unity of the Conservative Party - especially when the Opposition has such dangerous views right now.
Completely agree. If he does that, Cameron will essentially be saying that the cause of the EU is more important than the prosperity of Great Britain (given that the alternative to a violently divided Tory party is a Corbyn-led Labour).

I cannot believe he will be that stupid. And odious. And wrong.

Cameron knows Corbyn Labour is unelectable and that a divided Tory party will not change that.

perdix · October 2015

Tim Montgomerie is an attention seeking twit. He never got over his mate Davis losing the leadership.

GeoffM · October 2015

perdix said:
Tim Montgomerie is an attention seeking twit. He never got over his mate Davis losing the leadership.

This.

ReggieCide · October 2015

DavidL said:
Of course yet another problem for the Treasury is that that damn stupid triple lock and zero inflation means that the cost of pensions in real terms is going up by the full 2.5%. If the BoE were meeting its targets this would be more like 0.5%.

The pressure this puts on the welfare budget is largely being borne by our working poor. We have gone way too far down this road already.

This is what's wrong with democracy. Getting elected gets in the way of following the right course and/ or telling the truth

bigjohnowls · October 2015

SouthamObserver said:

SeanT said:

JEO said:
I'm hearing a few more rumours down the grapevine that Cameron's going to sack eurosceptic ministers in the coming months so they will have less status when they campaign to leave the EU.

It will be utterly appalling if he does that. The EU is clearly a very heated and important issue within the Conservative Party, and the only way we can overcome it is to have a mature debate and if both sides are treated with respect. If the leadership engages in a dirty tricks campaign to kneecap people on the other side of the debate, then it will cause the eurosceptics to respond in kind (with legitimate reason) and we will descend into civil war.

It will be despicable if Cameron puts stacking the deck in favour of the EU ahead of the unity of the Conservative Party - especially when the Opposition has such dangerous views right now.
Completely agree. If he does that, Cameron will essentially be saying that the cause of the EU is more important than the prosperity of Great Britain (given that the alternative to a violently divided Tory party is a Corbyn-led Labour).

I cannot believe he will be that stupid. And odious. And wrong.

Cameron knows Corbyn Labour is unelectable and that a divided Tory party will not change that.

Who you voting for in 2020 Boris or Jezza?

GeoffM · October 2015

bigjohnowls said:

GeoffM said:

bigjohnowls said:

DavidL said:
The budget sums are particularly hard this year. Those incompetent managers who run the health service are going to need another couple of billion to balance the books, the tax revenues are looking disappointing, north sea oil is down to next to zero, he has had to find some more for the train sets to keep the Northern Powerhouse on track and he needs to find some money to give his new infrastructure commission a head start.

Even if he wanted to finding an extra couple of billion to smooth the edges of these tax credits is going to be tricky. This is what a structural deficit looks like. Its not pretty. No wonder he is so keen to sell the Lloyds shares.
Every manager in the 95% of Acute hospitals that are significantly overspent must be incompetent.

Clearly nothing to do with Lansley
Agree with both of those assessments.
The problem is how you get rid of them and replace them with competent managers.
There are plenty in the private sector but you'd be able to hear the howls of lefty anguish from Pluto.
Only a fool would blame overspending by 95% of Hospitals in the Acute sector on incompetent managers.

Of course Circle private sector managers also concluded the market for Acute Healthcare was "unsustainable"

But hey you must have your finger on the pulse from over there.

http://www.hsj.co.uk/newsletter/comment/panic-and-denial-wont-solve-funding-issues/5090395.article?WT.tsrc=email&WT.mc_id=Newsletter170#.ViQUm36rQol

I was agreeing with you.

viewcode · October 2015

SeanT said:

JEO said:
I'm hearing a few more rumours down the grapevine that Cameron's going to sack eurosceptic ministers in the coming months so they will have less status when they campaign to leave the EU.

It will be utterly appalling if he does that. The EU is clearly a very heated and important issue within the Conservative Party, and the only way we can overcome it is to have a mature debate and if both sides are treated with respect. If the leadership engages in a dirty tricks campaign to kneecap people on the other side of the debate, then it will cause the eurosceptics to respond in kind (with legitimate reason) and we will descend into civil war.

It will be despicable if Cameron puts stacking the deck in favour of the EU ahead of the unity of the Conservative Party - especially when the Opposition has such dangerous views right now.
Completely agree. If he does that, Cameron will essentially be saying that the cause of the EU is more important than the prosperity of Great Britain (given that the alternative to a violently divided Tory party is a Corbyn-led Labour).

I cannot believe he will be that stupid. And odious. And wrong.

Cameron could fire every single member of the Cabinet and replace them with the cast of "Glee", and it wouldn't make a blind bit of difference to the election result

AndyJS · October 2015

My prediction for the Canadian election: pretty much a dead heat between the Conservatives and Liberals.

MP_SE · October 2015

JEO said:
I'm hearing a few more rumours down the grapevine that Cameron's going to sack eurosceptic ministers in the coming months so they will have less status when they campaign to leave the EU.

It will be utterly appalling if he does that. The EU is clearly a very heated and important issue within the Conservative Party, and the only way we can overcome it is to have a mature debate and if both sides are treated with respect. If the leadership engages in a dirty tricks campaign to kneecap people on the other side of the debate, then it will cause the eurosceptics to respond in kind (with legitimate reason) and we will descend into civil war.

It will be despicable if Cameron puts stacking the deck in favour of the EU ahead of the unity of the Conservative Party - especially when the Opposition has such dangerous views right now.

According to Harry Cole, Number 10 have been frantically calling wealthy Tory businessmen asking them to publically back the Remain campaign as it is currently a shambles.

Maybe Dave believes that keeping the EU together is more important than keeping the Tories together.

ReggieCide · October 2015

GeoffM said:

bigjohnowls said:

DavidL said:
The budget sums are particularly hard this year. Those incompetent managers who run the health service are going to need another couple of billion to balance the books, the tax revenues are looking disappointing, north sea oil is down to next to zero, he has had to find some more for the train sets to keep the Northern Powerhouse on track and he needs to find some money to give his new infrastructure commission a head start.

Even if he wanted to finding an extra couple of billion to smooth the edges of these tax credits is going to be tricky. This is what a structural deficit looks like. Its not pretty. No wonder he is so keen to sell the Lloyds shares.
Every manager in the 95% of Acute hospitals that are significantly overspent must be incompetent.

Clearly nothing to do with Lansley
Agree with both of those assessments.
The problem is how you get rid of them and replace them with competent managers.
There are plenty in the private sector but you'd be able to hear the howls of lefty anguish from Pluto.

Public sector "getting rid" means making redundant with a huge payoff, going on gardening leave for a month or two then getting re-employed in the public sector at a substantially enhanced salary.

Stark_Dawning · October 2015

perdix said:
Tim Montgomerie is an attention seeking twit. He never got over his mate Davis losing the leadership.

Quite agree. If Osborne was keeping the welfare status quo Montgomerie would be channelling Thatcher and berating the government for cowardice. He's a weak pundit who falls back on contraryism because he can't think of anything intelligent to write. Of all the poor right-wing hacks (and there are several) I recall he resorted to the 'Ed's played a blinder' card more than most.

GeoffM · October 2015

ReggieCide said:

GeoffM said:

bigjohnowls said:

DavidL said:
The budget sums are particularly hard this year. Those incompetent managers who run the health service are going to need another couple of billion to balance the books, the tax revenues are looking disappointing, north sea oil is down to next to zero, he has had to find some more for the train sets to keep the Northern Powerhouse on track and he needs to find some money to give his new infrastructure commission a head start.

Even if he wanted to finding an extra couple of billion to smooth the edges of these tax credits is going to be tricky. This is what a structural deficit looks like. Its not pretty. No wonder he is so keen to sell the Lloyds shares.
Every manager in the 95% of Acute hospitals that are significantly overspent must be incompetent.

Clearly nothing to do with Lansley
Agree with both of those assessments.
The problem is how you get rid of them and replace them with competent managers.
There are plenty in the private sector but you'd be able to hear the howls of lefty anguish from Pluto.
Public sector "getting rid" means making redundant with a huge payoff, going on gardening leave for a month or two then getting re-employed in the public sector at a substantially enhanced salary.

That's depressingly true. I really wish we could break that cycle.

MaxPB · October 2015

Poll out today in the Netherlands, puts Gert Vilders on 37% with an 18 point lead. I find that worrying.

bigjohnowls · October 2015

GeoffM said:

bigjohnowls said:

GeoffM said:

bigjohnowls said:

DavidL said:
The budget sums are particularly hard this year. Those incompetent managers who run the health service are going to need another couple of billion to balance the books, the tax revenues are looking disappointing, north sea oil is down to next to zero, he has had to find some more for the train sets to keep the Northern Powerhouse on track and he needs to find some money to give his new infrastructure commission a head start.

Even if he wanted to finding an extra couple of billion to smooth the edges of these tax credits is going to be tricky. This is what a structural deficit looks like. Its not pretty. No wonder he is so keen to sell the Lloyds shares.
Every manager in the 95% of Acute hospitals that are significantly overspent must be incompetent.

Clearly nothing to do with Lansley
Agree with both of those assessments.
The problem is how you get rid of them and replace them with competent managers.
There are plenty in the private sector but you'd be able to hear the howls of lefty anguish from Pluto.
Only a fool would blame overspending by 95% of Hospitals in the Acute sector on incompetent managers.

Of course Circle private sector managers also concluded the market for Acute Healthcare was "unsustainable"

But hey you must have your finger on the pulse from over there.

http://www.hsj.co.uk/newsletter/comment/panic-and-denial-wont-solve-funding-issues/5090395.article?WT.tsrc=email&WT.mc_id=Newsletter170#.ViQUm36rQol
I was agreeing with you.

But not with Circle who said Acute health was "no longer viable under current terms" when they cut and ran?

notme · October 2015

DavidL said:
The budget sums are particularly hard this year. Those incompetent managers who run the health service are going to need another couple of billion to balance the books, the tax revenues are looking disappointing, north sea oil is down to next to zero, he has had to find some more for the train sets to keep the Northern Powerhouse on track and he needs to find some money to give his new infrastructure commission a head start.

Even if he wanted to finding an extra couple of billion to smooth the edges of these tax credits is going to be tricky. This is what a structural deficit looks like. Its not pretty. No wonder he is so keen to sell the Lloyds shares.

The LLoyd shares wont help a structural deficit. You can only sell each share once, you cant use it as a basis to fund revenue expenditure.

Philip_Thompson · October 2015

I completely agree with @SeanT that the referendum must be fair and be seen to be fair. The losers will inevitably grasp straws to explain why they lost rather than accept they lost fair and square so Dave should be completely above board and leave no straws to grasp.

Handled right the EU can be shut down as an issue for decades or until the next major round of reforms whichever comes sooner. Handled wrong this will blow up before the GE.

GeoffM · October 2015

bigjohnowls said:

GeoffM said:

bigjohnowls said:

GeoffM said:

bigjohnowls said:

DavidL said:
The budget sums are particularly hard this year. Those incompetent managers who run the health service are going to need another couple of billion to balance the books, the tax revenues are looking disappointing, north sea oil is down to next to zero, he has had to find some more for the train sets to keep the Northern Powerhouse on track and he needs to find some money to give his new infrastructure commission a head start.

Even if he wanted to finding an extra couple of billion to smooth the edges of these tax credits is going to be tricky. This is what a structural deficit looks like. Its not pretty. No wonder he is so keen to sell the Lloyds shares.
Every manager in the 95% of Acute hospitals that are significantly overspent must be incompetent.

Clearly nothing to do with Lansley
Agree with both of those assessments.
The problem is how you get rid of them and replace them with competent managers.
There are plenty in the private sector but you'd be able to hear the howls of lefty anguish from Pluto.
Only a fool would blame overspending by 95% of Hospitals in the Acute sector on incompetent managers.

Of course Circle private sector managers also concluded the market for Acute Healthcare was "unsustainable"

But hey you must have your finger on the pulse from over there.

http://www.hsj.co.uk/newsletter/comment/panic-and-denial-wont-solve-funding-issues/5090395.article?WT.tsrc=email&WT.mc_id=Newsletter170#.ViQUm36rQol
I was agreeing with you.
But not with Circle who said Acute health was "no longer viable under current terms" when they cut and ran?

The NHS as a whole is "no longer viable under current terms".

MP_SE · October 2015

MaxPB said:
Poll out today in the Netherlands, puts Gert Vilders on 37% with an 18 point lead. I find that worrying.

But, but, but, the EU is meant to unite the countries of Europe. It is looking more divided than ever.

notme · October 2015

GeoffM said:

bigjohnowls said:

DavidL said:
The budget sums are particularly hard this year. Those incompetent managers who run the health service are going to need another couple of billion to balance the books, the tax revenues are looking disappointing, north sea oil is down to next to zero, he has had to find some more for the train sets to keep the Northern Powerhouse on track and he needs to find some money to give his new infrastructure commission a head start.

Even if he wanted to finding an extra couple of billion to smooth the edges of these tax credits is going to be tricky. This is what a structural deficit looks like. Its not pretty. No wonder he is so keen to sell the Lloyds shares.
Every manager in the 95% of Acute hospitals that are significantly overspent must be incompetent.

Clearly nothing to do with Lansley
Agree with both of those assessments.
The problem is how you get rid of them and replace them with competent managers.
There are plenty in the private sector but you'd be able to hear the howls of lefty anguish from Pluto.

Lots of people who take on the public sector challenge from the private sector find they just cant do what they want to do. They get frustrated and leave. So much of what staff expect from their employer isnt present in the private sector. Trying to challenge meets a complete brick wall.

Scott_P · October 2015

With Scotland leading 34-32 in the dying moments of a pulsating game at Twickenham, Joubert awarded a penalty to Australia after judging that Jon Welsh, a replacement prop, had been offside when he picked up a loose ball from a Scotland knock-on.

Replays immediately showed that the last touch had come from Nick Phipps as the Australia replacement scrum half tried to clasp the ball and the Scotland players pointed to the big screen, clearly urging Joubert to review his decision.

Phipps confirmed that he had tried to play the ball, rendering Joubert’s decision to be incorrect.

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/sport/rugbyunion/article4589682.ece

Sunil_Prasannan · October 2015

Danny565 said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

SeanT said:

JEO said:
I'm hearing a few more rumours down the grapevine that Cameron's going to sack eurosceptic ministers in the coming months so they will have less status when they campaign to leave the EU.

It will be utterly appalling if he does that. The EU is clearly a very heated and important issue within the Conservative Party, and the only way we can overcome it is to have a mature debate and if both sides are treated with respect. If the leadership engages in a dirty tricks campaign to kneecap people on the other side of the debate, then it will cause the eurosceptics to respond in kind (with legitimate reason) and we will descend into civil war.

It will be despicable if Cameron puts stacking the deck in favour of the EU ahead of the unity of the Conservative Party - especially when the Opposition has such dangerous views right now.
Completely agree. If he does that, Cameron will essentially be saying that the cause of the EU is more important than the prosperity of Great Britain (given that the alternative to a violently divided Tory party is a Corbyn-led Labour).

I cannot believe he will be that stupid. And odious. And wrong.
I voted UKIP at the Euro election last year.
Tell us about just how shy a Tory you were this year again

I was the only PB Tory who voted Labour at the GE2015

TGOHF · October 2015

bigjohnowls said:

GeoffM said:

bigjohnowls said:

GeoffM said:

bigjohnowls said:

DavidL said:
The budget sums are particularly hard this year. Those incompetent managers who run the health service are going to need another couple of billion to balance the books, the tax revenues are looking disappointing, north sea oil is down to next to zero, he has had to find some more for the train sets to keep the Northern Powerhouse on track and he needs to find some money to give his new infrastructure commission a head start.

Even if he wanted to finding an extra couple of billion to smooth the edges of these tax credits is going to be tricky. This is what a structural deficit looks like. Its not pretty. No wonder he is so keen to sell the Lloyds shares.
Every manager in the 95% of Acute hospitals that are significantly overspent must be incompetent.

Clearly nothing to do with Lansley
Agree with both of those assessments.
The problem is how you get rid of them and replace them with competent managers.
There are plenty in the private sector but you'd be able to hear the howls of lefty anguish from Pluto.
Only a fool would blame overspending by 95% of Hospitals in the Acute sector on incompetent managers.

Of course Circle private sector managers also concluded the market for Acute Healthcare was "unsustainable"

But hey you must have your finger on the pulse from over there.

http://www.hsj.co.uk/newsletter/comment/panic-and-denial-wont-solve-funding-issues/5090395.article?WT.tsrc=email&WT.mc_id=Newsletter170#.ViQUm36rQol
I was agreeing with you.
But not with Circle who said Acute health was "no longer viable under current terms" when they cut and ran?

What we can do with health has overtaken what we can afford.

We need to have an honest conversation about the limits of what the NHS can provide.

GeoffM · October 2015

Philip_Thompson said:
I completely agree with @SeanT that the referendum must be fair and be seen to be fair. The losers will inevitably grasp straws to explain why they lost rather than accept they lost fair and square so Dave should be completely above board and leave no straws to grasp.

Handled right the EU can be shut down as an issue for decades or until the next major round of reforms whichever comes sooner. Handled wrong this will blow up before the GE.

"Handled right" the EU can be shut down as an issue permanently and who cares if they ever have a major round of reforms. Handled wrong we'll still be members.

nigel4england · October 2015

bigjohnowls said:

GeoffM said:

bigjohnowls said:

GeoffM said:

bigjohnowls said:

DavidL said:
The budget sums are particularly hard this year. Those incompetent managers who run the health service are going to need another couple of billion to balance the books, the tax revenues are looking disappointing, north sea oil is down to next to zero, he has had to find some more for the train sets to keep the Northern Powerhouse on track and he needs to find some money to give his new infrastructure commission a head start.

Even if he wanted to finding an extra couple of billion to smooth the edges of these tax credits is going to be tricky. This is what a structural deficit looks like. Its not pretty. No wonder he is so keen to sell the Lloyds shares.
Every manager in the 95% of Acute hospitals that are significantly overspent must be incompetent.

Clearly nothing to do with Lansley
Agree with both of those assessments.
The problem is how you get rid of them and replace them with competent managers.
There are plenty in the private sector but you'd be able to hear the howls of lefty anguish from Pluto.
Only a fool would blame overspending by 95% of Hospitals in the Acute sector on incompetent managers.

Of course Circle private sector managers also concluded the market for Acute Healthcare was "unsustainable"

But hey you must have your finger on the pulse from over there.

http://www.hsj.co.uk/newsletter/comment/panic-and-denial-wont-solve-funding-issues/5090395.article?WT.tsrc=email&WT.mc_id=Newsletter170#.ViQUm36rQol
I was agreeing with you.
But not with Circle who said Acute health was "no longer viable under current terms" when they cut and ran?

Don't jump down my throat BJO as I'm not sure and this is not a dig, but wasn't part of the problem with Circle that they had their funding cut in what transpired to be a political move?

TGOHF · October 2015

Scott_P said:
With Scotland leading 34-32 in the dying moments of a pulsating game at Twickenham, Joubert awarded a penalty to Australia after judging that Jon Welsh, a replacement prop, had been offside when he picked up a loose ball from a Scotland knock-on.

Replays immediately showed that the last touch had come from Nick Phipps as the Australia replacement scrum half tried to clasp the ball and the Scotland players pointed to the big screen, clearly urging Joubert to review his decision.

Phipps confirmed that he had tried to play the ball, rendering Joubert’s decision to be incorrect.

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/sport/rugbyunion/article4589682.ece

The sooner we admit it was a crap throw in and get over the hard luck crap the better.

MikeL · October 2015

FPT - Danny565:

Con got 38% of people who voted.
Con got 25% of the population.

If Con got 32% of C2s who voted, that implies they got 20% of C2s in the population.

I said 20% absolute maximum, probably nearer 15%.

15% may well be correct, as I maintain high benefit claimants will be less likely to vote Con - ie Single person C2 no kids no benefits more likely to vote Con than Single person C2 with kids on huge benefits.

But whether that is right or wrong, the highest the figure could be is 20% - exactly as per my post!

Whereas the calculation re 71 MPs assumed 100%!

GeoffM · October 2015

notme said:

GeoffM said:

bigjohnowls said:

DavidL said:
The budget sums are particularly hard this year. Those incompetent managers who run the health service are going to need another couple of billion to balance the books, the tax revenues are looking disappointing, north sea oil is down to next to zero, he has had to find some more for the train sets to keep the Northern Powerhouse on track and he needs to find some money to give his new infrastructure commission a head start.

Even if he wanted to finding an extra couple of billion to smooth the edges of these tax credits is going to be tricky. This is what a structural deficit looks like. Its not pretty. No wonder he is so keen to sell the Lloyds shares.
Every manager in the 95% of Acute hospitals that are significantly overspent must be incompetent.

Clearly nothing to do with Lansley
Agree with both of those assessments.
The problem is how you get rid of them and replace them with competent managers.
There are plenty in the private sector but you'd be able to hear the howls of lefty anguish from Pluto.
Lots of people who take on the public sector challenge from the private sector find they just cant do what they want to do. They get frustrated and leave. So much of what staff expect from their employer isnt present in the private sector. Trying to challenge meets a complete brick wall.

Agree entirely - that's what's brought a premature halt to my brief employment by the NHS.

To repeat my reply to ReggieCide below because it applies here too:
That's depressingly true. I really wish we could break that cycle.

Scott_P · October 2015

@NicolaSturgeon: Note to my fellow independence supporters. People who disagree are not anti Scottish. Does our cause no good to hurl abuse (& it's wrong)

Will any of the zoomers here take heed?

viewcode · October 2015

JEO said:
I'm hearing a few more rumours down the grapevine that Cameron's going to sack eurosceptic ministers in the coming months so they will have less status when they campaign to leave the EU.

It will be utterly appalling if he does that. The EU is clearly a very heated and important issue within the Conservative Party, and the only way we can overcome it is to have a mature debate and if both sides are treated with respect. If the leadership engages in a dirty tricks campaign to kneecap people on the other side of the debate, then it will cause the eurosceptics to respond in kind (with legitimate reason) and we will descend into civil war.

It will be despicable if Cameron puts stacking the deck in favour of the EU ahead of the unity of the Conservative Party - especially when the Opposition has such dangerous views right now.

If I may for a moment? It is entirely possible that at the time of the referendum Cameron will be advocating IN and other members of the Cabinet (whether former or present) will be advocating OUT. It's not the only scenario, but not improbable, yes? And I'm wondering...does Cameron have the stomach for a proper fight? I don't know that he does. I can't think of a situation where he blackened an opponent's character, engaged in dirty tricks, or any of the hundred ways a politician bends people to his will by hurting somebody pour encourager les autres. His advancement to date has employed charm, emollience, and (in the case of the Sindy ref) pleading. Thatcher, Brown, Blair, Macmillan, Wilson - heck, even Major at a push - could kick people to the floor, kick them while they were down, and blame them for hurting their toecap with their balls. It will be interesting to see whether Cameron will step up to the plate, or whether he is willing to go down in history as the man who lost the EU whilst sticking his cock in a pig

Eh_ehm_a_eh · October 2015

SeanT said:

DavidL said:

SeanT said:
Hold your ground, Gideon.

We need to slash welfare to the bone. We need to see starving northerners and Scots doing weird jigs in the streets of the Home Counties, in the forlorn hope they might earn a sixpence to buy rusks for their children. We need to see RESULTS.
Maybe a new 90% rate on those earning over 400K? What do you think Sean?
To be honest, I doubt I will turnover £400k this year. Last year was exceptional. in my business earnings are extremely volatile.

But I can say I out-earned the prime minister of my country for five years in a row - by making up stupid stories.

THAT is something I will tell my grandkids. Incessantly. Til they have me dispatched to Dignitas.

Dignitas, very clinical. Not going to follow in the footsteps of Hunter S Thompson, the Hemingway brothers, Virginia Woolf?

Philip_Thompson · October 2015

GeoffM said:

Philip_Thompson said:
I completely agree with @SeanT that the referendum must be fair and be seen to be fair. The losers will inevitably grasp straws to explain why they lost rather than accept they lost fair and square so Dave should be completely above board and leave no straws to grasp.

Handled right the EU can be shut down as an issue for decades or until the next major round of reforms whichever comes sooner. Handled wrong this will blow up before the GE.
"Handled right" the EU can be shut down as an issue permanently and who cares if they ever have a major round of reforms. Handled wrong we'll still be members.

That's handled wrong if you think we should remain. There are four possible outcomes.

1: Leave victory in a referendum seen to be biased towards leave.
2: Leave victory in a fair referendum.
3: Remain victory in a fair referendum.
4: Remain victory in a referendum seen to be biased towards leave.

Some people would support 1/2, or 3/4 as they view the most important thing as being that their side wins. I don't. I am currently leaning towards supporting 3 then 2. I do not want to see a biased referendum to either side.

Eh_ehm_a_eh · October 2015

Scott_P said:
With Scotland leading 34-32 in the dying moments of a pulsating game at Twickenham, Joubert awarded a penalty to Australia after judging that Jon Welsh, a replacement prop, had been offside when he picked up a loose ball from a Scotland knock-on.

Replays immediately showed that the last touch had come from Nick Phipps as the Australia replacement scrum half tried to clasp the ball and the Scotland players pointed to the big screen, clearly urging Joubert to review his decision.

Phipps confirmed that he had tried to play the ball, rendering Joubert’s decision to be incorrect.

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/sport/rugbyunion/article4589682.ece

Get over it.

bigjohnowls · October 2015

GeoffM said:

bigjohnowls said:

GeoffM said:

bigjohnowls said:

GeoffM said:

bigjohnowls said:

DavidL said:
The budget sums are particularly hard this year. Those incompetent managers who run the health service are going to need another couple of billion to balance the books, the tax revenues are looking disappointing, north sea oil is down to next to zero, he has had to find some more for the train sets to keep the Northern Powerhouse on track and he needs to find some money to give his new infrastructure commission a head start.

Even if he wanted to finding an extra couple of billion to smooth the edges of these tax credits is going to be tricky. This is what a structural deficit looks like. Its not pretty. No wonder he is so keen to sell the Lloyds shares.
Every manager in the 95% of Acute hospitals that are significantly overspent must be incompetent.

Clearly nothing to do with Lansley
Agree with both of those assessments.
The problem is how you get rid of them and replace them with competent managers.
There are plenty in the private sector but you'd be able to hear the howls of lefty anguish from Pluto.
Only a fool would blame overspending by 95% of Hospitals in the Acute sector on incompetent managers.

Of course Circle private sector managers also concluded the market for Acute Healthcare was "unsustainable"

But hey you must have your finger on the pulse from over there.

http://www.hsj.co.uk/newsletter/comment/panic-and-denial-wont-solve-funding-issues/5090395.article?WT.tsrc=email&WT.mc_id=Newsletter170#.ViQUm36rQol
I was agreeing with you.
But not with Circle who said Acute health was "no longer viable under current terms" when they cut and ran?
The NHS as a whole is "no longer viable under current terms".

The whole of the overspend is in the Sector Lansley reforms disadvantaged ie Acute hospitals.

Those he gave all the power to are breaking even.

Oh and £4bn of previous NHS money tied up in the Better Care Fund has been stolen

GeoffM · October 2015

Philip_Thompson said:

GeoffM said:

Philip_Thompson said:
I completely agree with @SeanT that the referendum must be fair and be seen to be fair. The losers will inevitably grasp straws to explain why they lost rather than accept they lost fair and square so Dave should be completely above board and leave no straws to grasp.

Handled right the EU can be shut down as an issue for decades or until the next major round of reforms whichever comes sooner. Handled wrong this will blow up before the GE.
"Handled right" the EU can be shut down as an issue permanently and who cares if they ever have a major round of reforms. Handled wrong we'll still be members.
That's handled wrong if you think we should remain. There are four possible outcomes.

1: Leave victory in a referendum seen to be biased towards leave.
2: Leave victory in a fair referendum.
3: Remain victory in a fair referendum.
4: Remain victory in a referendum seen to be biased towards leave.

Some people would support 1/2, or 3/4 as they view the most important thing as being that their side wins. I don't. I am currently leaning towards supporting 3 then 2. I do not want to see a biased referendum to either side.

I'm a 2 every day of the week. 3 is the only other acceptable outcome.
Option 5 is:
5: Remain victory in a referendum seen to be biased towards remain.
That is the result that I expect.

MikeL · October 2015

Fundamental problem:

Society wants people with kids to have more money than people without kids (as kids cost money).

But nobody has suggested employers should be told to pay people with kids more than people without kids.

So the only possible way of meeting the objective is to pay benefits.

It's that simple - it's then just a question of how generous you make the benefits.

Higher pay can only really tinker at the edges - the "bonus" deemed necessary for kids is so great that higher pay will never meet it.

TGOHF · October 2015

MikeL said:
Fundamental problem:

Society wants people with kids to have more money than people without kids (as kids cost money).

But nobody has suggested employers should be told to pay people with kids more than people without kids.

So the only possible way of meeting the objective is to pay benefits.

It's that simple - it's then just a question of how generous you make the benefits.

Higher pay can only really tinker at the edges - the "bonus" deemed necessary for kids is so great that higher pay will never meet it.

Cobblers - people need to live within their means - not procreate first finance later.

bigjohnowls · October 2015

nigel4england said:

bigjohnowls said:

GeoffM said:

bigjohnowls said:

GeoffM said:

bigjohnowls said:

DavidL said:
The budget sums are particularly hard this year. Those incompetent managers who run the health service are going to need another couple of billion to balance the books, the tax revenues are looking disappointing, north sea oil is down to next to zero, he has had to find some more for the train sets to keep the Northern Powerhouse on track and he needs to find some money to give his new infrastructure commission a head start.

Even if he wanted to finding an extra couple of billion to smooth the edges of these tax credits is going to be tricky. This is what a structural deficit looks like. Its not pretty. No wonder he is so keen to sell the Lloyds shares.
Every manager in the 95% of Acute hospitals that are significantly overspent must be incompetent.

Clearly nothing to do with Lansley
Agree with both of those assessments.
The problem is how you get rid of them and replace them with competent managers.
There are plenty in the private sector but you'd be able to hear the howls of lefty anguish from Pluto.
Only a fool would blame overspending by 95% of Hospitals in the Acute sector on incompetent managers.

Of course Circle private sector managers also concluded the market for Acute Healthcare was "unsustainable"

But hey you must have your finger on the pulse from over there.

http://www.hsj.co.uk/newsletter/comment/panic-and-denial-wont-solve-funding-issues/5090395.article?WT.tsrc=email&WT.mc_id=Newsletter170#.ViQUm36rQol
I was agreeing with you.
But not with Circle who said Acute health was "no longer viable under current terms" when they cut and ran?
Don't jump down my throat BJO as I'm not sure and this is not a dig, but wasn't part of the problem with Circle that they had their funding cut in what transpired to be a political move?

From what I have read I think there funding cut is in line with that of other Acute hospitals who are only funded for additional emergency activity at 30% of the tariff rate.They have all lost funding via Better Care Fund too.

Not read anything about political targeting but who knows.

All I know is its getting so bad in a lot of hospitals that they are having to take out emergency loans just to pay their staffs monthly wages

viewcode · October 2015

Eh_ehm_a_eh said:

SeanT said:

DavidL said:

SeanT said:
Hold your ground, Gideon.

We need to slash welfare to the bone. We need to see starving northerners and Scots doing weird jigs in the streets of the Home Counties, in the forlorn hope they might earn a sixpence to buy rusks for their children. We need to see RESULTS.
Maybe a new 90% rate on those earning over 400K? What do you think Sean?
To be honest, I doubt I will turnover £400k this year. Last year was exceptional. in my business earnings are extremely volatile.

But I can say I out-earned the prime minister of my country for five years in a row - by making up stupid stories.

THAT is something I will tell my grandkids. Incessantly. Til they have me dispatched to Dignitas.
Dignitas, very clinical. Not going to follow in the footsteps of Hunter S Thompson, the Hemingway brothers, Virginia Woolf?

Do it Alan Turing stylee. Poisoned apple. Poetic and good for your teeth.

Incidentally, the death cocktail they administer in Dignitas tastes so repulsive they have to add an anti-emetic to prevent you hurling...:-(

Tim_B · October 2015

GeoffM said:

bigjohnowls said:

GeoffM said:

bigjohnowls said:

GeoffM said:

bigjohnowls said:

DavidL said:
The budget sums are particularly hard this year. Those incompetent managers who run the health service are going to need another couple of billion to balance the books, the tax revenues are looking disappointing, north sea oil is down to next to zero, he has had to find some more for the train sets to keep the Northern Powerhouse on track and he needs to find some money to give his new infrastructure commission a head start.

Even if he wanted to finding an extra couple of billion to smooth the edges of these tax credits is going to be tricky. This is what a structural deficit looks like. Its not pretty. No wonder he is so keen to sell the Lloyds shares.
Every manager in the 95% of Acute hospitals that are significantly overspent must be incompetent.

Clearly nothing to do with Lansley
Agree with both of those assessments.
The problem is how you get rid of them and replace them with competent managers.
There are plenty in the private sector but you'd be able to hear the howls of lefty anguish from Pluto.
Only a fool would blame overspending by 95% of Hospitals in the Acute sector on incompetent managers.

Of course Circle private sector managers also concluded the market for Acute Healthcare was "unsustainable"

But hey you must have your finger on the pulse from over there.

http://www.hsj.co.uk/newsletter/comment/panic-and-denial-wont-solve-funding-issues/5090395.article?WT.tsrc=email&WT.mc_id=Newsletter170#.ViQUm36rQol
I was agreeing with you.
But not with Circle who said Acute health was "no longer viable under current terms" when they cut and ran?
The NHS as a whole is "no longer viable under current terms".

That was obvious a decade ago when I was last in the UK.

Command economies are not sustainable, (just ask the Soviet Union and China), and the NHS is the ultimate command economy.

MikeL · October 2015

On any normal day, Australia would have won by 20+ points.

Aus scored five tries to Scotland's three. Of those three one was a charge down and one an interception. In terms of "normal play" it was five tries to one.

Aus also had a try ruled out for a tiny knock-on in a ruck that was only seen by TMO and could easily have not been noticed. That would have been six tries to one on normal play.

AndyJS · October 2015

MaxPB said:
Poll out today in the Netherlands, puts Gert Vilders on 37% with an 18 point lead. I find that worrying.

Actually the figures are for seats not percentages. That's the way they usually publish poll data in the Netherlands.

SouthamObserver · October 2015

bigjohnowls said:

SouthamObserver said:

SeanT said:

JEO said:
I'm hearing a few more rumours down the grapevine that Cameron's going to sack eurosceptic ministers in the coming months so they will have less status when they campaign to leave the EU.

It will be utterly appalling if he does that. The EU is clearly a very heated and important issue within the Conservative Party, and the only way we can overcome it is to have a mature debate and if both sides are treated with respect. If the leadership engages in a dirty tricks campaign to kneecap people on the other side of the debate, then it will cause the eurosceptics to respond in kind (with legitimate reason) and we will descend into civil war.

It will be despicable if Cameron puts stacking the deck in favour of the EU ahead of the unity of the Conservative Party - especially when the Opposition has such dangerous views right now.
Completely agree. If he does that, Cameron will essentially be saying that the cause of the EU is more important than the prosperity of Great Britain (given that the alternative to a violently divided Tory party is a Corbyn-led Labour).

I cannot believe he will be that stupid. And odious. And wrong.

Cameron knows Corbyn Labour is unelectable and that a divided Tory party will not change that.

Who you voting for in 2020 Boris or Jezza?

If Corbyn still leads Labour, or he's replaced by someone equally moronic, and I can't summon the enthusiasm to vote LD - and it's a struggle right now - I'll be staying at home.

I suspect 2020 will be a very low turnout GE.

MikeL · October 2015

TGOHF said:

MikeL said:
Fundamental problem:

Society wants people with kids to have more money than people without kids (as kids cost money).

But nobody has suggested employers should be told to pay people with kids more than people without kids.

So the only possible way of meeting the objective is to pay benefits.

It's that simple - it's then just a question of how generous you make the benefits.

Higher pay can only really tinker at the edges - the "bonus" deemed necessary for kids is so great that higher pay will never meet it.
Cobblers - people need to live within their means - not procreate first finance later.

Sure - I agree with you completely - you misunderstood my post!

My point is that you can't stop any people "losing" through higher pay - the maths don't add up.

Ultimately it's a philosophical choice.

In all OTHER aspects of life, if you want to do something expensive you need a higher salary. But a system has been set up where kids are the one exception - anyone can have them, however little they earn - and the taxpayer will fund the whole thing.

I agree with you - it shouldn't happen.

But my point is that people need to be honest and say what is happening - and why it shouldn't happen.

JEO · October 2015

Philip_Thompson said:

GeoffM said:

Philip_Thompson said:
I completely agree with @SeanT that the referendum must be fair and be seen to be fair. The losers will inevitably grasp straws to explain why they lost rather than accept they lost fair and square so Dave should be completely above board and leave no straws to grasp.

Handled right the EU can be shut down as an issue for decades or until the next major round of reforms whichever comes sooner. Handled wrong this will blow up before the GE.
"Handled right" the EU can be shut down as an issue permanently and who cares if they ever have a major round of reforms. Handled wrong we'll still be members.
That's handled wrong if you think we should remain. There are four possible outcomes.

1: Leave victory in a referendum seen to be biased towards leave.
2: Leave victory in a fair referendum.
3: Remain victory in a fair referendum.
4: Remain victory in a referendum seen to be biased towards leave.

Some people would support 1/2, or 3/4 as they view the most important thing as being that their side wins. I don't. I am currently leaning towards supporting 3 then 2. I do not want to see a biased referendum to either side.

Which is why cabinet ministers should not be sacked early, and why they should be allowed to campaign on either side. As they were in 1973.

Eh_ehm_a_eh · October 2015

MikeL said:
On any normal day, Australia would have won by 20+ points.

Aus scored five tries to Scotland's three. Of those three one was a charge down and one an interception. In terms of "normal play" it was five tries to one.

Aus also had a try ruled out for a tiny knock-on in a ruck that was only seen by TMO and could easily have not been noticed. That would have been six tries to one on normal play.

Why don't ypu chalk of the first Scotland try?
Qbviously on a normal day Australia would not have made a mistake.
Fucking spacer.

Eh_ehm_a_eh · October 2015

Eh_ehm_a_eh said:

MikeL said:
On any normal day, Australia would have won by 20+ points.

Aus scored five tries to Scotland's three. Of those three one was a charge down and one an interception. In terms of "normal play" it was five tries to one.

Aus also had a try ruled out for a tiny knock-on in a ruck that was only seen by TMO and could easily have not been noticed. That would have been six tries to one on normal play.

MikeL said:
On any normal day, Australia would have won by 20+ points.

Aus scored five tries to Scotland's three. Of those three one was a charge down and one an interception. In terms of "normal play" it was five tries to one.

Aus also had a try ruled out for a tiny knock-on in a ruck that was only seen by TMO and could easily have not been noticed. That would have been six tries to one on normal play.
Why don't you chalk of the first Scotland try?
Qbviously on a normal day Australia would not have made a mistake.
Fucking spacer.

isam · October 2015

SeanT said:

viewcode said:

Eh_ehm_a_eh said:

SeanT said:

DavidL said:

SeanT said:
Hold your ground, Gideon.

We need to slash welfare to the bone. We need to see starving northerners and Scots doing weird jigs in the streets of the Home Counties, in the forlorn hope they might earn a sixpence to buy rusks for their children. We need to see RESULTS.
Maybe a new 90% rate on those earning over 400K? What do you think Sean?
To be honest, I doubt I will turnover £400k this year. Last year was exceptional. in my business earnings are extremely volatile.

But I can say I out-earned the prime minister of my country for five years in a row - by making up stupid stories.

THAT is something I will tell my grandkids. Incessantly. Til they have me dispatched to Dignitas.
Dignitas, very clinical. Not going to follow in the footsteps of Hunter S Thompson, the Hemingway brothers, Virginia Woolf?
Do it Alan Turing stylee. Poisoned apple. Poetic and good for your teeth.

Incidentally, the death cocktail they administer in Dignitas tastes so repulsive they have to add an anti-emetic to prevent you hurling...:-(
Fuck that then.

I return to the Brompton Cocktail - heroin, cocaine and cognac (once prescribed for terminally ill cancer patients in Brompton Hospital, in the 1920s, until it was noted, severely, that it made the dying patients "too cheerful").

Twats.

I've done heroin and cocaine. Together I can confirm that they are wholly blissful. Add some fine cognac? Or maybe an aged malt whisky? Highland Park 18?

Yep. Count me in. Or out.

I think I have tried most drugs, but not heroin... For a long time though I've thought if I was diagnosed with something terminal Id get right on it

Tim_B · October 2015

SeanT said:

viewcode said:

Eh_ehm_a_eh said:

SeanT said:

DavidL said:

SeanT said:
Hold your ground, Gideon.

We need to slash welfare to the bone. We need to see starving northerners and Scots doing weird jigs in the streets of the Home Counties, in the forlorn hope they might earn a sixpence to buy rusks for their children. We need to see RESULTS.
Maybe a new 90% rate on those earning over 400K? What do you think Sean?
To be honest, I doubt I will turnover £400k this year. Last year was exceptional. in my business earnings are extremely volatile.

But I can say I out-earned the prime minister of my country for five years in a row - by making up stupid stories.

THAT is something I will tell my grandkids. Incessantly. Til they have me dispatched to Dignitas.
Dignitas, very clinical. Not going to follow in the footsteps of Hunter S Thompson, the Hemingway brothers, Virginia Woolf?
Do it Alan Turing stylee. Poisoned apple. Poetic and good for your teeth.

Incidentally, the death cocktail they administer in Dignitas tastes so repulsive they have to add an anti-emetic to prevent you hurling...:-(
Fuck that then.

I return to the Brompton Cocktail - heroin, cocaine and cognac (once prescribed for terminally ill cancer patients in Brompton Hospital, in the 1920s, until it was noted, severely, that it made the dying patients "too cheerful").

Twats.

I've done heroin and cocaine. Together I can confirm that they are wholly blissful. Add some fine cognac? Or maybe an aged malt whisky? Highland Park 18?

Yep. Count me in. Or out.

What about hypoxia? You simply go to sleep. Don't have to take or swallow anything. It was considered for death penalty use but rejected as the prisoner feels no discomfort and there is nothing for the witnesses to 'see'.

Philip_Thompson · October 2015

JEO said:

Philip_Thompson said:

GeoffM said:

Philip_Thompson said:
I completely agree with @SeanT that the referendum must be fair and be seen to be fair. The losers will inevitably grasp straws to explain why they lost rather than accept they lost fair and square so Dave should be completely above board and leave no straws to grasp.

Handled right the EU can be shut down as an issue for decades or until the next major round of reforms whichever comes sooner. Handled wrong this will blow up before the GE.
"Handled right" the EU can be shut down as an issue permanently and who cares if they ever have a major round of reforms. Handled wrong we'll still be members.
That's handled wrong if you think we should remain. There are four possible outcomes.

1: Leave victory in a referendum seen to be biased towards leave.
2: Leave victory in a fair referendum.
3: Remain victory in a fair referendum.
4: Remain victory in a referendum seen to be biased towards leave.

Some people would support 1/2, or 3/4 as they view the most important thing as being that their side wins. I don't. I am currently leaning towards supporting 3 then 2. I do not want to see a biased referendum to either side.
Which is why cabinet ministers should not be sacked early, and why they should be allowed to campaign on either side. As they were in 1973.

Completely agreed. This whole drama will have been for naught if remain only wins in a way that isn't accepted as at all valid by those who want to leave.

viewcode · October 2015

SeanT said:

viewcode said:

Eh_ehm_a_eh said:

SeanT said:

DavidL said:

SeanT said:
Hold your ground, Gideon.

We need to slash welfare to the bone. We need to see starving northerners and Scots doing weird jigs in the streets of the Home Counties, in the forlorn hope they might earn a sixpence to buy rusks for their children. We need to see RESULTS.
Maybe a new 90% rate on those earning over 400K? What do you think Sean?
To be honest, I doubt I will turnover £400k this year. Last year was exceptional. in my business earnings are extremely volatile.

But I can say I out-earned the prime minister of my country for five years in a row - by making up stupid stories.

THAT is something I will tell my grandkids. Incessantly. Til they have me dispatched to Dignitas.
Dignitas, very clinical. Not going to follow in the footsteps of Hunter S Thompson, the Hemingway brothers, Virginia Woolf?
Do it Alan Turing stylee. Poisoned apple. Poetic and good for your teeth.

Incidentally, the death cocktail they administer in Dignitas tastes so repulsive they have to add an anti-emetic to prevent you hurling...:-(
Fuck that then.

I return to the Brompton Cocktail - heroin, cocaine and cognac (once prescribed for terminally ill cancer patients in Brompton Hospital, in the 1920s, until it was noted, severely, that it made the dying patients "too cheerful").

Twats.

I've done heroin and cocaine. Together I can confirm that they are wholly blissful. Add some fine cognac? Or maybe an aged malt whisky? Highland Park 18?

Yep. Count me in. Or out.

I must confess to some left-handed admiration for somebody who, when faced with obtaining heroin, cocaine and cognac, worries about the quality of the cognac...

Philip_Thompson · October 2015

GeoffM said:

Philip_Thompson said:

GeoffM said:

Philip_Thompson said:
I completely agree with @SeanT that the referendum must be fair and be seen to be fair. The losers will inevitably grasp straws to explain why they lost rather than accept they lost fair and square so Dave should be completely above board and leave no straws to grasp.

Handled right the EU can be shut down as an issue for decades or until the next major round of reforms whichever comes sooner. Handled wrong this will blow up before the GE.
"Handled right" the EU can be shut down as an issue permanently and who cares if they ever have a major round of reforms. Handled wrong we'll still be members.
That's handled wrong if you think we should remain. There are four possible outcomes.

1: Leave victory in a referendum seen to be biased towards leave.
2: Leave victory in a fair referendum.
3: Remain victory in a fair referendum.
4: Remain victory in a referendum seen to be biased towards leave.

Some people would support 1/2, or 3/4 as they view the most important thing as being that their side wins. I don't. I am currently leaning towards supporting 3 then 2. I do not want to see a biased referendum to either side.
I'm a 2 every day of the week. 3 is the only other acceptable outcome.
Option 5 is:
5: Remain victory in a referendum seen to be biased towards remain.
That is the result that I expect.

Sorry that was a typo, that was meant to be option 4.

I am discounting as both implausible and irrelevant the referendum being won by the side the referendum was biased against. If leave wins in a referendum biased to remain, or remain wins in a referendum biased towards leave then the issue is closed.

HYUFD · October 2015

AndyJS said:
My prediction for the Canadian election: pretty much a dead heat between the Conservatives and Liberals.

2/3 of latest polls suggest Trudeau has opened a clear lead, much depends on whether the NDP vote collapses in his favour, that may even give him an outside chance of a majority

Nanos Liberal 37.3% Tory 30.5% NDP 22.1%

Ipsos Liberal 38% Tory 31% NDP 22%

EKOS Liberal 34.3% Tory 32.6% NDP 21%

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_in_the_Canadian_federal_election,_2015

Night

Tim_B · October 2015

viewcode said:

SeanT said:

viewcode said:

Eh_ehm_a_eh said:

SeanT said:

DavidL said:

SeanT said:
Hold your ground, Gideon.

We need to slash welfare to the bone. We need to see starving northerners and Scots doing weird jigs in the streets of the Home Counties, in the forlorn hope they might earn a sixpence to buy rusks for their children. We need to see RESULTS.
Maybe a new 90% rate on those earning over 400K? What do you think Sean?
To be honest, I doubt I will turnover £400k this year. Last year was exceptional. in my business earnings are extremely volatile.

But I can say I out-earned the prime minister of my country for five years in a row - by making up stupid stories.

THAT is something I will tell my grandkids. Incessantly. Til they have me dispatched to Dignitas.
Dignitas, very clinical. Not going to follow in the footsteps of Hunter S Thompson, the Hemingway brothers, Virginia Woolf?
Do it Alan Turing stylee. Poisoned apple. Poetic and good for your teeth.

Incidentally, the death cocktail they administer in Dignitas tastes so repulsive they have to add an anti-emetic to prevent you hurling...:-(
Fuck that then.

I return to the Brompton Cocktail - heroin, cocaine and cognac (once prescribed for terminally ill cancer patients in Brompton Hospital, in the 1920s, until it was noted, severely, that it made the dying patients "too cheerful").

Twats.

I've done heroin and cocaine. Together I can confirm that they are wholly blissful. Add some fine cognac? Or maybe an aged malt whisky? Highland Park 18?

Yep. Count me in. Or out.
I must confess to some left-handed admiration for somebody who, when faced with obtaining heroin, cocaine and cognac, worries about the quality of the cognac...

or use gin.....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brompton_cocktail

flightpath01 · October 2015

Mr Smithson is desperate for a change in policy, you can tell that - he is quoting Tim Monrgomerie. I hope he is well pensioned, because his trusty followers want to see pensioners hit instead. People on fixed incomes who are helpless to really adjust their lifestyles, unable to change jobs or earn more. Who would have thought they could be so jealous of a sodding bus pass? People coming to the end of their lives and at their most vulnerable, coming under spitteratzi type hate from pbhysterics.

scotslass · October 2015

As far as the Rugby is concerned - where is a Russian linesman when you need one? - yes I really do know something about football!

However it is quite reasonable for people to discuss a rough decision and the Scotland team goes out with their colours flying high. That is a contrast with some other teams. TGOHF does himself little good by his attitude on these matters which is nonetheless quite revealing.

I also notice that the SNP are now on 54 per cent in the Comres Scottish cross break! Now my own attitude to sub samples is well known. However, TGOHF usually seems to think they are important. How inconvenient it must be to have poll after poll which confounds his hopes!

HYUFD · October 2015

scotslass said:
As far as the Rugby is concerned - where is a Russian linesman when you need one? - yes I really do know something about football!

However it is quite reasonable for people to discuss a rough decision and the Scotland team goes out with their colours flying high. That is a contrast with some other teams. TGOHF does himself little good by his attitude on these matters which is nonetheless quite revealing.

I also notice that the SNP are now on 54 per cent in the Comres Scottish cross break! Now my own attitude to sub samples is well known. However, TGOHF usually seems to think they are important. How inconvenient it must be to have poll after poll which confounds his hopes!

Though yougov last week had No leading 52-48% on any rerun indyref in a poll which also had the SNP on over 50% in the constituency Holyrood vote, 45% on the list

flightpath01 · October 2015

Eh_ehm_a_eh said:

MikeL said:
On any normal day, Australia would have won by 20+ points.

Aus scored five tries to Scotland's three. Of those three one was a charge down and one an interception. In terms of "normal play" it was five tries to one.

Aus also had a try ruled out for a tiny knock-on in a ruck that was only seen by TMO and could easily have not been noticed. That would have been six tries to one on normal play.

MikeL said:
On any normal day, Australia would have won by 20+ points.

Aus scored five tries to Scotland's three. Of those three one was a charge down and one an interception. In terms of "normal play" it was five tries to one.

Aus also had a try ruled out for a tiny knock-on in a ruck that was only seen by TMO and could easily have not been noticed. That would have been six tries to one on normal play.
Why don't ypu chalk of the first Scotland try?
Qbviously on a normal day Australia would not have made a mistake.
Fucking spacer.

He should. The Aussies were dreaming of the big wave instead of defending for Scotland's first try, it was the most appalling miserable neglect of basic defence in world cup history. Amazingly they presented Scotland with two other golden tries. Scotland failed to take advantage of the huge opportunity presented them.

flightpath01 · October 2015

MikeL said:
On any normal day, Australia would have won by 20+ points.

Aus scored five tries to Scotland's three. Of those three one was a charge down and one an interception. In terms of "normal play" it was five tries to one.

Aus also had a try ruled out for a tiny knock-on in a ruck that was only seen by TMO and could easily have not been noticed. That would have been six tries to one on normal play.

Tiny knock on is a knock on, its the scrum half's responsibility to pick it up. It's like doing everything right except drop the ball by just an inch in touching down. In other respects penalties are too easy in union and recycling the ball at rucks is too easy. Players effectively always hold on and do not release.
Where Scotland were unlucky was where they were probably correctly penalised with a man sin binned for a deliberate knock on. It's a crass rule.
A different Aussie defence and stand off will have to turn up in the semis.

flightpath01 · October 2015

Philip_Thompson said:
I completely agree with @SeanT that the referendum must be fair and be seen to be fair. The losers will inevitably grasp straws to explain why they lost rather than accept they lost fair and square so Dave should be completely above board and leave no straws to grasp.

Handled right the EU can be shut down as an issue for decades or until the next major round of reforms whichever comes sooner. Handled wrong this will blow up before the GE.

In all practical terms I do not see how the referendum can be anything but fair. If ministers resign and campaign against I would have thought that would be a plus to the Leave side. Whatever the result all parties will have to live with it and with their previous campaigning. I do not see it beneficial to anyone to go out on a stupid limb.
What is not going to be good for anybody is a result that is not a significant one. Frankly I think that's why a minimum limit for change is wise ... say 55%. Thus anyone seriously considering change would actually be motivated to vote for change. The whole position is miserably poisoned if the result is a close one.

AndyJS · October 2015

Canada and the USA haven't both had centre-left administrations since the year 2000. It could happen again tomorrow.

http://www.cbc.ca/news2/interactives/poll-tracker/2015/index.html

RobD · October 2015

Scott_P said:
@NicolaSturgeon: Note to my fellow independence supporters. People who disagree are not anti Scottish. Does our cause no good to hurl abuse (& it's wrong)

Will any of the zoomers here take heed?

Kudos to her for that comment.

DecrepitJohnL · October 2015

JEO said:
I'm hearing a few more rumours down the grapevine that Cameron's going to sack eurosceptic ministers in the coming months so they will have less status when they campaign to leave the EU.

It will be utterly appalling if he does that. The EU is clearly a very heated and important issue within the Conservative Party, and the only way we can overcome it is to have a mature debate and if both sides are treated with respect. If the leadership engages in a dirty tricks campaign to kneecap people on the other side of the debate, then it will cause the eurosceptics to respond in kind (with legitimate reason) and we will descend into civil war.

It will be despicable if Cameron puts stacking the deck in favour of the EU ahead of the unity of the Conservative Party - especially when the Opposition has such dangerous views right now.

Rumours? David Cameron has already said ministers must campaign for "in". If Corbyn had any sense, he'd have already followed Harold Wilson and declared a free vote for Labour to avoid yet more pointless rows.

rcs1000 · October 2015

"Mr Hate Preacher, we've decided that you're going to need a new career. So, which is it going to be: BBC Presenter or Cabinet Minister?"

RobD · October 2015

rcs1000 said:
"Mr Hate Preacher, we've decided that you're going to need a new career. So, which is it going to be: BBC Presenter or Cabinet Minister?"

Pretty sure the BBC Presenter was a molester first.

Sandpit · October 2015

Morning all. This one is a rather worrying story:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/11939727/Friends-of-Jacky-Sutton-former-BBC-journalist-found-dead-in-Istanbul-airport-voice-fears-over-cover-up.html
Journalist and UN agency worker heading for Iraq found "hanged" in Intanbul airport bathroom. CCTV camera just happened to be unserviceable at the time.

RobD · October 2015

Sandpit said:
Morning all. This one is a rather worrying story:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/11939727/Friends-of-Jacky-Sutton-former-BBC-journalist-found-dead-in-Istanbul-airport-voice-fears-over-cover-up.html
Journalist and UN agency worker heading for Iraq found "hanged" in Intanbul airport bathroom. CCTV camera just happened to be unserviceable at the time.

I would certainly hope CCTV doesn't operate in the cubicles!

AndyJS · October 2015

"Voters are expected to show up in huge numbers Monday after the longest campaign in modern Canadian history, in an election that appears to be turning on the appetite for change and on which opposition party would best answer that desire."

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/party-leaders-cross-country-to-make-final-pitch-to-voters/article26866554/

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The pressure mounts on Osborne’s tax credit plan

Comments