Plato_Says said:

I heard that exchange too, resort of the scoundrel.

TCPoliticalBetting said:

I have just started to watch the Tony Hall live interviews and when a journalist "Neil Midgeley" asked him.
Qn - I understand that you have not personally sacked a person for bullying or intimidation, why not?
Hall waffled on about how there were fewer bullying allegations in 14/15 than 13/14. The journalist repeated the question.
Hall offered to go through later, all the last year's cases and then said "does your organisation have less bullying" or words to that effect.

I personally think it is a shame that Jeremy Clarkson wasn't prosecuted for assaulting his producer.

isam said:

Pulpstar said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

NorfolkTilIDie said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

NorfolkTilIDie said:

Wow. Employment rate of Somali women is just 10%!!

Is the male rate that much higher?

Male rate for Somalis is 40%, so four times higher, similar to Iranian men. But Iranian women are higher - 49%!!

So still piss poor basically.

What on earth are they doing here ?

Adding to the cultural gaiety of the nation ??
At least the polish builders & plumbers fix up your kitchen and bathroom.

Refugees innit?

Ooh la lala

Who is going to drive looky looky north London minicabs and chew chat if these boys aren't here? Not our feckless yoof

If you look at figure 68 here, you will see the largest rates of housing benefit seem to be from refugee popularions.

www.migrationwatchuk.org/briefing-paper/367

I suspect that you wouldn't be as good a worker if you and your family had just come through a warzone either.

Plato_Says said:

He got £100k instead. Well worth being called Irish and a single punch.

I'd volunteer for that deal.

JohnLilburne said:

Plato_Says said:

I heard that exchange too, resort of the scoundrel.

TCPoliticalBetting said:

I have just started to watch the Tony Hall live interviews and when a journalist "Neil Midgeley" asked him.
Qn - I understand that you have not personally sacked a person for bullying or intimidation, why not?
Hall waffled on about how there were fewer bullying allegations in 14/15 than 13/14. The journalist repeated the question.
Hall offered to go through later, all the last year's cases and then said "does your organisation have less bullying" or words to that effect.

I personally think it is a shame that Jeremy Clarkson wasn't prosecuted for assaulting his producer.

I imagine the compensation was more from lost earnings for it affecting his career.

How much do you think he was paid?!

NorfolkTilIDie said:

Plato_Says said:

He got £100k instead. Well worth being called Irish and a single punch.

I'd volunteer for that deal.

JohnLilburne said:

Plato_Says said:

I heard that exchange too, resort of the scoundrel.

TCPoliticalBetting said:

I have just started to watch the Tony Hall live interviews and when a journalist "Neil Midgeley" asked him.
Qn - I understand that you have not personally sacked a person for bullying or intimidation, why not?
Hall waffled on about how there were fewer bullying allegations in 14/15 than 13/14. The journalist repeated the question.
Hall offered to go through later, all the last year's cases and then said "does your organisation have less bullying" or words to that effect.

I personally think it is a shame that Jeremy Clarkson wasn't prosecuted for assaulting his producer.

I imagine the compensation was more from lost earnings for it affecting his career.

https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/702830599623598081

OldKingCole said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Jonathan, no, but there may be fewer colds

Hope your pestilence abates promptly.

It’ll be cold and unwelcoming outside, so there’ll be more!

Cold weather doesn't cause colds, viruses do. It is quite likely that the prevalence of winter colds is actually caused by staying indoors more, with other people who have colds

TheScreamingEagles said:

https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/702830599623598081

Good to see how little faith the public have in politicians and officials on both sides of the channel.

Liberty Rebel
Smart move having Adam Afriyie on #bbcdp to advocate stronger migration control policy.
Poor Chuka can’t play “raaacisst!” card in response

http://www.suellafernandes.co.uk/news/why-i-will-be-voting-leave-eu

I'm pleased to see that Suella Fernandes (one of the nicest people in politics) is backing Leave.

Hertsmere_Pubgoer said:

Plato_Says said:

Link to this evidence?

justin124 said:

TheWhiteRabbit said:

TGOHF said:

volcanopete said:

National Day of Action against benefit sanctions on 9th March.I hope Pbers will join their local actions.

What are "benefit sanctions" ?

When you have your benefits reduced because of any one of a number of transgressions, for example, not taking a job when offered

Also when Jobcentre staff decide to change the date or time a claimant is required to sign on. The claimant is sent a letter but if he fails to receive it in time and does not appear at the new time he/she is sanctioned. There has been clear evidence of managers doing this quite deliberately to meet targets imposed on them.

I'm currently claiming JSA.
When signing on they tell you what time to sign on in a fortnights time.

Lucky you. When my son was unemployed after leaving university he did not get a penny in benefits as his then girlfriend was working part time and the pair of them were deemed to have enough to live on. It's not like my day, I can tell you. The regime has got much, much stricter since the late 80s and early 90s.

TheScreamingEagles said:

https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/702830599623598081

So the public doesn't trust the EU, doesn't think anything of their politicians, don't think we got a good deal, but still will back In.

Post-deal, then, we have five polls.

Survation (phone) Leave 33%, Remain 48%.
Com Res (phone) Leave 39% Remain 51%
Yougov (online, change in methodology) Leave 38%, Remain 37%.
ICM (online) Leave 40%, Remain 42%
BMG (online) Leave 41%, Remain 44%.

I'm starting to think that the renegotiation hasn't made much difference either way.

Miss Flounders also told the jury about Johnson's infidelities, telling the court there had been 'quite a few' other women.

The court was told how Miss Flounders had been in Twitter contact with Johnson's victim, whom she recognised as one of the people who waited for Johnson after home games.

She said she even wished the teenager a happy birthday on Twitter in 2014, only a week or so before he was reported to police.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3463609/Adam-Johnson-s-girlfriend-Stacey-Flounders-takes-stand-evidence-behalf-child-sex-trial.html

Just found this from election night thread:

"SeanT said:
It is now possible to envisage the entire extinction of Labour, outside London.

Already dead in Scotland, UKIP harrying them in northern England, PC posed in Wales.

This is how a great party dies, by electing a quasi-Marxist North London dickhead as leader, then building an Obelisk."

Now that Labour has a fully blown Marxist North London dickhead as a leader, what does Corbyn need to build to keep up - a pyramid?

FrancisUrquhart said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/702830599623598081

So the public doesn't trust the EU, doesn't think anything of their politicians, don't think we got a good deal, but still will back In.

I think it is effect David Cameron effect.

He can sell most things, people like and trust him.

Leave just don't have anyone to take him on that front.

It's the economy, stupid.

AlastairMeeks said:

Casino_Royale said:

@TSE - very interesting.

There appear to be a large number of people who have no time for the EU at all, and no confidence in it, but are still voting Remain in despair.

Vote Leave need to target these people. Hard.

The question Leave need to ask themselves is why they are still less appealing than Remain. That will involve some searching examination in the mirror. To date, Leave has shown not the slightest inclination to carry out such an examination.

I am writing to Vote Leave at the weekend. You might now not want to help, given your position, but if you do, I would welcome your thoughts.

Pro_Rata said:

Slightly off topic, can't find a clear current status on Google over how Swiss efforts to restrict free-movement are going, just snippets that don't give a full picture:

https://www.eda.admin.ch/missions/mission-eu-brussels/en/home/key-issues/free-movement-persons.html

Other than the above, which doesn't give a totally up to date picture, I've seen something about a 2017 deadline on the current bilateral deals, and something about EU early in 2015 not wanting to enter negotiation on free-movement.

Are Switzerland likely to withdraw from EFTA and renegotiate static trade deals?

Any relevance to the options Britain are likely to have post any Brexit?

The ONS data is also a dog's breakfast. They don't do anything useful like give immigration per year, you have to faff about in Excel.

However, immigration has been well north of 500k per year for the entire decade (that's gross immigration), rising to over 600k over the last couple of years. Desperately disappointing figures for Cameron.

FrancisUrquhart said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/702830599623598081

So the public doesn't trust the EU, doesn't think anything of their politicians, don't think we got a good deal, but still will back In.

No one to blame but ourselves if that ends up being the case

New Thread New Thread

New thread.

MarqueeMark said:

watford30 said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

SandraM said:

Re: Savile. The Journalist Lynn Barbour put it to Savile in an interview published in 1990 that there were persistent rumours that he was sexually interested in little girls. Of course he denied it.

Given that rumours had appeared in print, why didn't senior management insist that children were chaperoned when anywhere near him?

Louis Theroux....

Much of the stuff about Saville that turned out to be true was on the Popbitch website over a decade ago. Enough people clearly knew, yet nothing happened.

I was told about Savile by a senior BBC "talent" 17 years ago....

The report is clearly a whitewash. "No evidence" is the original non-denial denial. It is clear the BBC was corporately aware of at least some of Savile's crimes, but they seem to have ignored them and were mainly concerned to maintain plausible denial at the top level.

SouthamObserver said:

Hertsmere_Pubgoer said:

Plato_Says said:

Link to this evidence?

justin124 said:

TheWhiteRabbit said:

TGOHF said:

volcanopete said:

National Day of Action against benefit sanctions on 9th March.I hope Pbers will join their local actions.

What are "benefit sanctions" ?

When you have your benefits reduced because of any one of a number of transgressions, for example, not taking a job when offered

Also when Jobcentre staff decide to change the date or time a claimant is required to sign on. The claimant is sent a letter but if he fails to receive it in time and does not appear at the new time he/she is sanctioned. There has been clear evidence of managers doing this quite deliberately to meet targets imposed on them.

I'm currently claiming JSA.
When signing on they tell you what time to sign on in a fortnights time.

Lucky you. When my son was unemployed after leaving university he did not get a penny in benefits as his then girlfriend was working part time and the pair of them were deemed to have enough to live on. It's not like my day, I can tell you. The regime has got much, much stricter since the late 80s and early 90s.

It certainly was much more generous back in the day. When I left the army I was going to take a few months off but I signed on to keep my "stamp" going and not because I wanted benefits. A couple of days later I got a giro in the post for only a few quid less than my take home pay as a soldier. I queried it and was told that I had been classified as being made redundant and so entitled to earnings-related benefit at 66% of my gross pay in my previous employment. Income tax in those days was 33%, so the financial difference between running my arse off getting shot at and sitting at home doing bugger all was about three quid a week.

That said, madness though it was, the benefits bill was a lot lower in real terms than it is today.

Hertsmere_Pubgoer said:

SouthamObserver said:

Hertsmere_Pubgoer said:

Plato_Says said:

Link to this evidence?

justin124 said:

TheWhiteRabbit said:

TGOHF said:

volcanopete said:

National Day of Action against benefit sanctions on 9th March.I hope Pbers will join their local actions.

What are "benefit sanctions" ?

When you have your benefits reduced because of any one of a number of transgressions, for example, not taking a job when offered

Also when Jobcentre staff decide to change the date or time a claimant is required to sign on. The claimant is sent a letter but if he fails to receive it in time and does not appear at the new time he/she is sanctioned. There has been clear evidence of managers doing this quite deliberately to meet targets imposed on them.

I'm currently claiming JSA.
When signing on they tell you what time to sign on in a fortnights time.

Lucky you. When my son was unemployed after leaving university he did not get a penny in benefits as his then girlfriend was working part time and the pair of them were deemed to have enough to live on. It's not like my day, I can tell you. The regime has got much, much stricter since the late 80s and early 90s.

I would much rather be working. The place I was at relocated up north at the end of January.

All the best, Hertsmere.