HYUFD said:

JackW said:

National - Quinnipiac

Trump 43 .. Cruz 29 .. Kasich 16
Clinton 50 .. Sanders 38

Clinton 46 .. Trump 40
Clinton 45 .. Cruz 42
Clinton 39 .. Kasich 47
Sanders 52 .. Trump 38
Sanders 50 .. Cruz 39
Sanders 44 .. Kasich 45

If the GOP had picked Kasich they would have the race in the bag, Hillary should be giving prayers of thanks they look likely to nominate Trump

The GOP should also be thanking their lucky stars Sanders isn't going to be the candidate.

SouthamObserver said:

DavidL said:

FWIW Cameron seems to me to have felt a temporary need to get out of second gear this week to get his Chancellor out of some largely self-induced difficulty. When he does that he shows that he really is a different class from anyone else currently politically active. He is of course flattered by the comparison with Corbyn who is beyond useless but even so...

This is not good news for Leave. If the majority who are not very interested in politics think the "wrong" answer is going to bring down Cameron then Project Fear will have its most powerful weapon and it will be directly focussed at Tory supporters who are just beyond irritation with Brussels and its stupidity but are very anxious to keep Cameron in charge. I must confess I myself find this a dilemma.

Remain remains the favourite but it is going to be a grudging, half hearted Remain that will solve nothing in even the medium term. Probably the worst of all worlds really.

A party that keeps putting EU membership front and centre even after a low turnout referendum delivers a Remain verdict, however narrow, is not going to be thanked by voters. The Tories really are going to have to put this to bed whatever the result.

But it won't be put back to bed. Within 5 years there will be another EU treaty with additional integration of the EZ with knock on implications for us and another referendum on the basis of current legislation. And Cameron will be gone. And, I think, the UK will not agree to such a new treaty making our continued membership problematic.

The problem is not now. Whilst not perfect the current EU situation is just about tolerable. The problem is where the EU is going. Nowhere I want to, that is for sure.

HYUFD said:

JackW said:

National - Quinnipiac

Trump 43 .. Cruz 29 .. Kasich 16
Clinton 50 .. Sanders 38

Clinton 46 .. Trump 40
Clinton 45 .. Cruz 42
Clinton 39 .. Kasich 47
Sanders 52 .. Trump 38
Sanders 50 .. Cruz 39
Sanders 44 .. Kasich 45

If the GOP had picked Kasich they would have the race in the bag, Hillary should be giving prayers of thanks they look likely to nominate Trump

Richard_Nabavi said:

JackW said:

Clinton 46 .. Trump 40
Clinton 45 .. Cruz 42
Clinton 39 .. Kasich 47
Sanders 52 .. Trump 38
Sanders 50 .. Cruz 39
Sanders 44 .. Kasich 45

Those are dreadful figures for Hillary, except that the figures for Trump and Cruz are worse.

Indeed.

It's the reason why the GOP establishment are pulling every stroke to avoid a Trump nomination but to no avail. Enough GOP voters will see him over the line and then admire his thoroughly entertaining but futile effort to defeat Clinton.

Dull it'll not be ....

Pulpstar said:

The GOP should also be thanking their lucky stars Sanders isn't going to be the candidate.

I expect his ratings would rapidly fall if he were.

Can you watch today's PMQs right now somewhere and if so where. Checked parliament Chanel etc but no luck

DavidL said:

But it won't be put back to bed. Within 5 years there will be another EU treaty with additional integration of the EZ with knock on implications for us and another referendum on the basis of current legislation. And Cameron will be gone. And, I think, the UK will not agree to such a new treaty making our continued membership problematic.

The problem is not now. Whilst not perfect the current EU situation is just about tolerable. The problem is where the EU is going. Nowhere I want to, that is for sure.

If there's another Treaty, we'll have a veto if there's anything in it we don't like. Why should it be a problem for us? More an opportunity.

PClipp said:

Danny565 said:

As I've said before, I don't think the Tory turmoil of the past week will be that much of a direct boost for "Leave" (in the sense of people thinking "Osborne gave a crap budget, therefore I'll vote Out to punish him").

However, I think one of the indirect consequences is that Cameron will have been scared out of a full-blooded "Project Fear", because he'll be too scared of really infuriating his MPs further - which helps "Leave", since "Remain" have nothing to fall back on if they're not scaring the living daylights out of everyone.

Don´t worry, Mr Danny. The Remain campaign is safely in the capable hands of Sir Crosby, who single-handedly can terrify anybody into voting whatever way he chooses.

Cameron will just have to do and say what he is told. Like he did in the recent General Election. And spend lots and lots of money.

Eh? Lynton Crosby is not working for Remain.

Pulpstar said:

HYUFD said:

JackW said:

National - Quinnipiac

Trump 43 .. Cruz 29 .. Kasich 16
Clinton 50 .. Sanders 38

Clinton 46 .. Trump 40
Clinton 45 .. Cruz 42
Clinton 39 .. Kasich 47
Sanders 52 .. Trump 38
Sanders 50 .. Cruz 39
Sanders 44 .. Kasich 45

If the GOP had picked Kasich they would have the race in the bag, Hillary should be giving prayers of thanks they look likely to nominate Trump

The GOP should also be thanking their lucky stars Sanders isn't going to be the candidate.

Indeed though Kasich beats Sanders albeit by 1%

Populus
#TTMN | Boris, immigration, & the Queen: The #EUreferendum one month in https://t.co/T6DAsRFCon https://t.co/o5lGnQvJlf

Alistair said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Ok we're getting the Ipsos Mori phone tomorrow now.

Do you know the field work data, big Polling moment this I feel

I'll ask

HYUFD said:

Pulpstar said:

HYUFD said:

JackW said:

National - Quinnipiac

Trump 43 .. Cruz 29 .. Kasich 16
Clinton 50 .. Sanders 38

Clinton 46 .. Trump 40
Clinton 45 .. Cruz 42
Clinton 39 .. Kasich 47
Sanders 52 .. Trump 38
Sanders 50 .. Cruz 39
Sanders 44 .. Kasich 45

If the GOP had picked Kasich they would have the race in the bag, Hillary should be giving prayers of thanks they look likely to nominate Trump

The GOP should also be thanking their lucky stars Sanders isn't going to be the candidate.

Indeed though Kasich beats Sanders albeit by 1%

I noticed that and it's something else that makes me very sceptical of Sanders' polling. If it came to those two in November Kasich would thrash him.

DavidL said:

SouthamObserver said:

DavidL said:

FWIW Cameron seems to me to have felt a temporary need to get out of second gear this week to get his Chancellor out of some largely self-induced difficulty. When he does that he shows that he really is a different class from anyone else currently politically active. He is of course flattered by the comparison with Corbyn who is beyond useless but even so...

This is not good news for Leave. If the majority who are not very interested in politics think the "wrong" answer is going to bring down Cameron then Project Fear will have its most powerful weapon and it will be directly focussed at Tory supporters who are just beyond irritation with Brussels and its stupidity but are very anxious to keep Cameron in charge. I must confess I myself find this a dilemma.

Remain remains the favourite but it is going to be a grudging, half hearted Remain that will solve nothing in even the medium term. Probably the worst of all worlds really.

A party that keeps putting EU membership front and centre even after a low turnout referendum delivers a Remain verdict, however narrow, is not going to be thanked by voters. The Tories really are going to have to put this to bed whatever the result.

But it won't be put back to bed. Within 5 years there will be another EU treaty with additional integration of the EZ with knock on implications for us and another referendum on the basis of current legislation. And Cameron will be gone. And, I think, the UK will not agree to such a new treaty making our continued membership problematic.

The problem is not now. Whilst not perfect the current EU situation is just about tolerable. The problem is where the EU is going. Nowhere I want to, that is for sure.

But surely there would 100% be another EU treaty with additional integration of the EZ with knock on implications for us if we left? I can't think of a concrete example plus why wouldn't the ECB try to repatriate EUR-denominated business (eg. clearing) if we were not in the EU?

We only won the court case because we _were_ in the EU.

Richard_Nabavi said:

DavidL said:

It will, in my opinion, result in us leaving or at least moving nearer to an EEA type arrangement. Better to do it now I think but whatever, unless there is a serious change of view on the part of the UK public, that is where I think we will end up.

But that's a good outcome, not a bad outcome. If we can gently disengage without the disruption of leaving, and at the same time get concessions favourable to us because we'll have a veto on the next treaty, then what's not to like? I'd say that was a particularly attractive scenario. I'm not particularly optimistic that it will happen, however; I think it's more likely that the Eurozone will fudge things as usual and there won't be any new treaty for many years.

I think it is a bad scenario because it means the current uncertainty will go on indefinitely and because it means the Tories will continue to divide on the issue.

I think it will happen because, for example, the present scenario where the ECB is effectively not an EU institution is really not acceptable. If there is to be any kind of democratic control the ECB needs to be made more accountable and the EU Parliament is the obvious body. Can't really do that at the moment. They will want the mechanisms of the CJE to hold countries to account in respect of budgets etc as well.

More and more of the game will be the bit we don't want to play. We should get out of the road and let them get on with it with our best wishes.

JackW said:

HYUFD said:

JackW said:

National - Quinnipiac

Trump 43 .. Cruz 29 .. Kasich 16
Clinton 50 .. Sanders 38

Clinton 46 .. Trump 40
Clinton 45 .. Cruz 42
Clinton 39 .. Kasich 47
Sanders 52 .. Trump 38
Sanders 50 .. Cruz 39
Sanders 44 .. Kasich 45

If the GOP had picked Kasich they would have the race in the bag, Hillary should be giving prayers of thanks they look likely to nominate Trump

Richard_Nabavi said:

JackW said:

Clinton 46 .. Trump 40
Clinton 45 .. Cruz 42
Clinton 39 .. Kasich 47
Sanders 52 .. Trump 38
Sanders 50 .. Cruz 39
Sanders 44 .. Kasich 45

Those are dreadful figures for Hillary, except that the figures for Trump and Cruz are worse.

Indeed.

It's the reason why the GOP establishment are pulling every stroke to avoid a Trump nomination but to no avail. Enough GOP voters will see him over the line and then admire his thoroughly entertaining but futile effort to defeat Clinton.

Dull it'll not be ....

There is a lot of class similarity between sanders and trump voters. The establishment could be due a big surprise..

Wanderer said:

PClipp said:

Danny565 said:

As I've said before, I don't think the Tory turmoil of the past week will be that much of a direct boost for "Leave" (in the sense of people thinking "Osborne gave a crap budget, therefore I'll vote Out to punish him").

However, I think one of the indirect consequences is that Cameron will have been scared out of a full-blooded "Project Fear", because he'll be too scared of really infuriating his MPs further - which helps "Leave", since "Remain" have nothing to fall back on if they're not scaring the living daylights out of everyone.

Don´t worry, Mr Danny. The Remain campaign is safely in the capable hands of Sir Crosby, who single-handedly can terrify anybody into voting whatever way he chooses.

Cameron will just have to do and say what he is told. Like he did in the recent General Election. And spend lots and lots of money.

Eh? Lynton Crosby is not working for Remain.

I thought he was. If he isn´t, that may explain why Cameron is doing so poorly on his own.

DavidL said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

DavidL said:

It will, in my opinion, result in us leaving or at least moving nearer to an EEA type arrangement. Better to do it now I think but whatever, unless there is a serious change of view on the part of the UK public, that is where I think we will end up.

But that's a good outcome, not a bad outcome. If we can gently disengage without the disruption of leaving, and at the same time get concessions favourable to us because we'll have a veto on the next treaty, then what's not to like? I'd say that was a particularly attractive scenario. I'm not particularly optimistic that it will happen, however; I think it's more likely that the Eurozone will fudge things as usual and there won't be any new treaty for many years.

I think it is a bad scenario because it means the current uncertainty will go on indefinitely and because it means the Tories will continue to divide on the issue.

I think it will happen because, for example, the present scenario where the ECB is effectively not an EU institution is really not acceptable. If there is to be any kind of democratic control the ECB needs to be made more accountable and the EU Parliament is the obvious body. Can't really do that at the moment. They will want the mechanisms of the CJE to hold countries to account in respect of budgets etc as well.

More and more of the game will be the bit we don't want to play. We should get out of the road and let them get on with it with our best wishes.

But the ECB doesn't opine on UK banks based in the UK. Or am I misunderstanding your point?

TOPPING said:

DavidL said:

SouthamObserver said:

DavidL said:

FWIW Cameron seems to me to have felt a temporary need to get out of second gear this week to get his Chancellor out of some largely self-induced difficulty. When he does that he shows that he really is a different class from anyone else currently politically active. He is of course flattered by the comparison with Corbyn who is beyond useless but even so...

This is not good news for Leave. If the majority who are not very interested in politics think the "wrong" answer is going to bring down Cameron then Project Fear will have its most powerful weapon and it will be directly focussed at Tory supporters who are just beyond irritation with Brussels and its stupidity but are very anxious to keep Cameron in charge. I must confess I myself find this a dilemma.

Remain remains the favourite but it is going to be a grudging, half hearted Remain that will solve nothing in even the medium term. Probably the worst of all worlds really.

A party that keeps putting EU membership front and centre even after a low turnout referendum delivers a Remain verdict, however narrow, is not going to be thanked by voters. The Tories really are going to have to put this to bed whatever the result.

But it won't be put back to bed. Within 5 years there will be another EU treaty with additional integration of the EZ with knock on implications for us and another referendum on the basis of current legislation. And Cameron will be gone. And, I think, the UK will not agree to such a new treaty making our continued membership problematic.

The problem is not now. Whilst not perfect the current EU situation is just about tolerable. The problem is where the EU is going. Nowhere I want to, that is for sure.

But surely there would 100% be another EU treaty with additional integration of the EZ with knock on implications for us if we left? I can't think of a concrete example plus why wouldn't the ECB try to repatriate EUR-denominated business (eg. clearing) if we were not in the EU?

We only won the court case because we _were_ in the EU.

Of course there would be such a treaty but as long as we have access to the single market we have the protection that you are talking about because any attempt to limit an EEA member from trading freely across the single market would be against the fundamental freedoms promised by the EU. What we would not be involved in is their procedures by which they fix and regulate their domestic budgets, something we have no interest in.

@BBCNewsPR: Pleased to say @nicholaswatt is the new Political Editor of @BBCNewsnight #Newsnight https://t.co/6n1VCMdeWy https://t.co/MDSU2pwWWR

just need PaddyPower to settle the market now

DavidL said:

Moses_ said:

Can you watch today's PMQs right now somewhere and if so where. Checked parliament Chanel etc but no luck

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b006nldz

Thank you sir MrDavid.

shiney2 said:

JackW said:

HYUFD said:

JackW said:

National - Quinnipiac

Trump 43 .. Cruz 29 .. Kasich 16
Clinton 50 .. Sanders 38

Clinton 46 .. Trump 40
Clinton 45 .. Cruz 42
Clinton 39 .. Kasich 47
Sanders 52 .. Trump 38
Sanders 50 .. Cruz 39
Sanders 44 .. Kasich 45

If the GOP had picked Kasich they would have the race in the bag, Hillary should be giving prayers of thanks they look likely to nominate Trump

Richard_Nabavi said:

JackW said:

Clinton 46 .. Trump 40
Clinton 45 .. Cruz 42
Clinton 39 .. Kasich 47
Sanders 52 .. Trump 38
Sanders 50 .. Cruz 39
Sanders 44 .. Kasich 45

Those are dreadful figures for Hillary, except that the figures for Trump and Cruz are worse.

Indeed.

It's the reason why the GOP establishment are pulling every stroke to avoid a Trump nomination but to no avail. Enough GOP voters will see him over the line and then admire his thoroughly entertaining but futile effort to defeat Clinton.

Dull it'll not be ....

There is a lot of class similarity between sanders and trump voters. The establishment could be due a big surprise..

Not quite sure where the "big surprise" is coming from? .. The nominations are a done deal.

It's Clinton/Trump in November and the average of the last four national polls gives Clinton a lead of just over 10 points.

Scott_P said:

@BBCNewsPR: Pleased to say @nicholaswatt is the new Political Editor of @BBCNewsnight #Newsnight https://t.co/6n1VCMdeWy https://t.co/MDSU2pwWWR

just need PaddyPower to settle the market now

Guardian TV adds another member....

TOPPING said:

DavidL said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

DavidL said:

It will, in my opinion, result in us leaving or at least moving nearer to an EEA type arrangement. Better to do it now I think but whatever, unless there is a serious change of view on the part of the UK public, that is where I think we will end up.

But that's a good outcome, not a bad outcome. If we can gently disengage without the disruption of leaving, and at the same time get concessions favourable to us because we'll have a veto on the next treaty, then what's not to like? I'd say that was a particularly attractive scenario. I'm not particularly optimistic that it will happen, however; I think it's more likely that the Eurozone will fudge things as usual and there won't be any new treaty for many years.

I think it is a bad scenario because it means the current uncertainty will go on indefinitely and because it means the Tories will continue to divide on the issue.

I think it will happen because, for example, the present scenario where the ECB is effectively not an EU institution is really not acceptable. If there is to be any kind of democratic control the ECB needs to be made more accountable and the EU Parliament is the obvious body. Can't really do that at the moment. They will want the mechanisms of the CJE to hold countries to account in respect of budgets etc as well.

More and more of the game will be the bit we don't want to play. We should get out of the road and let them get on with it with our best wishes.

But the ECB doesn't opine on UK banks based in the UK. Or am I misunderstanding your point?

My point is that at the moment we have an unhappy compromise by which the majority of member states have agreed to use additional co-operation provisions to regulate extremely important parts of their affairs but do not have access to the full panoply of EU institutions because there are non-EZ members. The EZ members are not happy with this and I have given examples of why they should not be.

Sooner or later they are going to want to integrate the 2 set ups so that there can be some sort of democratic accountability to very important parts of their governance.

It is not really true that the EU does not opine on UK banks but that is a different argument and that is not my point. My point is that the EU is not going to stay as it is. It never has. It is going to change and change in ways that make the views of non EZ members increasingly irrelevant.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/belgium/12202137/Brussels-attacks-why-Isil-is-losing-its-war-on-terror-in-the-West.html

Crickey this guy is holding himself to hostage to fortune....

JackW said:

It's Clinton/Trump in November and the average of the last four national polls gives Clinton a lead of just over 10 points.

She can thank the GOP throwing the kitchen sink at Trump for those leads. They were polling fairly closely before the Republican opposition to Trump really got going. Come November it will be very different.

http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/2016-general-election-trump-vs-clinton

surbiton said:

Nonetheless, whenever the IRA connection is raised, the Queen having lunch with him should be dragged up to show if it was good enough for the Queen to mix with this lot, then it was good enough for Corbyn too !

If they are all murdering thugs, the Queen, surely, should not have invited one of them, right ?

The Queen did what the Government asked her to do.

As I recall, Charles was very upset with the whole idea and scheduled it so the meeting could only be in the village that he last spent time with Mountbatten before his godfather was murdered

JackW said:

shiney2 said:

JackW said:

HYUFD said:

JackW said:

National - Quinnipiac

Trump 43 .. Cruz 29 .. Kasich 16
Clinton 50 .. Sanders 38

Clinton 46 .. Trump 40
Clinton 45 .. Cruz 42
Clinton 39 .. Kasich 47
Sanders 52 .. Trump 38
Sanders 50 .. Cruz 39
Sanders 44 .. Kasich 45

If the GOP had picked Kasich they would have the race in the bag, Hillary should be giving prayers of thanks they look likely to nominate Trump

Richard_Nabavi said:

JackW said:

Clinton 46 .. Trump 40
Clinton 45 .. Cruz 42
Clinton 39 .. Kasich 47
Sanders 52 .. Trump 38
Sanders 50 .. Cruz 39
Sanders 44 .. Kasich 45

Those are dreadful figures for Hillary, except that the figures for Trump and Cruz are worse.

Indeed.

It's the reason why the GOP establishment are pulling every stroke to avoid a Trump nomination but to no avail. Enough GOP voters will see him over the line and then admire his thoroughly entertaining but futile effort to defeat Clinton.

Dull it'll not be ....

There is a lot of class similarity between sanders and trump voters. The establishment could be due a big surprise..

Not quite sure where the "big surprise" is coming from? .. The nominations are a done deal.

It's Clinton/Trump in November and the average of the last four national polls gives Clinton a lead of just over 10 points.

I was referring to the GE when current sanders sympathisers will (probably) have a choice of Trump, Clinton or sitting it out.

foxinsoxuk said:

MarkHopkins said:

TOPPING said:

Interesting escalation in junior doctors' tactics. Walking out, no emergency cover.

Jeremy H was sitting fairly pretty at PMQs today, wonder what is going on in his dept or if this is a surprise.

It's the nuclear option from the BMA - no emergency cover seems unreasonable from a 'caring' profession.

No. It is no emergency cover from junior doctors. Senior doctors will cover (mostly at the expense of planned work). Indeed the emergency cover is going to be at a higher level of expertise.

Perfectly open to withdraw his unilateral imposition and restart negotiations. The BMA JDC position was cost neutral.

It's only cost-neutral if the government doesn't put more investment into weekend cover on top of what exists now.

@SebastianEPayne: Someone has been at Katy Clark's Wikipedia page @PickardJE https://t.co/xg7qDlcsoY

TOPPING said:

DavidL said:

TOPPING said:

DavidL said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

DavidL said:

.

I think it is a bad scenario because it means the current uncertainty will go on indefinitely and because it means the Tories will continue to divide on the issue.

I think it will happen because, for example, the present scenario where the ECB is effectively not an EU institution is really not acceptable. If there is to be any kind of democratic control the ECB needs to be made more accountable and the EU Parliament is the obvious body. Can't really do that at the moment. They will want the mechanisms of the CJE to hold countries to account in respect of budgets etc as well.

More and more of the game will be the bit we don't want to play. We should get out of the road and let them get on with it with our best wishes.

But the ECB doesn't opine on UK banks based in the UK. Or am I misunderstanding your point?

My point is that at the moment we have an unhappy compromise by which the majority of member states have agreed to use additional co-operation provisions to regulate extremely important parts of their affairs but do not have access to the full panoply of EU institutions because there are non-EU members. The EZ members are not happy with this and I have given examples of why they should not be.

Sooner or later they are going to want to integrate the 2 set ups so that there can be some sort of democratic accountability to very important parts of their governance.

It is not really true that the EU does not opine on UK banks but that is a different argument and that is not my point. My point is that the EU is not going to stay as it is. It never has. It is going to change and change in ways that make the views of non EZ members increasingly irrelevant.

True, but not as irrelevant as if we were not in the EU at all!

The argument seems to be that we should leave and let the EU do its own thing because if we stay the EU will do it's own thing.

For me, that pretty much is the argument. There are clear downsides to being in the EU but there are also upsides such as having a say in the rules for the Single Market. But if we lose the upsides of having a say then the reasons for staying weigh one way.

What we need is an amicable, close relationship where we get access to the Single Market, they get to organise their own affairs and we continue to work together on issues we have in common, not least of which after yesterday is security.

Anyway, must get some work done now.

Big_G_NorthWales said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/belgium/12202137/Brussels-attacks-why-Isil-is-losing-its-war-on-terror-in-the-West.html

Crickey this guy is holding himself to hostage to fortune....

I heard a so called expert saying that ISIL are losing territory and being seriously squeezed which makes them much more dangerous and likely to do many more terror attacks

It is definitely true they are losing ground. For example, just today, Syrian forces reached outskirts of Palmyra.

How that will affect potential terrorism in Europe I have no idea, but I certainly wouldn't write stuff like well Brussels shows that lone wolf attacks overstated and this is basically the only cell in Europe able to carry out serious attacks and by ISIS standards its crap...I think the fact is we just don't know. I one thing we do know, the Beligum authorities haven't got a f##king scubby doo if there any other nutters in their midst armed with weapons and bomb making equipment.

foxinsoxuk said:

MarkHopkins said:

TOPPING said:

Interesting escalation in junior doctors' tactics. Walking out, no emergency cover.

Jeremy H was sitting fairly pretty at PMQs today, wonder what is going on in his dept or if this is a surprise.

It's the nuclear option from the BMA - no emergency cover seems unreasonable from a 'caring' profession.

No. It is no emergency cover from junior doctors. Senior doctors will cover (mostly at the expense of planned work). Indeed the emergency cover is going to be at a higher level of expertise.

Perfectly open to withdraw his unilateral imposition and restart negotiations. The BMA JDC position was cost neutral.

Do you have figures for the numbers of consultants / senior doctors in hospitals when compared to junior doctors ?

It seems ludicrous to say that this will not affect patient care, either in emergency care or elsewhere.

The chappy who ran off from the airport left the biggest bomb undetonated, after shoving it away.

Bottled it at the last moment by the looks of it - thankfully.

FrancisUrquhart said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/belgium/12202137/Brussels-attacks-why-Isil-is-losing-its-war-on-terror-in-the-West.html

Crickey this guy is holding himself to hostage to fortune....

I heard a so called expert saying that ISIL are losing territory and being seriously squeezed which makes them much more dangerous and likely to do many more terror attacks

It is definitely true they are losing ground. For example, just today, Syrian forces reached outskirts of Palmyra.

How that will affect potential terrorism in Europe I have no idea, but I certainly wouldn't write stuff like well Brussels shows that lone wolf attacks overstated and this is basically the only cell in Europe able to carry out serious attacks and by ISIS standards its crap...I think the fact is we just don't know. I one thing we do know, the Beligum authorities haven't got a f##king scubby doo if there any other nutters in their midst armed with weapons and bomb making equipment.

new thread

New Thread New Thread

JosiasJessop said:

foxinsoxuk said:

MarkHopkins said:

TOPPING said:

Interesting escalation in junior doctors' tactics. Walking out, no emergency cover.

Jeremy H was sitting fairly pretty at PMQs today, wonder what is going on in his dept or if this is a surprise.

It's the nuclear option from the BMA - no emergency cover seems unreasonable from a 'caring' profession.

No. It is no emergency cover from junior doctors. Senior doctors will cover (mostly at the expense of planned work). Indeed the emergency cover is going to be at a higher level of expertise.

Perfectly open to withdraw his unilateral imposition and restart negotiations. The BMA JDC position was cost neutral.

Do you have figures for the numbers of consultants / senior doctors in hospitals when compared to junior doctors ?

It seems ludicrous to say that this will not affect patient care, either in emergency care or elsewhere.

I haven't said that it won't affect care, but emergency care can be covered. It will cost financially as Consultants doing extra shifts will cost substantially more than the juniors being covered.

Hunt has delivered an ultimatum, one that is unacceptable to the BMA JDC. They either back down or escalate. Escalation it is.

Not going to impress the week before the elections (Scotland, Wales and NI will not be striking because the new contract does not apply in devolved nations).