Pretty much what I said yesterday. He was not interviewed, this was found to be at odds with usual procedure, therefore the case was reopened and he was interviewed.
A very helpful timeline.
No - that's not what it says. It says that Brittan was interviewed because of the complaint made by the complainant that he had not somehow been interviewed because of his status. It was the identification process which was carried out because it was normal procedure.
We can't go about doing U-turns just because of one visible edge case. It's bonkers, as bonkers as changing your entire immigration policy because of one photo.
I don't really see why they're not going with the traditional man-with-a-red-flag solution here.
Yes, my thought exactly.
I can't see it happening. It's an utterly bonkers and completely artificial idea. One hopes it was only put into the consultation as something to be shot down.
Daily Politics have just shown the clip from last night's Question Time re alleged Tory voter and tax credits. The BBC are going to chew over this, like a Jack Russell with a bone.
I see they are asking for anyone who knows who she is, to get in touch.
Why do I get the feeling I have seen her somewhere before??
I doubt she voted Tory
Why?
Seemed like too obvious a set up...
Last knockings of the show and she just ranted about a different subject to the one being discussed without asking a question... Very similar to the labour plant in Ramsgate last year vs Diane James
Daily Politics have just shown the clip from last night's Question Time re alleged Tory voter and tax credits. The BBC are going to chew over this, like a Jack Russell with a bone.
I see they are asking for anyone who knows who she is, to get in touch.
Why do I get the feeling I have seen her somewhere before??
I doubt she voted Tory
Why?
Seemed like too obvious a set up...
Last knockings of the show and she just ranted about a different subject to the one being discussed without asking a question... Very similar to the labour plant in Ramsgate last year vs Diane James
Presume you think this guy isn;t a Tory either
Tory member Charlie Evans, a politics student at Exeter University, tweeted: "I actually feel sick to my stomach to be a member of the Conservative Party tonight over #taxcredits. That lady spoke for millions."
There are plenty of Tory MPs who are worried about the tax credit changes. As I said on the previous thread, there are so many changes coming down the pike, it's not clear to me what the actual impact will be in the round. I'd like more quantitative data, not just edge-case andecdota.
I predict a U Turn with protection for biggest losers
Luckyguy1983 said: » show previous quotes Where do the kids from those areas who wouldn't get into the grammar schools go? (not a criticism, a genuine question)
I guess to the better achieving comprehensives in the nicer areas? There would be places there vacated by those going to the grammar.. It would be in the same town so wouldn't affect them much
So the poor kids would either hi to a grammar or a better comp, and the richer kids would go to the existing good comp or a grammar... And the poor kids parents property would be worth more & the area would improve
It's not the children. Where would the teachers go? What's wrong with the simple minded notion of all an areas schools being good schools?
All an areas schools can be good schools but not all an areas pupils are the same. Aggressive streaming of some variety should exist as if there are naughty/mischievous/lazy/thick/whatever kids taking up most of the teachers attention and leading to the class getting dumbed down compared to what should challenge the brightest/hardest working kids then that's a complete wasted opportunity and the bright hard working kids lose out.
Daily Politics have just shown the clip from last night's Question Time re alleged Tory voter and tax credits. The BBC are going to chew over this, like a Jack Russell with a bone.
I see they are asking for anyone who knows who she is, to get in touch.
Why do I get the feeling I have seen her somewhere before??
I doubt she voted Tory
Why?
Sccchh people will realise we are both the same poster!!
Pretty much what I said yesterday. He was not interviewed, this was found to be at odds with usual procedure, therefore the case was reopened and he was interviewed.
(snip)
I'm not sure how you reach that conclusion from the document linked.
Why waste your time? He's beyond sensible reasoning and intent on continuing the smear against Brittan.
Daily Politics have just shown the clip from last night's Question Time re alleged Tory voter and tax credits. The BBC are going to chew over this, like a Jack Russell with a bone.
I see they are asking for anyone who knows who she is, to get in touch.
Why do I get the feeling I have seen her somewhere before??
I doubt she voted Tory
Why?
Seemed like too obvious a set up...
Last knockings of the show and she just ranted about a different subject to the one being discussed without asking a question... Very similar to the labour plant in Ramsgate last year vs Diane James
Daily Politics have just shown the clip from last night's Question Time re alleged Tory voter and tax credits. The BBC are going to chew over this, like a Jack Russell with a bone.
I see they are asking for anyone who knows who she is, to get in touch.
Why do I get the feeling I have seen her somewhere before??
I doubt she voted Tory
Why?
Seemed like too obvious a set up...
Last knockings of the show and she just ranted about a different subject to the one being discussed without asking a question... Very similar to the labour plant in Ramsgate last year vs Diane James
Presume you think this guy isn;t a Tory either
Tory member Charlie Evans, a politics student at Exeter University, tweeted: "I actually feel sick to my stomach to be a member of the Conservative Party tonight over #taxcredits. That lady spoke for millions."
There are plenty of Tory MPs who are worried about the tax credit changes. As I said on the previous thread, there are so many changes coming down the pike, it's not clear to me what the actual impact will be in the round. I'd like more quantitative data, not just edge-case andecdota.
I predict a U Turn with protection for biggest losers
My view is no U turn, just a smoother transition and/or taper. Of course, it will be portrayed as the greatest U turn since time immemorial, such is the UK's Twitter-led, infantile political scene.
Daily Politics have just shown the clip from last night's Question Time re alleged Tory voter and tax credits. The BBC are going to chew over this, like a Jack Russell with a bone.
I see they are asking for anyone who knows who she is, to get in touch.
Why do I get the feeling I have seen her somewhere before??
I doubt she voted Tory
Why?
Seemed like too obvious a set up...
Last knockings of the show and she just ranted about a different subject to the one being discussed without asking a question... Very similar to the labour plant in Ramsgate last year vs Diane James
Daily Politics have just shown the clip from last night's Question Time re alleged Tory voter and tax credits. The BBC are going to chew over this, like a Jack Russell with a bone.
I see they are asking for anyone who knows who she is, to get in touch.
Why do I get the feeling I have seen her somewhere before??
I doubt she voted Tory
Why?
Seemed like too obvious a set up...
Last knockings of the show and she just ranted about a different subject to the one being discussed without asking a question... Very similar to the labour plant in Ramsgate last year vs Diane James
Presume you think this guy isn;t a Tory either
Tory member Charlie Evans, a politics student at Exeter University, tweeted: "I actually feel sick to my stomach to be a member of the Conservative Party tonight over #taxcredits. That lady spoke for millions."
It just struck me watching it they she might be a plant... Maybe she wasn't. No need to get your knickers in a twist
Just amusing people think this lady is fibbing about who she voted for when she rumbles The Tories lied about Tax Credit Cuts.
I am commando by the way
Of course she's probably fibbing. Anyone who aggressively challenges any party like that in a clearly pre-prepared manner is probably not a voter for that party. Seemed obvious she was almost certainly lying to me too.
Just as the people who challenged Ed and got him to shockingly admit he thought Labour didn't spend too much were almost certainly not people who were thinking of voting Labour
I'm willing to be corrected here but in substance isn't Uber just a super-efficient way of organising minicabs? If so, why shouldn't it be subject to the same regulation and restrictions as other minicab companies?
Yes, I realise that it's cheap and popular. Those by themselves aren't reasons for changing laws to accommodate them.
I'm willing to be corrected here but in substance isn't Uber just a super-efficient way of organising minicabs? If so, why shouldn't it be subject to the same regulation and restrictions as other minicab companies?
I think it is - same rules on driver vetting, insurance etc.
I'm willing to be corrected here but in substance isn't Uber just a super-efficient way of organising minicabs? If so, why shouldn't it be subject to the same regulation and restrictions as other minicab companies?
I think it is - same rules on driver vetting, insurance etc.
I'm willing to be corrected here but in substance isn't Uber just a super-efficient way of organising minicabs? If so, why shouldn't it be subject to the same regulation and restrictions as other minicab companies?
Yes, I realise that it's cheap and popular. Those by themselves aren't reasons for changing laws to accommodate them.
As far as I know they are regulated the same as other private hire companies.
They're not regulated the same as taxis that are licensed to pick up from the street (rather than pre-booked) because that's not what they are. They're the same as private hire except you use an app instead of a phone call.
Daily Politics have just shown the clip from last night's Question Time re alleged Tory voter and tax credits. The BBC are going to chew over this, like a Jack Russell with a bone.
I see they are asking for anyone who knows who she is, to get in touch.
Why do I get the feeling I have seen her somewhere before??
I doubt she voted Tory
Why?
Seemed like too obvious a set up...
Last knockings of the show and she just ranted about a different subject to the one being discussed without asking a question... Very similar to the labour plant in Ramsgate last year vs Diane James
I think the maxim is innocent until proven Jezzbollah.
I'm willing to be corrected here but in substance isn't Uber just a super-efficient way of organising minicabs? If so, why shouldn't it be subject to the same regulation and restrictions as other minicab companies?
I think it is - same rules on driver vetting, insurance etc.
And metering of fares?
They're not allowed to use meters and as the High Court just determined they don't.
They use GPS, that's innovative but it isn't a meter.
Don't get me started on no-balls. The use of technology is changing the game. Bowlers are bowling overs of no-balls that are going unpunished cos the umpires only check it if a wicket falls. its bonkers.
And every so often a no ball is called incorrectly by the on field umpire followed by what would have been a wicket. A mistake that cannot be fixed.
I'd take it out of the hands of the on field umpire and let the third umpire check every delivery. Any front foot no ball should be punished by an extra run and a free hit.
They're not allowed to use meters and as the High Court just determined they don't.
They use GPS, that's innovative but it isn't a meter.
Yes, I think the High Court ruling may have slightly missed the point. Quoting a fare in advance (which is what Uber does) is not a 'meter' (ie measuring the time and/or distance actually travelled).
A Romanian mother and a Spanish couple have been arrested over the alleged sale of a baby boy who had apparently died but was found alive in Cardiff Bay.
The mother, 19, is suspected of trying to sell the now six-week-old newborn to the 25-year-old man and 26-year-old woman for up to £11,000.
That's the killer, isn't it? I agree with you. There is going to be a U Turn. It's like Brown and the ten pence tax rate removal all over again.
I think it's more likely to be the Education Maintenance Allowance, Child Benefit restrictions (remember Bobajob of this parish?), 'Bedroom tax', etc, all over again.
Don't get me started on no-balls. The use of technology is changing the game. Bowlers are bowling overs of no-balls that are going unpunished cos the umpires only check it if a wicket falls. its bonkers.
And every so often a no ball is called incorrectly by the on field umpire followed by what would have been a wicket. A mistake that cannot be fixed.
I'd take it out of the hands of the on field umpire and let the third umpire check every delivery. Any front foot no ball should be punished by an extra run and a free hit.
I don't see why there should be a free hit in a Test match. The idea of a free hit in One Dayers still feels strange to me, but a five day game does not need free hits.
I have to say I'm a bit surprised at that decision. You could easily imagine it having gone the other way.
It's a classic case of the law being out of date. Rather than arguing abstruse questions of definition in the High Court, we should be amending the legislation to take account of the new reality.
I liked this bit:
Transport for London is currently investigating whether there should be a minimum five-minute wait between Uber passengers ordering a car and being picked up.
I don't really see why they're not going with the traditional man-with-a-red-flag solution here.
That's a clever way to kill the enthusiasm for uber.
Can you imagine how frustrating it would be to request a cab, have it turn up straight away, then have to dance-on-the-spot while you count down for the passenger door to unlock?
Daily Politics have just shown the clip from last night's Question Time re alleged Tory voter and tax credits. The BBC are going to chew over this, like a Jack Russell with a bone.
I see they are asking for anyone who knows who she is, to get in touch.
Why do I get the feeling I have seen her somewhere before??
I doubt she voted Tory
Why?
Seemed like too obvious a set up...
Last knockings of the show and she just ranted about a different subject to the one being discussed without asking a question... Very similar to the labour plant in Ramsgate last year vs Diane James
I think the maxim is innocent until proven Jezzbollah.
Not with the BBC - remember Lord Haningfield?
I think the maxim is innocent until proven a Conservative expenses cheat.
We can't go about doing U-turns just because of one visible edge case. It's bonkers, as bonkers as changing your entire immigration policy because of one photo.
The early years of the coalition was littered by U-Turns after a couple of celebrity tweets.
I have to say I'm a bit surprised at that decision. You could easily imagine it having gone the other way.
It's a classic case of the law being out of date. Rather than arguing abstruse questions of definition in the High Court, we should be amending the legislation to take account of the new reality.
I liked this bit:
Transport for London is currently investigating whether there should be a minimum five-minute wait between Uber passengers ordering a car and being picked up.
I don't really see why they're not going with the traditional man-with-a-red-flag solution here.
That's a clever way to kill the enthusiasm for uber.
Can you imagine how frustrating it would be to request a cab, have it turn up straight away, then dance-on-the-spot as you count down for the passenger door to unlock?
It's genius.
Its ridiculous are they seriously proposing that if a woman on her own late at night books transport the doors to that should be locked for five minutes even if the vehicle is already there? It serves no public safety purpose whatsoever and is just an artificial constraint.
I'm willing to be corrected here but in substance isn't Uber just a super-efficient way of organising minicabs? If so, why shouldn't it be subject to the same regulation and restrictions as other minicab companies?
I think it is - same rules on driver vetting, insurance etc.
And metering of fares?
They're not allowed to use meters and as the High Court just determined they don't.
They use GPS, that's innovative but it isn't a meter.
I'm slightly toying here.
My point is that behind the whizz-bang internet aspect, Uber isn't that unfamiliar a concept. It's an old concept done very well. So old laws are quite capable of dealing with it.
Sometimes laws can become outdated. But not always. This is one area where I don't really see why we should be racing to change laws that have been settled for quite some time.
I shall wait with interest to see how employment law deals with Uber's terms of business with its drivers. That is an area where the law may need updating.
I shall wait with interest to see how employment law deals with Uber's terms of business with its drivers. That is an area where the law may need updating.
Is that any different to many existing minicab firms, though?
I have to say I'm a bit surprised at that decision. You could easily imagine it having gone the other way.
It's a classic case of the law being out of date. Rather than arguing abstruse questions of definition in the High Court, we should be amending the legislation to take account of the new reality.
I liked this bit:
Transport for London is currently investigating whether there should be a minimum five-minute wait between Uber passengers ordering a car and being picked up.
I don't really see why they're not going with the traditional man-with-a-red-flag solution here.
That's a clever way to kill the enthusiasm for uber.
Can you imagine how frustrating it would be to request a cab, have it turn up straight away, then dance-on-the-spot as you count down for the passenger door to unlock?
It's genius.
Its ridiculous are they seriously proposing that if a woman on her own late at night books transport the doors to that should be locked for five minutes even if the vehicle is already there? It serves no public safety purpose whatsoever and is just an artificial constraint.
Whatever next? Uber cars must carry a bale of hay, and a buggy whip?
Black cabs are a racket. Ridiculously over priced. Great if one is on City expenses but far too expensive, compared to the alternative.
The new tax credit threshold looks remarkably similar to the personal allowance on JSA/ESA.
Universal credit must surely require uniform, universal rates across out-of-work and in-work benefits as people transition from unemployment to employment and vice versa?
Average earned household income for working tax credit recipients is very low - barely £10,000, so notions of middle income earners being hit seem to be like Russian cruise missiles aimed at Syria that land in Iran; a bit wide of the mark.
I have to say I'm a bit surprised at that decision. You could easily imagine it having gone the other way.
It's a classic case of the law being out of date. Rather than arguing abstruse questions of definition in the High Court, we should be amending the legislation to take account of the new reality.
I liked this bit:
Transport for London is currently investigating whether there should be a minimum five-minute wait between Uber passengers ordering a car and being picked up.
I don't really see why they're not going with the traditional man-with-a-red-flag solution here.
That's a clever way to kill the enthusiasm for uber.
Can you imagine how frustrating it would be to request a cab, have it turn up straight away, then have to dance-on-the-spot while you count down for the passenger door to unlock?
It's genius.
I think it would be more likely to kill enthusiasm for Transport for London...
I shall wait with interest to see how employment law deals with Uber's terms of business with its drivers. That is an area where the law may need updating.
Is that any different to many existing minicab firms, though?
Uber's level of control over its drivers is what marks it out.
Don't get me started on no-balls. The use of technology is changing the game. Bowlers are bowling overs of no-balls that are going unpunished cos the umpires only check it if a wicket falls. its bonkers.
And every so often a no ball is called incorrectly by the on field umpire followed by what would have been a wicket. A mistake that cannot be fixed.
I'd take it out of the hands of the on field umpire and let the third umpire check every delivery. Any front foot no ball should be punished by an extra run and a free hit.
I don't see why there should be a free hit in a Test match. The idea of a free hit in One Dayers still feels strange to me, but a five day game does not need free hits.
The one argument against giving no balls to the third umpire is that it takes away the possibility of the batsman adjusting his shot on hearing the call. The reality is that batsman can't really adjust his shot anyway - so a free hit off the next ball would be the penalty instead.
I'm not a fan of limited overs cricket - but this is one innovation that I quite like. With any luck it would deter bowlers from pushing the line.
That's the killer, isn't it? I agree with you. There is going to be a U Turn. It's like Brown and the ten pence tax rate removal all over again.
I think it's more likely to be the Education Maintenance Allowance, Child Benefit restrictions (remember Bobajob of this parish?), 'Bedroom tax', etc, all over again.
I'm not convinced. The changes will make working people with low wage jobs - i.e. people who are "doing the right thing" significantly worse off.
The local Costa is advertising for staff at £7.50 per hour. A married couple, both working full time in said café, with 2 kids, will be £2068 per year worse off from next year according to the calculator in The Telegraph. If they have 3 kids, they will be £2500 worse off. A single parent, working full-time for £7.50/hour will be £1600/year worse off. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/budget/11726113/Budget-calculator-work-out-how-your-finances-have-changed.html
Not everyone on low wage is on minimum wage. The rise in the living wage will not necessarily help all low wage workers in the short run.
The new tax credit threshold looks remarkably similar to the personal allowance on JSA/ESA.
Universal credit must surely require uniform, universal rates across out-of-work and in-work benefits as people transition from unemployment to employment and vice versa?
Average earned household income for working tax credit recipients is very low - barely £10,000, so notions of middle income earners being hit seem to be like Russian cruise missiles aimed at Syria that land in Iran; a bit wide of the mark.
Every week people lose tax credits and child benefit as their kids grow older or move out or get a job - where is the outrage on this ?
I shall wait with interest to see how employment law deals with Uber's terms of business with its drivers. That is an area where the law may need updating.
Is that any different to many existing minicab firms, though?
Uber's level of control over its drivers is what marks it out.
The relationship between company, driver and customer is the key.
Uber have tried pushing the boundaries of the law everywhere they operate, hanging drivers out to dry for things like having no insurance. (In one US city they provided insurance when the car had a fare abroad, but not when the driver was driving to meet the fare. Normal car insurance of course wouldn't cover any activity around using the car as a taxi).
They always protest that they are just an app rather than a minicab company, yet the financial relationship is between the customer and the company, not the customer and the driver as with regular minicabs. They have a habit of ignoring inconvenient regulations and instead spend their cash on lawyers and lobbyists.
In my opinion if the customer is paying the company, then the company need to make sure that the car and driver are both operating safely and within the law.
That's the killer, isn't it? I agree with you. There is going to be a U Turn. It's like Brown and the ten pence tax rate removal all over again.
I think it's more likely to be the Education Maintenance Allowance, Child Benefit restrictions (remember Bobajob of this parish?), 'Bedroom tax', etc, all over again.
I'm not convinced. The changes will make working people with low wage jobs - i.e. people who are "doing the right thing" significantly worse off.
The local Costa is advertising for staff at £7.50 per hour. A married couple, both working full time in said café, with 2 kids, will be £2068 per year worse off from next year according to the calculator in The Telegraph. If they have 3 kids, they will be £2500 worse off. A single parent, working full-time for £7.50/hour will be £1600/year worse off. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/budget/11726113/Budget-calculator-work-out-how-your-finances-have-changed.html
Not everyone on low wage is on minimum wage. The rise in the living wage will not necessarily help all low wage workers in the short run.
Thanks for that link - I'm going to be much better off - huzzah.
However it doesn't factor in pay rises and negative inflation - nor the tax cuts from last year -so not the totality of the picture.
That's the killer, isn't it? I agree with you. There is going to be a U Turn. It's like Brown and the ten pence tax rate removal all over again.
I think it's more likely to be the Education Maintenance Allowance, Child Benefit restrictions (remember Bobajob of this parish?), 'Bedroom tax', etc, all over again.
I'm not convinced. The changes will make working people with low wage jobs - i.e. people who are "doing the right thing" significantly worse off.
The local Costa is advertising for staff at £7.50 per hour. A married couple, both working full time in said café, with 2 kids, will be £2068 per year worse off from next year according to the calculator in The Telegraph. If they have 3 kids, they will be £2500 worse off. A single parent, working full-time for £7.50/hour will be £1600/year worse off. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/budget/11726113/Budget-calculator-work-out-how-your-finances-have-changed.html
Not everyone on low wage is on minimum wage. The rise in the living wage will not necessarily help all low wage workers in the short run.
Two people working 40 hours a week on 7.50 an hour have a gross household income from work of £600 a week or c. £30,000 a year. Why are we subsidising their income at all..?
What would be good to see is a graph covering say 5 or 6 years showing how the same couple have been affected from 2011 to 2017 by the various changes introduced. I would guess they are much better off than they were in 2011 even with the tax credit cuts, the income tax threshold alone has been worth over £1k a year per person since 2011 and inflation has been very low over that time too.
That's the killer, isn't it? I agree with you. There is going to be a U Turn. It's like Brown and the ten pence tax rate removal all over again.
I think it's more likely to be the Education Maintenance Allowance, Child Benefit restrictions (remember Bobajob of this parish?), 'Bedroom tax', etc, all over again.
I'm not convinced. The changes will make working people with low wage jobs - i.e. people who are "doing the right thing" significantly worse off.
The local Costa is advertising for staff at £7.50 per hour. A married couple, both working full time in said café, with 2 kids, will be £2068 per year worse off from next year according to the calculator in The Telegraph. If they have 3 kids, they will be £2500 worse off. A single parent, working full-time for £7.50/hour will be £1600/year worse off. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/budget/11726113/Budget-calculator-work-out-how-your-finances-have-changed.html
Not everyone on low wage is on minimum wage. The rise in the living wage will not necessarily help all low wage workers in the short run.
Two people working 40 hours a week on 7.50 an hour have a gross household income from work of £600 a week or c. £30,000 a year. Why are we subsidising their income at all..?
it also doesn't factor in the effect of the new childcare subsidy.
The total number of working tax credit households where there are two full time earners is 145,000 only, and only 50,000 of those qualify for working tax credits.
68% of working tax credit households have an adult in them who does no paid work.
Pretty much what I said yesterday. He was not interviewed, this was found to be at odds with usual procedure, therefore the case was reopened and he was interviewed.
A very helpful timeline.
No - that's not what it says. It says that Brittan was interviewed because of the complaint made by the complainant that he had not somehow been interviewed because of his status. It was the identification process which was carried out because it was normal procedure.
No it doesn't - that may be your inference, but it very precisely doesn't say that. It says that 'Commander McNulty asked for a review of the rape investigation from an experienced investigating officer who had not previously been involved in the case. This is part of established police practice.'
and then that 'The review concluded on 19 May 2014, recommending that Lord Brittan should be interviewed under caution.'
You infer that this interview was recommended because of the complainant's objections - supporters of Tom Watson may infer it was recommended because of his intervention. But this timeline indicates that it was recommended as part of an independent review.
The total number of working tax credit households where there are two full time earners is 145,000 only, and only 50,000 of those qualify for working tax credits.
68% of working tax credit households have an adult in them who does no paid work.
Then subtract those with children under 12 who got major help with childcare...
" those poor people stuck in that room for three whole hours with that trumped-up turnip of a man."
"But Yentob really took pomposity to a new level. He took it to the moon and back and then he claimed the journey on expenses."
Ha. Unusually good writing from Bryony Gordon. Not only funny but makes the point well that he was trying to blame everyone else when he was the one legally in charge of KC, also linking his "day job" at the BBC back to the scandal.
'We of course took our medicine when we lost out on child benefit a few years ago.' Of course - 'we're all in it together'. The Tories are going to be fine.
The total number of working tax credit households where there are two full time earners is 145,000 only, and only 50,000 of those qualify for working tax credits.
68% of working tax credit households have an adult in them who does no paid work.
I must say it's excellent that the country is having a national debate about the common desire to pay less tax though
With industry asking for £2bn of subsidies and the revelation some kids got over £70,000 a year from Kids Company, I think I'm in the wrong business...
With industry asking for £2bn of subsidies and the revelation some kids got over £70,000 a year from Kids Company, I think I'm in the wrong business...
. It was about his heroics, his valiant efforts to save the charity.
He had tried to stand down, but there was simply nobody quite as brilliant to replace him. He had brought in auditors, and gave the impression that he had been involved in getting staff new office space at Deutsche Bank once Kids Company’s headquarters were forced to close.
As it happens I know that deal was secured entirely by the bank’s managing director, Nick Lawson, who himself runs a small charity in memory of his son. (If you are feeling generous, do go and look at the work of the Angus Lawson Memorial Trust).
" those poor people stuck in that room for three whole hours with that trumped-up turnip of a man."
"But Yentob really took pomposity to a new level. He took it to the moon and back and then he claimed the journey on expenses."
Ha. Unusually good writing from Bryony Gordon. Not only funny but makes the point well that he was trying to blame everyone else when he was the one legally in charge of KC, also linking his "day job" at the BBC back to the scandal.
The total number of working tax credit households where there are two full time earners is 145,000 only, and only 50,000 of those qualify for working tax credits.
68% of working tax credit households have an adult in them who does no paid work.
Not sure I understand that first sentence: should one of the references to WTC be a reference to CTC?
Where are you getting your stats from? I got involved in a debate on this the other day and found it devilishly difficult to get meaningful figures either for individual benefits or the macro figures. Brown did a very good job of hiding these entitlements and the government is only just starting to bring these rights out of the shadows.
I don't really care for bans on interacting with other posters, but seeing as I am no longer allowed to interact w flightpath, shouldn't he or she be disallowed from commenting on my posts/asking me questions/ referencing me in posts to other people?
'We of course took our medicine when we lost out on child benefit a few years ago.' Of course - 'we're all in it together'. The Tories are going to be fine.
Pretty much what I said yesterday. He was not interviewed, this was found to be at odds with usual procedure, therefore the case was reopened and he was interviewed.
A very helpful timeline.
No - that's not what it says. It says that Brittan was interviewed because of the complaint made by the complainant that he had not somehow been interviewed because of his status. It was the identification process which was carried out because it was normal procedure.
No it doesn't - that may be your inference, but it very precisely doesn't say that. It says that 'Commander McNulty asked for a review of the rape investigation from an experienced investigating officer who had not previously been involved in the case. This is part of established police practice.'
and then that 'The review concluded on 19 May 2014, recommending that Lord Brittan should be interviewed under caution.'
You infer that this interview was recommended because of the complainant's objections - supporters of Tom Watson may infer it was recommended because of his intervention. But this timeline indicates that it was recommended as part of an independent review.
That is simply not correct. It was the identification process which was done because it was usual procedure.
This is the relevant quote - "In response, the CPS said that before it was able to review the evidence, there were other inquiries the MPS should complete. It referred to the fact that the complainant had not been asked formally to identify Lord Brittan - a procedure required when the accused person has disputed being involved in the alleged incident."
You said that the failure to interview was found to be at odds with usual procedure. But the report does not state that. So you are wrong in making that point. It was only the failure to do the identification which was not in line with usual procedure.
I see lots of ad hominem stuff on the woman on QT, both from the left ("Ha, why did she vote Tory then?") and the right ("Can't believe she voted Tory"). I don't think either side should pick on her personally - the point is that she's struck a nerve, and I doubt if it's been lost on Osborne.
On a (somewhat) less contentious issue, there's a survey of EU officials etc. of some interest here:
Mr. Palmer, it was discovered some time ago that individuals from one party often pretend to be from the other in the letters pages of papers [the most trusted part of a paper, apparently].
Whether the lady in question was or not, I suspect much the same happens with Question Time and similar programmes.
Edited extra bit: writers sometimes hire sock puppet reviews or followers on Twitter (who always RT and make someone seem more influential). It's also the case, but thankfully uncommon, that some pretend to be another individual who then gives terrible reviews and ratings to 'rivals' [the obvious flaw, deceit aside, is that people buy more than one book, and the next best thing to someone buying your own is buying a similar book by someone else, which increases the chance of them buying yours later...]
Mr. Palmer, it was discovered some time ago that individuals from one party often pretend to be from the other in the letters pages of papers [the most trusted part of a paper, apparently].
Whether the lady in question was or not, I suspect much the same happens with Question Time and similar programmes.
The number of plants in Question Time/debate audiences particularly around election time was quite staggering.
Joe Public was invariably Joe 'local councillor/activist' Smith.
The total number of working tax credit households where there are two full time earners is 145,000 only, and only 50,000 of those qualify for working tax credits.
68% of working tax credit households have an adult in them who does no paid work.
Not sure I understand that first sentence: should one of the references to WTC be a reference to CTC?
Where are you getting your stats from? I got involved in a debate on this the other day and found it devilishly difficult to get meaningful figures either for individual benefits or the macro figures. Brown did a very good job of hiding these entitlements and the government is only just starting to bring these rights out of the shadows.
Luckyguy1983 said: » show previous quotes Where do the kids from those areas who wouldn't get into the grammar schools go? (not a criticism, a genuine question)
I guess to the better achieving comprehensives in the nicer areas? There would be places there vacated by those going to the grammar.. It would be in the same town so wouldn't affect them much
So the poor kids would either hi to a grammar or a better comp, and the richer kids would go to the existing good comp or a grammar... And the poor kids parents property would be worth more & the area would improve
It's not the children. Where would the teachers go? What's wrong with the simple minded notion of all an areas schools being good schools?
All an areas schools can be good schools but not all an areas pupils are the same. Aggressive streaming of some variety should exist as if there are naughty/mischievous/lazy/thick/whatever kids taking up most of the teachers attention and leading to the class getting dumbed down compared to what should challenge the brightest/hardest working kids then that's a complete wasted opportunity and the bright hard working kids lose out.
Clearly not all pupils are the same but as you suggest all schools should be, they should be equally determined to get the best out of their pupils. Turning the site of a poor school in a low rent area into a grammar, as suggested by our kipper friend, would denude other schools of the grammar standard teachers at the same time as the former good comprehensives were being left to deal with a cohort of naughty lazy thick or whatever kids. A pretty desperate attempt to promote grammar schools.
I see lots of ad hominem stuff on the woman on QT, both from the left ("Ha, why did she vote Tory then?") and the right ("Can't believe she voted Tory"). I don't think either side should pick on her personally - the point is that she's struck a nerve, and I doubt if it's been lost on Osborne.
On a (somewhat) less contentious issue, there's a survey of EU officials etc. of some interest here:
The total number of working tax credit households where there are two full time earners is 145,000 only, and only 50,000 of those qualify for working tax credits.
68% of working tax credit households have an adult in them who does no paid work.
That's helpful. Do you have a source please? I'm sufficiently intrigued that I want to find out more about the changes that will affect the working poor.
BBC - A chap is spending four days locked in a hotel room listening to nothing but Rick Astley's 1980s hit, Never Gonna Give You Up […] which famously became the focus of an internet prank, 2,500 times on repeat.
BBC - A chap is spending four days locked in a hotel room listening to nothing but Rick Astley's 1980s hit, Never Gonna Give You Up […] which famously became the focus of an internet prank, 2,500 times on repeat.
Flightpath continually referencing me/replying to comments/trolling... I have been banned from interacting with him or her, surely the ban should cut both ways else it's a joke?
Mr. Palmer, it was discovered some time ago that individuals from one party often pretend to be from the other in the letters pages of papers [the most trusted part of a paper, apparently].
Whether the lady in question was or not, I suspect much the same happens with Question Time and similar programmes.
Edited extra bit: writers sometimes hire sock puppet reviews or followers on Twitter (who always RT and make someone seem more influential). It's also the case, but thankfully uncommon, that some pretend to be another individual who then gives terrible reviews and ratings to 'rivals' [the obvious flaw, deceit aside, is that people buy more than one book, and the next best thing to someone buying your own is buying a similar book by someone else, which increases the chance of them buying yours later...]
Plus the usual load of disingenuous guff from Mr Palmer. Never mind she might be lying through her teeth, 'she struck a nerve'.
At the moment grammar schools are generally found in places where house prices are high, and attended by rich kids whose parents pay for private tutoring.
This leads to dimwits claiming that 'free school meal kids are underrepresented' at 21st century Grammar schools.. Can people REALLY be that stupid? It is because there are so few of them you ****s
If there were a grammar school in every constituency, in the poorest part of that constituency, it would lead to poor kids being able to attend them, or if they don't pass the exam, going to a better comp than they would have previously. The areas near the grammar school would become more desirable to live in, and the kids wouldn't be consigned to the dustbin that is the worst comp in the manor
Assuming Red Bull don't go dummy-spitting. Which is quite an assumption.
Potentially good new, yes. The engine regs are a mess though, makes it almost impossible to provide a major update during the season. Apparently Honda worked out what was their problem some months ago but don't have enough 'tokens' to do anything about it. It's the only reason their drivers are still positive about the car.
On a related note, I saw a really good interview with a Manor chap last weekend, which makes me think Haas might hit the ground running. As well as the Ferrari engine and Williams components, being out of the sport this year means Haas don't have the same restrictions, such as limited wind tunnel time, so their 2016 car, aided by Grosjean, might just leap right into the midfield.
BBC - A chap is spending four days locked in a hotel room listening to nothing but Rick Astley's 1980s hit, Never Gonna Give You Up […] which famously became the focus of an internet prank, 2,500 times on repeat.
Is this what they do instead of waterboarding these days?
I am sure most of us here have done some silly things for student RAG weeks, Children in Need etc. But this guy is completely bonkers. I hope the publicity from the BBC means that he makes his goal for what sounds like a worthwhile cause.
'We of course took our medicine when we lost out on child benefit a few years ago.' Of course - 'we're all in it together'. The Tories are going to be fine.
But we aren't all in it together JWisemann - those earning less than £10,600 are no longer paying any tax.
As of next April those earning 10,800 wont be all in it together either..
Flightpath continually referencing me/replying to comments/trolling... I have been banned from interacting with him or her, surely the ban should cut both ways else it's a joke?
The ban initially applied to you, it has now been extended to flightpath as well.
At the moment grammar schools are generally found in places where house prices are high, and attended by rich kids whose parents pay for private tutoring.
This leads to dimwits claiming that 'free school meal kids are underrepresented' at 21st century Grammar schools.. Can people REALLY be that stupid? It is because there are so few of them you ****s
If there were a grammar school in every constituency, in the poorest part of that constituency, it would lead to poor kids being able to attend them, or if they don't pass the exam, going to a better comp than they would have previously. The areas near the grammar school would become more desirable to live in, and the kids wouldn't be consigned to the dustbin that is the worst comp in the manor
Don't you see, isam:
Non fee-paying Grammar schools = Evil! Fee-paying Public schools = Cool!
Daily Politics have just shown the clip from last night's Question Time re alleged Tory voter and tax credits. The BBC are going to chew over this, like a Jack Russell with a bone.
I see they are asking for anyone who knows who she is, to get in touch.
Why do I get the feeling I have seen her somewhere before??
I doubt she voted Tory
Why?
Seemed like too obvious a set up...
Last knockings of the show and she just ranted about a different subject to the one being discussed without asking a question... Very similar to the labour plant in Ramsgate last year vs Diane James
Daily Politics have just shown the clip from last night's Question Time re alleged Tory voter and tax credits. The BBC are going to chew over this, like a Jack Russell with a bone.
I see they are asking for anyone who knows who she is, to get in touch.
Why do I get the feeling I have seen her somewhere before??
I doubt she voted Tory
Why?
Seemed like too obvious a set up...
Last knockings of the show and she just ranted about a different subject to the one being discussed without asking a question... Very similar to the labour plant in Ramsgate last year vs Diane James
Presume you think this guy isn;t a Tory either
Tory member Charlie Evans, a politics student at Exeter University, tweeted: "I actually feel sick to my stomach to be a member of the Conservative Party tonight over #taxcredits. That lady spoke for millions."
It just struck me watching it they she might be a plant... Maybe she wasn't. No need to get your knickers in a twist
Be honest, you have no basis whatsoever for concluding she was lying about voting Tory, you just wanted to attack her credibility because you don't like what she said.
Daily Politics have just shown the clip from last night's Question Time re alleged Tory voter and tax credits. The BBC are going to chew over this, like a Jack Russell with a bone.
I see they are asking for anyone who knows who she is, to get in touch.
Why do I get the feeling I have seen her somewhere before??
I doubt she voted Tory
Why?
Seemed like too obvious a set up...
Last knockings of the show and she just ranted about a different subject to the one being discussed without asking a question... Very similar to the labour plant in Ramsgate last year vs Diane James
Daily Politics have just shown the clip from last night's Question Time re alleged Tory voter and tax credits. The BBC are going to chew over this, like a Jack Russell with a bone.
I see they are asking for anyone who knows who she is, to get in touch.
Why do I get the feeling I have seen her somewhere before??
I doubt she voted Tory
Why?
Seemed like too obvious a set up...
Last knockings of the show and she just ranted about a different subject to the one being discussed without asking a question... Very similar to the labour plant in Ramsgate last year vs Diane James
Presume you think this guy isn;t a Tory either
Tory member Charlie Evans, a politics student at Exeter University, tweeted: "I actually feel sick to my stomach to be a member of the Conservative Party tonight over #taxcredits. That lady spoke for millions."
It just struck me watching it they she might be a plant... Maybe she wasn't. No need to get your knickers in a twist
Be honest, you have no basis whatsoever for concluding she was lying about voting Tory, you just wanted to attack her credibility because you don't like what she said.
I think we can all agree that she is desperate to pay less tax - we are all small state right wingers now..
Daily Politics have just shown the clip from last night's Question Time re alleged Tory voter and tax credits. The BBC are going to chew over this, like a Jack Russell with a bone.
I see they are asking for anyone who knows who she is, to get in touch.
Why do I get the feeling I have seen her somewhere before??
I doubt she voted Tory
Why?
Seemed like too obvious a set up...
Last knockings of the show and she just ranted about a different subject to the one being discussed without asking a question... Very similar to the labour plant in Ramsgate last year vs Diane James
Daily Politics have just shown the clip from last night's Question Time re alleged Tory voter and tax credits. The BBC are going to chew over this, like a Jack Russell with a bone.
I see they are asking for anyone who knows who she is, to get in touch.
Why do I get the feeling I have seen her somewhere before??
I doubt she voted Tory
Why?
Seemed like too obvious a set up...
Last knockings of the show and she just ranted about a different subject to the one being discussed without asking a question... Very similar to the labour plant in Ramsgate last year vs Diane James
Presume you think this guy isn;t a Tory either
Tory member Charlie Evans, a politics student at Exeter University, tweeted: "I actually feel sick to my stomach to be a member of the Conservative Party tonight over #taxcredits. That lady spoke for millions."
It just struck me watching it they she might be a plant... Maybe she wasn't. No need to get your knickers in a twist
Be honest, you have no basis whatsoever for concluding she was lying about voting Tory, you just wanted to attack her credibility because you don't like what she said.
Being honest, I have no basis for it that's true, I just watched a tv show and expressed an opinion on what I saw... I have no opinion on what she said, haven't given tax credits a minutes thought.
Daily Politics have just shown the clip from last night's Question Time re alleged Tory voter and tax credits. The BBC are going to chew over this, like a Jack Russell with a bone.
I see they are asking for anyone who knows who she is, to get in touch.
Why do I get the feeling I have seen her somewhere before??
I doubt she voted Tory
Why?
Seemed like too obvious a set up...
Last knockings of the show and she just ranted about a different subject to the one being discussed without asking a question... Very similar to the labour plant in Ramsgate last year vs Diane James
Daily Politics have just shown the clip from last night's Question Time re alleged Tory voter and tax credits. The BBC are going to chew over this, like a Jack Russell with a bone.
I see they are asking for anyone who knows who she is, to get in touch.
Why do I get the feeling I have seen her somewhere before??
I doubt she voted Tory
Why?
Seemed like too obvious a set up...
Last knockings of the show and she just ranted about a different subject to the one being discussed without asking a question... Very similar to the labour plant in Ramsgate last year vs Diane James
Presume you think this guy isn;t a Tory either
Tory member Charlie Evans, a politics student at Exeter University, tweeted: "I actually feel sick to my stomach to be a member of the Conservative Party tonight over #taxcredits. That lady spoke for millions."
It just struck me watching it they she might be a plant... Maybe she wasn't. No need to get your knickers in a twist
Be honest, you have no basis whatsoever for concluding she was lying about voting Tory, you just wanted to attack her credibility because you don't like what she said.
Audience plants aren't exactly rare. Cool your jets. Isam isn't a PBToryherdster.
BBC - A chap is spending four days locked in a hotel room listening to nothing but Rick Astley's 1980s hit, Never Gonna Give You Up […] which famously became the focus of an internet prank, 2,500 times on repeat.
That is simply not correct. It was the identification process which was done because it was usual procedure.
This is the relevant quote - "In response, the CPS said that before it was able to review the evidence, there were other inquiries the MPS should complete. It referred to the fact that the complainant had not been asked formally to identify Lord Brittan - a procedure required when the accused person has disputed being involved in the alleged incident."
You said that the failure to interview was found to be at odds with usual procedure. But the report does not state that. So you are wrong in making that point. It was only the failure to do the identification which was not in line with usual procedure.
This is a discussion over semantics. The case was reviewed. The review recommended taking an action that had hitherto not been taken before the initial investigation had been concluded. The MET conceded the results of that review were correct. The interview then happened. Hopefully that's a form of words we can both subscribe to.
The argument here yesterday and previously was that the investigation had been re-opened without justification at the behest of Tom Watson. Yesterday I said it appeared to be more because the alleged victim wasn't interviewed the first time round, and that seemed wrong (this was strenuously disagreed with). Now we find that after the case closed, it was reviewed, and a recommendation made to interview under caution. You can slice that any way you like, but the only thing I can see that is really unjust was the lack of rigour in the initial investigation, which had it done its work properly in the first place, and had it cleared Lord Brittan of wrongdoing, may have improved his quality of life in his last months.
Funny how we are oh so British and constantly apologetic about being almost incessantly off-topic.
I'm guessing 'off-topic' is a vanilla forums thing that PB chooses to observe mainly in the breach, and I've never found quite how far into outer-space the limit is.
So, on the subject of Canadian politics, about which I know stuff all, I say:
Jackass penguins! Kiwis! Duck-billed platypusses!
Drawing a parallel between the incumbent performance in Canada and New Zealand is disturbingly on-topic...
Comments
I can't see it happening. It's an utterly bonkers and completely artificial idea. One hopes it was only put into the consultation as something to be shot down.
Just as the people who challenged Ed and got him to shockingly admit he thought Labour didn't spend too much were almost certainly not people who were thinking of voting Labour
Yes, I realise that it's cheap and popular. Those by themselves aren't reasons for changing laws to accommodate them.
And metering of fares?
They're not regulated the same as taxis that are licensed to pick up from the street (rather than pre-booked) because that's not what they are. They're the same as private hire except you use an app instead of a phone call.
They use GPS, that's innovative but it isn't a meter.
I'd take it out of the hands of the on field umpire and let the third umpire check every delivery. Any front foot no ball should be punished by an extra run and a free hit.
That's a clever way to kill the enthusiasm for uber.
Can you imagine how frustrating it would be to request a cab, have it turn up straight away, then have to dance-on-the-spot while you count down for the passenger door to unlock?
It's genius.
Can you imagine how frustrating it would be to request a cab, have it turn up straight away, then dance-on-the-spot as you count down for the passenger door to unlock?
It's genius.
Its ridiculous are they seriously proposing that if a woman on her own late at night books transport the doors to that should be locked for five minutes even if the vehicle is already there? It serves no public safety purpose whatsoever and is just an artificial constraint.
My point is that behind the whizz-bang internet aspect, Uber isn't that unfamiliar a concept. It's an old concept done very well. So old laws are quite capable of dealing with it.
Sometimes laws can become outdated. But not always. This is one area where I don't really see why we should be racing to change laws that have been settled for quite some time.
I shall wait with interest to see how employment law deals with Uber's terms of business with its drivers. That is an area where the law may need updating.
One day left, 45 runs ahead. A miracle for this not to be a draw.
Whatever next? Uber cars must carry a bale of hay, and a buggy whip?
Black cabs are a racket. Ridiculously over priced. Great if one is on City expenses but far too expensive, compared to the alternative.
Universal credit must surely require uniform, universal rates across out-of-work and in-work benefits as people transition from unemployment to employment and vice versa?
Average earned household income for working tax credit recipients is very low - barely £10,000, so notions of middle income earners being hit seem to be like Russian cruise missiles aimed at Syria that land in Iran; a bit wide of the mark.
Can you imagine how frustrating it would be to request a cab, have it turn up straight away, then have to dance-on-the-spot while you count down for the passenger door to unlock?
It's genius.
I think it would be more likely to kill enthusiasm for Transport for London...
I'm not a fan of limited overs cricket - but this is one innovation that I quite like. With any luck it would deter bowlers from pushing the line.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/5dd4caa8-1b0d-11e5-8201-cbdb03d71480.html#axzz3ojrqtJac
The local Costa is advertising for staff at £7.50 per hour. A married couple, both working full time in said café, with 2 kids, will be £2068 per year worse off from next year according to the calculator in The Telegraph. If they have 3 kids, they will be £2500 worse off. A single parent, working full-time for £7.50/hour will be £1600/year worse off.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/budget/11726113/Budget-calculator-work-out-how-your-finances-have-changed.html
Not everyone on low wage is on minimum wage. The rise in the living wage will not necessarily help all low wage workers in the short run.
Uber have tried pushing the boundaries of the law everywhere they operate, hanging drivers out to dry for things like having no insurance. (In one US city they provided insurance when the car had a fare abroad, but not when the driver was driving to meet the fare. Normal car insurance of course wouldn't cover any activity around using the car as a taxi).
They always protest that they are just an app rather than a minicab company, yet the financial relationship is between the customer and the company, not the customer and the driver as with regular minicabs. They have a habit of ignoring inconvenient regulations and instead spend their cash on lawyers and lobbyists.
In my opinion if the customer is paying the company, then the company need to make sure that the car and driver are both operating safely and within the law.
However it doesn't factor in pay rises and negative inflation - nor the tax cuts from last year -so not the totality of the picture.
What would be good to see is a graph covering say 5 or 6 years showing how the same couple have been affected from 2011 to 2017 by the various changes introduced. I would guess they are much better off than they were in 2011 even with the tax credit cuts, the income tax threshold alone has been worth over £1k a year per person since 2011 and inflation has been very low over that time too.
So actually a load of bollocks.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-26618139
The oncoming disaster for the Tories in a nutshell.
In case you missed it, the 10th, of 12, episode of sci-fi serial Zodiac Eclipse (by me) is now up:
http://www.kraxon.com/zodiac-eclipse-gunboat/
Strange but true: originally, I was going to call the ship The Morris Dancer, not The Sun Dancer.
68% of working tax credit households have an adult in them who does no paid work.
and then that 'The review concluded on 19 May 2014, recommending that Lord Brittan should be interviewed under caution.'
You infer that this interview was recommended because of the complainant's objections - supporters of Tom Watson may infer it was recommended because of his intervention. But this timeline indicates that it was recommended as part of an independent review.
" those poor people stuck in that room for three whole hours with that trumped-up turnip of a man."
"But Yentob really took pomposity to a new level. He took it to the moon and back and then he claimed the journey on expenses."
Of course - 'we're all in it together'. The Tories are going to be fine.
With industry asking for £2bn of subsidies and the revelation some kids got over £70,000 a year from Kids Company, I think I'm in the wrong business...
The tax credit changes are going to effect about 20,000 people negatively and their situations can be fixed by taking on more work.
Where are you getting your stats from? I got involved in a debate on this the other day and found it devilishly difficult to get meaningful figures either for individual benefits or the macro figures. Brown did a very good job of hiding these entitlements and the government is only just starting to bring these rights out of the shadows.
This is the relevant quote - "In response, the CPS said that before it was able to review the evidence, there were other inquiries the MPS should complete. It referred to the fact that the complainant had not been asked formally to identify Lord Brittan - a procedure required when the accused person has disputed being involved in the alleged incident."
You said that the failure to interview was found to be at odds with usual procedure. But the report does not state that. So you are wrong in making that point. It was only the failure to do the identification which was not in line with usual procedure.
On a (somewhat) less contentious issue, there's a survey of EU officials etc. of some interest here:
http://us2.campaign-archive1.com/?u=1b8c27812b5639c97eae8a815&id=5ae811af31&e=d50c4c3e1b
Whether the lady in question was or not, I suspect much the same happens with Question Time and similar programmes.
Edited extra bit: writers sometimes hire sock puppet reviews or followers on Twitter (who always RT and make someone seem more influential). It's also the case, but thankfully uncommon, that some pretend to be another individual who then gives terrible reviews and ratings to 'rivals' [the obvious flaw, deceit aside, is that people buy more than one book, and the next best thing to someone buying your own is buying a similar book by someone else, which increases the chance of them buying yours later...]
Bryony caught something from our Malc.
;-)
Joe Public was invariably Joe 'local councillor/activist' Smith.
When talking about "working" tax credit households, I should perhaps have said Employed Tax Credit Households.
I wasn't including any of the 1.3m tax credit households that are completely unemployed. 30% of tax credit households have no workers in them.
" an agreement on a loser interpretation of ‘ever-closer union’;"
I'm not entirely sure that's what Cameron had in mind?
*edit* I see you've already provided it. Thanks!
BBC - A chap is spending four days locked in a hotel room listening to nothing but Rick Astley's 1980s hit, Never Gonna Give You Up […] which famously became the focus of an internet prank, 2,500 times on repeat.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-34547464
No doubt The Screaming Eagle would approve….
Flightpath continually referencing me/replying to comments/trolling... I have been banned from interacting with him or her, surely the ban should cut both ways else it's a joke?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/34548368
Assuming Red Bull don't go dummy-spitting. Which is quite an assumption.
This leads to dimwits claiming that 'free school meal kids are underrepresented' at 21st century Grammar schools.. Can people REALLY be that stupid? It is because there are so few of them you ****s
If there were a grammar school in every constituency, in the poorest part of that constituency, it would lead to poor kids being able to attend them, or if they don't pass the exam, going to a better comp than they would have previously. The areas near the grammar school would become more desirable to live in, and the kids wouldn't be consigned to the dustbin that is the worst comp in the manor
On a related note, I saw a really good interview with a Manor chap last weekend, which makes me think Haas might hit the ground running. As well as the Ferrari engine and Williams components, being out of the sport this year means Haas don't have the same restrictions, such as limited wind tunnel time, so their 2016 car, aided by Grosjean, might just leap right into the midfield.
As of next April those earning 10,800 wont be all in it together either..
Non fee-paying Grammar schools = Evil!
Fee-paying Public schools = Cool!
Not a tory, indifferent about tax credits
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LHNu5T4MdnA
The argument here yesterday and previously was that the investigation had been re-opened without justification at the behest of Tom Watson. Yesterday I said it appeared to be more because the alleged victim wasn't interviewed the first time round, and that seemed wrong (this was strenuously disagreed with). Now we find that after the case closed, it was reviewed, and a recommendation made to interview under caution. You can slice that any way you like, but the only thing I can see that is really unjust was the lack of rigour in the initial investigation, which had it done its work properly in the first place, and had it cleared Lord Brittan of wrongdoing, may have improved his quality of life in his last months.