Is it not a required courtesy to the sitting incumbent MP, to be notified whenever a fellow MP from the same party visits their constituency?
Not if they are a Tory Scum.
Ah, so Stella Creasy has the Corbynite black thumb mark against her, soon to be #purged
What is the problem the Left have with her? I don't understand.
Insufficiently on message?
Stella had success persuading the coalition to tackle the wonga scandals.
What was so bad about Wonga and none of the umpteen other payday loan companies that also charge horrific interest rates? I tweeted her at the time asking what made Wonga so bad, but never got a reply.
You have no heart.
Serious question though. I do shift work, so am at home during the day quite often. Daytime TV is awash with ads for assorted short term loans all charging eye watering APR's of varying degrees. What was so bad about Wonga specifically that caused the very effective campaign that Stella waged?
I've helped people who have dealt with Wonga.
Wonga's had some really pernicious lending policy.
They would lend without verifying income.
They also had a rollover policy. So all you would do is repay the interest and take out a new loan each month.
For example, you took out a loan of £200, the interest on that would be £40 a month, with a reloan fee of £15 each time.
So each month you'd be paying north of £50 a month without paying anything back on the principal, so after a year people might have taken a £200 quid loan, repaid close to £700 a year without paying a penny to the principal.
Miss one payment or be an hour late, they could get quite aggressive with extra fees on top
(For example they payment from your debit card each month, they would transact the payment at 2am, and if there weren't funds in your account, they would ring you and threaten charges if payment wasn't made by 2pm)
Over on Betfair, someone is keen to back the kippers in OW&R tonight.
You can get on labour between 4/11 & 2/5 if you're quick.
Kippers ought to be a 2/1 IMO.
Hmm. Not so sure.
A lot depends on wheteher the tories vote kipper - I suspect the tories might not do too badly in the end, though.
How low do you see the tory vote going?
In this type of constituency it will divide between UKIP and abstentions I think. In a more middle-class seat you'd get some Tories voting Labour to stop UKIP, as happened in Newark for example.
I'm not convinced 2015 tory voters in a constituency like this will now vote ukip though. If they didn't flip kipper in May, why would they now?
I share your scepticism. Just maybe if the Tories had been miles behind UKIP here but they were actually pretty close. So those looking for a UKIP win seem to me to betting on a complete collapse of the Labour vote. I don't see that, not to a sufficient extent anyway.
Looks like McDonnell chickened out of his big set piece appearance today
@JamieRoss7: BREAKING: John McDonnell is "99%" not coming to this meeting. "We'll have to blame George Osborne," says the chair of the meeting.
@JamieRoss7: This is all v funny. A man's on stage raging against the media who are all sitting here having travelled for no reason. Worst evening ever.
Wonga's had some really pernicious lending policy.
They would lend without verifying income.
They also had a rollover policy. So all you would do is repay the interest and take out a new loan each month.
For example, you took out a loan of £200, the interest on that would be £40 a month, with a reloan fee of £15 each time.
So each month you'd be paying north of £50 a month without paying anything back on the principal, so after a year people might have taken a £200 quid loan, repaid close to £700 a year without paying a penny to the principal.
Miss one payment or be an hour late, they could get quite aggressive with extra fees on top
(For example they payment from your debit card each month, they would transact the payment at 2am, and if there weren't funds in your account, they would ring you and threaten charges if payment wasn't made by 2pm)
That's a magnificent piece of hand-wringing, do-gooder virtue signalling with absolutely no concept of reality.
Wonga's had some really pernicious lending policy.
They would lend without verifying income.
They also had a rollover policy. So all you would do is repay the interest and take out a new loan each month.
For example, you took out a loan of £200, the interest on that would be £40 a month, with a reloan fee of £15 each time.
So each month you'd be paying north of £50 a month without paying anything back on the principal, so after a year people might have taken a £200 quid loan, repaid close to £700 a year without paying a penny to the principal.
Miss one payment or be an hour late, they could get quite aggressive with extra fees on top
(For example they payment from your debit card each month, they would transact the payment at 2am, and if there weren't funds in your account, they would ring you and threaten charges if payment wasn't made by 2pm)
That's a magnificent piece of hand-wringing, do-gooder virtue signalling with absolutely no concept of reality.
That's the reality of it.
Talking of no concept of reality, tell us is VAT charged on Payday loans?
foxinsoxuk agree with you. Patient's interests come first. Chucking a frail elderly person out of hospital without somewhere suitable to go could literally kill them.
Looks like McDonnell chickened out of his big set piece appearance today
@JamieRoss7: BREAKING: John McDonnell is "99%" not coming to this meeting. "We'll have to blame George Osborne," says the chair of the meeting.
@JamieRoss7: This is all v funny. A man's on stage raging against the media who are all sitting here having travelled for no reason. Worst evening ever.
Wonga's had some really pernicious lending policy.
They would lend without verifying income.
They also had a rollover policy. So all you would do is repay the interest and take out a new loan each month.
For example, you took out a loan of £200, the interest on that would be £40 a month, with a reloan fee of £15 each time.
So each month you'd be paying north of £50 a month without paying anything back on the principal, so after a year people might have taken a £200 quid loan, repaid close to £700 a year without paying a penny to the principal.
Miss one payment or be an hour late, they could get quite aggressive with extra fees on top
(For example they payment from your debit card each month, they would transact the payment at 2am, and if there weren't funds in your account, they would ring you and threaten charges if payment wasn't made by 2pm)
That's a magnificent piece of hand-wringing, do-gooder virtue signalling with absolutely no concept of reality.
Didn't TSE say he had dealt with clients who have had issues with Wonga. So I fail to see how that comment has "absolutely no concept of reality".
Scrapping the tax credits cuts is a poor idea. They should have gone ahead with them and just phased them in.
They are.
The transition from the tax credit system to universal credit is, to all intents and purposes, the same thing.
2.3m current tax credit recipients are also effectively on notice that they can't expect any further benefits for more children from April 2017, so by my reckoning they need to get cracking and get all impregnation completed by June 2016.
Working tax credits are not going to change though, that is the real corporate subsidy for low wages and subsidy for people's lifestyle choice of working part time.
Working Tax Credits are peanuts. If you earn £14k and have no kids you get ZERO Tax Credits of any kind.
The serious money is in Child Tax Credits - and they are on a sliding scale with earnings. So someone earning £14k gets massively more Child Tax Credit than someone earning, say, £24k.
So Child Tax Credits have a colossal impact on work incentives.
Wonga's had some really pernicious lending policy.
They would lend without verifying income.
They also had a rollover policy. So all you would do is repay the interest and take out a new loan each month.
For example, you took out a loan of £200, the interest on that would be £40 a month, with a reloan fee of £15 each time.
So each month you'd be paying north of £50 a month without paying anything back on the principal, so after a year people might have taken a £200 quid loan, repaid close to £700 a year without paying a penny to the principal.
Miss one payment or be an hour late, they could get quite aggressive with extra fees on top
(For example they payment from your debit card each month, they would transact the payment at 2am, and if there weren't funds in your account, they would ring you and threaten charges if payment wasn't made by 2pm)
That's a magnificent piece of hand-wringing, do-gooder virtue signalling with absolutely no concept of reality.
That's the reality of it.
Talking of no concept of reality, tell us is VAT charged on Payday loans?
No, it's not the reality.
It is a one-sided painted picture of anything you think might signal concern in any "reasonable" reader.
Pay Day Loans are offered to those who already have failed to repay credit agreements and are not considered credit-worthy by traditional means. If there is to be any credit available to people in that situation then it MUST have a fairly substantial cost to cover credit risk.
The alternative - and presumably this is the one you favour - is that people who have put themselves in this position get no access to credit. The problem with this is that the downsides to the individual can be much more serious than the cost of pay day loans
There are millions of people in the UK who exist paycheque to paycheque and things that would be of little inconcenience to the bulk of the population (say a car breakdown meaning you can't go to work, or the washing machine going kaput, or window getting smashed in bad weather) are outwith their ability to deal with without access to this sort of credit.
Wonga's had some really pernicious lending policy.
They would lend without verifying income.
They also had a rollover policy. So all you would do is repay the interest and take out a new loan each month.
For example, you took out a loan of £200, the interest on that would be £40 a month, with a reloan fee of £15 each time.
So each month you'd be paying north of £50 a month without paying anything back on the principal, so after a year people might have taken a £200 quid loan, repaid close to £700 a year without paying a penny to the principal.
Miss one payment or be an hour late, they could get quite aggressive with extra fees on top
(For example they payment from your debit card each month, they would transact the payment at 2am, and if there weren't funds in your account, they would ring you and threaten charges if payment wasn't made by 2pm)
That's a magnificent piece of hand-wringing, do-gooder virtue signalling with absolutely no concept of reality.
Didn't TSE say he had dealt with clients who have had issues with Wonga. So I fail to see how that comment has "absolutely no concept of reality".
Not clients per se, when I did some voluntary work for families of prisoners.
Everyone saying Tax Credits will be "dealt with" through Universal Credit later.
But an important change to Tax Credits IS going ahead.
From April 2017, Tax Credits WILL be limited to 2 children for all new claimants / new children born after that date.
Has everyone actually digested this?
Indeed.
It is also a policy that may have significant consequences in a great many policy areas.
Once people get the message that the taxpayer isn't paying for reproduction, there could be significant cultural knock-ons and reduced demand on many services such as housing, healthcare, education and on certain specific demographics where large families are seen far more commonly.
Absolutely spot on.
It is a huge change - which is going to lead to behavioural change - which in turn is going to lead to exactly what you have written in your post.
And I still don't think most media commentators have fully digested it.
Instead we've got people going on about subsidising low pay which completely misses the point - because employers don't pay workers with children more than workers without children (doing the same job).
The whole thing is about subsidising children - and this cut - to put it bluntly - is about stopping children being born to people who can't afford them without subsidy.
Wonga's had some really pernicious lending policy.
They would lend without verifying income.
They also had a rollover policy. So all you would do is repay the interest and take out a new loan each month.
For example, you took out a loan of £200, the interest on that would be £40 a month, with a reloan fee of £15 each time.
So each month you'd be paying north of £50 a month without paying anything back on the principal, so after a year people might have taken a £200 quid loan, repaid close to £700 a year without paying a penny to the principal.
Miss one payment or be an hour late, they could get quite aggressive with extra fees on top
(For example they payment from your debit card each month, they would transact the payment at 2am, and if there weren't funds in your account, they would ring you and threaten charges if payment wasn't made by 2pm)
That's a magnificent piece of hand-wringing, do-gooder virtue signalling with absolutely no concept of reality.
Didn't TSE say he had dealt with clients who have had issues with Wonga. So I fail to see how that comment has "absolutely no concept of reality".
His "issues" were the the outcomes people had given themselves. If his "clients" had repaid their previous lending under the agreed contract, they wouldn't be left with only pay day loans and the associated risk premium.
It's the worst form of nanny state socialism to blame others for problems that individuals created for themselves. However, people are stupid and they do stupid things. Once they are in that position, the question is wht is best - no access to credit or access to expensive credit.
One of my bank accounts has an overdraft which, in its standard terms, charges £1 a day when used. If I used that to borrow £100 each month, the cost would be very similar to that of a pay day loan, including the cost of rollover if used each month. That's a high street bank, charging what pay day lenders chargee.
Obviously that's expensive and thankfully I don't need to use it. But for people living on the margin of solvency, there are genuine and important reasons for access to credit, even at that level of cost.
Dair You have about the same ability as the Chancellor to understand life for the less privileged and fortunate than you. Tempted to call you a knob, but that would be rude.
Everyone saying Tax Credits will be "dealt with" through Universal Credit later.
But an important change to Tax Credits IS going ahead.
From April 2017, Tax Credits WILL be limited to 2 children for all new claimants / new children born after that date.
Has everyone actually digested this?
Indeed.
It is also a policy that may have significant consequences in a great many policy areas.
Once people get the message that the taxpayer isn't paying for reproduction, there could be significant cultural knock-ons and reduced demand on many services such as housing, healthcare, education and on certain specific demographics where large families are seen far more commonly.
Absolutely spot on.
It is a huge change - which is going to lead to behavioural change - which in turn is going to lead to exactly what you have written in your post.
And I still don't think most media commentators have fully digested it.
Instead we've got people going on about subsidising low pay which completely misses the point - because employers don't pay workers with children more than workers without children (doing the same job).
The whole thing is about subsidising children - and this cut - to put it bluntly - is about stopping children being born to people who can't afford them without subsidy.
Wonga's had some really pernicious lending policy.
They would lend without verifying income.
They also had a rollover policy. So all you would do is repay the interest and take out a new loan each month.
For example, you took out a loan of £200, the interest on that would be £40 a month, with a reloan fee of £15 each time.
So each month you'd be paying north of £50 a month without paying anything back on the principal, so after a year people might have taken a £200 quid loan, repaid close to £700 a year without paying a penny to the principal.
Miss one payment or be an hour late, they could get quite aggressive with extra fees on top
(For example they payment from your debit card each month, they would transact the payment at 2am, and if there weren't funds in your account, they would ring you and threaten charges if payment wasn't made by 2pm)
That's a magnificent piece of hand-wringing, do-gooder virtue signalling with absolutely no concept of reality.
I have some sympathy with the view that Wonga and the others are providing a service, and people should know what they're getting into. These companies should be better than loan sharks, and as such a necessary evil.
Creating two fake law firms to harass customers is completely out of order.
In addition, they were so incompetent that it was discovered that they could not even consistently and accurately calculate the amount customers owed. That's really when I lost patience with them: that's a fundamental of any financial business.
Dair You have about the same ability as the Chancellor to understand life for the less privileged and fortunate than you. Tempted to call you a knob, but that would be rude.
I support access to credit for the those in society who are in the worst financial position.
You appear to not support this.
Yet I am out of touch and lacking understanding. Absolutely priceless.
The BBC need to bring back The Thick Of It for one more season. Have Malcolm just out of jail and on the side of the "normals" plotting to get rid of the lefty nutbags and a bungling Chancellor leaving open goals which the nutbags can't score with.
First case collapsed as the prosecution had for got to put "in Glasgow" at the end of the charge.
If DavidL is around, perhaps he can tell us what the likely sentence is if she's found guilty.
If she's sentenced to a period longer than 12 months that automatically triggers a by election.
Assuming no previous convictions, allegations of provocation etc I would frankly expect a non custodial sentence. Probably a community payback order which is the equivalent of a CSO. Pretty surprising this was re-raised to be honest, probably only raised because it was so high profile and embarrassing.
The BBC need to bring back The Thick Of It for one more season. Have Malcolm just out of jail and on the side of the "normals" plotting to get rid of the lefty nutbags and a bungling Chancellor leaving open goals which the nutbags can't score with.
The problem is the reality is funnier than the fiction. I don't think even Armando Iannucci could have come up with the chaos of the past few weeks.
First case collapsed as the prosecution had for got to put "in Glasgow" at the end of the charge.
If DavidL is around, perhaps he can tell us what the likely sentence is if she's found guilty.
If she's sentenced to a period longer than 12 months that automatically triggers a by election.
Assuming no previous convictions, allegations of provocation etc I would frankly expect a non custodial sentence. Probably a community payback order which is the equivalent of a CSO. Pretty surprising this was re-raised to be honest, probably only raised because it was so high profile and embarrassing.
Thanks. Is the sentence she'd get in England & Wales
That's a magnificent piece of hand-wringing, do-gooder virtue signalling with absolutely no concept of reality.
I have some sympathy with the view that Wonga and the others are providing a service, and people should know what they're getting into. These companies should be better than loan sharks, and as such a necessary evil.
Creating two fake law firms to harass customers is completely out of order.
In addition, they were so incompetent that it was discovered that they could not even consistently and accurately calculate the amount customers owed. That's really when I lost patience with them: that's a fundamental of any financial business.
Lenders are forced to be creative on debt recovery because the current legislation makes it practically impossible to recover civil debts in the UK.
The price paid for credit reflects the effectiveness of collections recovery for the firm, so the more robust a firm is in recovering bad debts, the lower price it can charge customers.
If you don't repay a loan shark, they will inflict physical violence on you and/or take your physical property. If you don't repay a pay day loan firm you get a few letters and phone calls and - given that the entire market is made up with people who have already chosen not to repay their debts and know that there is no consequence for this (other than making it harder to borrow more) the letters and phone calls will be ignored.
Taking offence at pretty much any debt collection practise in use today is, again, virtue signalling by people who have no understanding of the realities of the situation.
The BBC need to bring back The Thick Of It for one more season. Have Malcolm just out of jail and on the side of the "normals" plotting to get rid of the lefty nutbags and a bungling Chancellor leaving open goals which the nutbags can't score with.
The problem is the reality is funnier than the fiction. I don't think even Armando Iannucci could have come up with the chaos of the past few weeks.
I'd also suggest some of the writers including Armando wouldn't want to stick the knife into Corbyn.
First case collapsed as the prosecution had for got to put "in Glasgow" at the end of the charge.
If DavidL is around, perhaps he can tell us what the likely sentence is if she's found guilty.
If she's sentenced to a period longer than 12 months that automatically triggers a by election.
Assuming no previous convictions, allegations of provocation etc I would frankly expect a non custodial sentence. Probably a community payback order which is the equivalent of a CSO. Pretty surprising this was re-raised to be honest, probably only raised because it was so high profile and embarrassing.
Should the sheriff not be considering the profile and the details of the case?
Much like the exceptionally draconian sentences rushed through after the English riots in 2010, threatening behaviour at the Polling Place should be treated very harshly indeed to send a clear message to the public that such behaviour is intolerable.
Fair enough TSE. It all sounds pretty scrote like. At a previous employer, one of the workers (who turned out to be very short term) managed to take out a payday loan using my company phone as the contact. I had great fun for about a year winding up their debt collectors when they rang chasing the debt. Debt collector: Is this Alan Stevens? Me: It might be. DC: Can you confirm your DOB and post code? Me: And what if I don't? DC: Well, you won't find out what this call is about. Me: You're calling from a debt collection agency, I think I can take a wild stab in the dark what it may be about. DC: Well, I'll terminate the call then Me: Go on, explain why that should bother me? Click....
With this particular mob the debt doubled every 90 days and that didn't include any late fees etc.
That's a magnificent piece of hand-wringing, do-gooder virtue signalling with absolutely no concept of reality.
I have some sympathy with the view that Wonga and the others are providing a service, and people should know what they're getting into. These companies should be better than loan sharks, and as such a necessary evil.
Creating two fake law firms to harass customers is completely out of order.
In addition, they were so incompetent that it was discovered that they could not even consistently and accurately calculate the amount customers owed. That's really when I lost patience with them: that's a fundamental of any financial business.
Lenders are forced to be creative on debt recovery because the current legislation makes it practically impossible to recover civil debts in the UK.
The price paid for credit reflects the effectiveness of collections recovery for the firm, so the more robust a firm is in recovering bad debts, the lower price it can charge customers.
If you don't repay a loan shark, they will inflict physical violence on you and/or take your physical property. If you don't repay a pay day loan firm you get a few letters and phone calls and - given that the entire market is made up with people who have already chosen not to repay their debts and know that there is no consequence for this (other than making it harder to borrow more) the letters and phone calls will be ignored.
Taking offence at pretty much any debt collection practise in use is today, again, virtue signalling by people who have no understanding of the realities of the situation.
Evidently the FCA were virtue signalling to the 2.6 million pound level. Either that, or you're talking rubbish.
As I said, I can see the need for such companies. But if they operate then they have to operate cleanly.
Tuned in late after busy day at work. Mao! What the fuck! How bad can this get?
The thing that gets me about it is that his explanation of what he was trying to do makes it seem he is genuinely surprised the bit did not play particularly well. I honestly think he could have made the gag in a way which, even if it did win people over, did not invite derision immediately - don't pull out an actual book, do the quote first then say it's Mao (thus probably holding off the laughing jeers that ruined his delivery flow) and how even he could see this government is going wrong - but he actually seems surprised at the reaction.
Fair enough TSE. It all sounds pretty scrote like. At a previous employer, one of the workers (who turned out to be very short term) managed to take out a payday loan using my company phone as the contact. I had great fun for about a year winding up their debt collectors when they rang chasing the debt. Debt collector: Is this Alan Stevens? Me: It might be. DC: Can you confirm your DOB and post code? Me: And what if I don't? DC: Well, you won't find out what this call is about. Me: You're calling from a debt collection agency, I think I can take a wild stab in the dark what it may be about. DC: Well, I'll terminate the call then Me: Go on, explain why that should bother me? Click....
With this particular mob the debt doubled every 90 days and that didn't include any late fees etc.
My favourite debt collection agency was the firm of solicitors called Wright Hassell (appropriately named)
Never have I dealt with a thicker set of people in my life.
They had never heard of the concept of statute barred.
Fair enough TSE. It all sounds pretty scrote like. At a previous employer, one of the workers (who turned out to be very short term) managed to take out a payday loan using my company phone as the contact. I had great fun for about a year winding up their debt collectors when they rang chasing the debt. Debt collector: Is this Alan Stevens? Me: It might be. DC: Can you confirm your DOB and post code? Me: And what if I don't? DC: Well, you won't find out what this call is about. Me: You're calling from a debt collection agency, I think I can take a wild stab in the dark what it may be about. DC: Well, I'll terminate the call then Me: Go on, explain why that should bother me? Click....
With this particular mob the debt doubled every 90 days and that didn't include any late fees etc.
My favourite debt collection agency was the firm of solicitors called Wright Hassell (appropriately named)
Never have I dealt with a thicker set of people in my life.
They had never heard of the concept of statute barred.
Evidently the FCA were virtue signalling to the 2.6 million pound level. Either that, or you're talking rubbish.
As I said, I can see the need for such companies. But if they operate then they have to operate cleanly.
Wonga didn't.
No, the FCA were simply applying the current legislation which makes it effectively impossible for any pay day lender to enforce debt recovery (as well as most mainstream lenders).
The legislation is the virtue signalling.
A good example of how the legislation works today - if someone has a defaulted debt in debt recovery, should the person call the lender/collections agency to repay the debt, before payment is taken, the agent is in breech if they do not confirm that making the payment is affordable to the caller before taking it.
Trudeau is only 5 years younger than Cameron but looks at least 10 years younger.
Given how being head of government is supposed to age you, perhaps he'll catch up. But granted, I'd have put it at looking 15 years younger. Marco Rubio is another one who looks a lot younger than he is I think.
Contrary to the claims of some of the self styled 'experts' on here the Turkish shooting down of a Russian jet was grossly illegal under international law regardless as to whether the jet strayed into Turkish airspace or not.
Whilst I wouldn't expect any better from the loons on here, I certainly would expect better from our government and NATO when they tried to justify it. Still this is a government that seems to have issues with international laws.
Tuned in late after busy day at work. Mao! What the fuck! How bad can this get?
The thing that gets me about it is that his explanation of what he was trying to do makes it seem he is genuinely surprised the bit did not play particularly well. I honestly think he could have made the gag in a way which, even if it did win people over, did not invite derision immediately - don't pull out an actual book, do the quote first then say it's Mao (thus probably holding off the laughing jeers that ruined his delivery flow) and how even he could see this government is going wrong - but he actually seems surprised at the reaction.
Tom Watson's face was hilarious. It took about 5 seconds for it to sink in what book he was referring to then a look of pain spread across his face.
If it was painful for Watson and stressed him out, so much the better, a more odious thug it would be hard to meet. Has he apologised to Leon Brittan's wife yet.. in person, or was it just a weasel worded letter?
@ JeremyCliffe: Labour moderates have only three possible futures: 1) move against leadership soon, 2) quit and set up new party, 3) watch as party dies.
@ JeremyCliffe: Labour moderates have only three possible futures: 1) move against leadership soon, 2) quit and set up new party, 3) watch as party dies.
Contrary to the claims of some of the self styled 'experts' on here the Turkish shooting down of a Russian jet was grossly illegal under international law regardless as to whether the jet strayed into Turkish airspace or not.
Whilst I wouldn't expect any better from the loons on here, I certainly would expect better from our government and NATO when they tried to justify it. Still this is a government that seems to have issues with international laws.
Not as many as your friends Putin and Assad though.
I do not understand what the problem with the NHS and social care people is. It is easily fixed (for the nhs). 1. Anyone designated as being capable of release has a 3 working day notice period given to the local authority (LA) where they previously lived. 2. After that date if still in an NHS bed then the local authority is charged a room rate of I suggest £1,000 a day (non-alz).
Since the LA can re-home them for outside London under £1,000 a week, then watch the LAs jump to address the problem..... Simples.
Far too simplistic an analysis of why people end up bed-blocking. What if the person needs to go into a home but won't? What if they need to go into a home but there are no spaces in any suitable ones nearby? What if they need domiciliary care and no agency can be found to deliver the package they need because they can't recruit any staff?
These things can be tackled, but it isn't easy. THe Better Care Fund is partially aimed at delayed discharge (and partly at reducing admissions in the first place) but it is taking a while to get going. Because social care stuff has been disjointed before and will continue to be expensive.
===================== As for GO today, I seem to be alone in thinking that McMao (as we will have to call him) wasn't THAT bad given that all his attack lines had been removed from under him by GO, leaving him with almost literally nothing to say.
And how would you suggest local councils pay this fine?
Tuned in late after busy day at work. Mao! What the fuck! How bad can this get?
It's worse.. At the end of the quote he threw the little red book across the HOC at the government benches but it fell just short........Like everything else he does really. Truly unbelievable TV.
Contrary to the claims of some of the self styled 'experts' on here the Turkish shooting down of a Russian jet was grossly illegal under international law regardless as to whether the jet strayed into Turkish airspace or not.
Whilst I wouldn't expect any better from the loons on here, I certainly would expect better from our government and NATO when they tried to justify it. Still this is a government that seems to have issues with international laws.
Not as many as your friends Putin and Assad though.
Putinistas appealling to international law does demonstrate amazing chutzpah!
Back to the real world for a bit, the Russians have bombed a Turkish aid convoy in northern Syria:
Frederike GeerdinkVerified account @fgeerdink 48m48 minutes ago reportedly 7 died in #russian bombing of #turkish #aid convoy in #azaz. i don't know what to make of this mess, to be honest.
Conflict News @Conflicts 55m55 minutes ago MORE: Unconfirmed reports of 7 people killed in the attack on an alleged aid convoy in #Azaz - @News_Executive
It won't from the Western powers. Russia perhaps was deliberately probing Turkey's willingness to shoot aircraft down, or perhaps the planes stumbled a bit. U2 spyplanes used to get hopelessly lost on training exercises and find themselves over the Soviet Union.
This was a completely meaningless incident. The next incident's implied peril has gone up though.
Or Russian 'fishing trawlers'.
As I've said yesterday and today, there needs to be de-escalation. It's easy enough to find a set of words that would satisfy their domestic audiences without admitting guilt in any form. (I think "regrettable incident" used to be commonly used)
But it seems Putin, as I expected, may not be wanting to leave it at that.
Perhaps the Turks should stay out of Syria now and abide by international law? Sounds like Erdogan is starting to back down now, perhaps he should have spoken to Saakashvilli and Poroshenko before listening to those neocons whispering bad advice into his ears.
Do you think Putin's Russia should stay out of other countries?
Tuned in late after busy day at work. Mao! What the fuck! How bad can this get?
It's worse.. At the end of the quote he threw the little red book across the HOC at the government benches but it fell just short........Like everything else he does really. Truly unbelievable TV.
So I imagine to add insult to injury that it is now filed away somewhere safe like Liam Byrne's letter was last time and could be brought out as a prop at the next election.
As the Russians are operating alongside the Iraqi and Syrian governments they have superior intelligence on targets so logically they would likely be inflicting less civilian casualties due to mistakes in targeting.
Because if there is one thing the Russians are known for it is taking care not to kill civilians in a war zone.
LOL - they took a lot of care in Chechnya - or was that a lot of care to flatten it?
They seem to be dropping iron bombs too rather than PGM's?
I find myself believing that Corbyn and McDonnell are a couple of prostrately-challenged old fogeys who imagine themselves as Johnny Rotten and Sid Vicious - making ever more ridiculous gestures and statements on Bill Grundy's show to attract attention.
Corbyn will be making butter adverts in five years time, while McDonnell will either be in the jungle or the Big Brother House.
There is something vaguely publicity-whore about them.
I's like to believe that you're such an idiot. But you've sadly provided plenty of evidence otherwise in the past.
You've linked to stories that exhibit exactly the characteristics you mention above, yet oddly because they match your opinions you put them on here.
What is a 'professional outfit' on the Internet? 'Partial and one-sided' is also very much in the eye of the observer, and the test can easily be fooled by a good writer. 'Cross checking' is also difficult on the Internet, where many stories on different sites can all link back to the same single source.
And the source does matter: what do you call a 'proper' source? For instance, a source that is from a small media organisation owned by a friend of Assad's should be treated with a certain amount of criticism if it backs that regime. Yet you failed to mention that.
You just try to use arbitrary distinctions to rubbish sources you dislike, and forget those distinctions when the sources contain information you like.
This isn't really about politics any more, it's about a basic failure on your part to read and comprehend. Your first para here isn't even English as far as I can make out.
READ the source that Alistair cited and you might understand. My list of objections do not refer to any internet outfit, it refers to the 'Monitoring group' known as 'The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights' (it might sound a bit more credible if someone told him what an observatory actually is). This monitoring group IS an insurgent propaganda operation. It's not pretending to be otherwise. Furthermore it does not even endeavour to list sources for its claims on casualty numbers. It is this organisation that I claim is not a professional outfit. It is not in any way a credible or reliable source of casualty numbers, let alone trying to work out percentages. You would surely agree?
As for the rest of it, that's precisely what I DON'T do. I don't judge a book by it's cover - I note it for sure, but as to the rest, I recognise and have said frequently (including in discussions with you) that there is no such thing as an impartial or even a fully trustworthy media source, and you should read them all with full knowledge of their agenda.
I'm sorry I really can't make the distinction any clearer for you.
I do not understand what the problem with the NHS and social care people is. It is easily fixed (for the nhs). 1. Anyone designated as being capable of release has a 3 working day notice period given to the local authority (LA) where they previously lived. 2. After that date if still in an NHS bed then the local authority is charged a room rate of I suggest £1,000 a day (non-alz).
Since the LA can re-home them for outside London under £1,000 a week, then watch the LAs jump to address the problem..... Simples.
Far too simplistic an analysis of why people end up bed-blocking. What if the person needs to go into a home but won't? What if they need to go into a home but there are no spaces in any suitable ones nearby? What if they need domiciliary care and no agency can be found to deliver the package they need because they can't recruit any staff?
These things can be tackled, but it isn't easy. THe Better Care Fund is partially aimed at delayed discharge (and partly at reducing admissions in the first place) but it is taking a while to get going. Because social care stuff has been disjointed before and will continue to be expensive.
===================== As for GO today, I seem to be alone in thinking that McMao (as we will have to call him) wasn't THAT bad given that all his attack lines had been removed from under him by GO, leaving him with almost literally nothing to say.
And how would you suggest local councils pay this fine?
Very simple. Arrange your staff and systems so that you find care home slots for the non-ays people in advance. Now if you think that arranging that within a week is beyond the ability of council staff.....
I do not understand what the problem with the NHS and social care people is. It is easily fixed (for the nhs). 1. Anyone designated as being capable of release has a 3 working day notice period given to the local authority (LA) where they previously lived. 2. After that date if still in an NHS bed then the local authority is charged a room rate of I suggest £1,000 a day (non-alz).
Since the LA can re-home them for outside London under £1,000 a week, then watch the LAs jump to address the problem..... Simples.
Far too simplistic an analysis of why people end up bed-blocking. What if the person needs to go into a home but won't? What if they need to go into a home but there are no spaces in any suitable ones nearby? What if they need domiciliary care and no agency can be found to deliver the package they need because they can't recruit any staff?
These things can be tackled, but it isn't easy. THe Better Care Fund is partially aimed at delayed discharge (and partly at reducing admissions in the first place) but it is taking a while to get going. Because social care stuff has been disjointed before and will continue to be expensive.
===================== As for GO today, I seem to be alone in thinking that McMao (as we will have to call him) wasn't THAT bad given that all his attack lines had been removed from under him by GO, leaving him with almost literally nothing to say.
And how would you suggest local councils pay this fine?
Very simple. Arrange your staff and systems so that you find care home slots for the non-ays people in advance. Now if you think that arranging that within a week is beyond the ability of council staff.....
Oh yes of course. And then you employ agency staff to back fill them.
And then you wave your magic wand to find the care home places which are shutting down at a huge rate because Councils don't have the money to make them a going concern.
This isn't really about politics any more, it's about a basic failure on your part to read and comprehend. Your first para here isn't even English as far as I can make out.
READ the source that Alistair cited and you might understand. My list of objections do not refer to any internet outfit, it refers to the 'Monitoring group' known as 'The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights' (it might sound a bit more credible if someone told him what an observatory actually is). This monitoring group IS an insurgent propaganda operation. It's not pretending to be otherwise. Furthermore it does not even endeavour to list sources for its claims on casualty numbers. It is this organisation that I claim is not a professional outfit. It is not in any way a credible or reliable source of casualty numbers, let alone trying to work out percentages. You would surely agree?
As for the rest of it, that's precisely what I DON'T do. I don't judge a book by it's cover - I note it for sure, but as to the rest, I recognise and have said frequently (including in discussions with you) that there is no such thing as an impartial or even a fully trustworthy media source, and you should read them all with full knowledge of their agenda.
I'm sorry I really can't make the distinction any clearer for you.
You start off each of your posts with a little sneery attack. It's not a sign that you think you're on firm ground.
As for the first paragraph of my post: it's perfectly understandable.
Please read my objections to your post. You have created a series of false distinctions that make you think you can accept or reject information. On the face of it they sound good. Sadly, they are also utterly arbitrary, and it's clear you don't stick to them yourself. In fact, taken to extremes they're contradictory.
And you just use them to confirm 'facts' which match your world view, and reject those that do not.
As for your main claim, which is an attack on the SOHR. You claim: "This monitoring group IS an insurgent propaganda operation." That's quite a claim, and I hope you have full sources for that which match your criteria. So please post them, so we can all see how well your links 'proving' that assertion follow what you claim you do. (BTW, I like the way you put 'IS' in capitals, to associate it with IS).
Remember, according to you they must not be: -totally and self-confessedly partial and one sided -not on the ground -not a professional outfit -not cross-checked
'For nearly two years, SOHR has reported only acts of violence by the regime against the rebels. Mainstream international media like the BBC, al-Jazeera and al-Arabya, have relied on it as their sole source of news.
Statistic after horrific statistic pours from "the Britain-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights" (AP). It's hard to find a news report about Syria that doesn't cite them. But who are they? "They" are Rami Abdulrahman (or Rami Abdel Rahman), who lives in Coventry. http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/jul/12/syrian-opposition-doing-the-talking
-not cross-checked
'The organization claims to have a wide network of contacts in the region who feed their information to the head office, where it is processed and then posted on the SOHR website, Facebook and Twitter accounts.
RT asked Abdulrahman whether he personally knows "hundreds of people," as he himself puts it, working in Syria for SOHR, and whether he can really trust all of them.
"I know all of the activists working for the SOHR," he replied.
When RT wondered when the last time Abdulrahman actually went to Syria was, he said it was 15 years ago.
Comments
Wonga's had some really pernicious lending policy.
They would lend without verifying income.
They also had a rollover policy. So all you would do is repay the interest and take out a new loan each month.
For example, you took out a loan of £200, the interest on that would be £40 a month, with a reloan fee of £15 each time.
So each month you'd be paying north of £50 a month without paying anything back on the principal, so after a year people might have taken a £200 quid loan, repaid close to £700 a year without paying a penny to the principal.
Miss one payment or be an hour late, they could get quite aggressive with extra fees on top
(For example they payment from your debit card each month, they would transact the payment at 2am, and if there weren't funds in your account, they would ring you and threaten charges if payment wasn't made by 2pm)
McDonnell trying to bury the Labour Party
@JamieRoss7: BREAKING: John McDonnell is "99%" not coming to this meeting. "We'll have to blame George Osborne," says the chair of the meeting.
@JamieRoss7: This is all v funny. A man's on stage raging against the media who are all sitting here having travelled for no reason. Worst evening ever.
Talking of no concept of reality, tell us is VAT charged on Payday loans?
I reckon Lab a buy if I had to choose, sell turnout
http://bit.ly/1MDqAqH
First case collapsed as the prosecution had for got to put "in Glasgow" at the end of the charge.
The serious money is in Child Tax Credits - and they are on a sliding scale with earnings. So someone earning £14k gets massively more Child Tax Credit than someone earning, say, £24k.
So Child Tax Credits have a colossal impact on work incentives.
It is a one-sided painted picture of anything you think might signal concern in any "reasonable" reader.
Pay Day Loans are offered to those who already have failed to repay credit agreements and are not considered credit-worthy by traditional means. If there is to be any credit available to people in that situation then it MUST have a fairly substantial cost to cover credit risk.
The alternative - and presumably this is the one you favour - is that people who have put themselves in this position get no access to credit. The problem with this is that the downsides to the individual can be much more serious than the cost of pay day loans
There are millions of people in the UK who exist paycheque to paycheque and things that would be of little inconcenience to the bulk of the population (say a car breakdown meaning you can't go to work, or the washing machine going kaput, or window getting smashed in bad weather) are outwith their ability to deal with without access to this sort of credit.
My contribution to the big society.
If she's sentenced to a period longer than 12 months that automatically triggers a by election.
https://twitter.com/Conorpope/status/669563881078026242
It is a huge change - which is going to lead to behavioural change - which in turn is going to lead to exactly what you have written in your post.
And I still don't think most media commentators have fully digested it.
Instead we've got people going on about subsidising low pay which completely misses the point - because employers don't pay workers with children more than workers without children (doing the same job).
The whole thing is about subsidising children - and this cut - to put it bluntly - is about stopping children being born to people who can't afford them without subsidy.
It's the worst form of nanny state socialism to blame others for problems that individuals created for themselves. However, people are stupid and they do stupid things. Once they are in that position, the question is wht is best - no access to credit or access to expensive credit.
One of my bank accounts has an overdraft which, in its standard terms, charges £1 a day when used. If I used that to borrow £100 each month, the cost would be very similar to that of a pay day loan, including the cost of rollover if used each month. That's a high street bank, charging what pay day lenders chargee.
Obviously that's expensive and thankfully I don't need to use it. But for people living on the margin of solvency, there are genuine and important reasons for access to credit, even at that level of cost.
https://twitter.com/JustinTrudeau
http://hipsterttoi.tumblr.com/post/36988708671/submitted-by-floorboardscreak#notes
You have about the same ability as the Chancellor to understand life for the less privileged and fortunate than you. Tempted to call you a knob, but that would be rude.
Miriam González-Durántez and Michael Sheen to edit festive editions of Today programme
http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/nov/25/today-programme-guest-editors-revealed-in-bbc-radio-christmas-feast-michael-sheen-miriam-gonzalez-durantez
I wonder what those episodes are going to be like then?
However, there are other sides of their business which are utterly wrong:
http://www.fca.org.uk/news/wonga-redress-unfair-debt-collection-practices
Creating two fake law firms to harass customers is completely out of order.
In addition, they were so incompetent that it was discovered that they could not even consistently and accurately calculate the amount customers owed. That's really when I lost patience with them: that's a fundamental of any financial business.
You appear to not support this.
Yet I am out of touch and lacking understanding. Absolutely priceless.
It really was a bit Micky Mao.
The price paid for credit reflects the effectiveness of collections recovery for the firm, so the more robust a firm is in recovering bad debts, the lower price it can charge customers.
If you don't repay a loan shark, they will inflict physical violence on you and/or take your physical property. If you don't repay a pay day loan firm you get a few letters and phone calls and - given that the entire market is made up with people who have already chosen not to repay their debts and know that there is no consequence for this (other than making it harder to borrow more) the letters and phone calls will be ignored.
Taking offence at pretty much any debt collection practise in use today is, again, virtue signalling by people who have no understanding of the realities of the situation.
Aarrgghh!
Much like the exceptionally draconian sentences rushed through after the English riots in 2010, threatening behaviour at the Polling Place should be treated very harshly indeed to send a clear message to the public that such behaviour is intolerable.
At a previous employer, one of the workers (who turned out to be very short term) managed to take out a payday loan using my company phone as the contact.
I had great fun for about a year winding up their debt collectors when they rang chasing the debt.
Debt collector: Is this Alan Stevens?
Me: It might be.
DC: Can you confirm your DOB and post code?
Me: And what if I don't?
DC: Well, you won't find out what this call is about.
Me: You're calling from a debt collection agency, I think I can take a wild stab in the dark what it may be about.
DC: Well, I'll terminate the call then
Me: Go on, explain why that should bother me?
Click....
With this particular mob the debt doubled every 90 days and that didn't include any late fees etc.
One book. 12 red crayons.
As I said, I can see the need for such companies. But if they operate then they have to operate cleanly.
Wonga didn't.
Never have I dealt with a thicker set of people in my life.
They had never heard of the concept of statute barred.
Modern life is unspoofable.
The legislation is the virtue signalling.
A good example of how the legislation works today - if someone has a defaulted debt in debt recovery, should the person call the lender/collections agency to repay the debt, before payment is taken, the agent is in breech if they do not confirm that making the payment is affordable to the caller before taking it.
http://www.tostadora.co.uk/web/mickey_mao/536154
This is an interesting and worrying story. I wonder if there are any more friends of the Wests out there?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-devon-34924430
http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/international/261300-russians-may-have-a-strong-case-in-turkish-shootdown
Whilst I wouldn't expect any better from the loons on here, I certainly would expect better from our government and NATO when they tried to justify it. Still this is a government that seems to have issues with international laws.
#westandwithcorbyn
Although... How many Labour MPs are actually Co-op MPs? If they split, could the Co-op become the opposition?
They seem to be dropping iron bombs too rather than PGM's?
New Thread New Thread
Corbyn will be making butter adverts in five years time, while McDonnell will either be in the jungle or the Big Brother House.
There is something vaguely publicity-whore about them.
READ the source that Alistair cited and you might understand. My list of objections do not refer to any internet outfit, it refers to the 'Monitoring group' known as 'The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights' (it might sound a bit more credible if someone told him what an observatory actually is). This monitoring group IS an insurgent propaganda operation. It's not pretending to be otherwise. Furthermore it does not even endeavour to list sources for its claims on casualty numbers. It is this organisation that I claim is not a professional outfit. It is not in any way a credible or reliable source of casualty numbers, let alone trying to work out percentages. You would surely agree?
As for the rest of it, that's precisely what I DON'T do. I don't judge a book by it's cover - I note it for sure, but as to the rest, I recognise and have said frequently (including in discussions with you) that there is no such thing as an impartial or even a fully trustworthy media source, and you should read them all with full knowledge of their agenda.
I'm sorry I really can't make the distinction any clearer for you.
And then you wave your magic wand to find the care home places which are shutting down at a huge rate because Councils don't have the money to make them a going concern.
As for the first paragraph of my post: it's perfectly understandable.
Please read my objections to your post. You have created a series of false distinctions that make you think you can accept or reject information. On the face of it they sound good. Sadly, they are also utterly arbitrary, and it's clear you don't stick to them yourself. In fact, taken to extremes they're contradictory.
And you just use them to confirm 'facts' which match your world view, and reject those that do not.
As for your main claim, which is an attack on the SOHR. You claim: "This monitoring group IS an insurgent propaganda operation." That's quite a claim, and I hope you have full sources for that which match your criteria. So please post them, so we can all see how well your links 'proving' that assertion follow what you claim you do. (BTW, I like the way you put 'IS' in capitals, to associate it with IS).
Remember, according to you they must not be:
-totally and self-confessedly partial and one sided
-not on the ground
-not a professional outfit
-not cross-checked
Good luck.
After three short spells in prison in Syria for pro-democracy activism, Abdulrahman came to Britain in 2000 fearing a longer, fourth jail term.
"I came to Britain the day Hafez al-Assad died, and I'll return when Bashar al-Assad goes," Abdulrahman said, referring to Bashar's father and predecessor Hafez, also an autocrat.
http://uk.reuters.com/article/2011/12/08/uk-britain-syria-idUKTRE7B71XG20111208
'For nearly two years, SOHR has reported only acts of violence by the regime against the rebels. Mainstream international media like the BBC, al-Jazeera and al-Arabya, have relied on it as their sole source of news.
In recent months, several experts and Syrians interviewed by AsiaNews accused Western and Gulf State media of selective reporting. More recently, coverage has become more impartial, but SOHR continues to defend Islamic extremists to avoid losing support among rebel forces.'
http://www.asianews.it/news-en/Massacres-by-Islamic-extremists-bolster-Bashar-al-Assad-28219.html
'the organisation includes opposition combatants among the number of civilian casualties, as long as these are not former members of the military.'
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/mepo.12003/abstract - via wiki
-not on the ground
'When RT wondered when the last time Abdulrahman actually went to Syria was, he said it was 15 years ago.'
https://www.rt.com/news/317813-sohr-visit-syria-long/
-not a professional outfit
Statistic after horrific statistic pours from "the Britain-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights" (AP). It's hard to find a news report about Syria that doesn't cite them. But who are they? "They" are Rami Abdulrahman (or Rami Abdel Rahman), who lives in Coventry.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/jul/12/syrian-opposition-doing-the-talking
-not cross-checked
'The organization claims to have a wide network of contacts in the region who feed their information to the head office, where it is processed and then posted on the SOHR website, Facebook and Twitter accounts.
RT asked Abdulrahman whether he personally knows "hundreds of people," as he himself puts it, working in Syria for SOHR, and whether he can really trust all of them.
"I know all of the activists working for the SOHR," he replied.
When RT wondered when the last time Abdulrahman actually went to Syria was, he said it was 15 years ago.
"But I know some of the Observatory activists through common friends."
https://www.rt.com/news/317813-sohr-visit-syria-long/