May be I'm niave but the lesson of history seems to suggest we have had 70 years of peace in Western Europe for the first time in modern history. It seems to have been Churchill's dream and supported by the vast majority of moderate politicians ever since that a united Europe was an insurance against further world wars. Plus the Tories are tying themselves in knots. Vote to stay in protect world peace, and watch the Tories implode. What's not to like?
I see IDS is claiming that migrants are forcing wages down, especially amongst the poor. Surely it is the employers, who are exploiting the migrants' desperation, that are forcing wages down.
Exactly. The answer to low wages is to raise the minimum wage. Which, to be fair to him, is what IDS' former cabinet colleague George Osbourne has just done.
Not sure throwing money at a problem improves it, normally just causes another problem, in this case increasing the minimum could well increase unemployment.
I did my dissertation on employment rates and fluctuations in the minimum wage. Found the employment effects were minimal with increases in m.w. I focussed on low-skilled workers
Police in Scotland are assessing whether to launch a criminal investigation into two former DWP ministers’ handling of so-called disability fit-to-work tests. Disabled activist John McArdle of the Black Triangle campaign lodged a complaint with police in March against Iain Duncan Smith and Chris Grayling,according to the Disability News Servicenews agency. He also produced evidence of suicides he said were related to fitness-to-work tests. Mr McArdle says the ministers may be guilty of “willful neglect of duty by a public official”, which is a criminal offence. According to the Crown Prosecution Service, willful neglect “can be the result of a positive act or a failure to act”. “There must also be an element of knowledge or at least recklessness about the way in which the duty is carried out or neglected,” the CPS explains. “The test is a subjective one and the public officer must be aware that his/her behaviour is capable of being misconduct.” http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...ministers-over-fit-to-work-tests-a7020471.htm
Certainly, on the face of it, it seems fine. But then, when they BBC go down the road of high culture and innovation, with less of an eye on the ratings, let's not barrack it for not representing its audience [as usually happens]. Traditionally, the BBC has sought to innovate, educate and entertain. When it gets the balance right, it is superb. But after a while people in power start to take that for granted and want to screw about with it, be it the amount of money it receives and/or its political independence. What this Govt, and all future Govts need to do is make sure that the BBC remains as the finest broadcaster in the world and that it is never in a position where it is in danger of losing that standard or its status of the people's channel due to Govt intervention. British Govts usually destroy things eventually, so my hopes aren't high: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-36259237
Huh. When I saw you'd replied, TSS, I assumed you'd be complaining about needing a TV license to watch iPlayer.
Not at all. I consider the TV licence quite cheap considering the fantastic diverse output the BBC manages. In comparison, SKY for example, are ripping their customers off every month. And BBC's iPlayer is just about the best of its kind. Try ITV's Player for example. Jeez, is that crap.! And that's without taking into account their **** programming.
Sports channels are pretty good, and tbh, I'd pay it just for Sky Atlantic. If it had Peaky Blinders and the Bake Off, it'd be the perfect TV channel. It's a bag of crap, no doubt there.
I still don't know why people bring up Sky in comparision. One you don't have to have and decide to pay for whatever you want. The other you are made to pay just to have a tv. I now have Sky Q and all channels, plus fibre and phone for £100 a month.
I chose SKY because some people on here will no doubt have it, plus there is no other direct comparison channel that anyone on here can have a knowledgeable chat about. For those who enjoy SKY I say fine. That's upto you. I did do a 12 hour survey of SKY programming once, while I was looking after a friend's home. I couldn't believe the amount of advertising that went on. And this on a channel my friend was paying for. But, as I say, upto those who are fine with it.
http://gu.com/p/4j5k6?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other The Electoral Commission is taking the Tory party to court because of their failure to disclose relevant information over spending in by-elections and the last general election. There are now nine police forces investigating the claims (up from seven previously).
It would be interesting to see where the electoral fraud scenario will lead. Channel Four who broke the story are adamant that this is a story which has real legs and is likely to end in custodial sentences. Hopefully it will go sufficiently far enough to bring down the current government. I would love to see this happen as well as wonder if the Blue Labour factor will be quite so hostile to the estimable Jeremy Corbyn is they look like having a shot in power.
I couldn't agree more. Even the Ulster Unionist MP wants in, so if is good enough for him then it is for me!!
A coalition with the SNP is the best way I can think of for Labour to get massacred in England next election. Which won't happen, anyway. Slap on the wrist.
The SNP scenario is fascinating. Nicola Sturgeon seems set in her ways to become as much of an irritant as Alex Salmond. It would not object to Scotland getting independence but it would be the death knell for radical politics in this country and I would struggle to see how Labour could ever get in without it's supporters in Scotland. The annoying thing for me is that the way the SNP go about their business is objectionable but Sturgeon is the most effective leader of any of the political parties in the UK and her policies are generally those which Labour should be pursuing. Under Blair Labour prostituted it's socialist past for power and effectively became a watered down version of the Tories. I would not object to Labour forging a closer relationship with the SNP in the short term but the fact that it will likely to have negative consequences amongst the (narrow minded) English voters will mean that the electorate will reject it regardless of the social benefits and the desire to retain Scotland in to the UK. The whole question is fascinating as no one wants Scotland interfering in English legislation yet an independent Scotland would result in the equally unwanted scenario whereby the Conservatives would be likely to retain power indefinitely unless Labour lurched towards the centre again. It is intriguing to see how keeping Scottish MPs out of Westminster would be to Scotland's benefit and the English would surely vote in all legislation that would be to the benefit of the remaining UK countries and to the detriment of Scotland. I feel that Westminster will become pretty vindictive in this respect.
