|
Nederlands My dutch girlfriend goes home tomorrow after meeting my family and we won't be living in the same country until march For what I hope are obvious reasons, I've mostly not had a chance to pay any remote attention to newspapers. Aside from Iraq doing it's thing. Is my prediction of lots of poo poo things being buried bearing much fruit?
|
# ? Jun 16, 2014 13:50 |
|
|
# ? Jun 7, 2024 12:18 |
|
Ddraig posted:I believe that in every single photo of Cameron where he's being a man of the people and drinking a pint or eating a pasty or whatever it's an amazing coincidence that any labelling on the product is always facing the camera. It's unbelievable how such a thing can consistently happen by chance. Sounds like you've blown this conspiracy wide open!
|
# ? Jun 16, 2014 14:16 |
|
Spangly A posted:For what I hope are obvious reasons, I've mostly not had a chance to pay any remote attention to newspapers. Aside from Iraq doing it's thing. Is my prediction of lots of poo poo things being buried bearing much fruit? quote:Nick Clegg has pledged to protect education spending on children and teenagers "from cradle to college". Other than that, there hasn't been anything much beyond Carney making more "alarming noises" about imminent interest rate rises.
|
# ? Jun 16, 2014 14:40 |
|
mfcrocker posted:Brovine - Honduras Welp. Sorry, St Clare's Cancer Hospice, but I don't think I'll be winning that one!
|
# ? Jun 16, 2014 14:58 |
|
This is a c&p, not mine but its good to see it all in one lump lest yee forget. This is from poster ipse on the guardian comments.quote:Nick Clegg & the broken LibDem promises since 2010: I can sort of understand the first section, after all they didnt have a majority so just couldnt do it, no idea if they actually tried putting any of that stuff through (apart from vote reform, which as I understand was basically the bribe from the torys) its the 2nd section that irks me. To vote for something as a block requires the whip doesnt it? Have there actually been any full on 'rebellions' against a Tory bill?
|
# ? Jun 16, 2014 15:14 |
|
goddamnedtwisto posted:Hmm. Now I have to cheer on Argentina. For someone who has the 1986 World Cup as one of his formative footballing memories, this might hurt a bit. I got ENGERLAND somehow - if you like and if it's not against the rules you can swap with me, like when we swap ownership of Las Malvinas later. ¡Adelante!
|
# ? Jun 16, 2014 16:04 |
|
Milliband was in a classic catch 22 Don't do the photo op. As the only leader not posing with the sun he would be branded as not supporting England Do it. Get done over by Hillsborough. He needs to take the fight much more to the conservatives, but he can't fight on the economy because the numbers appear to show a recovery. I recently read the diaries of a new labour spin doctor for the first Blair election, and there are a lot of interesting parallels. Especially to do with Scotland.
|
# ? Jun 16, 2014 16:14 |
|
So what would people have done here if they were Miliband with the photo op? Honestly?
|
# ? Jun 16, 2014 16:34 |
|
Apparently asking prices for houses in London have fallen by 0.5% this month.
|
# ? Jun 16, 2014 16:39 |
|
thehustler posted:So what would people have done here if they were Miliband with the photo op? Honestly? Done the photo. Liverpool isn't going to go Tory over a single photo, and could stand to realise that they've been played by The Scum as much as Ed was. Easier to mea culpa to Liverpool, than to have "Didn't support England, Dad was a Commie England-hating immigrant" in the public mind in the run up to an election. And you know the Heil, Scum and Telegraph would have brought it up constantly (the context lost of course).
|
# ? Jun 16, 2014 17:04 |
|
thehustler posted:So what would people have done here if they were Miliband Self immolation
|
# ? Jun 16, 2014 17:18 |
|
HortonNash posted:Done the photo. Alternatively, not done the photo, but made either a small press conference, or statement, expressing support and best wishes to the England team, while saying that it would be inappropriate for a leader of a political party to be ostensibly advertising a newspaper, particularly during ongoing legal proceedings. You express support, as well as both making the other politicians look bad and refocus attention on the newspaper's misdoings at the same time.
|
# ? Jun 16, 2014 17:19 |
|
^ that's easily the better option. Just curious!
|
# ? Jun 16, 2014 17:30 |
|
Pesmerga posted:Alternatively, not done the photo, but made either a small press conference, or statement, expressing support and best wishes to the England team, while saying that it would be inappropriate for a leader of a political party to be ostensibly advertising a newspaper, particularly during ongoing legal proceedings. You express support, as well as both making the other politicians look bad and refocus attention on the newspaper's misdoings at the same time. That's a direct declaration of war on News International. I don't expect them to support Labour, but doing what you suggest is akin to poking a tiger in the eye with your cock.
|
# ? Jun 16, 2014 17:41 |
|
thehustler posted:So what would people have done here if they were Miliband with the photo op? Honestly? Taken a stand, called them out for 1) Hillsborough, 2) Being owned by Rupert Murdoch, Hacker Boss, 3) Exploitation of Women via Page 3. Would also have thrown a dig at Cameron for it being no wonder he was happy to pose in the shot, what with him being so close and cushy with Brooks, Coulson and Murdoch. Honestly, telling the Sun to go gently caress itself for the above reasons would have probably given him a bigger boost than going with it.
|
# ? Jun 16, 2014 18:58 |
|
Metrication posted:Apparently asking prices for houses in London have fallen by 0.5% this month.
|
# ? Jun 16, 2014 19:06 |
|
Seaside Loafer posted:This is a c&p, not mine but its good to see it all in one lump lest yee forget. This is from poster ipse on the guardian comments. In fairness to the Lib Dems, they didn't break their electoral reform promises insomuch as Labour and the Tories broke theirs. There's only so much a party of 57 MPs can do when they have 570 others openly collaborating against them. The rest is accurate, though.
|
# ? Jun 16, 2014 19:12 |
|
thehustler posted:So what would people have done here if they were Miliband with the photo op? Honestly? Print out a picture of Kelvin MacKenzie, paint my arse with the union flag, take a poo poo on the picture and wipe my arse with the special. Everyone wins. It would probably end my political career but what a way to go out
|
# ? Jun 16, 2014 19:15 |
|
thehustler posted:So what would people have done here if they were Miliband with the photo op? Honestly? (nicked)
|
# ? Jun 16, 2014 19:15 |
|
HortonNash posted:That's a direct declaration of war on News International. I don't expect them to support Labour, but doing what you suggest is akin to poking a tiger in the eye with your cock. That's exactly the kind of attitude that NI get their power from, the idea that any feeble statement, no matter how mild, could be seen as an attack on NI and thus provoke negative headlines.
|
# ? Jun 16, 2014 19:23 |
|
winegums posted:
|
# ? Jun 16, 2014 19:26 |
|
Contains rules for Prime Minister Edward Milliband and other fictional characters.
|
# ? Jun 16, 2014 19:31 |
|
Think I have this issue
|
# ? Jun 16, 2014 19:45 |
TinTower posted:In fairness to the Lib Dems, they didn't break their electoral reform promises insomuch as Labour and the Tories broke theirs. There's only so much a party of 57 MPs can do when they have 570 others openly collaborating against them. The Orange Book: Reclaiming Liberalism, they love the idea of privatizing the NHS, Prisons, Pensions and other public things.
|
|
# ? Jun 16, 2014 19:47 |
|
Fluo posted:The Orange Book: Reclaiming Liberalism, they love the idea of privatizing the NHS, Prisons, Pensions and other public things. Yeah, which is why I said the rest is accurate. You can't really blame the lack of electoral reform this Parliament on Clegg, though. (Although, that said, the Orange Book is basically the same as Blue Labour: an ideological faction with current hold over their parties, including their leaders and their frontbenchers being well versed in the politics.) TinTower fucked around with this message at 20:00 on Jun 16, 2014 |
# ? Jun 16, 2014 19:56 |
TinTower posted:Yeah, which is why I said the rest is accurate. You can't really blame the lack of electoral reform this Parliament on Clegg, though. What I mean is, most if the Libdem power players at the moment are on the liberal end of the liberal democrats. That's why when back in 2007 Libdems were voting on who would be there leader it was kind of obvious it didn't matter because both Nick Clegg and Chris Huhne are orange bookers and the vote was pretty much split, 500votes or so difference. Vince Cable, David Laws, Chris Huhne, Nick Clegg, Susan Kramer, Mark Oaten, Paul Marshall (free market investor, also father of one of the Mumford & Son dweebs) and Edward Davey all have been high up in the Libdems ranks or are still are. Electoral reform no, but them breaking their pledge with tuition fees was pretty obvious not just in the Tories interest but also the Libdem's Orange Bookers political idealogical interest, I called it even before the election.
|
|
# ? Jun 16, 2014 20:12 |
|
nuzak posted:That's exactly the kind of attitude that NI get their power from, the idea that any feeble statement, no matter how mild, could be seen as an attack on NI and thus provoke negative headlines. No, they get their power from owning the most read newspaper in the UK.
|
# ? Jun 16, 2014 20:24 |
|
baka kaba posted:I got ENGERLAND somehow - if you like and if it's not against the rules you can swap with me, like when we swap ownership of Las Malvinas later. ¡Adelante! Soz, chance of winning easily outweighs love of country. Although if Messi handballs a goal in against England to win the final I might have to change my choice of charity to the Royal Marines Benevolent Fund.
|
# ? Jun 16, 2014 22:02 |
|
Is that the Pope's name?
|
# ? Jun 16, 2014 22:19 |
|
Just wondering if someone could explain this properly to me, as clear information on it doesn't seem to be easy to come by. Obviously, anyone can stand for parliament in the general election if they're willing to put forward a deposit, but they're very, very unlikely to win the vote if they stand as independents/members of small parties. How then does one get themselves nominated as a candidate for one of the big three? Does it differ between parties? Is it a case of joining up and getting yourself noticed in campaigns etc? Or are there actual interviews with senior party folk that anyone (/any member) can apply for? Or is it just a case of knowing the right people? The party websites are perfectly clear about who they are nominating, but less so on how exactly they got to that position. Not that I'm actually considering trying for that sort of stuff, just something I was thinking about the other day. The fact that the nominated candidates all seem to just appear with no real explanation as to how they earned the privilege might well be a major factor behind voter alienation etc.
|
# ? Jun 16, 2014 22:37 |
|
ThomasPaine posted:Just wondering if someone could explain this properly to me, as clear information on it doesn't seem to be easy to come by. Obviously, anyone can stand for parliament in the general election if they're willing to put forward a deposit, but they're very, very unlikely to win the vote if they stand as independents/members of small parties. How then does one get themselves nominated as a candidate for one of the big three? Does it differ between parties? Is it a case of joining up and getting yourself noticed in campaigns etc? Or are there actual interviews with senior party folk that anyone (/any member) can apply for? Or is it just a case of knowing the right people? The party websites are perfectly clear about who they are nominating, but less so on how exactly they got to that position. Differs between parties in detail but the broad steps are much the same. Candidates are either selected from a "local list" by the constituency party or, for the safest seats, are "parachuted in" by the national party. So assuming you don't have the time, money, or family connections for the latter and want to go with the former, you start as a volunteer - canvassing, stuffing envelopes, observing counts, that sort of thing. From there you can possibly go for an actual salaried role (Labour have the most of these, the Tories the least) or internship within the party machine as an assistant to an MP, which may eventually lead you to the heady heights of SPAD-dom from where being parachuted in might be possible. The more conventional route though is once you've got your feet under the table in the local machine you can try to get yourself a council seat (and this can often be the most vicious and political part of the process). Do your job well as a councilor and, well, you'll probably disappear into worthy obscurity, but earhole the right people in the regional machine, get good at golf, join the right Masonic lodges and learn to laugh at the local constituency party leader's godawful jokes and maybe you might get onto a local list (and then get some fat-faced school chum of the Deputy Chairman parachuted in over you). Notice that at no point in this process are things like competence, knowledge, or basic human decency required or even particularly advantageous.
|
# ? Jun 16, 2014 23:07 |
|
goddamnedtwisto posted:Differs between parties in detail but the broad steps are much the same. Candidates are either selected from a "local list" by the constituency party or, for the safest seats, are "parachuted in" by the national party. Thank you for this. I am now very angry.
|
# ? Jun 16, 2014 23:32 |
|
With Labour you also have to take into account the National Executive Committee who will decide whether it's an All Women's Shortlist (which is the case near me even though local members protested strongly against it) or an open selection.
|
# ? Jun 16, 2014 23:42 |
|
ThomasPaine posted:Thank you for this. I am now very angry. Why?
|
# ? Jun 17, 2014 00:00 |
|
HortonNash posted:Why? goddamnedtwisto posted:Notice that at no point in this process are things like competence, knowledge, or basic human decency required or even particularly advantageous.
|
# ? Jun 17, 2014 00:08 |
|
tdrules posted:With Labour you also have to take into account the National Executive Committee who will decide whether it's an All Women's Shortlist (which is the case near me even though local members protested strongly against it) or an open selection. Most (not all - there are plenty of sexist old dinosaurs out there after all) of the objections to all-woman shortlists came because they were often used as a stealth means of parachuting NEC-approved candidates into safe seats. It's worth pointing out that none of the parties ever actually admit to parachuting people in - it just so happens that the local party is wholeheartedly behind one particular candidate who happens to have worked at the same PR company as the leader of the party, to the point where they often unanimously elect him before he's even set foot in the constituency. That the national party then happens to help them out with the printing bill in the really tight local elections not long after that is purely coincidental. (It's interesting as an aside to that to see how the massive increase in the cost of elections has almost entirely homogenised party structures this century - until very very recently (late 90s) all three main parties gathered the majority of their budgets from local parties and membership dues, giving the local parties (and the unions for Labour) an almost completely free hand in candidate selection. This is why some back benchers were so likely to revolt, as we last saw with the Eurosceptics at the end of the Major years; withdrawal of the whip held no fear whatsoever if the local constituency or your union were behind you because - if you stayed excommunicated - you could easily afford to finance your own independent campaign and indeed the national party would be hurt by the loss of your constituency funds. Nowadays most of the party budgets come from corporate donations to the national party so the constituencies are reliant on the central party, so everyone gets in lock-step as soon as the whips so much as look funny at them)
|
# ? Jun 17, 2014 00:18 |
|
goddamnedtwisto posted:(It's interesting as an aside to that to see how the massive increase in the cost of elections has almost entirely homogenised party structures this century - until very very recently (late 90s) all three main parties gathered the majority of their budgets from local parties and membership dues, giving the local parties (and the unions for Labour) an almost completely free hand in candidate selection. This is why some back benchers were so likely to revolt, as we last saw with the Eurosceptics at the end of the Major years; withdrawal of the whip held no fear whatsoever if the local constituency or your union were behind you because - if you stayed excommunicated - you could easily afford to finance your own independent campaign and indeed the national party would be hurt by the loss of your constituency funds. Nowadays most of the party budgets come from corporate donations to the national party so the constituencies are reliant on the central party, so everyone gets in lock-step as soon as the whips so much as look funny at them) Another reason why political funding reform is desperately needed in this country and most other countries, too.
|
# ? Jun 17, 2014 06:03 |
|
Inflation's dropped to 1.5%, which makes it hard to credit that the base rate will go up this year.
|
# ? Jun 17, 2014 10:36 |
|
e: Sorry, I had no idea phonepost would make that so huge! Pork Pie Hat fucked around with this message at 13:51 on Jun 17, 2014 |
# ? Jun 17, 2014 11:58 |
|
|
# ? Jun 7, 2024 12:18 |
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-27886265quote:Doctors now have a legal duty to consult with and inform patients if they want to place a Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) order on medical notes, the Court of Appeal in England ruled. I don't think this will be the earth-shattering thing the papers are making it out to be but it's going to be an interesting few weeks until we get updated legal advice on what we have to do with DNACPR orders. The Resuscitation Council's statement is helpful and seems to suggest that the court had its hands tied by the ECHR and advocates against prosecutions when their ruling is breeched. quote:In such circumstances the RC (UK) emphasises the importance of clinicians documenting clearly their reasons, should they decide not to discuss a DNACPR decision with a patient or explain it to them. The judgement recommends also that the court should be very slow to find that such decisions, if conscientiously taken, violate a patient’s rights under Article 8 of the European Convention.
|
# ? Jun 17, 2014 12:54 |