Westminster Politics

sun_tzu said:
yeah but if you read the text -he actually isnt
He is saying the measure of productivity has limited uses... one example of this is disabled (he also cites long term and youth unemployment)
Click to expand...

Are they measuring productivity in a new way, in order for him to highlight this? Or is it the way that's been used for a number of years?

It reads like productivity rate has fallen, and he doesn't want to talk about the effects austerity has had on it.
 
vi1lain said:
Are they measuring productivity in a new way, in order for him to highlight this? Or is it the way that's been used for a number of years?

It reads like productivity rate has fallen, and he doesn't want to talk about the effects austerity has had on it.
Click to expand...

like that way for years - hence the equalities act provided the relief through HMRC to offset this know effect so yeah as I say on a technical point he is correct and to spin this into a "nasty party" line is as much as lie as to pretend that this accounts for the whole of the UK productivity gap to other countries.

As I say plenty of nasty party examples but its stretching incredulity to spin this in that way
 
sun_tzu said:
like that way for years - hence the equalities act provided the relief through HMRC to offset this know effect so yeah as I say on a technical point he is correct and to spin this into a "nasty party" line is as much as lie as to pretend that this accounts for the whole of the UK productivity gap to other countries.

As I say plenty of nasty party examples but its stretching incredulity to spin this in that way
Click to expand...

Okay but now i'm confused.
They have been measuring productivity in the same way for years, yes? Despite it's limitations.
Equality act was enacted in 2010 - has the rate of productivity been falling for 7 years? Or is this the first year that it's showed signs of slowing down?
- edit, I just had a quick look, this is the first year where Output per worker for the whole economy has actually decreased.

If it's the latter, then how can he be right when there was nothing wrong with the way of measuring productivity previously wasn't an issue, further more how does he lead with the notion that disabled workers have a big effect on this?

Especially since, when broken down - the productivity in Services actually grew, but productivity in manufacturing fell - out of the two, I would imagine more disabled workers would be in services?

I'm not really sure how this is "spin".
 
vi1lain said:
Okay but now i'm confused.
They have been measuring productivity in the same way for years, yes? Despite it's limitations.
Equality act was enacted in 2010 - has the rate of productivity been falling for 7 years? Or is this the first year that it's showed signs of slowing down?
- edit, I just had a quick look, this is the first year where Output per worker for the whole economy has actually decreased.

If it's the latter, then how can he be right when there was nothing wrong with the way of measuring productivity previously wasn't an issue, further more how does he lead with the notion that disabled workers have a big effect on this?

Especially since, when broken down - the productivity in Services actually grew, but productivity in manufacturing fell - out of the two, I would imagine more disabled workers would be in services?

I'm not really sure how this is "spin".
Click to expand...
he is not saying that - he is saying all along there are issues with taking productivity as the be all and end all - as he stipulates things can be bad for the measure of productivity and good for the economy overall
we do have a productivity issue in the UK compared to some other places - I guess education and regulations might be the major issues if I was to pick them but he really isnt talking about that - he is saying dont get fixated on this one measure as it has limitations - then cites an example...

to spin this as nasty party blames disables for productivity is as I say a stretch a little too politicized imo.
 
sun_tzu said:
he is not saying that - he is saying all along there are issues with taking productivity as the be all and end all - as he stipulates things can be bad for the measure of productivity and good for the economy overall
we do have a productivity issue in the UK compared to some other places - I guess education and regulations might be the major issues if I was to pick them but he really isnt talking about that - he is saying dont get fixated on this one measure as it has limitations - then cites an example...

to spin this as nasty party blames disables for productivity is as I say a stretch a little too politicized imo.
Click to expand...

I get that, but that personally reads as a political deflection too.
Regardless of it's limitation in measurements, a fall in productivity rate, despite most people working more hours is bad especially after so many years of austerity and in the run up to Brexit.
 


All 13 Scottish Tories voted against. Pricks.

No doubt the news will focus on how nice and personable Ruth Davidson is though instead of asking her about this.
 
SteveJ said:
The Ofsted chief - who has no teaching experience - shows her true colours:

Disadvantage no excuse for poor performance of schools - Ofsted chief:
https://www.theguardian.com/educati...cuse-for-poor-school-performance-ofsted-chief

Ofsted's next head, Amanda Spielman, rejected by MPs:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-36723828
Click to expand...

TBF she's right, this year one of the top performing 50 primaries in the country was in a lower income Pakistani area in Bradford. I've known primaries/secondaries in very much deprived areas get very good results and are classed as outstanding schools. It comes down to having good heads, great behavioural management and organised framework of teaching.

My missus is a teacher and says one of the major differences between a special measures school and an Outstanding school, is in the latter you can teach where as the latter it's crowd control and even the danger of violence to teachers and pupils alike. That's all down to how those 2 schools (both in deprived areas) managed pupil behaviour from the onset.
 
People like this is why other folks lose patience and support the Govt coming down like a ton of bricks:
 
Member 5225 said:
People like this is why other folks lose patience and support the Govt coming down like a ton of bricks:
Click to expand...


Yeah there’s definitely not that many out there surviving because of Foodbanks. They’re all scrounges like this woman. Shut em all up and use the money to do up Rees Mogg’s house instead.
 
Wait how does having puppies to sell mean you are not eligible for access to foodbanks? And why does anyone give a toss who has access to foodbanks. The bloke who tweeted that is the prime example of why the left ends up berating the right for being heartless.
 
FlawlessThaw said:
Wait how does having puppies to sell mean you are not eligible for access to foodbanks? And why does anyone give a toss who has access to foodbanks. The bloke who tweeted that is the prime example of why the left ends up berating the right for being heartless.
Click to expand...

Their rise in popularity is often used as an example of the abject poverty many citizens now live in under the Tories.

What people neglect to mention, because they don't know better or it doesn't support their argument, is the availability of food banks is much higher now and you no longer need a referral to use them, and where you do the criteria for getting one has been relaxed. It leads to widespread overuse/abuse such as that woman who is hardly the intended target user.
 
11101 said:
Their rise in popularity is often used as an example of the abject poverty many citizens now live in under the Tories.

What people neglect to mention, because they don't know better or it doesn't support their argument, is the availability of food banks is much higher now and you no longer need a referral to use them, and where you do the criteria for getting one has been relaxed. It leads to widespread overuse/abuse such as that woman who is hardly the intended target user.
Click to expand...

I don't know enough about the availability of foodbanks now compared to before. But that is a fair argument although arguably the increase was driven by demand in the first place.

Using some random woman as an example that foodbanks are full of rampant abuse is a bit over the top.
 
FlawlessThaw said:
I don't know enough about the availability of foodbanks now compared to before. But that is a fair argument although arguably the increase was driven by demand in the first place.

Using some random woman as an example that foodbanks are full of rampant abuse is a bit over the top.
Click to expand...

Ultimately it comes down to what do you see a welfare system as being for. The older generations grew up with it as a safety net for those with literally nothing and a food bank was originally something you used when you had no other options left. The recent generations only know the system as it is now, where a food bank is something you use when money is tight that week.

Both think it should be the way they know it.
 
You have to be referred to a food bank and their rise in use has mostly been down to the sanction happy welfare system we now have

The older generation have cheap housing, free uni, jobs for life and a kick arse pension, they have it soo tough
 
The Conservatives are ripping off the plot to the Bruce Willis film Surrogates
 
He resigns and all May does is talk about how sad she is, how about you warn other MPs to actually follow the ministerial code.

It was exactly the same when Fallon resigned.
 
They resign from cabinet but not from their seat, the cnuts.

David Davis was reported as threatening to resign if Green was sacked. I suppose he wasn't technically sacked, but you never know.
 
712 said:
They resign from cabinet but not from their seat, the cnuts.

David Davis was reported as threatening to resign if Green was sacked. I suppose he wasn't technically sacked, but you never know.
Click to expand...

We can live in hope.

Work shy bastard is probably just looking for an excuse to jack it in in fairness.
 
712 said:
Green: 'I regret I've been asked to resign'. Why don't they just say sacked?
Click to expand...

I assume he gets to keep his benefits if he agrees to resign.
 
He sank his own battleship thanks to the lying, but there are two other strands at play: first, that people can still be prudish about porn in 2017; secondly, the actions of police officers, during their time of sergice and otherwise.

I know that most people here won't care about the latter, on account of it being a Tory minister, yet the conduct of the police is clearly open to question. And more practically, we can ill-afford a schism between MPs and law enforcement right now.

I also heard a caller to LBC ask if it was 'extreme' (legal) porn. What does that even mean?



In other news:

- Nazamin Zaghari-Radcliffe is a step close to freedom.

- The Government are to allow councils to increase taxes by around 6%. It'll be interesting to see how many go to the maximum, as there are local elections in 2018.

- Income tax receips in November were higher than expected, leading to reduction in brrowing. In fact, public sector borrowing is the lowest it's been since prior to the financial crisis.
 
Nick 0208 Ldn said:
He sank his own battleship thanks to the lying, but there are two other strands at play: first, that people can still be prudish about porn in 2017; secondly, the actions of police officers, during their time of sergice and otherwise.

I know that most people here won't care about the latter, on account of it being a Tory minister, yet the conduct of the police is clearly open to question. And more practically, we can ill-afford a schism between MPs and law enforcement right now.

I also heard a caller to LBC ask if it was 'extreme' (legal) porn. What does that even mean?



In other news:

- Nazamin Zaghari-Radcliffe is a step close to freedom.

- The Government are to allow councils to increase taxes by around 6%. It'll be interesting to see how many go to the maximum, as there are local elections in 2018.

- Income tax receips in November were higher than expected, leading to reduction in brrowing. In fact, public sector borrowing is the lowest it's been since prior to the financial crisis.
Click to expand...

That'd be the UK government, considering their plans to limit the legality of certain 'types' of porn. Added onto the fact I'd imagine part of the problem was Green doing it at work, which clearly isn't really on.
 
Cheesy said:
That'd be the UK government, considering their plans to limit the legality of certain 'types' of porn. Added onto the fact I'd imagine part of the problem was Green doing it at work, which clearly isn't really on.
Click to expand...

Well i was no fan of the cennsorship you are referring to and said as much at the time. Nor am i sure if the latter is an issue, given the right circumstances (not that i am an employer).
 
FlawlessThaw said:
I don't know enough about the availability of foodbanks now compared to before. But that is a fair argument although arguably the increase was driven by demand in the first place.

Using some random woman as an example that foodbanks are full of rampant abuse is a bit over the top.
Click to expand...
I help out with free food distribution, it's only basic stuff - sandwiches that we make, crisps, cake, drinks. One day a smart-looking young man in a suit came to the door. We ask no questions, we just give to anyone who wants some food.

I looked out the window and before he'd even left the church grounds he was absolutely stuffing the sandwiches down, like a starving man. It makes you realise that you don't have to look like a down-and-out to be really hungry and needing a bit of help.
 
Nick 0208 Ldn said:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...s-denied-last-election-voting-system-slanted/

An overall majority of 14. But blocked by the Lib Dems post 2010, and Labour are obviously quite happy with the bias of the existing system.
Click to expand...

Wasn't it blocked by the Lib-Dems because the Tories reneged on their coalition agreement over the wording of the PR referendum, which Cameron put in a way he expected to be rejected, rather than that previously agreed? Just off memory, I'm often wrong.

Might be another thing to blame Cameron for I suppose. Although looking back it might have been better for Clegg to have ended the coalition at that point as well.
 
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...t-i-daniel-blake-job-centre-dwp-a8119286.html

Suicide attempts by disabled people double since the introduction of Fit to Work. If suicide is more appealing to people than your policies, your policies are wrong. The way disabled people have been kicked in the dick by this government is appalling. The horror stories involving private companies in particular make you wonder if our MPs have so much as an ounce of empathy between them.
 
712 said:
Wasn't it blocked by the Lib-Dems because the Tories reneged on their coalition agreement over the wording of the PR referendum, which Cameron put in a way he expected to be rejected, rather than that previously agreed? Just off memory, I'm often wrong.

Might be another thing to blame Cameron for I suppose. Although looking back it might have been better for Clegg to have ended the coalition at that point as well.
Click to expand...

I don't remember that myself, but i wouldn't rule it out at all either (not with Cameron). Whether a change in wording would have led to a different result in the AV Ref though...doubtful IMO.


FlawlessThaw said:
What is the bias in the existing system for Labour over the Conservatives?

Seems like Labour managed to stop the Conservatives from gerrymandering further considering the difference between the popular vote and number of seats.
Click to expand...

The existing constituency boundaries mean that it requires fewer votes for Labour to win a seat in parliament. Both the Lib Dems and the Tories are disadvantaged but the latter most of all.
 
Nick 0208 Ldn said:
I don't remember that myself, but i wouldn't rule it out at all either (not with Cameron). Whether a change in wording would have led to a different result in the AV Ref though...doubtful IMO.




The existing constituency boundaries mean that it requires fewer votes for Labour to win a seat in parliament. Both the Lib Dems and the Tories are disadvantaged but the latter most of all.
Click to expand...
How does that work? Tories have 48% of seats on 42% of the vote, Labour have 40% of both.
 
Ubik said:
How does that work? Tories have 48% of seats on 42% of the vote, Labour have 40% of both.
Click to expand...

Because we have constituencies with vast discrepancies in population. Compare the Isle of Wight to Aberavon for example.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.