Blah Blah

They look like traffic data cameras to me. They used to be a camera up a lampost with a battery at the bottom. They just look like the same thing operating with a smaller battery. They are used for data gathering on traffic flow.

It's a reflection of the gap between those at the top and those at the bottom. Plato argued the the ratio between top salary and bottom salary should be no more than 6-1. JP Morgan argued no more than 20-1. Today the ratio can be in the 1000s-1. What those figures say to me, is just how imbalaced the employment market is, in relation to cost of living etc. The average salary is 27k, but most people in full time work don't earn it - that too reflects how that wage gap skews average figures. We've been here before of course. The entire industrial revolution was enabled by such inequality of earnings, and things like employment, housing and welfare rights are historically a recent thing. But when government tries to do something to address the imbalance (like rising min wages etc) they run into a ton of other problems. We live in a plutocracy (always have) and you can't have true democracy with that. It's not really capitalism that is the problem either, but the form of capitalism that plutocrats foist upon us.

Rye lane is fully covered with CCTV and is full of people day and night. Perfectly safe. Like most stabbings, this was probably between two people who know each other - not a lawless random rampage through bargain basements and pound shops! But you are probably right to not wine there Fox. It's usually fully of drunken students stumbling between Canavans and the Bussey - all a bit too young and exciting for you ;)

I think you are spot on heartblock. Sadly this is yet another ideologically driven pursuit.

LondonMix is correct on this one. The recruitment crisis is real. I know many qualified professionals who have moved abroad, from nurses and midwives to doctors. Australia seems to be a favourite destination. At the same time, the latest recruitment drive is targetting countries like the Phillipines and there is something to be said about taking qualifed staff from countries that need them as much as we do. Personally I think that Hunt is playing chess on this one. He's hoping for public support to drop off etc rather thsn make any real effort to resolve the dispute. And whomever posted the scenario of cancelling docotors contracts and making them reapply is right. That is the only way this new contract can be imposed, but I think that would enrage the BMA if he went down that route (although I wouldn't put anything beyond this government).

So it may open the way for challnges elsewhere. Thanks for that Dave.

Does anyone know what exactly the overcharging equates to in real terms for those affected. I.e how much % was the overcharge?

No they weren't charged to the national expenses at all. They were left off any accounting completely. And the rules are clear on what constitutes national and local spending. The cost of a hotel in a constituency to put up activists is a local expense. Head office are trying to claim that can be included as a national expense. It will be for the electoral commission to decide, but if they decide it is indeed a local expense, then the electoral agent in those 24 constituencies of guilty of both overpsending on limits and not reporting those expenses. It IS a criminal offence to do that with a fine and up to a year in prison as a consequence for both the MP concerned and the electoral agent. It's pretty serious stuff.

I don't understand you point Mac. It's not the fault of senior doctors and consultants that demand has grown while funding of services has not.

Philip Green is just the reincarnate of the equally hideous Goldsmith senior. More interested in milking the profits than running stable business. And he has previous form too. But as usual, he will be able to continue doing what he has always done - hostile takovers followed by asset stripping - and ruining long standing companies.

Just because they can earn something doesn't mean they do. Jeremy Hunt is a full supporter of privatisation - there's no doubt about that. And slowly his department has been strangling funding accross the country so that certain areas are doomed to see a drop in service and outcomes - which in turn will affirm his case for privatisation. The NHS already does outsource because of things that have been cut. In the area of psychiatry and mental health (the area I work in), there has been the closure of wards that once had 5000 beds accross the country and the loss of 3000 staff. Now, the NHS regularly has to hire beds in the private sector at a cost of ?1000 plus per week (each) because it has no beds for increasing numbers of patients. And sometimes, there are no beds avaialable in the private sector at all. So where do we treat people then? Junior doctors are under particular stress as it is. It doesn't matter how much you pay anyone. If a person is working extrememly long hours, some of them unsocial, in an environment that is under resourced, they are going to suffer. It looks as though there is a legal challenge to this contract anyway. A contract can not be 'imposed' without both sides agreement to it. But it will take time for that legal challenge to work through the courts. In the meantime, I expect the strikes to continue and fully support them.

Trade deals are always difficult to negotiate with the bigger countries (and markets) always having the upper hand. It's nonsense to think leaving the EU will suddenly give us a better position when negotiationg trade deals with EU countries (for all the reasons I listed above). The EU is a collective machine, not a single country and all are bound by the same rules. There will be NO 'special' deals. And if we can't agree we will still be subject to WTO rules which means a 10% tariff on vehicles alone. The ONS publish figures of just over 200bn in exports to the EU or 44.6% of our total epxorts. They are a pretty reliable source wouldn't you say? All summarised here with links to the spredsheets of breakdowns. http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160105160709/http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/international-transactions/outward-foreign-affiliates-statistics/how-important-is-the-european-union-to-uk-trade-and-investment-/sty-eu.html You might want to retract your assumption that I don't check my facts before quoting figures. But I would never take a suggestion from anyone that was laced with sarcasm.

And nowhere have I talked about imports. The EU doesn't force us to import anything. We choose to do that. We have trade defecits with China too and just about every other country we trade with, because we don't make anything anymore. We can't compete with the likes of China and leaving the EU won't change that. Exports on the other hand are extrememly important for jobs and business. And that's why I keep referring to those. If we change who we import from, we may pay more or less for that import which is passed on to consumers. If we lose our ability to export to the EU or anywhere, people will lose jobs, and businesses go bust. I don't want to play Russian Roulette with those ?200bn of annual exports and the UK jobs and businesses they support. Do you?

I think it would be in the spirit of democracy to re-run those elections yes. Criminal fraud is serious, esp when it comes to elections. It is also the case that in marginal seats, foot soldiers are extrememly important and effective in reaching voters. The reason why there are spending limits set in law is so that no party can outspend another to victory. These overspends paid for party activists to stay in the constitutency for the puspose of campaigning on behalf of the MP standing. So yes, it matters deeply.

'we are in trade defeceit with the EU we are actually more important to them than us' This is just not the case ???? (re importance). We are not special at all. If we leave the EU we will not be able to escape trade tariffs as the out campaign seem to think. So what if Germany sell cars to us. They cannot negotiate a free trade deal with us because they will still be in the EU. This is what the out campaigners fail to understand. Membership buys us access to that market, and the benefits it brings. Leave, and to still have access to that market we will have to pay for it. Those who negotiate EU trade agreements have all said the same thing. There is no way that the 26 other member states will tolerate us leaving and still having access to trade on free terms - just no way at all - and Germany will be powerless to do anything about it. And the significance of what both Obama and Clinton have both said, is that the out campaign seems to think we can replace that trade (if the door is kept closed to us) with trade to countries like America. But America has said that won't happen. And whilst we are in the wilderness of withdrawal, and uncertainty of just what trade agreements we can salvage etc, what do you suppose will happen to confidence in our economy. Investment is already an an all time low.

I'll take kids doing wheelies on the pavements over naked every time :P

But it's not as easy as just finding something else LondonM. There's an asking price and then a secret auction! This is always going to put people at a disadvantage unless they bid stupidly over the asking price. It's part of what is wrong with the market. If a home is to go to the highest bidder, then it should be in an open auction.

Would that be in comparison to typical Tory incompetence in overspending in electoral campaigns and then not declaring it uncleglen?

Crime is up everywhere. Nothing to do with cuts to Police of course!!!!

Where to begin with that Jah? I never go for irrelevant emotional filler and that post is so devoid of any actual facts that it's hard to know where to start. The cost of membership is a fraction of our GDP, and is paid back in spades, both in grants and in the ?200bn exports that membership of the EU enables us to sell. Up to three millions jobs exist because of that membership. So economically it's a pretty good payback. Our deficit is a simple case of services costing more than we collect in tax. The EU is not the reason the UK has, like many countries, seen a decline since the 60's. Competition from countries that can undercut our labour and production costs are the reason why. The EU does not tells us what to pay workers. Nor does it tell us what we can charge for something. As for bankruptcy. WW1 and 2 did far more to bring us to bankruptcy and we had much bigger debt then as a result. And then there was that global banking collapse of 2008 that had it's touch paper lit in the USA. Again, don't see the EU being responsible for that. Although the Tories would have us all believe it was Gordon what did it! Debt and deficit are the consequence of the way modern banking does business. It is not something created by the EU. As for law. The EU only affects around 6% of our laws through it's directives. Hardly taking over our sovereignty at all. We are not part of the Euro, nor Shenghan. We have had the ability to shape treaties in our interest in the past, and that will continue. I have no time for conspiracy theories of new world orders. TTIP is just a trade treaty, a flawed one yes, but just a treaty all the same. Of course the USA acts out of self interest - tell me any country that doesn't. That's why trade agreements are so difficult to negotiate and take so long to come to an agreement on. But as always is the case with business, those with the biggest markets to offer, always have the edge. This is why the brexit claim that we would have no trouble renegotiating the 53 trade agreements we have with the EU is a fantasy. The EU is a marketplace of 500 million consumers. We are just 63 million. We are not special and we will have to pay just like everyone else who wants access to the EU marketplace whether we stay OR leave. Both Obama and Clinton have said there will be no trade deal with them if we leave the EU. They don't need us or our exports. The days of the British Empire have long gone and it's time we woke up to that. And the post ends by telling us that it's not in our (the people's) interests to stay in the EU. Here is an excerpt of something I wrote on another thread; "So they EU are shafting working people are they? Workers have the following protections because of the EU; Health and safety at work: general rights and obligations, workplaces, work equipment, specific risks and vulnerable workers. Equal opportunities for women and men: equal treatment at work, pregnancy, maternity leave, parental leave protection against discrimination based on sex, race, religion, age, disability and sexual orientation. Labour law: part-time work, fixed-term contracts, working hours, employment of young people, informing and consulting employees. Individual EU countries must make sure that their national laws protect these rights laid down by EU employment laws (Directives). And then of course there's the people kept in jobs by the ?200bn of exports to the EU annual. Yeah right, whatever has the EU ever done for working people." My issue with the out campaign all along has been the lack of opinion based on hard facts. The EU is far more complex than TTIP or its membership fees. Yet those wanting to leave can't say how we'll protect those jobs, exports and workplace protections. The truth is they just don't know. I for one am not prepared to vote for something that will at the very least create economic uncertainty, at a time when the economy is flatlining and the world's markets are pretty volatile. So I'm saying vote in, and we can work to reform the things that don't work.

You asked for that though Chief.

But is this any different to the cycling campaigners that do the same thing? Turn up en masse and ride round central London making it impossible for vehicles to pass through?

I think Cameron is only too happy to use Obama to back the 'in' campaign. Obama has to act in the interests of the US, that goes with the job of president (or any government for that matter). Obama is also right in that trade agreements take a long time to negotiate - that's just the reality for any country. But he made a very good point which should be taken on board by those so keen on Brexit. A trade deal with the EU opens doors to a market of 500 million plus people. A trade deal with the UK is just 60 million people. That alone should tell people that we are not special, nor more important than our neighbours. In business, there are no special people, just consumers and profit. The EU will always have the upper hand on any trade negotiations.

I too am fed up of the EU Brexit stuff. It's media overload. Looking forward to when all these damn elections are over.

And just to add that I find the silence on this deafening. Electoral fraud is serious, except it seems when the Tories are at it. The exposure of this is solely down to the excellent journalists at Channel 4, the only media organisation it seems that has no qualms of exposing corruption irregardless of the political party guilty of it.