You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
I take my earlier post back. People over 60 should have the vote taken from them
Done, I will change it from 16 - 60. I will get on and implement it. Do you still want me to call it the final solution? Will help it get backing from Labour party.
@martinhutch, Yes your right, huge pressure, I'm sure. Personally I think much more effort should've been spent challenging Labour leave voters to show them that their vote in 2016 has been subsumed into a louder right wing movement, and that they should back remain, but the Labour executive has been long conflicted by Brexit, and I don't think is sure of it's position even now
I think Corbyn et al realised a while ago that their votes to leave have been co-opted by an always stronger, better financed right wing leave campaign. There was after all no caveat in 2016, there was no addendum that showed that one wanted to leave but not in a right wing way, but in a more agreeable socialist way...and that they've been played.
Aah, we are where we are, those leave Labour votes need to come on-side, but without scaring the remain (and larger) part of the party. It's a balancing act that is doomed in our un-nuanced system I think
I didn’t mean to be funny kayla1… I was calling for people not to get angry at someone because they were upset due to the lies and twisted “facts” spread by Johnson, Gove, Cummings & Co… concentrate on stopping Johnson, or he’ll keep using the same tactics, and we’ll head into a hole of a very Orwellian nature that we might not climb back out of in our lifetimes.
And as predicted, British companies panic and take measures to protect themselves.
The Labour party’s plans to take large parts of the energy industry back under public control is on a collision course with EU laws that guard Europe-owned companies against government takeovers.
The EU rules mean a Labour administration could face rising costs or a legal battle in European courts over plans to pay a discount to nationalise energy networks and the big six energy suppliers.
British companies that are not covered by the ECT have already set up offshore holdings to take advantage of similar bilateral agreements with tax havens such as Hong Kong, Luxembourg, Switzerland and Singapore.
SSE, which owns two energy networks and is the UK’s second largest energy supplier, told the Sunday Times that it had moved the assets into a new Swiss holding company. In the same report National Grid said it had shifted its gas and electricity transmission arm into subsidiaries based in Luxembourg and Hong Kong.
UK Power Networks is also understood to be protected by a bilateral treaty because it has been owned since 2010 by CKI, an investor based in Hong Kong
I'm quite hurt that the Guardian didn't pick up that I moved my pension stock out of Uk listed companies. 🙁
I didn’t mean to be funny… I was calling for people not to get angry about someone being upset due to the lies and twisted “facts” spread by Johnson, Gove, Cummings & Co… vote to stop Johnson, or he’ll keep using the same tactics, and we’re heading into a hole…
I just google image searched them and I didn't realise they were actual FB ads (they were, weren't they?) I thought they were Daily Mash style piss takes of how brexiters think 😬
Just having a did and trying to understand the recent poll a bit better. Found this, that some of you might find interesting:
https://www.ft.com/video/d358c454-776e-4a1e-993c-914f5b329b04
I have a question though: does the YouGov poll capture the recent spike in younger voter registration?
I thought they were Daily Mash style piss takes of how brexiters think
No. Real. Part of the targeted marketing that caused the uptick in support for Leave in the final weeks of the referendum campaign. That and polar bears and bullfighting. The same people are about to win a minimum of 5 years to embed themselves further into the seat of power in the UK. Do anything you can to prevent your seat returning a Johnson backing MP, please.
No worries here on that score, we live in a very safe Labour seat but I'll still be voting for them to hammer the point home.
Can somone tell me the new minimum contract hours Labour will be enforcing? They say zero hours contracts will be banned, what they don't say is what the new minimum contract hours will be? I assume they're not banning part time work all together.
So what? 37 hours? 8 hours? 4 hours?
When I was a student I dropped my Supermarket job down to one evening shift of 3.25 hours at exam time, I assume that will definately be illegal under Labour?
We will tackle insecurity by ... Banning zero-hour contract
We will end insecurity and exploitation by ending zero-hours contracts
I might vote Tory if it means she’ll end up homeless
Classy
Aah, we are where we are, those leave Labour votes need to come on-side, but without scaring the remain (and larger) part of the party. It’s a balancing act that is doomed in our un-nuanced system I think
It always was. Those saying labour should come down strongly on one side or the other have always been in denial of the fix labour finds itself in, and then find an easy scapegoat in Corbyn. Whoever leads the party was always going to have to try and please both sides. I almost wonder if this 'change in direction' is by design, hence why they've made such a song and dance about it. The job of seeing off the lib dems is mostly complete, now they have to look to the other side. One advantage they have is that the labour leave voters shouldn't be too difficult to win back. As we all know, many labour voters are massively tribal, and they won't need much persuasion to come back.
Re MRP poll, my understanding (from listening to Owen Jones podcast this morning) is that it doesn't take into account the recent registration surge.am I right in saying the constituency poll was likely to be based on phone calls and will therefore favour old voters?
am I right in saying the constituency poll was likely to be based on phone calls and will therefore favour old voters?
Yougov have been trying to poll younger voters & weighting their study appropriately, so it should cover it
One advantage they have is that the labour leave voters shouldn’t be too difficult to win back. As we all know, many labour voters are massively tribal, and they won’t need much persuasion to come back.
Well a labour government is in the bag then? I'll quote you on that when Boris gets his majority
Any ideas how I can stop personally addressed election cr*p coming through my letterbox? Have just had a letter from a Lib Dems NHS Psychiatrist addressing me as "dear friend". FFS please make it stop.
The MRP poll has loads of flaws. The only reason it's been hyped up is because it was the only poll that was anywhwere close to the result last time. I kind of think polls should be banned during the campaign. The lack of of transparency in how they are conducted is in direct conflict with the power they have to skew the result and change the campaign.
I right in saying the constituency poll was likely to be based on phone calls and will therefore favour old voters?
My understanding is that they try to minimise this, but also account for it in the weightings of their model. There'll be different ± margins in each constituency to reflect this (ie, constituencies with weaker data will have bigger uncertainty).
So I've just come back from a meeting with a company in Peterborough, who at 24 hour notice was asked if they would host Pritty Patel's electioneering speech. It's a high-tech company involved in additive manufacture which no doubt the government are selling as our savour when we leave the EU. The irony is that many of the people working in the company are EU nationals, but I bet she won't mention that in her speech!
In fact, thinking about it I could have prevented this whole Brexit mess when David Cameron was visiting a company I was working at during the 2010 election campaign. He even stopped to talk to my colleague at the next desk. I'd take one for the team if I could go back in time.
Sorry
I thought Pritti had been locked in a cupboard with Rees Mogg fopr the duration of the campaign? in case she said that the poor should be beaten to death with sticks for being impertinent to their betters, then made into dog food, or something.
How much do we need voting reform?!?
Well we tried and that referendum was a balls-up too.
Oh and I'm over 60. I'd happily give up my vote for a suitable annual pension and a holiday home somewhere sunny.
Autumn Pastures home for the terminally bewildered?
I'll join you 😀
Sadly binners it would be a cock up.
When I was a student I dropped my Supermarket job down to one evening shift of 3.25 hours at exam time, I assume that will definately be illegal under Labour?
You are either very dim or being deliberately obtuse to criticise Labour.
They aren't stupid, even if you think they are.
You are either very dim or being deliberately obtuse to criticise Labour.
They aren’t stupid, even if you think they are.
What will the new minimum contract hours be?
I’d happily give up my vote for a suitable annual pension and a holiday home somewhere sunny.
There's a place in Switzerland that does fantasic biscuits. And you could have all the money you can spend for the rest of your life.
What will the new minimum contract hours be?
Greater than zero I expect.
Everyone who's paid attention and had a little think understands that the issue is not giving a fixed minimum to people who want it. So you apply for a job and they say 'yeah it'll be full time' and the contract says that there is no minimum number of hours, that means you many not always get the money you might depend on.
If, however, you agree a contract for 1 hour a week with a company, and it's in the contract, then no-one will have a problem with this, because you know up-front that it's only one hour and you can plan around that. That won't be banned, cos it would be stupid. Also one is not zero.
Zero hours contracts are two way agreements - the employer doesn't have to provide any hours but equally, the employee doesn't have to work any either.
Therefore, you can ban this type of contract without stipulating how many hours an employer must offer.
Any ideas how I can stop personally addressed election cr*p coming through my letterbox?
Takes a while for the post to stop though, so even if you sign up, you may still get some unwanted mail for a while afterwards
Anyone studied the DUP manifesto yet?
What will the new minimum contract hours be?
If, however, you agree a contract for 1 hour a week
LOL, you've certainly spotted the problem!
That's one way out.
Another way out is if we leave the EU. The sole reason 0 hours contracts exist is because of the working time directive. That made contracts a legal requirement. Before that contracts were optional and casual workers didn't need one. If Labour get us out of the EU, they can tweak our new version of the working hours directive so contracts aren't allowed for *very* low contract hours. That way casual workers don't lose their jobs but Labour can genuinely claim to have banned 0 hours contracts without putting anyone out.
Your idea is ok, but 4 hours PCM is embarrassingly low given the claim and at that there will *still* be people who like their arrangement getting their jobs banned who will be all over the news with sad faces. Banning some people's jobs to move some other people 'up' to a mere four hour PCM commitment is a toxic news story.
I like the libdems idea - you don't ban causal working but you say below a certain number of hours the salary goes up. Yes, that's flawed, but it's far more doable than an outright ban.
Sky news is currently interviewing some proper morons right now in Blackpool, a leave voting teacher and an old bag of a conservative voting HR manager on crutches and sporting pink hair.
Hahahah for ****s sake, talk about Turkeys voting for Christmas - Boris must be pissing himself with laughter.
Before that contracts were optional and casual workers didn’t need one.
And you've spotted the opposite problem. A job with no contract has no requirement for hours. So a 0 hours non-contract. The problem for the person with a job that has no hours and therefore no money remains unsolved. Being in or out of the EU won't change that.
dazh
Subscriber
You’re just re-writing history now. You know full well that labour brexit policy shifted towards the remain side due to the threat of the lib dems.
What Binners knows and what he believes are not the same thing.
you don’t ban causal working
****s sake you are incredible and infuriating.
No-one's banning casual working. That would be utterly insane.
The ABUSE of zero hours contracts is the issue. This is what the Labour party wants to do. Not ban casual working. Why on earth would they want to do that?
Jeez, the Labour proposal was to ban zero hours contracts unless both sides agreed it suited them, ie they could be voluntary but not compulsory. There's no mileage trying to be clever about it
Hahahah for **** sake, talk about Turkeys voting for Christmas – Boris must be pissing himself with laughter.
Yeah yeah we get it, you are smarter than everybody else with your silly beard and dark rim glasses. In fact, is that you Jeremy?
I dislike Corbyn probably as much as McCarthy would have.
A job with no contract has no requirement for hours. So a 0 hours non-contract. The problem for the person with a job that has no hours and therefore no money remains unsolved.
Yup, so the alternative is to keep compulsory contracts and go with Molegrip's suggestion of picking a pitifully small minimum contract hours like 4 hours PCM. Which also doesn't solve the no money problem unless you regard four hours guaranteed work a months as adequate.
As Molegrips says Labour are not going to ban casual working because that would be "utterly insane". What they say they *are* going to do is ban zero hours contracts. There's only two sane ways to do that and neither of them solve the problem people want solved.
Jeez, the Labour proposal was to ban zero hours contracts unless both sides agreed it suited them, ie they could be voluntary but not compulsory.
Where's you link for that, that's not what the manifesto says. (If that *was* the policy it would just be maintaining the status quo.)
Rather than getting exasperated, please explain the policy, so that we can all try and understand it. Because I don’t.
I don't know if the policy is fully spelled out, however it would be safe to assume.thwt they won't draft laws that are simply the statements out of their manifesto. The law making process is a bit more involved.
The intention is to prevent people from being forced into zero hours contracts, presumably by making employers offer a decent number of hours. The employee could then be free to ask for a.lower number if they want.
Not hard to see how this could be the positive change that Labour are intending.
So, you don’t understand it either? Fine.
Maybe a start would be an automatic opt out unless you purposely sign up, a bit like the EU working time regulations but the opposite.
I agree that highly flexible hours might suit some people, they could do 5 hours at sports direct on a Monday, 3 hours at a coffee shop on Wednesday etc.
The big thing in my mind is that that if you work on a zero hours contract at the moment, you have to be available at beck and call and if you can't be, because your doing another zero hours contract, or doing a school run, they can just sack you off.
It's like slavery.
I dislike Corbyn probably as much as McCarthy would have.
Unsuprising given you are about as right wing as McCarthy
I have worked on a zero hours contract. My choice. I was also free to take up other work if I wanted, free to refuse work if I wanted, did not have to be on call to take work.
that sort of zero hours contract is fine and not abusive.
What is not acceptable is to be unable to take up other work and to have to agree to work when called. that is abusive.
So, you don’t understand it either?
No, all I've got is a single sentence.
I'm exasperated that people are filling in the blanks with their own made up rubbish, then disapproving of the policy because it's rubbish - when it's their own made up rubbish. A highly destructive level of confirmation bias. Reminds me of that Harry Enfield character that rants on about celebrities having done hypothetical things he just made up.
Johnson saying he wants to revoke C4 s license because they empty chaired him
He really is the most remarkable coward, isn't he!
I love the whiney middle class cockbags blokes who’s biggest dilemma is what Audi spec to get get for their next company car, and what Santa Cruz to put on the roof bars, loftily pontificating on the pros and cons of zero hours contracts
No, all I’ve got is a single sentence.
There isn’t a policy, just an aim. If you can’t explain what you’ll do, people have to either fill in the blanks, or assume you’re floating farts. No more “we have a plan, it’s the best plan, the greatest plan, we just can’t tell you what it is”. That’s not good enough, from any party. 2016 and its aftermath should be warning enough. It’s no better than assurances from Johnson that his party has a plan for social care… we just can’t see it or scrutinise it. Don’t accept such empty fluff from politicians.
Anyway, just made the mistake of watching BBC The Papers, they saying that Johnson had the right approach to the C4 debate because it had made the Conservative Party complaints the front page story ON THE TELEGRAPH instead of the climate debate and issues. THE TELEGRAPH. As if Johnson and the paper were in no way connected.
I love the whiney middle class cockbags blokes who’s biggest dilemma is what Audi spec to get get for their next company car, and what Santa Cruz to put on the roof bars, loftily pontificating on the pros and cons of zero hours contracts
Steady on binners. Maybe lay off the ether for a bit?
I've worked on a zero hours contract. In fact, it's pretty common round where I currently live. No one has any issue with it as it provides "freedom" in both directions, employees being able to take up other work as they desire.
That's probably a good example of zero hours, the bad aspect is that technically you can basically be on call to do work at any time time, and if you're unavailable due to other commitments they could just sack you off for 'being inflexible'..
The moral of the story is that it has to work both ways.
When you have a situation where an employer is not setting specific hours but expect you to work at short notice or irregular hours, that's when it becomes very unfair.
No one has any issue with it as it provides “freedom” in both directions, employees being able to take up other work as they desire.
I was under the impression that there will be a silent chunk of people who get shafted because of this flexibility and Labour are interested in those people - rather than the ones who can make it work, that are happy with it - and perhaps have other good life choices available to them.
I've noticed Gove is increasingly becoming the voice pipe for Boris.
I loathe his every fibre.
Gove never fails to sink below expectations , which is impressive considering my opinion of him already!
Tories threatenin C4 s license is all getting a bit orwellian
C4 license is up for renewal in 2024; if Tories attempt to review before then I think C4 would definitely appeal.
Licence renewal is managed by Ofcom so any attempt to exert political influence would, I'm sure, be made public in no time.
Anyone hear Gavin Williamson on 5live earlier?
An embarrassment; failed to answer a single question directly.
Asked to comment on johnson's insults - melon faced piccaninnies, letter box wearing, bumboys etc - in the context of candidates being stood down for equally offensive comments on social media he prattled on about johnson's focus being on uniting the divided UK.
Nicky Campbell attempted, repeatedly, to get a clear answer but....nothing.
What a useless prick; from tory perspective, another tool to deflect criticism away from johnson.
One question: How bad would the Tories have to be (or just Johnson) before the public turned their backs in disgust?
What would they have to do that was bad enough to push sentiment against them? Because it seems to me they are way past that anyway.
Serious and funny.
(No comments about Corbyn being useless that's just not my view - let's assume for the sake of argument the Tories are just awful anyway.)
I have a zero hours contract and for the last 3 weeks its been that - previously working 2-3 days per week since April and now nothing. I've also been denied any holiday - many employers are abusing the system.
Rone - at present he appears teflon-like; same as Farage.
I can't see what would prompt a significant rejection of him; tories have built cult (yes, intended spelling) of personality around him and made the election into a single issue - get brexit done - which is dog-whistle politics but appeals to a surprisingly large number of voters
Too many voters have swallowed the demonisation of Corbyn; as you request, I won't comment about his actual or perceived competency.
Also true to say that too many voters have, wrongly, equated johnson's vocabulary with intelligence and competence.
The single issue brexiters in constituencies where BP have stood down their candidates have, in the main, transferred their allegiance to tories.
Sentiment will turn against him when, after the expected election win, he will be exposed as the incompetent he really is.
Depressing, isn't it?
(No comments about Corbyn being useless that’s just not my view – let’s assume for the sake of argument the Tories are just awful anyway.)
Sorry, you can’t discuss why Johnson can get away with so much without discussing the only alternative the voters think, under FPTP, they have in front of them at this election in most of England. And it’s worse than them just winning an election… the Conservatives have only been able to move further and further right thanks to having an opponent they think they don’t have to fight for heart and minds of huge swathes of Britain where Labour should be a dangerous opponent for them.
Sorry, you can’t discuss why Johnson can get away with so much without discussing the only alternative the voters think, under FPTP, they have in front of them at this election in most of England.
I don't think that is the point of my point.
I'm just saying what in isolation would it take to NOT vote Boris. I'm assuming if he took part in a child sacrifice then Corbyn would look slightly more appealing to some?
Now he's sent his dad onto Breakfast telly with a note for teacher.
Looks like Boris is also trying to replace an evisceration from Neil with a light prodding from Andrew Marr instead. BBC should book him, then replace Marr with Neil due to a 'diary clash' at the last minute.
I’m just saying what in isolation would it take to NOT vote Boris.
Sorry, most people are going to vote for what they see as the least worst choice between two parties. That what the awful FPTP does to us all. The potential PMs and their parties’ policies are weighed up. Voters don’t have the luxury of considering only one of the party leaders in isolation.
In my opinion, Johnson long ago did enough to make him entirely unsuitable for public office of any kind. Not sure there is much more he can do to look any worse as a potential PM.
I have a zero hours contract and for the last 3 weeks its been that – previously working 2-3 days per week since April and now nothing. I’ve also been denied any holiday
Nightmare, but I'm not sure how this policy helps you:
We will tackle insecurity by … Banning zero-hour contract
We will end insecurity and exploitation by ending zero-hours contracts
Nobody else in this thread can see how either. They'll have to either set a ludicrously low number of compulsory hours, or just leave the EU and end compulsory contracts for work because as Molegrips says:
No-one’s banning casual working. That would be utterly insane.
The best policy on contract hours I've heard is the Lib Dems - you don't impose minimum legal contract hours, or end the requirement for contracts but below a certain number of hours the salary has to go up.
Hope you get a full time job soon.
One question: How bad would the Tories have to be (or just Johnson) before the public turned their backs in disgust?
They have used the Trump approach and it has worked brilliantly. As the great man Trump said "He could shoot someone on 5th Aveneue and he wouldn't lose any voters"
One question: How bad would the Tories have to be (or just Johnson) before the public turned their backs in disgust?
This for me has been the hardest part to deal with in this election. Obviously the way things work with FPTP does screw things up a bit, but my gut feeling at the start of this would be that pretty much all remainer Torys , especially in safe Tory seats would vote LD as a protest. The LDs offer remainer moderate Conservatives an easy way out, without voting for Corbyn. If the polls play out, they just haven't taken that opportunity.
Which has led me to believe that the number of actual true moderate Conservative supporters is woefully low. Ergo a massive chunk of the population are either really just selfish, self centered nasty people, or just blind to what the Torys have become.
I really do have no idea how bad they have to get before people start to desert them.
I would suggest some sort of averaging system. If a person has averaged say 15 hours a week over the last 3 months, then they need to be given at least 66% of the hours. Just a rough idea.
Constituency level betting odds if anyone's interested
https://www.paddypower.com/politics/england-constituencies-a-d
Boris in LBC now currently getting a bit of gentle ripping by Ferrari.
Wonder why he turned up for a moderately right wing broadcaster that he's comfortable with?
The deal is still oven ready for the microwave.
I don't agree with Ferrari on most topics but he's at least a dignified interviewer compared to the vitriol coming from Andrew Neil's gob.
bonespurs boris, cowardly, climate change denier, lying racist islamophobic shit. He fits right in.
Boris in LBC now currently getting a bit of gentle ripping by Ferrari.
And even under this gentlest of prodding he falls apart...
I don’t agree with Ferrari on most topics but he’s at least a dignified interviewer compared to the vitriol coming from Andrew Neil’s gob.
I've never heard a Ferrari interview but I've listened to a lot of political podcasts which almost always involve fairly soft inteviews. The interviewee opens up a lot more, I suspect a soft interview actually acheives a lot more than a hard interview.
We don't really learn anything from questiones designed to expose an awkward paradox or whatever.
Agreed.
It just doesn't produce the soundbites which is what I think drives this stuff. I think broadcasters fighting for attention chase this for impact.
It's a both a shame and product of our over-consumption of media.
Nightmare, but I’m not sure how this policy helps you:
Would the employee as opposed to accepting the zero hours contract be able to agree a contract for x days or hours per week so this situation doesn't occur? or have I misunderstood?
Its no wonder that the Tories are threatening Channel 4. And thats what they're blatantly doing. Its not even veiled
Channel 4 news is the best independent source of news in the country IMHO, and takes its remit of holding the government to account very seriously.
Just look at what 9 years of threats have done to the impartiality of the BBC and the quality of its journalism.
Johnson getting destroyed on Nick Ferrari phone in
No wonder he's too terrified to face Andrew Neil!
I bet his handlers are desperate to keep him away from that one