BBC BLOGS - Newsnight: From the web team
« Previous | Main | Next »

Tuesday 5 October 2010

Verity Murphy | 12:13 UK time, Tuesday, 5 October 2010

Tonight on the programme Richard Watson has exclusive new information on a British man accused of being behind plans to carry out Mumbai-style attacks in Europe, which led to a ratcheting up of terror warnings from both the UK and US governments.

Jeremy and the team up in Birmingham will bring you all of the latest Conservative conference news, which continues to be dominated by fallout from yesterday's decision to strip higher earners of child benefit from 2013.

The prime minister has today defended that decision in an interview with the BBC.

Mr Cameron conceded that it is "very difficult to do this in a way which is fair", but insisted that taxing child benefit or introducing a formal means test would be more costly and less fair.

At the same time the government has suggested that it might introduce a transferable tax allowance for married couples before the end of the current parliament in 2015.

Previously the married couples' tax allowance had been kicked into the long grass and was only to apply to basic rate tax payers. Is its sudden re-emergence an attempt to ameliorate middle class anger? And will it work?

And Jeremy will be talking to the Home Secretary Theresa May about all this and asking her if the Tories are soft on crime and justice.

Join us for all of that at 10.30pm.


  • Comment number 1.

    Janet Tavakoli reports on more sharks in shock feeding off each other :-

    "Taxpayers might again ask why the Federal Reserve was so eager to bail out all of AIG's deals linked to problematic CDOs at 100 cents on the dollar. The largest beneficiary of that largesse was Goldman Sachs, whose former officers rose to influential positions in the U.S. Treasury and Federal Reserve Bank and were at Goldman's helm when these deals were created."

    More to come. Any comments George, Boris ?

    And by the way Ive just had to drive all round Birmigham to get to my destination cus the roads up Broad street are closed, real pain you lot are !

  • Comment number 2.

    If Chief Police Officers don't reduce crime, they'll be out of a job says Theresa May. This appears to be the same peculiar thinking we have heard elsewhere e.g. if head Teachers don't improve the results of their schools they'll be out of a job and if NHS administrators don't bring about an improvement in health, they'll be for the chop. Note how this is Public Sector (state) managers. The problem, of course, is that Vince Cable and George Osborne can't chop the bankers as the latter are in the Private Sector. If anything, if Vince and George etc say or do anything wrong, it will be them for the chop!

  • Comment number 3.

    NN 'Jeremy and our political reporters Michael Crick and David Grossman are still on the scene to bring us the latest from the conference tonight and we hope to be speaking to a senior Cabinet member.'

    Is it to be more repetition of who said what (to which we will already have been overexposed by news bulletins and other politics shows all day?

    Or perhaps another performance by Mr 'YESorNO' Paxman, as with his 'discussion' with Boris last night, harping on the trivia of whether Boris actually spoke to the PM?

    I find it more hopeful to read blogs such as those posted in the link from ecolizzy at 9.03 today, which suggest that the GBP may have reached their limit of abuse by EU and realise it's time for action not words.

  • Comment number 4.


    with you wielding the axe, tablle, whispering 'chop, chop'? fun, fun? and pointing your right index begging to be followed?

  • Comment number 5.

    4. At 3:42pm on 05 Oct 2010, mimpromptu wrote:

    with you wielding the axe, tablle, whispering 'chop, chop'? fun, fun?
    and pointing your right index begging to be followed? "

    Every day your posts continue to show readers here that you really don't understand much of what you read, and that you can't help responding to words regardless of how they appear in sentences and won't be helped either. Why would someone warning of the dangers to the public about loss of their state ever want to wield the axe (on the public sector)?

    Did you ever understand what Solidarity was fighting for in Poland? It wasn't fighting for an end of socialism you know, any more than the Chinese protesting in 1989 were. Quite the opposite in fact. They were both protesting about a threat TO socialism. What they called democracy we call socialism/totalitarianism, what they called anarchism, we call libertarianism/freedom/democracy!

  • Comment number 6.

    "The purchase of long-term government bonds through the program will be conducted as a temporary measure, and will serve a different purpose compared with the existing purchases of long-term government bonds. Therefore, the Bank's holdings of long-term government bonds purchased through the program will be treated differently from the long-term government bonds purchased within the ceiling of the amount of banknotes in circulation.",-october-5,-2010-20101005123699/

  • Comment number 7.


    Were THEY now? That's 'news' for me.

  • Comment number 8.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 9.

    Mimpromptu - think about Poland back in 1988. At the time, that Thatcher was there lauding the union Solidairty, she was busy wrecking unions in the UK through changes to legislation.
    Unions I hasten to remind you are the means whereby workers bond together in solidarity. Thatcher was an anarchist, she was busy eroding the state and their means of support, the pubic sector unions. She was exploiting the grievances of Solidarity to help facilitate the demise of socialism, she wasn't supporting their ideals at all. You need to look very careful at what politicians get up to as they speak with forked tongues - see Hazel Blears interview with Andrew Neil as an example of a Libertarian acting as if they were a socialist (whether they know it or not). It's like asking females why they dress attractively/sexily - they say it's because they like it because the alternative might not make them look good. What sort of self-serving limited (insightless) explanation is that? We are up to our neck in this more these days. Ask people why they do things and they give you a story. That's all. Watch Newsnight and you see people exchanging stories and arguing about whose story is best! Hopeless.

  • Comment number 10.


    After all, since St Tony declaimed the doctrine of pre-emptive attack anywhere in the world, from Dubya's Right Hand, (and we KNOW there are thousands of 'them' among us) a bit of 'Shock'n'Awe' from Hadrian's Wall to Pevensey, might just nip it in the bud.

    The righteous should have no fear - should they? And there is no shortage of Chinooks (suddenly) I hear.

    "We shall fight on the Main Aisle; we shall fight in computer inks and stationery; we shall fight where vegetables give way to ice-cream and deep among sausages and pies; even on the escalator to the toilets! We shall never surrender."

    Oh - it will be reported as all going awfully well.

  • Comment number 11.

    Gold taking off now around $1340

    GBP 842 And the pound is strong.

    Silver following - $22.70

    There will be many big corrections along the way targeting $3000
    Silver targeting $200

  • Comment number 12.


    The Fair Folk came up with a new Well-er-fair-ish scheme, with a great big hole in it THAT NO ONE HAD NOTICED. The hole was that couples were not taxed as couples, such that those co-habiters got more.

    Then up strode Dave, sweeping aside the fool who drew up this inept scheme, and declared (with no reference to his penchant for rewarding marriage) that transferrable tax might be installed in law (by - ooh - er - say 2015). Hurrah! It's win-win: Marriage wins and Dave wins.

    Anyone know Nick's view?

  • Comment number 13.

    I look forward to Jeremy's interview with Theresa May.
    The problem with prison is that each inmate costs the taxpayer £40,000 per annum. Prison building is slow, the economy is in tatters, so many are either released early/community service/are let off. I could think of the perfect solution to reduce crime...... recruit the Gurkhas into the British Police force and see crime plummet!

    Also looking forward to Richard's exclusive tonight.

  • Comment number 14.

    Peter Hambro talking his book -

  • Comment number 15.


    your 'story' is the worst of all the stories I've come across in my lifetime and I wished it wasn't just the most hopeless. At least you would deserve then some pity and consolation

  • Comment number 16.


    Hi 76. I am inclined to think that the problem with prison is that, like war, alcohol, tobacco (still grown in EU) TV bullying, political lying, commercial coercion (including advertising) we accept it as the norm.

    What is more, having labelled it democratic civilisation, we export it at the 'barrel of a drone'.

    Against that, 40K per unit of failure, doesn't register on my Swingometer.

  • Comment number 17.


    you don't intend to surrender, you mean? everything comes to an end sooner or later, singie

  • Comment number 18.

    #15 Correction

    I was referring to #9

    Maggie was loved by the majority of Poles then and is loved still now, tb01

    Professional Company

    Mr table likes his PC
    And I wonder who it might be.
    Officers, profs and presidents?
    They are clearly very naive
    Whoever it might ‘essentially’ be.

  • Comment number 19.

    Snow fair!

    The next time I hear the words "fair", "fairness" or the puerile "Is that fair/it's just not fair!" with regard to political policy I will reach for my pea-shooter.

    Since when was life fair?

    Here we have the politics of pragmatism/coalition played out for the benefit of the political ignorami of the British media; this type of balancing of policy - high rate taxpayers lose child benefit, benefits- dependent families have allowances capped - has been going on in Europe for decades; our media, however, are purely fixated on the US.

    The Coalition will continue with a balanced approach to policy - wait for the Spending Review results - when the child benefit moans will be seen for what they are; whinges from Media City, who may well make up the bulk of the higher rate tax payers affected.

    Remember how they all trashed the Dome because they had to wait for a train?

    Meanwhile Yvette Cooper takes to the barricades for the downtrodden higher rate taxpayers; what has the Labour Party come to?

    I'd like to buy Iain Duncan-Smith a drink; his exposition of the Coalition approach to welfare and work was masterly; it sounded like Labour of the Sixties. Ca ira!

    And just WHERE did Fraser Nelson of the Economist acquire that accent?
    Halfway between Balloch and Boston(Mass.)?

    Vive la Coalition!

  • Comment number 20.


    Feel free, singie, to bomb yourself and your mates, but please do not make too much noise and make sure not to leave any debris floating or lying around. As you're into modern electromechanochemical techniques, I shouldn't think it's going to prove too difficult for yourselves.

  • Comment number 21.

    13. At 7:25pm on 05 Oct 2010, Mistress76uk wrote:

    "I could think of the perfect solution to reduce crime...... recruit the Gurkhas into the British Police force and see crime plummet!"

    Don't you think you'd need lots more immigration (Gurkhas) to do that and what, with the 'withering away of the state' brought about by our incumbent Libertarians, who'd be left to pay them?

    Don't worry though, with less police about (Public Sector cuts), the already pitiable detection rates (under 10% for most offences) are bound to go down even further anyway, so crime will soon be falling making Theresa and everyone else in HMG look very good to an ever more stupid electorate.

    We're just consumers who have to pay to listen to their rubbish.

  • Comment number 22.

    "17. At 8:12pm on 05 Oct 2010, mimpromptu wrote:

    you don't intend to surrender, you mean? everything comes to an end sooner or later, singie"

    You do realise that you are, once again, attention-seeking - a kind of blogospehere 'going commando'?

  • Comment number 23.

    Max Keiser talks about high frequency trading :-

  • Comment number 24.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 25.


    It's the other way round, table, and perhaps more importantly, I do not hide in black holes pretending I'm not who I am.

  • Comment number 26.


    One of the most beautiful images of humanity, is a mother holding a new baby. Dave, of course, being a politician (to whom a picture is worth a thousand polling-points) has no conception of this (any more than he knows what living continuously at the limit of one's income feels like) and is still milking the baby.

    Politicians constantly say the first duty of government it to protect us.
    Please will someone tell Dave to pass his political-prop back to mummy? This will protect us from the banal image of Samantha playing 'Vote-crawlers Wife'. Dave will have to find some other prop to his hollow persona.

  • Comment number 27.

    Best exchange of the night:

    Jeremy : You haven't tried to give me a date so far!
    Theresa: Are you asking me for a date Jeremy?

    :o) Priceless

    Excellent report by Richard too

  • Comment number 28.


    To re-habilitate or not to re-habilitate - that is the question.

    I have heard is said BUT NOT HEARD IT DEBATED that drugs in prison help to damp-down the overall volatility of the incarcerated male. That sounds like POLICY to me. It must surely be possible, in a secure facility, to eliminate drugs IF THAT WERE THE INTENTION.

    I rather suspect that a drug-free ethos, and a rehabilitative intent, GO HAND IN HAND; it's not looking good. Add to that, Theresa May's empty prattle founded on a lack of visceral/cultural knowledge of 'the criminal', AND Clarke's stratospheric blather, and you have a recipe for fudge pudding.

    Mr Pickwick added a note of unintended humour when he talked of, poorly prepared for life, mentally disturbed (delusional) 'users'. Apparently he meant P for prisoners not P for parliamentarians. Could have fooled me.

    Will Parliament institute a programme of useful work? Have they closed any subsidised bars yet? Will mental health checks be made?

    Oh - it's all going awfully predictably

  • Comment number 29.

    Jazz..em ..nice.

    Child benefit: Scrap it altogether (and start this tomorrow, not 3yrs time) The state should not fund family life. If you want it yourself.

    Prisoners. 3 strikes then your hung from the neck till dead. A more cost effective policy me thinks than the pussy footing thats infected the justice and prison service over the last 20-30years

    P:S I raised 5 children - youngest now 17yrs(nightmare) - and have no idea how much child benefit i recieved, via the woman, when and in what form it was recieved, and what it was spent on. It was never mentioned in our house hold. The words 'child benefit' never passed our lips..not once! In the early days we would scratch around for rent money but never mentioned that we'll be alright..because of the little bit we recieved in this benefit. No, I went out and sold my soul to ensure I raised the rent. Smart move in ensuring that this benefit money went to the woman and not the man. Something tells me the woman has stashed it over the years...just in case i ever kick her out of the house or if she ever had the nerve to move out...she'd have a little fund for herself. So stop this benefit know, because most of its getting spent at Marks & Spencers or hidden under the floor boards.. its a racket..a womans racket.

  • Comment number 30.

    Quite a few guests on tonight's Newsnight did think that the child benefit cuts proposals, which seem to have come out of the blue, what with even Teresa May not having been able to state the date of learning about them, have been handled rather badly, a bit of a shambles really. However, one of the positive things that have come out of it is that the Prime Minister does seem to have enough guts to be humble enough to say sorry, sorry, in this case at least, for the fact that the cuts had not been included in the Tory election manifesto.

    It looks like George Osborne needs to learn a few things fast. Perhaps the educating table might 'volunteer'? Or is he, in fact, one of the culprits for the shambles? I have a sneeky feeling that the visit to the Russian boat a few months ago might haunt him for a long time unless he does something about the 'flickering link'.


  • Comment number 31.


    One for gumshoe Crick.

    How many MPs think their constituents voted for THEM (rather than the ROSETTE)? If rosettes filled the benches, would governance be any the worse?


  • Comment number 32.


    It's also beautiful to see a father holding his baby, as well as brothers and sisters, an auntie, an uncle, grandparents and family friends, as long as it's done with love and care, the qualities I don't think the Prime Minister is deprived of.

  • Comment number 33.

  • Comment number 34.

    SEC's Mary Schapiro Interview on May 6 `Flash Crash' Report :-

  • Comment number 35.

    #75 a few more thoughts on your post - bit by bit

    'Try to think about the following. When an idea pops into your head, ask what or who put it there.'

    False, table, I'm simply responding to statements that indeed may have been put into somebody else's head, which was singie's in this case.
    'If you just stop at the point that it seems to be your idea because it's in your head, ask if that might be a failure of analysis.'

    Failure of analysis? Shouldn't you have said that it was rather, in your view, the wrong conclusion that you thought I'd come to?

    'Perhaps other people look into the sources of what they think and question whether the propositions which occur to hem are true or false, whilst also trying to work out how those propositions came about, i.e how they fit in with the rest of the world's knowledge.'

    Lots of people attempt do that kind of thing and have done in the past, including all the Greek philosophers but no one as yet has come up with a universal, complete and true set of knowledge or beliefs, one that all the clever clogs would agree with. Just look at how many 'gods' there are, for example. Stephen Hawkins may indeed be close to working out the beginning of the Universe but even he does not claim to know how the brain and heart work, heart in the figurative sense, that is.

    'Looking at the way that you post here, it seems to me that you don't think or analyse deeply/carefully/extensively enough.'

    We'll just have to disagree on that one. I do think that I think deeply.

    'This is not good for you. It's what a lot of psychotics do.'

    I wasn't aware that it's one of the psychotic characteristics not to think 'deeply enough' as you put it but rather what's described by psychiatry, abnormally which does not, in my opinion, is exactly the same thing as differently to somebody else. Here's a quote from Free Wiki: 'People experiencing psychosis may report hallucinations or delusional beliefs, and may exhibit personality changes and thought disorder. Depending on its severity, this may be accompanied by unusual or bizarre behavior, as well as difficulty with social interaction and impairment in carrying out the daily life activities.'

    You accuse me, and a few others of being delusional but what am I supposed to be delusional about? I do not see bats flying around in my attic here or cobras squirming on the floor. I do experience pressure symptoms in my body but they are physical and not imaginary. You yourself hinted at that if I disobey you they might get worse.

    'Try to learn from others how to do so more self-critically and responsibly, or just don't bother doing it at all, is my kind advice.'

    I'm learning all the time, table, especially how to criticise yourself, 'mr know it all' and I do consider myself to be self-critical, something I've carrying since childhood, particularly thanks to my Grandma.

    'Leave it to those who do have more discipline, and just show them some respect for the effort they put in that you either can't or won't. Your behaviour is coming across as child-like, and 'cheeky'. If mine comes across as paternalistic, it should, as I really do know what I'm talking about and if you look more widely beyond this blog, you'll see I am in good professional company.'

    I've already answered those above though one or two of my posts have been deleted from the website. As you seem to have access to the Mods, I should imagine you've seen them anyway.

    'Good-bye', mr clever clogs surrounded by good professional company

  • Comment number 36.

  • Comment number 37.

    Listening to songs sung by a Polish singer, Lucja Prus, who unfortunately has died prematurely of cancer, I am reminded of a Polish saying, the words being sung in fact by the actor Daniel Olbrychski, that women sometimes make water out of men's brains which I suppose in some cases is very true.


  • Comment number 38.

    From 2.40 mins in

    Rodney Shakespeare speaks the sick truth ( Fractional Reserve Banking ) and Max goes off on one with the bank fraud :-!

  • Comment number 39.

  • Comment number 40.

    Re; Tory Conference:

    Can we PLEASE address the issue of where the 2.7m new jobs, the £400 Bn of new investment and growth of a third in our exports are going to come from that are forecast by the Office for Budgetary Responsibility?

    One key area is the issue of how the spending cuts reverberate through the economy - the so-called "fiscal multiplier" effect - delving deeper into the OBR's assumptions underlying their forecast,their assessment on what effect government increases/decreases in spending has on the economy states:

    "The academic literature on fiscal multipliers finds a wide range
    of estimates. According to a recent IMF literature review,
    estimates range from -1.3 to greater than 4. Given this range, it
    would be wrong to attach too much weight to any one estimate
    or study, when the most appropriate multiplier depends on the
    type of fiscal policy used and the country in question."

    C) OBR -

    I'd say that is a pretty conclusive, definite "We don't know" wouldn't you? So before we all lose the will to live, I'll get to the point:

    Taking £120 Bn of spending out of the economy through spending cuts and tax increases will have a significant effect on the level of demand in the economy - and this effect will be magnified as it works its way through the economy. Just how much effect it will have is unknown - and both the OBR and IMF state that it depends on precise WHAT is cut.

    As Government is people-intensive and the leaked Treasury forecast predicts 1.2M public sector jobs going, all the work in this area shows that the multiplier effect will be magnified because the ongoing reduction in spending will tend to be in the "front line" of the economy - i.e. consumer spending by - soon to be - ex-civil servants.

    The other key element of likely spending cuts will be in capital investment - particularly in construction. The construction industry has a huge supply chain which is also known to have a strong magnifier effect - and it is also very labour-intensive.

    Cuts in welfare spending that impact lower income people are also intensely deflationary, as a much higher proportion of lower income spending goes on domestically produced goods and services, whereas tax increases for the rich tend to reduce luxury good imports and top end property prices.

    So I'd say that my assessment of £1Tn fall in demand is at the high end compared to the OBR's view, but if there is a rapid ramp up in unemployment and fall in living standards as has happened in Eire, it's quite probable - the Irish unemployment level equates to 5m in the UK.

    The other component is the cost of unemployment - the double whammy of falling tax receipts and rising benefits payments: both act to produce a sharp deterioration in government finances and drive up borrowing to bridge the gap - in Eire Government debt is RISING, not falling.

    So the OBR has no solid view on the multiplier effect of government spending reductions or increases - yet it predicts a massive increase in private sector employment, huge new investment in capacity by the private sector and a surge in exports by a third.

    This forecast implies the UK economy will outperform even the most dynamic economies of the world in recent times against a backdrop of the credit crunch, the EuroZone debt crisis, the huge surge in Chinese exports, the stagnation of the US economy and the lending "strike" by UK banks.

    Given that the OBR assessment of the impact of spending reductions on domestic demand deflation on the multipliers quoted above ranges from -£118 Bn to +£480 Bn - OR MORE - I'd say it's a pretty open question whether I'm right and the cuts will pitch the UK into a depression, or whether the OBR is right and the economy will produce modest growth.

    Feeling lucky? REALLY lucky? Willing to take the risk with your job, your home, your pension, your savings? Are you really convinced the UK will produce the economic miracle that the OBR's forecast implies?

    The ideological underpinning for the Government's economic policy is clearly the libertarian dogma that the public sector "crowds out" the private sector, therefore it is an act of faith that cutting the public sector will leave "space" for the private sector to expand - so it will.

    Such faith in the nature of the economics may be a comfort to the Tories, as is peoples' belief in life after death for those that believe in supernatural forces - but should the country's future rest on such blind faith?

    Manufacturing employment continues to fall - direct construction employment is set to fall by 500,000 on KNOWN contractions - then there's defence, etc.


    Stop banging on about the fine details of the welfare cuts and how grumpy the Tory right is that a few thousand better off people are going to lose out on child benefit - the real issue is whether virtually all of us are about to be pitched into a depression that will last a whole generation.


  • Comment number 41.

    36 - a trivial sideshow that the main media think important to cover. 1 Billion saved on CB is nothing. Unless we face up to the real sick truth it is going to be terrible in the Country. Watch the video on 38 its there.

  • Comment number 42.


    Easy. He stays rich and powerful - we remain stuck with democratic impotence.

    Oh - it's all going awfully well.

  • Comment number 43.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 44.


    Apparently, it is OK to imbibe - during pregnancy - a SMALL amount of potential foetus poison, that also impairs (in a small amount) critical judgement; presumably including the judgement about taking another drink!

    We are still in thrall to alcohol - it is the warp of out culture.

    They told us yesterday that British mental health is in crisis.

    I'd just say we are barmy.

    Has Nick closed any of Westminster's 19 subsidised bars yet? Are any MPs pregnant?

  • Comment number 45.


    mr bunning

    Newsnight has been trying to tackle the issue of the future of Britain for a long time already, though obviously the word itself does not appear every night. I should imagine that it's exactly what many journalists, and politicians, are very worried and concerned about.

  • Comment number 46.


    "They said that the job just couldn't be done
    With a will he went right to it!
    He tackled that job that 'couldn't be done'
    And couldn't do it!"

    We need a 'British Survival Forum', not wretched factional party 'conferences', giggled over by juvenile media.

    If ever there were a time to


  • Comment number 47.


    It was a firm but soft 'grilling' though, don't you think, Mistress76uk?, with Theresa May answering the questions calmly, given probably the circumstances of the lead-up to the announcement.


  • Comment number 48.

    Max in a calm mood sets it out :-

    41 correction - "terrible in THIS country"

    Its interesting that the main media and hence public will go off on one on a relatively trivial matter of CB.
    Well if it takes that to wake up to the horror then so be it.

  • Comment number 49.

    !REVOLT NOW!" (#38 link)

    Did any of you reading this have an older (taller) brother, who held you off whan you wanted to kill him?

    The Westminster Monster IS TOYING WITH US. Did we not revolt over Iraq?
    AT LAST we get a referendum - a 'deckchair referendum'. 'AV' are the first two letters of "AVIN A LARF!"

    Oh - it's all going awfully well.

  • Comment number 50.

    Theresa May said that low income parents cannot be expected to pay for the child benefit of high earners.

    But the government are going to cut the child benefit of disabled children who have one parent who earns £44000 and who have to have a stay at home parent to care for them, whilst expecting those same parents to pay for the child benefit of households with incomes of £80000 who have no disabled child.

    This seems to be discriminatory against families of disabled children who disproportionatly have a parent who stays at home as a carer.

  • Comment number 51.

    more 'gnoming' on the bar stools. so funny.

    the tories are right to cut benefits for the rich. tax money is for the poor and needy not rich and greedy. especially if in the long term it reduces taxes.

    prison doesn't work. nor does the justice system which is why we had a massive increase in organised crime gangs in the uk that more than doubled up labour.

    a state cannot enforce law if people do not choose to live by it [see iraq] so the sttae needs to give the philosphy of why it is better to choose to live with honour than without. But the hayekist moral relativists do not believe in the good as the highest idea of the mind so why should anyone else? People say choosing the good is for 'suckers' yet Plato's Republic shows why it is the tyrant who is most unhappy while those who choose the good that manifests as justice are the happiest.

    the government role is to win the hearts and minds of the nation to choose the good. This will be called discrimination and oppression because those who choose 'fairness and equality' as the highest ideas think any type of discrimination [for the good] is an oppression. They deny there is any such thing possible as the good even though the definition is in the dictionary.

  • Comment number 52.

    "I think that global macro funds are trading against the dollar and it is worrisome to imagine the avalanche that could happen."

  • Comment number 53.

    A GOOD TIME TO DIG UP BAD NEWS (#49 additional)

    'Democracy' contains within itself both MOCK and CRASS. I would hazard a guess THIS IS ONLY TRUE IN ENGLISH.

    What have we done? Why is our governance a mockery, enacted by a collection of the most crass actors in the land?

    It is slowly emerging (not on Newsnight) that the fraud in the last election went wider than Warsi. But my investigations show that the rules are ambiguously rigged, to allow the 'Political Lie'. I predict case-law will soon add to the power of the Minster-Monster to perform without integrity.

    Keiser is SOOOO right. We must REVOLT, dismantle Westminster politics, and SPOILPARTYGAMES.

  • Comment number 54.

    Matters in the National Interest from this week’s Party Conference.

    This list is now closed.

  • Comment number 55.

    “It takes two” by Ike and Tina Turner was used as Top Con’s ‘Anthem’

    More Domestic Violence intimated?

    ‘Hooz writes a poem about the death of Plaff’

    So what?

    Judging by Mr Hooz script his time might have been better spent training as a Doctor!

    Rarely seen in the news footage from trouble spots around the world are women.

    So how come there is such high population growth?

    On a more serious note - assuming that some might think that the above comments should be taken seriously (!!!) - Jonathan Miller’s report tonight - on C4 News - on the people of the Swat Valley indirectly offers many, many reasons on why the conflict in Afghanistan must be fought and why the West should do everything it can to support the people of Pakistan.


BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.