Politicians, the press and the police
Politicians, the press and the police.
Together they have become the Bermuda Triangle into which reputations have simply disappeared.
After cash for honours, came the arrest of a Tory MP who'd received leaks and passed them to the papers. After the scandal of MPs' expenses comes today's row about who knew what about the hacking of the phones of the great and the good and the merely famous.
But today Yates of the Yard decided that he did not want another starring role on the national political stage.
His insistence that there was no evidence that John Prescott's phone was tapped, insufficient evidence to bring other prosecutions and that no new evidence had been produced by the Guardian, sounded pretty definitive but these waters are still treacherous.
There will still be a Commons enquiry and there will be calls for an independent investigation into the police's handling of this affair.
There will still be awkward questions for News International, for the Tories' Director of Communications Andy Coulson and for the man who hired him David Cameron.
This is a story fuelled by genuine outrage at abuses by the press and politically inspired protests designed to damage the Conservatives.
The Tory leader is hoping that beyond the triangle of Westminster, Wapping and Scotland Yard few will be paying too much attention and that he can hang on to the Director of Communications - the former editor of the News of the World - who he values so much.
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
So Nick and the ZaNuLabour young veterans who have been all over this today.
Yeats of the Yard YES Yeats of the Yard says basically that the Guardians story and this blog are wrong.
The fat controller was not tapped he carefully investigate and the number of hackings reported by the paper are untrue.
So the smearing of Cameron can stop, McPoison was guilty just get used to it.
What has become clear is the desperation of the ZaNuLabour party and their alleys.
It also proof of Nicks readiness to follow the Mandy line before the facts of proved.
I dont expect that there will be an apology the people involved are just not big enough.
Complain about this comment
Politicians or
Journalists. The danger is
In unequal arms.
Complain about this comment
Nick, for the love of God, this story is not about Couslson, lol!
Will someone else chip and and tell Nock why he is totally missing the significance of this story.
Complain about this comment
Nick
politically inspired protests designed to damage the Conservatives
Seems to me this is the story. Except for the behaviour of the media whipped up by the ZaNuLabour spin machine.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
mr robinson, you really are clutching at straws now arent you!
having witnessed your 6pm news "opinion" of what cameron and coulson "think" you now advance this in your blog.
hows about you ask more pertinant questions, such as:
why are labour MPs so keen to reopen the inquiry?
why prescott and mandelson have been given so much news time today, to express their "opinions" (and i use that term loosely) regarding an issue that they know absolutely nothing about? (not to mention how they got caught out doing the wrong thing and tried to cover it up!)
even brown took the time to comment on this non story, from his important g8 summit, its beginning to smell more like a labour spin campaign than a factual based news story.
do labour MPs believe they are more important than the police? the police say there is nothing to investigate and no new evidence has been produced.
the message to the guardian and labour MPs is clear... put up or shut up!
Complain about this comment
The statement by Yates, that no new evidence has been put forward, that evidence thoroughly investigated at the time did not show wide scale tapping, and that there was not sufficient evidence for further investigation, not only justifies Cameron's statement this morning, but calls into question the competence of those that have called for Coulson to be sacked, or suggested that it raises questions of Cameron's judgement.
Sacked for what?
Those people must now put up, or apologise.
It appears that, in the absence of substantiated claims to the contrary, that Coulson took an honourable decision at the time. Whilst he was not aware of what had happened, he took responsibility, and resigned.
Did Brown do that when McBride was responsible for the smear campaign in the PM's office - no. He claimed he knew nothing about it, and stayed in his job.
The real story that has emerged today is one of attempted smears on Cameron, the demolition of another mans career, and all based on an unsubstantiated newspaper story - it shows that certain politicians are rather trigger happy.
I hope the BBC ensure that this story gets as much publicity as the Coulson one!
Complain about this comment
Not only into this affair should there be an inquiry but that of Baby P
and many many others as well.
People have been arrested jsut for handing out leaflets in a public space , that have been oked by a judge.
But phone taping by the press and no charges yet huge compo payout.
Think the police have a lot of issues to answer other wise
the concept of policing by concent by the public is going to end on a bonfire.
Maybe along with the BBC's alledged impartial reporting
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
I have little time for most of the press bias; it has always been prejudicial and judgemental and played on closed minds. Balance being the last consideration and the truth never to be allowed to get in the way of a good story
High in this policy has always been the News of the World and its ilk, the old tabloids but the Guardian has now sunk lower than low in pursuit of its horrendous bias which has always distinguished it as the most unbalanced and prejudiced paper in the old broadsheets.
These men have been investigated by the yard they have faced a jury and served their sentences and unless the Guardian has firm indefatigable evidence that the course of justice has been perverted they should face the full rigour of the law themselves
When we have such a corrupt socialist government giving taxpayers money to the wealthiest bankers in the world and putting the honest working man woman and child into long term poverty and depravation using their own money then creating a smoke screen to the real debate on how deplorably we have been served for the last 12 years is as reprehensible as it gets within the most reprehensible of professions bar the oldest.
The recent event of politics had placed bankers politicians below the level of journalists the Guardian have just shifted them back to the bottom
Come on journalist time to grow up the public no what you are up to and deserve better rest assured the time is coming when they will get it.
We need the comprehensive figures of where we are where we have been and where we are going. All we have is a statistics office that tells nothing of the truth because every department massages every figure delays it or mismatches time periods and or areas get onto some real journalism or get out.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
I hope that this whitewash is not connected with an email I sent this morning to a cross-party representation of the HOC about surprising monitoring of my PC with rather close links to Sky Sports, the Sun and the Daily Mail.
Perish the thought that FURTHER INFORMATION would lead to cases being dropped...........
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
As anticipated, this smear started in the Labour Party in a desperate attempt to turn the tables after the McBride affair. Trouble is, the story did not have any legs and I would suspect the editor of the Guardian is now very cross with the source of this scurrilous attempt at muck raking.
Will there be apologies over this? There should be, but I won't be holding my breath.
Complain about this comment
Goodness me. Maybe the Met will take a longer look at whatever evidence the Guradian journalists have to back their story. I hope they do. If there is wrongdoing it has to be looked into.
The really big story is that Brown and the other G8 leaders have COMMITTED to stop global temperature rising by more than 2degrees...
Now that's what I call a great manifesto commitment. Nobody really knows how hot the earth is today, probably still won't agree in 20 years time. And all the politicians involved will have retired anyway.
Anybody know how to stop the sun itself getting hotter from time to time? Or bottle up the vulcanos. Thought not.
I just bet Brown will commit to rid the UK of gremlins and pixies before the end of the next parliament. "No more Tory gremlins and pixies..."
Complain about this comment
What a load of rubbish seen above, politically motivated to damage the Tories? One would think that spin is a one sided affair, don't you all get it Cameron is spinning so much over the last few weeks he has got dizzy, even the help of poor misunderstood Nick cannot save him from the centrifugal force.
Of course we can believe them when Cameron of the nu tories says "There is a world of difference between what he did as a tabloid editor and what he does for us." NOT, after all the good old Tories would never do anything underhand as only labour does, if you believe that you believe anything but there again Cameron has got some people believing in Santa Claus.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
More material for Armando Iannucci's satire.
Labour's Ann Clwyd, the MP for Cynon Valley, called for Coulson to be barred from parliament.
"Given Mr Coulson's dubious reputation, none of us on the Labour benches can feel comfortable while this man is allowed to wander the corridors here. Can't we, at the very least, while he is under suspicion, take his pass away from him?" Another Labour MP, Martin Salter ventured much the same.
I do wonder about these MPs. After the expenses scandal, I'd think twice about referring to "dubious reputations".
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Will there ever be a day when journalists kick Mandy (twice justly disgraced but still taken seriously by you media sheep) properly into the long grass and start to do some proper investigative work? This silly, probably fraudulent but venomous dirt from the NewSewer must stop - but still you give copious time to these liars that we have as an administration. Expose the NewGutterSnipe that started this and then properly destroy his or her reputation. I am heartily sick and tired of this sycophantic adherence to the party line. It is evil and dishonest. Do something properly for once.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
tom @ 24
Gosh, Mr Robinson, three posts in one day!! Must be a story which the Beeb can take the usual anti-Cameron line
er, excuse me ... he did 4 posts the other (yester?) day on Gordon's ten pee problems
Complain about this comment
Hello Sun
Could you please make sure that you don't shine so brightly down here on Earth as we have just decided at a recent 'jollie' that the temperature on Earth should not increase by 2 degrees.
I know that in the past we used to sacrifice virgins in the hope of controlling the weather but these are in short supply at the moment. However, we do have someone down here who goes by the name of Flash Gordon - will he do?
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Over the last few weeks there has been a very noticeable change in the Guardian's attitude towards the government and Brown in particular. A repositioning from their traditional pro-Labour stance.
Is this latest story or non-story the result of pressure being applied on them to return to their traditional ways?
Reading through all of the NOTW related articles with writers more-or-less all singing from the same sheet, one does get that impression.
If that is the case then the Guardian is no better than the NOTW.
Complain about this comment
'There are serious questions that have to be answered' is the response from clown smiling Brown at the G8. Why not 'There may be serious questions that have to be answered but I will not attempt to preempt the results of any investigations until they are concluded'. The man is positively relishing the prospect of placing his opponent in a bad light.
Complain about this comment
At first i was concerned that the Tories would be tainted by this,i am now wondering if its a none story and looked around for what else was happening...........lo and behold we find MP's second jobs are being published they wouldnt be trying to bury this away would they ???
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
"politically inspired protests designed to damage the Conservatives"
This story looks like it going to form another text book case which typifies the depravity of Labour and its willing use of the smear.
When Labour are not smearing, they are casting false aspirations in parliament that the Tories would cut spending, compared to Labour's investment.
And when Labour are not using dubious tactics against the Tories, they use their dark arts on each other. Gordon was said to have psychological flaws, Mo Mowlem was said to have mental health issues and Tony Blair to have reneged on a fictitious Granita deal.
Never mind the illegal wars. Never mind Labour's failure to apologise for delivering the opposite of an end to boom and bust. Why do we have to put up with such a morally depraved Government????
The decent people of the Labour party should rise up and overthrow the corrupt cancer at the heart of this government.
Complain about this comment
The argument seems to be that Andy Coulson isn't a suitable person to be doing his current job, given that he had to resign from his previous one. Cameron's judgment in appointing him is thereby called into question.
Of course, one could equally wonder whether Peter Mandelson was a suitable person to be the UK's EU Commissioner after he had to resign from his two previous jobs. And question Blair's judgment in appointing him, not to mention Brown's in making him a peer and a minister.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
The (quite proper) quid pro quo for having an Executive which directly controls the Legislature through the Whips system, is that our press is more intrusive in ferreting out stories than other countries'. Long may newspapers continue their dark arts.
Complain about this comment
I think that there really is a story here. Just not one that is particularly party political. So many "stories" come from "sources" or "leaks" and I for one would not be at all surprised if they were often obtained illegally.
Here's the rub - When such a story unveils an issue that really should be in the public domain, MP's expenses, we applaud the leak. If the "leak" merely unveils an embarrassing story it is an invasion of privacy. Who should decide as to whether the hacking of email accounts or mobile phones is in the public interest or not. I certainly would not trust our politicians to do the right thing. As with many issues it is not a straight forward right and wrong matter.
Complain about this comment
Thanks, Nick but very little new information seems to have come to light.
The phone tap story was covered in depth last year in Nick Davies' excellent book 'Flat Earth News.'
Complain about this comment
IF, a big if, Labour were looking to hang on to Murdoch's coat tails a little longer, they just blew it big time. The next election will be, "It was; The Sun, The Times, Die Welt, The Sunday Times, The News of The World or even good old Rupe himself, what won it"!
The excited embrace by certain people and in particulr Nick Robinson and Alistair Campbell, (with The Shadowy Lord behind them), was sickening to see and recuperative to observe, crumble!
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
There does seem to be a startling lack of facts and evidence at the basis of this so called story.
Complain about this comment
Never mind the politics, the press and police forming a bremuda triangle....
More like New Labour Press Office, the Guardian and the BBC.
Reputations have already been lost on this one !
Complain about this comment
It doesn't matter if Cameron stands by Coulson or not, he is damaged goods. Like me Dave being the PR man he is will at some point put some distance between them.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
The Grauniad must be miffed that its story turned out to be a damp squib.
Contrast this pathetic attempt with the Telegraph's devastating exposure of MP's expenses.
In the same way that the labour party couldn't organise a cabinet coup, its left-wing mouthpieces can't deliver a credible scoop.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Amazing how the arch self publicist Prescott was so quickly available for media quotes this morning. He really must be gutted that the police have now said that he was not on the list for hacking his phone. I suppose that there haven't been any discussions between the Grauniad editor and the Labour Comms Director about this story as Gordon is obviously not making the headlines at the G20?
Complain about this comment
Prescott is just terrified that there is even more evidence out there that he was having sex on company time; when he was supposed to be doing a job for the country, he was doing a job on his secretary on the ministerial office furniture.
The disgraceful thing about this is that he is allowed to speak at all; we should review his conduct and stop his pension. Never mind about protecting his reputation, we should be examining his conduct in detail1
As for The Dark Lord High Everything...
AA
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
If the "Bermuda Triangle" is in the process of the mother of all coverups, then Nick, you are right to kepp picking away at this sore...
Otherwise, this would seem to lend MORE not less moral fibre to David Cameron. In the face of unfounded allegations, smears if you will, he has stood up the barrage of left leaning coverage on the issue and backed his man.
All I have seen today is a lot of spineless ex-ministers and Labour flunkies parade themselves on TV, spitting mock fury based on nothing more than innuendo and flimsy "evidence".
This is yet another example of Labour wanting to pronounce someone guilty until they can prove their innocense. The sooner this lot are out of power the better.
These are the death throes of a dying government. Sad really.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
in the run up to the next election (can it come too soon?) we are going to have to suffer more and more of these smear stories as that is all the present government have to fight with.....
meanwhile in the real world, GB has committed us to not allow the climate to increase by more than 2°C by 2050... next time you are in number 10 nick can you ask Gordon the following...
1. what is the earth's temperature today?....if he does not know that then the 2°C promise is meaningless....
2. If by 2050 the temperature has exceeded 2°C what are the sanctions?
3. What measures is he intending to introduce to ensure a maximum of 2°C in 41 years time?
4. Exactly how much do these useless meetings cost in financial and environmental terms?
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Has tbe communication director of the conservative party organised this little astroturfing defence effort? or maybe Murdoch workers? Just throwing in my effort. Cant just sit back and laugh without adding my little contribution.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
66. At 8:59pm on 09 Jul 2009, dhwilkinson wrote:
Has tbe communication director of the conservative party organised this little astroturfing defence effort? or maybe Murdoch workers? Just throwing in my effort. Cant just sit back and laugh without adding my little contribution.
---
Phew - too subtle for me. If the author, or anybody else that understands what this means, could translate it for me, I would be most grateful.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Alistair Campbell really looked and sounded like a has been on Channel 4 News. Desperately trying to keep a non story going.
Just when will he and the rest of them realise everyone's seen through them now and know fine well who started this story off.
Spin only works when it's fresh and new.
Mandelson and Campbell et al are 12 years of tired old hat.
Doesn't it show?
Complain about this comment
Have to say I only drift into these blogs intermitantly and find the need to comment even less frequently, however, it looks to me that with a few exceptions, most of the people on this thread fail to grasp the fact that the endless propaganda being peddled is being read exclusivly by the members of their own sad club.
Dearie me!!!!
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
WarrierTess 30
There was never a story anyway, at least not a political one.
The only question political journalists should be asking is why is the Guardian recycling an old story now.
Complain about this comment
react @ 67
yes I was jesting, obviously I was! - ah well - but on a more serious note, there IS something particularly, I dunno ... offputting about the idea of a phone tap - I mean, can you imagine yapping away to your mother ... swapping recipes and stuff ... and having David Cameron (or some other politician) listening in? - 1984
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Sterling donefor, sorry ,beats me too.
Nick,
"This is a story fuelled by genuine outrage at abuses by the press and politically inspired protests designed to damage the Conservatives."
I found this sat with difficulty twixt the previous and following sentences .
Care to elaborate?
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
statement from AC John Yates
I have been asked by the Commissioner today to establish the facts around our inquiry into the alleged unlawful tapping of mobile phones by Clive Goodman and Glen Mulcaire. I was not involved in the original case and clearly come at this with an independent mind.
Just by way of background. In December 2005, the Met received complaints that mobile phones had been illegally tapped.
We identified that Goodman and Mulcaire were engaged in a sophisticated and wide ranging conspiracy to gather private and personal data, principally about high profile figures. Clearly they benefited financially from these matters.
Our inquiries found that these two men had the ability to illegally intercept mobile phone voice mails, commonly known as phone tapping.
Their potential targets may have run into hundreds of people, but our inquiries showed that they only used the tactic against a far smaller number of individuals.
In January 2007, Goodman and Mulcaire were jailed for four and six months, guilty to conspiring to unlawfully intercept communications.
Mulcaire also pleaded guilty to an additional five charges relating to similar matters.
On sentencing the two men, Mr Justice Gross at the Old Bailey said the case was "not about press freedom, it was about a grave, inexcusable and illegal invasion of privacy."
The police investigation was complex and was carried out in close liaison with the Crown Prosecution Service, Senior Counsel and the telephone companies concerned.
The technical challenges posed to the service providers to establish that there had in fact been interception were very, very, significant.
It is important to recognise that our enquiries showed that in the vast majority of cases there was insufficient evidence to show that tapping had actually been achieved.
Where there was clear evidence that people had been the subject of tapping, they were all contacted by the police.
These people were made aware of the potential compromise to their phones and offered preventative advice.
After extensive consultation with the CPS and Counsel, only a few were subsequently identified as witnesses in the proceedings that followed.
I said earlier in this statement that these two men were engaged in a sophisticated and wide ranging conspiracy to gather personal data about high profile figures. One was a private detective and one was a journalist. It is reasonable therefore to expect them to be in possession of data about such matters as it's part and parcel of their job.
I emphasise that our enquiries were solely concerned with phone tapping. This, as far as we are aware, affected a much smaller pool of people.
There has been a lot of media comment today about the then Deputy Prime Minister John Prescott. This investigation has not uncovered any evidence to suggest that John Prescott's phone had been tapped.
This case has been subject of the most careful investigation by very experienced detectives. It has also been scrutinised in detail by both the CPS and leading Counsel. They have carefully examined all the evidence and prepared the indictments that they considered appropriate.
No additional evidence has come to light since this case has concluded.
I therefore consider that no further investigation is required.
However, I do recognise the very real concerns, expressed today by a number of people, who believe that their privacy may have been intruded upon.
I therefore need to ensure that we have been diligent, reasonable and sensible, and taken all proper steps to ensure that where we have evidence that people have been the subject of any form of phone tapping, or that there is any suspicion that they might have been, that they have been informed.
Posted by The Editor at 20:01 Labels: MPS STATEMENT, News, plod, Politics
Complain about this comment
The Tory press and the Tory Press Barons like Rupert Murdock are attempting to hound Labour out of office.
Its an orchestrated move on many fronts; consider Tory Shadow Minster Damian Green, who received leaked information from a Home Office civil servant and party member and another Tory party activist responsible for stealing the Commons MPs expenses disk that resulted in the expense scandal.
So much for David Cameron's promises of openness and transparency its just a Big Con.
As democracy sweeps slowly around the world, ours could be slipping away.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
it does not appear that coulson was implicated at all in this or any other crime, and as editor resigned as this was done on his watch, something sadly no longer reconised as being the honorable thing to do. although i would have thought mandleson would have some sympathy, being forced to resign twice. as for damaging cameron i think this will have the opposite effect, clear precise, and prepared to stand by a collegue that evidently has done no wrong.
Complain about this comment
graham009 82
"another Tory party activist responsible for stealing the Commons MPs expenses disk that resulted in the expense scandal"
You might like to try to substantiate that one - it is contrary to all the evidence.
Complain about this comment
No 76 Saga
I agree it is a little unsettling to think that the powers that be may be aware that I will be going out for a drink tomorrow with three of my friends and may be, we will go out for a curry afterwards. Why they would want to know, I have no idea.
On a serious point. As I posted earlier, when is a tap in the public interest and who should decide that it is? If it is, who decides that it should be in the public domain?
Complain about this comment
So, John Prescott will not answer legitimate questions posed by his local newspaper regarding expenses, but finds most of the day available to bemoan the bismirching of his human rights to privacy.
This from a man whose friend and boss employed a spin docter to smear opposition politicians wives.
The only word is hypocrite. John, climb back into your comfortable second home and prepare for Lordship.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
"graham009 wrote:
The Tory press and the Tory Press Barons like Rupert Murdock are attempting to hound Labour out of office."
Tory press barons like Ruper Murdock? Would that be the same Rupert Murdock who publicly backed Labour in the last three elections?
Murdock is only trying to side with the Tories now because he has seen which way the wind is blowing. If Labour were still riding high in the polls he would still be supporting them.
"Its an orchestrated move on many fronts; consider Tory Shadow Minster Damian Green, who received leaked information from a Home Office civil servant and party member and another Tory party activist responsible for stealing the Commons MPs expenses disk that resulted in the expense scandal."
Are you trying to imply that parties who use leaked information are somehow unfit for government? Are you aware that Labour relied heavily on leaks during the last Tory Government? And a certain Gordon Brown helped make his name as a result of leaks - I wonder what happened to him?
"So much for David Cameron's promises of openness and transparency its just a Big Con.
As democracy sweeps slowly around the world, ours could be slipping away."
So it is more open and transparent that government failings are kept away from the voters? Every party when they are in opposition will benefit from leaks. The leaking of information that the government doesn't want released that actually helps democracy - it shines a bright light on what the government want to keep hidden.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Blimey, Mandy and Broon must be really scared of this guy to throw all this at it.
It's just a shame that the public are a bit more grown up and bored of smear campaigns and hyped up nonsense!
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Nick,
As stated by the Metropolitan Police, no additional evidence has been found, and - in my opinion - this is a non-story that is being used to smear the Conservative party.
However, how should we judge Mr Coulson? Mr Coulson did not commit these acts. The individual who committed the act was a reporter, Clive Goodman, and an investigator utilised by the reporter. If the left-wing media attempt to hold Mr Coulson at fault for the actions of his underling, then if they have any shred of professional ethics remaining, they should hold Gordon Brown to an equal standard for the actions of Gordon's underling Damian McBride, and Derek Draper, the "journalist" McBride was going to utilise to libel Tory MPs. If you call on Cameron to sack Coulson, then you should call on the Labour party to sack Brown.
The media let Brown off the hook for the actions of his underling, but appear determined to lynch Coulson for the actions of his underling. This appears to be another example of the usual left-wing double standards and hypocrisy.
I thought that the BBC had a duty to political balance. It appears I was mistaken, and the BBC is following the Guardian and reporting smears not news. Hold Brown equally responsible with Coulson! Be a journalist, not a stooge!
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Anyone else see Gordon at the L'Aquila beano?...
...didn't he look haggard and grey!
Complain about this comment
Nick, did I hear you correctly on the 10 o'clock news? Alex Ferguson may have questions for the Tories?
I had no idea it was the Tories who allegedly hacked his phone. Wow! This is serious. No wonder the BBC is spending so much time on this story! All the posters who doubted you must be feeling foolish now.
Complain about this comment
The matter should be properly investigated and/or reinvestigated based on new evidence. There is no question that if wrongdoing is discovered, those responsible should be prosecuted.
But, what is far more worrying than the (allegedly) criminal behavior of some journalists is the way ordinary citizens can now be legally spied on by local authorities and have their emails intercepted under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIPA).
Prescott is right to demand an investigation into a breach of his privacy - but has he forgotten that it was HIS government that created RIPA, the snooper's charter?
Complain about this comment
#82 graham009
Tory MP Green will not be charged.
Mr Green - MP for Ashford - and Home Office worker Christopher Galley, who passed on the information, have always denied any wrongdoing over the leaks, forwarded to the press, which related to immigration and crime.
Mr Galley will not face prosecution either, the CPS said.
So much for Duff Gordon's promises of openness and transparency it was just a Big Red Herring.
Duff wouldn't know what democracy was if it jumped up and bit his botty.
Complain about this comment
Could I just ask why Nick Robinson was reporting on the 10:00 news tonight from outside Conservative Central Office and not from outside the News International HQ? Assuming the Guardian has its facts straight, just who does Nick think is responsible for all this illegal phone tapping - the Tories or the Murdoch papers?
Complain about this comment
Just watched "Yates of the Yard's" statement on this non-story on Newsnight.
He quashed it with such eloquence, conciseness, authority and leadership.
Why can't we have people like him in government?
We need REAL honourable people like him in government...not the spivs like Mandelson and Sugar.
Complain about this comment
"Politicians, the press and the police.
Together they have become the Bermuda Triangle into which reputations have simply disappeared."
Nick old fruit
Can you send us a postcard as proof it really exists?
Complain about this comment
I wonder what the impact of all this will be on the average floating voter? ... speaking purely for myself, I guess I'd have to say that I'm a little less likely to vote Tory tonight than I was when I got up this morning
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
As a voicemail professional, I think that an explanation of the technology is called for. Put quite simply, a mobile phone's voicemail is stored on a computer with a very large hard disk. In addition to storing the voicemail, this computer will also have the ability to track logins accessing the voicemail. This will include date and time information. If the number calling is not the mobile number but another one with a legitimate login, then this will also be recorded. If the login used was the 'superuser' who has unlimited administrative access over the voicemail computer, then this will also be tracked. Using this information, it would be possible to cross reference the times and numbers used to access voicemail with phone usage and the location of the phone used by using phone company records. So, if the phone used happened to be located inside the offices of a newspaper or that of a private detective, then this would be evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that the voicemail account was hacked, especially if the location of the legitimate mobile phone was elsewhere.
The only reason why the Police might not make an arrest for technical reasons is if by the time the illegal access was discovered the records were somehow overwritten as part of the voicemail system's data housekeeping to conserve hard disk space.
Other than that, the data about phone and voicemail usage will be available and the only real reason not to proceed will be political.
It would therefore be useful if a technical clarification was provided by the Police or the CPS.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
111. At 11:02pm on 09 Jul 2009, sagamix wrote:
I wonder what the impact of all this will be on the average floating voter? ... speaking purely for myself, I guess I'd have to say that I'm a little less likely to vote Tory tonight than I was when I got up this morning
---
Don't feel bad about that. It is well documented that critical judgement deteriorates with tiredness.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Its all about misdirection!
Why is everyone missing the point. The police dude was only looking at evidence in the 1 case that they successfully prosecuted as he was directed to do by the commisioner. He has done no investigation into the countless other intercepts done by journalists of most papers. The Met doesn't want to either, as it will be terrible for them, that they didn't continue the case with other journalists at the time they prosecuted the NoW dudes. Have you not noticed how toxic this is in all papers except Guardian? They are all crapping it. Just think of all the civil cases the celebs are going to take. The lawyers are salivating.
The people who are worried :
Cameron/Coulson/Wade :
Cameron et al have been misdirecting the argument, the guardian is talking about the overall scandal whereas the Conservatives are always just referring to the 1 narrow case involving the journalist that got sent down. Thats what Cameron gave Coulson his second chance for. If it gets out that he must have known about all the others, then he is TOAST. Damed disthonest of Cameron to give this impression, but he's left himself an out, whereby he can say he was always referring to this one case. Just wait until coulson is up at the select committee, all thase angry MP's that have been tortured by the papers, PAYBACK !!!!
The papers:
Lotsa lovely lawsuits against them ! CHA-CHING, journos/editors go to jail? Oh dear.
Press Complaints Council:
Failed! Again! You are TOAST
Kelvin MacKenzie:
He was on tonight saying it was all nonesense. Oh dear, this investigation will widen to the other forms that newspapers get their info and I don't think he'll like that.
The Police:
They should have investigated all the journalists at the time, it fell throuigh the cracks in the floor did it?
The strange way the police dude gave us all the impression that everything was rosy with only hours of investigation; he was very careful with his words, wasn't he? He gave the impression that prescott had nothing to worry about when in fact he was talking about the 1 case where the dude went to jail, not about the actual cases that the Guardian is talking about. More misdirection.
Are the papers banking that after the MP revelations that everyone is bored with bad news. This is the time for all true journalists to show their mettle, and dare I say it, BLOGGERS, now is your time to shine! It will be very interesting if the papers and powers that be manage to bury this story. This is so much more scandalous than the MP revelations.
Complain about this comment
"sagamix wrote:
I wonder what the impact of all this will be on the average floating voter? ... speaking purely for myself, I guess I'd have to say that I'm a little less likely to vote Tory tonight than I was when I got up this morning"
So the temperature in hell has gone up a few degrees? As lets be honest here there is more chance of the Devil needing snow shoes then you voting Tory!
It might make a few voters less likely to vote Tory (some mud will stick which is why the Labour machine has been pushing this so hard) but I expect most voters who are willing to look behind the headlines would realise that the Tories aren't really at fault here
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
108 FellowCuckoo
In your post you mention that Nick was reporting from outside Conservative Central Office.
The reporting from outside offices is common practice on TV news.
Can someone explain to me how reporting from outside a closed dark empty building,whatever party or ministry building it is, adds one iota of interest or validity to the report?
THe beeb and others could save a fortune on these pointless outside reports.
Complain about this comment
The amount of Tory supporters trying to play this story down is amusing to say the least. . .
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
The allegations are that that the News of the World paid a million quid to stop people saying their phones were tapped etc
If they were tapped and the million quid is the reason the police weren't informed, then.....
..........I'd allege that that is a conspiracy to pervert the course of justice by the paper, it's agents and those who accepted the money and so kept quiet, allegedly.
Complain about this comment
129. notsosilentmajority
You said ...
"Welcome JJJ... another follower of the Draper/McBride transparent troll tradition. You can be spotted so easily you know"
I say ...
No, no such thing. Just a citizen who doesn't want to be a hypocrite by saying that it was terrible what the MPs did with expenses, but allow a far bigger scandal, the infringement of the personal liberties of thousands in order to make money for huge corporations, to be swept under the carpet without making my mark. I am just as vehemently against I.D. cards, which I believe you might agree with me about.
Complain about this comment
There are a lot of unanswered questions of who what where why
The police seem not to want to go over this again they have come up with there answer of there is no new information
This seems to be that Police only did every closed investigation first time round and settled for the quick result that would satisfy every one without looking too closely at the matter
If it had been a member of the public they would of seized every computer every CD, DVD, every file and any other form media that could hold any information to what they had been up too
If this is so the Police have allot of questions to answer to why they did not look more closely into the matter
As the EDITOR of News of the World I would of thought that he would of wanted to know allot about the scoop of where and how they got the information before it was sent to the print room and any scoop that is likely to bite back would of had to go to the legal department for checking for liability first
This raise allot more questions than anwsers
Complain about this comment
News Intl group have been using Private Investigation for years.These people gather information,carry out surveillance,liase with police 'sources' etc,and are even used by one red top to set up stories,by acting as Agent Provocateurs.A person(Mr GB) is one of the most senior people(contractors!) used by NI Group
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Come on people! don't fall for all this political 'outrage'.this really does smell like the political class grasping for a story to get public sympathy.....of course whilst more mp's sneak out the back door
Complain about this comment
Absolutely Priceless! A member of this government complaining about invasion of privacy. It's alright for everyone else's privacy to be invaded in the falacious, 'war on terror', isn't it John? See how funny it is when it happens to you.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Any one, by what ever methods they may use gets my vote to bring lying politicians to book. Is this how they foundout about john and tracy?
Unfortunately politicians and the media seem to believe they are a race apart from the man in the street. Sadly we know only too well that they aren't. Carry on tapping as far as I'm concerned. If you have nothing to hide what have you to fear? That's what you apply to us in the justice systme isn't it?
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Hey has anyone noticed sarga thinks his vote is important. its a floater waiting for the next popular gravy train Well Well Well.that puts nulabour out for a start.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
#128 ..The amount of Tory supporters trying to play this story down is amusing to say the least. . .
It is not the story that is being played down but the way it is being turned into a political attack on Cameron... this is an old trick to try and make someone guilty by vague association...... even if Coulson is involved why should that affect the conservative party... Did GB resign when Mcbride was found out? Did any party leader resign when their members were found abusing expenses... The electorate is fed up with these inter party spats when the UK is falling down the plughole...
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
... one or two of you seem sceptical about my new status as a floating voter to which all I say is watch this space - I may be unlikely to don clown togs (they're not too flattering, to be honest) but there is no way that I'd wantonly rule out one our great parties of state at such a crucial ... pivotal, even ... time for the nation - there's still a few months to go and the Tories are in the frame, as far as I'm concerned - main thing now needed (to capture me) is a few tweaks to their manifesto ... abolition of private education, common ownership of banks, energy, transport etc, positive discrimination in favour of women and minorities, open door immigration, 100 pc inheritance tax, couple of other things and we're ON
Complain about this comment
OK. So Cameron has shown himself to be 'tough' by sacking a few harmless old duffers who took an over-liberal interpretation of the expenses rules.
So will he be tough enough to sack somebody who, at the very least, has been associated with practices that could be seen to represent a bigger threat to personal freedom than any ID card scheme you might care to mention?
Complain about this comment
It must be a coincidence, but the newspaper that is pursuing this perceived story the most is also the newspaper that benefits significantly from all those public sector jobs adds in its paper and on its website.
Labour is playing a very clever game with The Guardian by channelling all those adds to The Guardian. It is time for a law that requires public sector jobs adds to be spread across all media outlets or, probably much cheaper, a dedicated government jobs website. This should help prevent biased coverage in return for covert funding of a few friendly newspapers through procurement of add space with those very papers.
Perhaps time for the commons cultural committee to look into this?!
Complain about this comment
Well Nick, Yates has said nothing to see, move along.
I bet you're gutted.
Complain about this comment
Stephen Pound on BBC Breakfast News this morning saying that 'David cameron would regret his 'I'm feeling relaxed' comment on this issue and that it would come back to haunt him. We'll see won't we.
Complain about this comment
Yet another political hitewash...
I still haven't had replys from G.Brown, Darling or the Police as to why NO MP has be invistigated or charge with invalid/missleading or fradulant filling in of their Tax forms.
Regardless of what the fees office paid for as legitimate expenses, the TAX rules for MP's as laid out in the inland rev MP's tax guidlines state that MP's MUST declare the amount of any ACA payments that were not exclusivily used by the MP in carrying out their duties as an MP.
For example a small buniness owner when buying a PC or Van each year has to declare to the TAX man if the PC is used for persional use and if so what percentage and simulary with the VAN. Tax is then due on that percentage.
The same rules apply to ACA and infact MP's are forced on the tax return to declare the that ALL ACA is legit and sign a special box directly under a very cearly worded decleration.
I can not see how any MP who declares the house where their partner/kids live full time can legially declare that 100% of their ACA's are exclusivily used in their MP's duties. THIS quite simply is TAX advoidance and show have the full weight of the TAX law thrown at them.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
146. At 07:52am on 10 Jul 2009, sagamix wrote:
... one or two of you seem sceptical about my new status as a floating voter to which all I say is watch this space - I may be unlikely to don clown togs (they're not too flattering, to be honest) but there is no way that I'd wantonly rule out one our great parties of state at such a crucial ... pivotal, even ... time for the nation - there's still a few months to go and the Tories are in the frame, as far as I'm concerned - main thing now needed (to capture me) is a few tweaks to their manifesto ... abolition of private education, common ownership of banks, energy, transport etc, positive discrimination in favour of women and minorities, open door immigration, 100 pc inheritance tax, couple of other things and we're ON
------------------------------------------------------------------------
You were doing so well until you got to three things
Private Education
Inheritance Tax
And that most vile of newspeak Positive discrimination a lovely example of an oxymoron
Complain about this comment
15. kaybraes
So there is no evidence of the claimed phone tapping as stated by the Guardian and then trumpeted to the rafters by Nick Robinson et al
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Have Just been listening to a Lawyer for some of the aggrieved doing an interview for Radio 4.
He recons that there is evidence & this was sealed in an agreement made to finalise the original court case and settle the claim.
The problem is the evidence will have to be unsealed by the courts before the Police can make any further investigations.
The Police have, quite rightly, said that there is no reason to investigate the original case any further, but you have to wonder why others where not informed so they could of pressed their own cases at the time.
All this sounds like a stitch up in the Courts to me.
The trouble is, if everybody concerned puts in for a separate investigation & presses for the original evidence to be unsealed, this whole thing could run & run.
Yes, This is an ideal opportunity for Labour to hypocritically smear the Tories, but thats show Biz.
If my phones were being illegally tapped, I would want the issue to be fully investigated as well.
Andy Coulson may of known what was going on because it happened on his watch, so hes not out of the woods yet.
Complain about this comment
The timing of this perceived story in The Guardian (and this was a co-ordinated effort with Campbell and the former deputy pm all up in arms) is another strong pointer towards elections this autumn. The earlier pointer was Mandelson's statement that there will be no update on the govenrment's spending and revenue plans prior to the next election, which implies an electtion before the pre-budget, which usually is presented late November (or the abolition of the pre-budget).
The hearings by the commons cultural committee, to which Coulson will be invited, will no doubt be timed in a way that Coulson has to spend some of his time on other things than the election in the weeks prior to that election and The Guardian and The Beeb will seek to keep this perceived story making the headlines.
It's suuuu ovvias!
Complain about this comment
7
'do labour MPs believe they are more important than the police?'
It would seem the answer is yes.
BBC Breakfast this morning is reporting that MPs will now investigate!
Complain about this comment
Nick, how do you obtain all of your information. Are you fully open and transparent.
Complain about this comment
"york1900 wrote:
As the EDITOR of News of the World I would of thought that he would of wanted to know allot about the scoop of where and how they got the information before it was sent to the print room and any scoop that is likely to bite back would of had to go to the legal department for checking for liability first"
You would expect the Editor of a serious newspaper to check the sources and want to know how the information was obtained. However, I don't think anyone will argue that the NotW is a serious paper :)
Tabloids seem to work on the principle that they get more money from running the story then then lose from being sued.
Complain about this comment
"sagamix wrote:
... one or two of you seem sceptical about my new status as a floating voter to which all I say is watch this space - I may be unlikely to don clown togs (they're not too flattering, to be honest)"
Can anyone see why people are sceptical? The ironic thing is that as much people when they make a comment about "Clowns" refer to the Labour party.
"main thing now needed (to capture me) is a few tweaks to their manifesto ... abolition of private education, common ownership of banks, energy, transport etc, positive discrimination in favour of women and minorities, open door immigration, 100 pc inheritance tax, couple of other things and we're ON"
So basically you will move to the Tories if they head even further to the left then the Socalist Labour party.
So not really a floating voter then?
Complain about this comment
Why isn't the Guardian calling for Grodon Brown to resign over the Damian McBride affair? Why aren't they calling for Ed Balls to resign over the Damian McBride affair.
Why aren't the Guardian calling for Gordon Brown to resign for his attempt to place his best mate, Ed Balls, in number eleven to be chancellor when he was so close to Damian McBride?
Why are the Guardin still obsessing about a tory that Scotlan Yard has already investigated and refuses ot investigate further?
Why is this disussion not about the continued erosion of human rights and civil liberties under this disasterous newlabour administration who haven't a are in the world for individual freedoms; they let this ituatioon develo over twelve year sbecause it suited their own ends - to snoop on us all.
Why isn't this discussion about the vast databases built up under newlabour that we have no control over?
Get rid of this intrusive government.
Call an election
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
The first question on BBC's Question Time last night was about phone-tapping, and the first politician to answer was Labour Minister Andy Burnham, who gave a quite reasonable reply and didn't mention Coulson once.
Clearly this answer was not acceptable to the BBC barons as Dimbleby jumped in and immediately asked about the position of Andy Coulson. The same angle was pushed by the BBC presenter on Question Time Extra (yawn, should have gone to bed).
Can we have some serious journalism on the BBC please? There are serious political questions about the press arising from this affair (the over-mighty Murdoch empire for one), to which we can now add the juvenilia of the BBC (and I mean BBC presenters, editors, and journalists, and not the excellent young people who contributed to the Question Time programme).
Complain about this comment
169. At 09:30am on 10 Jul 2009, johnharris66 wrote:
The first question on BBC's Question Time last night was about phone-tapping, and the first politician to answer was Labour Minister Andy Burnham, who gave a quite reasonable reply and didn't mention Coulson once.
Clearly this answer was not acceptable to the BBC barons as Dimbleby jumped in and immediately asked about the position of Andy Coulson. The same angle was pushed by the BBC presenter on Question Time Extra (yawn, should have gone to bed).
Can we have some serious journalism on the BBC please? There are serious political questions about the press arising from this affair (the over-mighty Murdoch empire for one), to which we can now add the juvenilia of the BBC (and I mean BBC presenters, editors, and journalists, and not the excellent young people who contributed to the Question Time programme).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Indeed i do enjoy the schools question time, although that girl who said " kids have nothing to do" grated on me somewhat
I swear Andy Burnham wesr eyeliner
Complain about this comment
Guardian back-tracking already.
Fergie and Shearer NOT tapped, but may have left messages on Gordon Taylor's phone which was ...... a case which is long closed ! !
Taylor settled for 700 grand, and none of the evidence came out in court.
Perhaps Fergie should be suing the Guardian for running a story which could bring all the unheard dirt into the public domain ....
... 'tapping' in football terms has other connotations ! !
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Nick
Is the Secretary of State for Justice suffering from an acute bout of laryngitis? Has the same illness struck down the Home Secretary and other members of the Cabinet?
It all comes down to the cover up. Who had most to gain?
News International obviously. But also if the methods employed made the headlines, the people who used these methods would gain. Private investigators OK. Then it gets murky. Security Services MI5 and MI6, NSA...
The DPP will I suspoect draw a line under this affair pretty quickly. Some backbenchers will keep it going for a bit but in doing so may find themselves in contempt of the law.
PS Did I hear at the end of the Daily Politics show the other day Andrew Neil congratulate you on your new job - Business editor I think I heard?
Complain about this comment
170
Indeed i do enjoy the schools question time, although that girl who said " kids have nothing to do" grated on me somewhat
----------------
Indeed. Wouldn't it be wonderful to have nothing to do. I miss those days.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Just looked at Guardian web site, and found a captioned-photo-list of those involved, including "Alan Shearer" and "Alex Shearer" ..... the latter being a ruddy complectioned Scotsman, recently knighted.
Another reson to sue THEM, SIR Alex ? ?
Complain about this comment
I have seen this question raised elsewhere but without any responses:
On what grounds could Cameron sack Coulson?
Surely no trade union rep. would sanction the arbitrary dismissal of an employee? If Yates of the Yard starts an investigation and Coulson is charged then we have a totally different situation.
Does innocent until proven guilty only apply to Labour Party members and apparatchiks?
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Politicians, the press and the police
Nick, wrong headline.
Should be Police tell Politicians and the press that they are too busy to indulge in playground scraps
Complain about this comment
Obviously the long arm of the Mayor keeping the Met at bay! Nu compassionate tories will do anything!
Complain about this comment
181, Oh so very fooled and tracically oblivious Steve.
Nothing to do with the mayor old chap.
An investigation in which there was never the slightest suggestion that there was anything to do with Coulson, and they don't want start it up again because they feel it would be pointless.
I know you would like to put the ills of the world at the feet of the next government, but lets keep it sensible.
Complain about this comment
Yep, well, it's all been said.
Much ado about nothing.
That ghastly Labour MP on Breakfast this morning baying for blood, gleaming eyes waiting to put the knife into David Cameron.
It won't happen. It's all a non-starter. A Party POO POO.
Labour are so afraid. And so they should be. They will be losing their jobs in a matter of months.
Complain about this comment
David Cameron said over McBride:- "I do not know what Gordon Brown knew and when he knew it but what I do know is that he hired these people, he sets the culture"
So what kind of culture is David Cameron setting over hiring Andy Coulson as his communications director, when he knew that this person had resigned from the NOtW over telephone hacking scandal all of which happend on his watch?
Complain about this comment
Stephen Pound. That's his name, the Labour man they trawl out to speak to the media quite a lot.
From the looks of him he is about to retire anyway.
Let the Police get on with their real jobs.
Complain about this comment
#166, Econoce wrote:
"@ Frankfisher (161)
There is no such thing as a licence fee (although it is called like that): it is a tv ownership tax. Even if you could demonstrate to only watch commercial channels (by videoing your life, all hypothetically), you still had to pay the fee.
Anyway, to add insult to injury, the licence fee will at some stage disappear, not for noble reasons but because everyone can get his tv content through the web quite soon. And at that stage the beeb will be paid by the Treasury. This is happening now anyway via a detour, but then even the most dim people in the UK will be aware of it."
=====
Econoce,
Good point.
Why doesn't government impose a small unit tax on every PC sold, as they are capable of receiving internet TV?
Likewise, as they want to fund the extension (more like introduction) of highspeed broadband, why do they not apply a similar small tax on every mobile handset, as they also talk up the provision of wireless access to content? Why limit it to a tax on fixed-line phone lines?
Of course, in their wisdom, this government took GBP 22BIL out of the phone companies through the most expensive auction of licences anywhere in the world. (No idea where THAT money went.) If they'd taken a more sensible approach, they could have used large amounts of that money to pay companies specifically to invest in broadband development. But that just isn't government style.
Grab it, spend it, wonder where it's all gone... No foresight!
Complain about this comment
"182. At 10:34am on 10 Jul 2009, greatHayemaker wrote:
181, Oh so very fooled and tracically oblivious Steve.
Nothing to do with the mayor old chap."
Wouldn't Steve's comment at 181 be considered libelous? There is currently zero evidence to support his comments.
What is the purpose of the pre-moderation process if comments like that get through?
Complain about this comment
I just wonder how deep this phone tapping goes.
I'm old enough to remember 'Watergate' and the scandal that followed that investigation.
We all know what happened to Richard Nixon.
Is any party leader going to risk his career for an ex-Fleet Street hack?
Complain about this comment
I don't normally finger Nick on this blog as being biased, but I really do feel the way the BBC has handled this story has been catastrophic for its reputation as an impartial broadcaster. If there is a story here, it is emphatically not about Coulson and Cameron. The story appears to be about Labour smears using its in house journal, the Guardian, combined with some genuine concern about what some journalists working for News International may have been up to a few years ago.
Complain about this comment
146. sagamix wrote:
"... one or two of you seem sceptical about my new status as a floating voter"
=
Should be 'voting floater' ;-)
Complain about this comment
184
How many times?
At the moment, it seems Coulson has done nothing wrong.
McBride did and was caught red handed.
Its like talking to a wall.
Complain about this comment
#184. At 10:36am on 10 Jul 2009, duckoff wrote:
David Cameron said over McBride:- "I do not know what Gordon Brown knew and when he knew it but what I do know is that he hired these people, he sets the culture"
So what kind of culture is David Cameron setting over hiring Andy Coulson as his communications director, when he knew that this person had resigned from the NOtW over telephone hacking scandal all of which happend on his watch?
_________________________________________________________________________
The huge difference is that McBride was working for Brown out of No 10 when his offences were committed!!! Get it?????????
Complain about this comment
What are the skills and abilities ar needed to be a Director of Communications if his/her job is to COMMUNICATION clearly and truthfully?
Whose interests does he/she really serve?
Complain about this comment
"duckoff wrote:
David Cameron said over McBride:- "I do not know what Gordon Brown knew and when he knew it but what I do know is that he hired these people, he sets the culture"
So what kind of culture is David Cameron setting over hiring Andy Coulson as his communications director, when he knew that this person had resigned from the NOtW over telephone hacking scandal all of which happend on his watch?"
Lets compare the two using the evidence you have so kindly provided:
Gordon Brown HIRED McBride. McBride was the person at fault. Therefore Gordon Brown was directly responsible for HIRING the person at fault.
David Cameron HIRED Coulson. Coulson was the editor (manager) of the person responsible (there is no indication that he even hired the people responsible).
There is currently no evidence against Coulson but there is evidence against McBride.
If in the future David Cameron hired Gordon Brown as an advisor would you then try to tie McBride's actions to David Cameron? As you are basically doing that with Coulson.
Admittedly the case is slightly different (Brown never resigned - and nor should he and AFAIK McBride didn't break the law)
Complain about this comment
Come on then Nick, after your rush of blogs yesterday on the 'scandle' (IF THERE EVER WAS ONE) you seem to be very quite today, are you pouring over yesterday's comments thinking 'oh dear, I knew I should have taken what Mandy & Liebour said with a pinch of salt'. Remember Nick, you have become the story with the continued bias you show towards Liebour.
Complain about this comment
I'm curious why my first post on this thread - Is that a full unreserved apology Nick? - was removed.
Clearly as the news moves this story appears to be gaining legs and running. This was a political story about Coulson yesterday but it is now a corporate story about News International. Coulson was getting the stories and probably was guarded from the sources of the news or from the methods used to get the information.
I still think without the smoking gun Coulson is ok
Complain about this comment
184. At 10:36am on 10 Jul 2009, duckoff wrote:
"So what kind of culture is David Cameron setting over hiring Andy Coulson as his communications director, when he knew that this person had resigned from the NOtW over telephone hacking scandal all of which happend on his watch?"
=
Good point. But are there any principled PR/media advisors out there?
173. excellentcatblogger wrote:
"PS Did I hear at the end of the Daily Politics show the other day Andrew Neil congratulate you on your new job - Business editor I think I heard?"
=
Nick old bean.
Is this true? Are they moving you to where Campbell can't mess with your head?
Complain about this comment
The wally on here who tries to equate the shameful McBride / Draper affair with this is on the wrong track.
McBride / Draper were directly employed by this ghastly Prime Minister and were acting FOR him.
Any alleged phone tapping was not done under the aegis or auspices of David Cameron.
When I worked in HR for a huge national well respected company we often gave candidates a job despite hearing of blips in their past. They knew and we knew that they knew what may or may not have happened. Therefore they tried harder and were better in their jobs than the more complacent arrogant types who thought they were an asset and we were lucky to employ them.
Such a case, I would imagine, is DC employing Coulson.
Good on you David - a fair man indeed.
Complain about this comment
My comment has just been removed, so I am sending it back: Never mind Nick. You can find a place on the politically-neutral Newsnight panel together with the other four Labour people. If you were a really independent and professional political journalist you would go on the BBC News at Ten tonight and announce: "I confess. David Cameron is innocent OK. He and me were victims of the Guardian newspaper, trying to do a favour to the Labour Party, and of various Labour MPs. Sorry everybody. "
I presume the BBC minders don't want someone to mention the obvious connections between the BBC and the Labour Party, so what is going to happen now.
Complain about this comment
If you're enjoyed this article on the NOTW, there's an almost identical one in Robert Peston's blog in the business section.
Complain about this comment
It's rather interesting tha Robert Peston is muscling in on this "story", but at least he's offering some hard background, rather than tittle tattle. Seems that several papers have been clearly identified as engaging in the communication intercept activity.
Guess that's the difference...
Business focused people tend to look at what happens, for whom and at what cost (DELIVERY) while political focused people tune into the subtle nuances of who's up, who's down, what the words "seem" to say and completely forget that it's what you DO, not what you say you may or not do, that delivers a decent outcome for Joe Public.
Practical politics must start with ideas. (As does every aspect of life.) But the whole political commentary stuff has become so introverted that it appears like navel gazing while the country sinks.
It's far worse than the Titanic... What we now have is people focusing on the new tune being written by some bloke, to hand to the band to play, while the boat nosedives...
Complain about this comment
#122 JohnnyJimmyJones
Thank god somebody else said that. Yates' comments were relating to a 'thin slice of the pie' not all of the allegations.
I don't see why everybody is being so blase about it. It does make me wonder how different some of the posts above would have been if Andy Coulson was Labour's director of communications.
Another thing, with all this Zanu Labour, Liebour, Nu Conservative's, etc. Haven't some of you people grown out of name calling? Can't you debate/discuss the facts without the pettiness.
Complain about this comment
"crowdedisland wrote:
I don't normally finger Nick on this blog as being biased, but I really do feel the way the BBC has handled this story has been catastrophic for its reputation as an impartial broadcaster. If there is a story here, it is emphatically not about Coulson and Cameron. The story appears to be about Labour smears using its in house journal, the Guardian, combined with some genuine concern about what some journalists working for News International may have been up to a few years ago."
Making the story about Labour trying to smear the Tories is just as bad as trying to make the story Coulson and Cameron.
The story is that the NotW is alleged to have hacked into the voice mail of thousands of innocent people just because they are in the public eye and apparently the police were aware of this but didn't pursue it.
Complain about this comment
The moderator has been a busy boy or girl.
I posted a response to another poster some time ago and I have been notified of its removal, apparently I broke the house rules and no further explanation is required.
I note the person , to whom I responded, has vanished too.
I suspect they were treated to the same non reason.
I have reported a comment once and I was told that the description to which I took exception was perfectly acceptable to the BBC
" Vacuous Poshboy" The politics of envy allowed at the BBC as long as it has in its sights a Tory eh?In this case George Osborne.
Some should remember that Ms Harman and T Blair attended exclusive schools and I am certain there are quite a few more.
I amuse myself now and then by counting those who accuse a particular party of flooding the boards, are these people clairvoyant?
Or are they just clutching at straws?
This will be deemed " off topic" and I no longer care!
Complain about this comment
Do you think Alec Ferguson will now stop giving interviews to the Murdoch-owned Sky Sports.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
"puzzling wrote:
What are the skills and abilities ar needed to be a Director of Communications if his/her job is to COMMUNICATION clearly and truthfully?
Whose interests does he/she really serve?"
They are people hired by a political party to handle the delivery of their parties message to the public - so I guess that they serve the party that they work for.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
195 farmer giles
since the TV news broadcasts are full of this then it is not likely to be forgotton in a hurry, Yates statement only concerned one man, it does'nt end there there are others involved and they must be rooted out.
My concern is not Coulson although if he is guilty he must go,Thats Camerons problem not ours.
What I fail to understand is that the Tory bloggers on here are trying to draw a curtain over this. They complain almost on a daily basis and with some justification that this is a nanny state, there is to much CCTV and police stop and search etc.
Yet this to me is the greatest infringement of our civil liberties in my life time, their not watching you on camera from a distance they cold be listening to every word you say, the inference this morning was that the other papers are giving it a miss, some will say because its a non story, have you ever known a newspaper not run a story thats headline news on TV, I have'nt,the inference was that they are not running the story because they are possibly up to their eyeballs doing the same thing.
If that is remotely true then we have a hell of a lot to be worried about and it needs people like us to complain about these activities not to write on here trying to sweep it under the carpet hoping it will go away. If it is'nt stopped now these people will go from strength to strength and who knows when they will be listening to your conversation. Lets unite cross part to attempt to nip this in the bud now.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Interesting point 205. I was thinking the same myself.
I wonder how many of these alleged "buggees" had used either the Sun or News of the World to publicise things or leak things into the press?
If the News of the World were bugging Alan Shearer would that have been during the time he was giving exclusive interviews as one of the many stars who do so to the Sun or News of The World?
Apparently they are the only papers that the sports starts trust. Or so their strapline goes.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
#202. At 11:38am on 10 Jul 2009, thornton_reed wrote:
Another thing, with all this Zanu Labour, Liebour, Nu Conservative's, etc. Haven't some of you people grown out of name calling? Can't you debate/discuss the facts without the pettiness.
_________________________________________________________________________
Blair/Mandelbrown started it all by rebranding Labour as New Labour and then pronouncing it in Estuary English as NuLabour. It is only then a short step to equate this menacing, illiberal, controlling party with Zanu PF, especially since Brown has now adopted Zimbabwean economic policies.
So ZaNuLab is accurate, amusing and sums them up in one composite word!
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
After the Police investigating the Police in repect to the last London G8 affair, then the Parliamentry Expenses affair, now followed by Newspapers Hacking everybody else.
I would'nt mind so much but Newspaper BECOMING THE STORY, and in the Case of News International we have a situation whereby one hand doe's not know what the other hand is doing what with the goings on between the THE SUN and THE NEWS OF THE WORLD, for have these Reporters been bitten by a Policeman, or a Politician to get into this mess instead of carrying out everyday honest reporting of events.
Well, you can say one thing, if they were looking for a BIG STORY then they WILL find this one on their own Door-Step.
Complain about this comment
Once again the Labour spin machine is put into gear.
Farmer Brown and his trusty Brownites mount up and start the Muck spreading.
They find some filth, put it into the centrifuge, fling it as hard as they can at their political rivals and hope some of it sticks.
Yes phone tapping is wrong.
No the police are not after Coulson.
No Coulson should not resign.
Who cares if somebody overheard Prescott munching his way through an "all you can eat" buffet.
The most important issue for the British people is to get BROWN and his cronies out.
Complain about this comment
I wonder if Mr Cameron would be so relaxed if the NoW, when Mr Coulson was editor, tapped his phone and would he have given him a second chance.
With respect to Yates of the Yard should he not have spent some time, at the Guardian's office' demanding any new evidence they have, then spent days or even months checking, especially, when they claim to know the names of the reporters involved in tapping. Why rush out a statement within hours? I suspect there's more to this than meets the eye. I wonder if there's some truth in the reports that members of the police force were paid to provide information and this is the start of a coverup.
Complain about this comment
Come on Robinson Minor - you Wuss. Print my missive. lol
Complain about this comment
I think most English people who are interested enough, realise that ALL electronic media is likely to be intercepted by various interested parties, usually Government organs such as security services but occasionally by 'others' e.g. private investigators etc.
Therefore, it is mainly the political dimension of this story that is of interest insofar as can it be used to damage the Tories.
Which is where this English blogger departs as I simple could not care less if the Tories or Labour or the Lib-Dems ceased to exist tomorrow.
They are all well past their sell-by date and have stunk for ages.
In any meaningful sense, these parties are dead, dead, dead.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
214
Grandy, noone is defending the NOTW for this infringement on liberties.
What we are doing is pointing out the obvious chasm between the NOTW scandal and Duncan Cameron. An editor who is not involved in the scandal, except by association, is later hired by the Tories.
Its a bit weak doncha think?
Complain about this comment
My...the moderators have been keept busy - 88 posts removed.
Judging by some of my posts which have been removed in the past there will be no good reason for removing most of them!
no. 89 (probably),
Complain about this comment
"grandantidote wrote:
What I fail to understand is that the Tory bloggers on here are trying to draw a curtain over this. They complain almost on a daily basis and with some justification that this is a nanny state, there is to much CCTV and police stop and search etc."
I suspect many Tory bloggers are trying to draw a curtain over the side story (the part linking Cameron and the Tories). At the moment the big story seems to be almost forgotten.
"Yet this to me is the greatest infringement of our civil liberties in my life time, their not watching you on camera from a distance they cold be listening to every word you say, the inference this morning was that the other papers are giving it a miss, some will say because its a non story, have you ever known a newspaper not run a story thats headline news on TV, I have'nt,the inference was that they are not running the story because they are possibly up to their eyeballs doing the same thing."
I agree that it is a great infringement (and you have to be worried about the validity of the stories got using the method used - anyone who knows your number can leave a voice mail and try to stitch you up!) However, it was my impression (and I maybe wrong or have got the wrong end of the stick from the media) that the government want to bring in laws that will force mobile phone companies to keep records of all calls made on their network (as the nice sounding lady on the Orange helpline likes to say "it's for security" - if you have an Orange phone and have called them up to query your bill I am sure you know what I am talking about!)
"If that is remotely true then we have a hell of a lot to be worried about and it needs people like us to complain about these activities not to write on here trying to sweep it under the carpet hoping it will go away. If it is'nt stopped now these people will go from strength to strength and who knows when they will be listening to your conversation. Lets unite cross part to attempt to nip this in the bud now."
I agree that this investigation shouldn't be dropped but the focus of the investigation needs to be the the depth and breadth of the conspiracy (who was involved? and how many were spied on?) and not "Who does the ex-editor work for now?"
And also if I have heard correctly (and it wasn't a random Daily Mail style exagerated headline) then perhaps the Government should think twice about recording all our mobile conversations - I have nothing against police applying for taps (as long as they have sufficient reason to request it) but recording every conversation is wrong.
Complain about this comment
Labour muck spreading goes something like this: -
Point Prescott at the "All you can eat buffet".
Make sure he has plenty of fluids laced with syrup of figs.
Release Prescott and allow him to devour everything in sight; making sure limbs, small children and pets are out of his range.
Reverse Prescott into the media spotlight and let him rip.
In all the time I have observed him in the Political arena, he appears to have communicated in this fashion.
His appearance on the news regarding the Phone Tap scandal was no exception.
Labour should be proud of their ex-Deputy Prime Minister.
Complain about this comment
221. At 12:36pm on 10 Jul 2009, Invader-Zim wrote:
Who cares if somebody overheard Prescott munching his way through an "all you can eat" buffet.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
At the expense of the tax payer no doubt
Complain about this comment
"TheBlameGame wrote:
But as someone on the box said last night, how many editors of red tops, where this type of snooping is common practice, are completely unaware of what goes on? That's stretching credulity isn't it? So it is quite legitimate for posters here to question Cameron's judgement in appointing Coulson. But the main story is about News International and the press in general compromising the privacy of individuals. Not the spin NR and the Guardian are putting on it."
I think Labour supporters who suggest that Coulson should be aware of what his staff are doing are walking on thin ice as the same claim could be laid against Brown concerning McBride.
I would expect that plausible denialability applies in such cases - if you don't want something to be directly traced back to you then it is simply better if you don't know about. I doubt that the editor of a scandal sheet like the NotW or the Sun really cares how the story breaks as long as it is juicy and sells the papers.
Complain about this comment
Many of my comments were allowed through by The Mods originally but then removed some hours later because someone complained. The subject matter related to senior Labour figures going for the throat of David Cameron on the strength of mere allegations and implied criticism of Nick's stance. So much for free speech!
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
216. At 12:09pm on 10 Jul 2009, Ian_the_chopper wrote:
You said "I wonder how many of these alleged "buggees" had used either the Sun or News of the World to publicise things or leak things into the press?"
Well then they deserve to have their private life illegally hacked into (and their friends lives, and their familys/lawyers/Doctors/Accountants lives). The papers should be able to hang, draw and quarter them.
Grow up Ian_the_chopper!
I just did a scan of the major daily papers and everyone of them except Guardian has bumped the story down to a couple of lines on their homepage, the times doesn't even have a mention of it. The papers are crapping themselves and trying to make the story go away. They are trying to blindside us to their contant use of illegal tactics. They are deliberately trying to take our eyes of any illegal activities they have been involved in, which is a disgrace.
The only upside is that any minor celeb worth their salt is going to get a lawyer and try and sue the pants of Newscorp.
Let me see ...
established precedent of 700k per offence, 3000 * 700k = 2,100,000,000
Thats 2.1 Billion NewsCorp wwill have to pay out.
It'll be like sucking from their mothers teat for the celebs.
And Coulson is TOAST when all those angry MPs on the select committee get him. He wont have a chance to sleaze himself out of that one.
Complain about this comment
"crowdedisland wrote:
It is only then a short step to equate this menacing, illiberal, controlling party with Zanu PF, especially since Brown has now adopted Zimbabwean economic policies.
So ZaNuLab is accurate, amusing and sums them up in one composite word!"
Apart from the fact that it really isn't very accurate, if anything our economic problem is the opposite to theirs. We risk deflation they have (or at least had) hyper-inflation.
I am no fan of Labour but they can't be compared to Mugabe.
Complain about this comment
There is an easy answer to all of this. Change or set up your phone pin to one that cannot be linked to you or unsubscribe via your phone provider. Anyone with an ounce of common sense and a regard to their privacy such as an important celebrity would have done this from the outset!
Complain about this comment
Re: 186 fairlyopenminded.
T.V. Licences are a progressive from on Income Tax levied upon anyone in Ownership of a TV Receiver, for it matters not that anyone may only choose to view TV Chennels other than those of the BBC.
The arguement of old was in statement that, because there was no way of really preventing any owner of any TV Receiver from watching BBC Programming therefore everyone HAD TO and still doe's Pay for what they may NEVER wish to View.
However, with the onset of Digital TV, that past statement no longer hold water for there are no reasons at all why the BBC cannot SELL its Programming like SKY TV in Packages form, for why should we firstly pay for any TV Licence to watch Public Sector Broadcasting to THEN moreover have to Pay once AGAIN for the same Programming at the TV Licence Fee Payers expense, just to then VIEW to PAY again for a SKY Package to view re-runs of the SAME Programmes that we have already paid for.
On the other hand, BBC WORLD shows U.K. PRIME-TIME TV Programmes for a Fee across Europe by using a Scrambles Signal, but the Countries in which these Programmes are shown DO NOT PAY ANY GOVERNMENT ENFORCED TAX FOR ANY TV LICENCE, UNLIKE HERE IN THE U.K.
Complain about this comment
We have a situation where the usual suspects have by using parliamentary privilege hung, drawn and quartered Andy Coulson without Charge, Trial or Conviction is this democracy?????????
Complain about this comment
Let's face it.
Tabloid news is a load of Prescott.
If they are not tapping phones for pseudo scandal, then they are inventing the scandal.
The nature of the News industry is to get the story by hook or by crook.
If they can't get the News, then they make the News.
The sad thing about this story is that GUTTER POLITICIANS are using the GUTTER PRESS to tarnish the future UK government.
This muck spreading reeks of Brownite desperation.
Complain about this comment
What a joke. Nearly 90 posts removed?! So the BBC found that more than 1 in 3 people's view unacceptable eh?
What I tried to say (in my previously removed 2 posts), is that:
1) McBride's case was politically motivated. Fictional stories conjured out of thin air, and employed as an advisor at the same time.
2) Coulson's case was more paparazzi-like. How can you explain otherwise that politicians on both sides are tapped? Also, he was not employed at the time when these acts were carried out. They also had a court case 2 years ago. If there are no new evidence coming out, I'd consider the matter closed.
3) For the Labour people to come out and smear the Tories is plain ridiculous. Unless he did something inappropriate when he is employed by the Conservatives, I don't see much wrong in this.
Not that I agree with phone tapping, which the govt suggested they should do to for "security", but I wish Jacqui Smith is still here to use the pathetic line "There's nothing to fear if you have done nothing wrong." That argument doesn't sounds too great now does it?
Complain about this comment
To my relief, I can confirm that I cannot extract water from my phone.
There is definately no visible plumbing.
Furthermore, my underpants were removed because they were found to have broken the house rules.
Complain about this comment
If he says he knew nothing about it then I'm sure he didn't. Would Mr Cameron associate himself so closely with a person whose veracity was in question? I don't understand why so many posters here are being overly defensive.
Complain about this comment
224. At 12:41pm on 10 Jul 2009, JohnConstable wrote:
...it is mainly the political dimension of this story that is of interest insofar as can it be used to damage the Tories.
Which is where this English blogger departs as I simple could not care less if the Tories or Labour or the Lib-Dems ceased to exist tomorrow...
In any meaningful sense, these parties are dead, dead, dead.
Well, yes - but the thing is that they're not dead. There is no doubt at all in my mind that if there was any viable alternative that was capable of forming a government most people would vote for it - but there simply isn't. They survive because there are no predators.
Complain about this comment
Ohhhh, I had my posting removed. Not sure why.
All I suggested is that Nick gets very good access to GB, and that he reports GB's comments in a positive fashion. Anybody here see a link?
As this blog is called Polititians, press and the police i think it is not as far off topic as many postings tend to be, and Nicks favourable reporting of New Labour press releases is a common held belief not only of mine but of many others on this site, or are opinions now not allowed?
Complain about this comment
Bloggers who are interested in (part of) Government(s) capability to monitor your electronic activity should look up 'Lawful Interception' on Wiki.
If you are or become of interest to certain parties, then they will literally be able to track everything that you do, especially electronically.
It is far, far more than 'Walls have ears' these days.
I believe Napoleon said it ... 'knowledge is power'.
Complain about this comment
It did seem a rather rapid response by the Met to say that no further enquiries would be undertaken. There do seem to be all sorts of individuals popping up with some claim to have been "bugged".
Hopefully the DPP will take a cool look and decided whether some action should be taken.
Nick did say that Sir Alex Ferguson would have questions for the Tory party, as shown on BBC TV last night. That really is a step too far.
If S'rAlex believes he was subject to phone tapping/communication interception,etc., he should (quite properly) go after the perpetrators News Corp and NoTW. If the finger subsequently points at Coulson for any involvement while he was editor at NoTW, fair cop.
But what has that to do with the Tories? The guy worked for Rupert Murdoch's empire prior to resigning.
The McBride situation, raised by many posters on this blog, was quite different. He was involved in party political matters while a member of the administration's communication staff. That meant he was a CIVIL SERVANT and the constitutional convention had always been that civil servants should be non-party. Until Blair politicised that type of appointment.
IMHO any advisor employed by government should have to follow those conventions - or else be paid directly by the party, not the tax-payer. In other words, there should be a clear distinction between the role of formulating GOVERNMENT policy and build PRTY manifesto and propoganda.
If that no longer applies, then why was a junior lady civil servant sacked for criticising Blears on an internet site?
Cameron hired Coulson AFTER an event for which he wasn't (still isn't) found guilty. Brown hired (or approved) McBride, who committed some breach while on HIS staff. And of course Brown says he had no idea of the type of actions being carried out.
I thought it was silly of Cameron to hire Coulson just because Westminster types (including commentators) focus on the innuendo, tittle tattle and don't keep their eye on the DELIVERY.
Complain about this comment
What a waste of paper this story is - but it does shed light on a number of people in the Lab and Lib parties.
The "Coulson should be sacked" brigade - given that he has done nothing wrong whilst an employee of the Tories and there is no evidence that he was even aware of the phone tapping, any dismissal would be unlawful - I assume therefore that the sacking brigade are even as I type lobbying for their respective parties to include as a manifesto commitment the repeal of all laws relating to workers rights!
The "demonstrates Cameron's character to insist on hiring Coulson" brigade. Totally agree - Cameron has hired someone who, based on the evidence we have told about, resigned his previous job even though he was not aware of the illegality activity because he took ultimate responsibility for something that happened on his watch, in other words someone with a clear and strong commitment to personal responsibility. Incidentally the last time a govt. minister resigned for the actions of his dept. was sometime in the late 1950s.
And finally the lab MP who asked for Coulson's pass to be remove because they (the MPs) feel uncomfortable that someone of his dubious reputation is allowed into the Commons - that is the sort of smearing comment I would expect from an embittered old hag gossiping to a neighbour in a poor quality TV drama - I suggest that MP now apologises (not holding my breath)
Complain about this comment
A story in todays Times tells us that David Cameron is possibly related to Moses (of Bible fame).
My heart sank when I read that one as I recalled the fate of Michael Howard ala 'Shylock the Jew' at the hands of Alastair Campbell's spin machine.
The very tribal Campbell will probably throw up something like 'Would you trust Dayid Cameron to lead you to the promised land?'.
Yes, politics can be a disgustingly low business.
Complain about this comment
Much too late for Coulson...
You don't really think Coulson knew nothing do you? He would be the only one in fleet street. You all think Coulsons got Camerons backing ? Unforunatley if you listen to him carefully, the famous Second Chance is for the royal household tapping. When it is shown conclusively that the whole of the NoW newsroom was at it, then Coulson is TOAST, and more than that, Cameron will take a big hit.
Did Cameron ask Coulson about other hacking activities or was he concerned with just that 1. Did Coulson tell Cameron that was a single incident, that breaking into peoples private voicemail was not indemic in NoW newsroom?
Cameron must explain this, instead of continually misdirecting by answering questions that were not asked, and not answering the question that was actually asked by the Guardian.
All it will take is for some journalist to ask Cameron whether the second chance refers to that 1 incident, or whether it is a blank pass for all the illegal activity that allegedly happened
How does Cameron answer that?
If he says the second chance refers to just the royal household incident, then the non-evil media are going to go to town on him for the 30 NoW jornalists allegedly involved under Coulsons watch.
If he says the second chance refers to ALL the incidents, then can he really stand up and say that he is happy to have someone working for him at heart of his party/(or indeed government) who allegedly consistently broke the law by allowing his journalists to carry out their nefarious activities. It will not stand.
Has anybody else tried to post comments on other newspapers? all my comments (very non-offensive but pro guardian) have not even shown up on the Mail site, the Sky site, the Times site.
All you people complaining about the attacks on Coulson should take note that your comments appear on Guardian/BBC site. What does that tell you? It is a huge disgrace the way that right wing papers are trying to bury this story so as to hide their activities. Are you people really happy with the way the Right wing press is presenting (or not as is the case) this story?
Complain about this comment
Nick
Two more British soldiers have died today and the government seems unable to put together a consistent story about why these soldiers are fighting there in the first place (this morning's Today Programme). One polititian was even spluttering on about Gay Rights!!
Now that is a political story you should be commenting on. It affects real people - not polititians and journalists. But in your Westminster Village real people do not seem to exist.
Complain about this comment
Most of the politicians allegedly 'tapped' are the very same ones that trotted out the line 'if you've nothing to hide you've nothing to fear' in respect of ID cards. Not so happy now the boot is on the other foot are they?
Any political story from the Grauniad has a left bias, and now they have been shown up to be gullible fools. Never mind, plenty of public sector non-jobs in the employment section for their political cronies.
Complain about this comment
I was looking at my wretched MPs voting record on TheyWorkForYou. She votes how she's told with depressing monotony. I noticed this little nugget the spineless automaton helped vote through the other day:
That the draft Identity Cards Act 2006 (Provision of Information without Consent) Regulations 2009, which were laid before this House on 6 May, be approved.
I hope they all sink!
Complain about this comment
Complainers and moderators seem to be keen today. I have had two comments removed, apparently off topic. Both directly related to Nick's blog above or his comments on the subject on the 10 o'clock news last night. Oh well.
Complain about this comment
Splodgio
I think everyone should adopt your spelling of 'polititians'. It's much more apt.
Complain about this comment
Just paused for a quick sandwich at my desk whilst trying to maintain a healthy private company in this overtaxed over regulated country of ours, so have not had a chance to read most of the blogs - sorry if this point has been made earlier:
So, The Guardian eh? The one paper who will get stuffed financially by a change of government. A public sector who only employs people who are needed. No more adverts for outreach workers for depressed people with three legged cats.
Just watch them, they will rake up anything they can to keep these jokers in power.
Anyway, back to work to actually CREATE the wealth that makes the whole think function in the first place - fewer of us about these days - guess some law will be passed soon to make me work even harder. Oh! deep joy!
Complain about this comment
Ah well!
The police - does anyone believe them any more?
The politicians - so quick to censure and such good role models!
The government - so trustworthy and competent!
The journalists - those champions of the public interest!
And finally you Nick - just a little too much innuendo lately!
Complain about this comment
Where is Mr Mike_Naylor today ?
Complain about this comment
spoldgio @ 250
'British' Ministers may be incapable of telling you why 'our boys' are out there in Afghanistan but an Iraqi Minster probably could.
This Minister said recently that we have got democracy here now in Iraq and we are never going back (to a dictatorship).
It is very arguable whether 'British' Armed Forces should be shouldering so much of this burden in Afghanistan but the principle of trying to spread {some version of} democracy, by various means, around the world is not a bad idea in itself.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
While British soldiers are dying in horrifying numbers because of our lousy government's failure to resource ans equip the armed forces properly, the BBC and Nick Robinson clearly think embarrassing the Tories over what Andy Coulson may or may not have done two and a half years ago is a bigger story.
Complain about this comment
152. 217. and ±40pc of these comments
Mods, can you create a new house rule please?
We reserve the right to fail messages which
* upset the author and his staff by questioning either his/their impartiality or accuracy, even if it is supported by well-reasoned evidence, and in so doing reserve the right not to recognize any subjectivity on these blogs.
That way you don't have to confuse people by telling them their comment is "off-topic". Honesty is always the best policy.
Many thanks.
Complain about this comment
Time for Nick Robinson to resign. Anyone agree with me ?
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
For several years well, more maybe more, I remember being told and have often repeated:
Be careful what you say on the phone as someone maybe listening. Yes, I know we are not important and what we say wont be interesting, but who really thinks that all conversations are private.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
#237, LondonHarris wrote:
"Re: 186 fairlyopenminded.
T.V. Licences are a progressive from on Income Tax levied upon anyone in Ownership of a TV Receiver, for it matters not that anyone may only choose to view TV Chennels other than those of the BBC.... "
LondonHarris, this strayed off topic, so likely to be chopped.
My point was not to discuss the validity or otherwise of having "public service broadcasters" payed for via a "licence" fee to avoid it being funded by central government. That's a whole oher debate.
Comment was simply, if a "licence" is payable, it should attach to PCs as well as TV receivers as both can do the same job.
Likewise, mobiles as well as fixed line phoones should attract any tax taken to invest in in high speed broadband.
Meanwhile, back on topic, it looks like lots of papers have been busy using the same source (investigator) to hack into people's lives. Bad thing!
Complain about this comment
262. At 2:28pm on 10 Jul 2009, MarcoPongo wrote:
"Time for Nick Robinson to resign. Anyone agree with me ?"
No
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
#256 Dazzamania- correct, here we have a story involving the government ,the politicians ,the journalists & of course the BBC.
how many of them would know the truth if it jumped out in front of them and slapped them ??
Sid.
PS. come on kirk,(the moderator) what happened to free speech? if your employer doesn't like what 1/3 of the contributors want to say ,that's there problem not ours!!!
Sid
Complain about this comment
264. At 2:39pm on 10 Jul 2009, Japanbytes wrote:
For several years well, more maybe more, I remember being told and have often repeated:
Be careful what you say on the phone as someone maybe listening. Yes, I know we are not important and what we say wont be interesting, but who really thinks that all conversations are private.
=============================
It is sound advice (pun not intended). The chances of someone actually listening in are slim, but all calls are recorded by the American NSA onto disc/tape. They are then analysed by Cray supercomputers that employ algorithms usually looking for certain key words. If there is a hit the conversation is then analysed by human intelligence to assess its importance and if further action is required. I assume you live in the UK, in which case the US decides if it is worth telling MI5 or MI6 about a suspicious call or not.
Complain about this comment
Invader-zim, I agree the most important thing is to try and get rid of this incompitent goverment and yes I would care if come one overhurd prescott at a all you can eat buffet cause i bet they will need a life time of therapy.
This is really a non story coming from a goverment who thinks it ok to tap our phone calls log our e-mails and texts and film our every move. There are more serious things going on than who may of done what years ago, unless evidence says otherwise.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
198 flame patricia,
We have absolutely no evidence that Coulson has done any wrong, but he was the man in charge,as you say he resigned and no charges were made against him maybe rightly so but if I were looking to employ someone who although in charge of this sort of organisation and this had been happening under his nose even though he claimed to know nothing about it. then I would have grave doubts about his suitability whether he was involved or not, I am afraid that in the old terms he was guilty by association,. I think Cameron was foolish to employ this man knowing that this problem could arise.
On the other hand you mention Mcbride, as far as I am aware this man had a good clean but fiery record before being employed by Brown, but it turned out that he was silly and perhaps stupidly vindictive, he sent the Emails that we are all aware of, he was found out and sacked immediately.
My point being that if you want to compare these two situations, Brown employed a man who was as they say clean but he went wrong, Cameron has employed a man who although he escaped prosecution, was certainly involved in publishing the material that had been wrongfully obtained and never questioned its source. Cameron has employed some one with previous as they say ,where as Brown employed some one of good clean character although something of a firebrand. And you wish to condemn Brown.there is'nt a lot to choose between the two characters but do try atleast to put it in reasoned perspective.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Never seen so many comments 'removed' by the moderators as on this post. I'm getting worried - but you can't get me I don't live in UK!
Seriously, though, the issue is NOT what he did or didn't do in a previous incarnation - it is all about the Labour Party and its cronies trying to throw muck. Guilty or not before, he had the guts to resign. Could GB please follow suit?
Complain about this comment
It's a tremendous achievement of Alistair Campbell, Gordon Brown and Mandelson that they have turned the UK into a giant version of Logan's Run where people are too scared to see what's on the outside and acept that, however low theri status, they are the beneficiaries of enormous government munificence.
Sadly, as the European elections proved, their brainwashing attempts have failed.
This little episode of tingulation - how very newlabour - is another atttempt to hole the opposition by any manner fair or foul.
Sadly, for the country, these attacks will et bloodier and bloodier for the next ten months as newlabour desperately clings to power.
What a difference between the last days of Major's government that spent the final two years building infrastructure; bringing down government debt and generally polishing up the motor before the hand over to its incompetent new owner.
These regular attacks are a disgrace; the very idea that newlabour wants to clean up politics is one that should be treated with the utmost scorn.
Call an election
Complain about this comment
flamepatricia
'Look, these moderators are something else. I have never seen such swiping off on any other sites.'
Try the Guardian CiF site when that loathsome reptile Alistair Campbell has a piece up. The level and intensity of invective is wonderfull.
Complain about this comment
flamey
p.s. Is that supposed to be a joke or are you trying to be moderated for obscure reasons of your own?
Complain about this comment
too much corruption and a lack of honesty well would you never.
seems that too many people are digging for dirt and obtaining gold today.
well may be the police can sort out the mess but i doubt they will be permitted to prosecute those guilty as they have to take orders from some.
Complain about this comment
270 excellentcatblogger
Thank you for your response. Interesting and informative.
Complain about this comment
Nick,
A Labour supporting paper, that only stays in business because of the advertising this Labour government throws its way, reheats old allegations with a lot of added speculation and insinuation, a load of Labour and Lib Dem MPs politically motivated claims, in bizarrely over the top ways, while bravely hiding behind parliamentary privilege, and you happily report it as if it was news. Since when did speulation and opinion become news?
How about some real journalism? Write down a list of donors to the Labour Party, a list of people that the government have awarded contracts to, and ponder why so many people are on both lists.
Complain about this comment
267. At 2:44pm on 10 Jul 2009, JohnnyJimmyJones wrote:
262. At 2:28pm on 10 Jul 2009, MarcoPongo wrote:
"Time for Nick Robinson to resign. Anyone agree with me ?"
No
=
Yes
(Test for Mods)
Complain about this comment
I appreciate that some posts need removing even mine on a Friday night after the third bottle of Australian Shiraz but when so many posts on a journalistic topic are being pulled by the sensitive the message is beginning to get home somewhere..
So I hope they are taking very serious note of the posts they are keeping and removing to ensure that every journalist, every editor, every producer and senior manager is fully aware of the strength of feeling and that they are taking proper note of their public.
On the other hand the general lack of response in all blogs to most posts indicates the bin is closer to the desk than the editors in-tray.
Complain about this comment
OK Grandantidote. But there is a difference.
Brown employed McBride and Draper who undisputedly sent the emails. Proven fact. Brown sacked them but Brown himself did not resign.
Cameron employed somebody who was NOT implicated and still is NOT implicated (whatever you and other Labourites think).
In this country we are innocent until proven guilty.
I stick to my guns. David Cameron, in my opinion, did and still is doing, right.
Complain about this comment
73. At 3:23pm on 10 Jul 2009, grandantidote
McBride wasn't sacked, he resigned. And he is now back working for the government, behind the scenes.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7995044.stm
http://scotlandonsunday.scotsman.com/labourparty/McBride-39back-working-for-government39.5364066.jp
Complain about this comment
278. Pop.
I stand corrected, and can well imagine the venom on the Guardian site.
However, I have never been there, nor would I sully my innocence in so doing. ROFL.
Complain about this comment
Did Michael Jackson die of swine flu?
Wooooops, pardon me. OFF TOPIC.
I would imagine Vanessa Phelps would complain, but probably not Nigella, she's a sweetie. Who cares what their voice messages are anyway?
The world's gone mad. Swine flu swoops again....
Complain about this comment
OMG! If McBride is back watch out for emails containing swine flu to infiltrate the system.
Complain about this comment
Re:266 fairlyopenminded wrote:
Comment was simply, if a "licence" is payable, it should attach to PCs as well as TV receivers as both can do the same job.
Firstly, why bring up the subject of TV Licences in the First-Place, just to dismiss it and tell a responder that it is not relevent to what you previously said, only to repeat the "same-as" asforementioned again.
The Point I am making is that in the U.K. threre should not be any needs to pay a Tax on watching Television, as the same currently applies to using a P.C.
Complain about this comment
Well I am off to make the dinner now.
A sumptous lip smacking stew of reptilian Campbell and unctious snail trails a la Mandelson. Bit of grated Mcbride and Draper pepper to finish off with a flourish.
Er, snooping on phone calls? Well, I wouldn't worry, David Cameron, it is the newest party game. It's sweeping the country as we speak.
Complain about this comment
#281 japanbytes
One further point: you may hear that such processing power on existing Cray computers could not cope. This is correct, but about 5 years ago the NSA purchased Cray (effectively nationalising it). There are two consequences:
1. NSA controls the market, vetting potential buyers. The old generation Crays are available for sale to Universities etc. Newer generations are available to "friendly" spy agencies such as GCHQ.
2. How many newer generations are not known, neither are their processing capabilities and they (NSA) are not telling. Even to the friendly spy agencies. Generally computing development has been exponential rather than linear, so I believe that they can handle the voulmes of data involved.
It is ironic that CIA/NSA/US Armed Forces etc are very secretive but former personnel are allowed to write fiction novels, that are incredibly detailed on factual content. Take a look at a Dale Brown novel, you might think you were reading the aircraft flying manual! British personnel on the other hand do not possess such freedoms.
Complain about this comment
Post 234, perhaps you need to get some chill pills and re read my comment.
As anyone who knows football will tell you Sir Alex Ferguson, that well known supporter and donor to the Labour party, who got his Knighthood from the current government by the way, has famously refused to speak to anyone from the BBC or appear on the after the game interviews on Match of the Day after the BBC made comments in a Panorama programme about football agents.
I was raising what I felt a fair point in querying whether after the allegations made about what the News of The World have alledly been up to, which if true as you say is an extremely serious legal matter, whether he will be following the same line with Sky Sports and other arms of the News International Group like The Sun and the News of the World?
Some football clubs are alleged to leak stories to tabloids in order to unsettle players at other teams or other managers or to try to encourage players to seek transfers. The Sun and News of The World would appear to be one of the major routes that this is done, if past experience is anything to go by.
Complain about this comment
I got 'deleted' earlier for saying this was a non-story and there was far more important things to worry about.
I've changed my mind.
This is the most outrageous attack on the civil liberties of anyone who has a mobile phone and who has not had the common sense to change the network default PIN to one of their own choosing. Don't journalists realise that some of these people are responsible for the security of the realm!! The fact that they can't even secure their own mobile phone should not in any way lessen the regard we have for these great public servants, or make us worried in any way, shape or form.
The sheer brass neck of journo's to dial into the voicemail of these people should be exposed for the vile, underhand action that is, and all those who may or may not have anything to do with it, had any knowledge of this practise, or those who surnames contain at least one letter the same as those who have already been found guilty, should be immediately hounded out of their jobs.
This conspiracy of spookery, conducted on the explicit orders of the Conservative party a whole two years before they knew anything about it, is a scandal. They are not fit to hold the office of Her Majesty's Opposition and as this type of behaviour is what we would rightly only expect the government to portray, they should immediately be made to form a one.
That'll learn 'em
Complain about this comment
#282:
Here's a little piece on Labour donors and Government contractors:
http://www.againstcorruption.org/BriefingsItem.asp?id=13013
Complain about this comment
In actual fact Cameron has gone up in my estimation over this. The fact that he has stood by Coulson because nothing has been proved against him shows real character. The easy thing to do would have been to rid yourself of someone who could have proved potentially embarrassing immediately.
I do wish that until something is proved against Coulson the media and journalists would stop pursuing this man. Do we not remember what happened to Dr. Kelly weapons inspector, who was basically hounded to death. Have we learnt nothing.
Complain about this comment
grandantidote 273
You say that once he was found out McBride was sacked immediately. This is not true and needs to be corrected. Established facts are as follows.
No 10 was warned by the Telegraph of the McBride story being about to appear in the Times on the previous Friday afternoon. No 10 and the Telegraph prepared a spoiler story which was published late in the evening on the Telegraph website. The Times story then appeared on schedule on the Saturday morning. Throughout the morning and early afternoon there was a substantial debate played out on the news media as various "talking heads" argued for and against McBride and, as we all know, tried to associate the story with the PM. No 10 attempted damage limitation by announcing that McBride had apologised for his actions to colleagues and had said that he was working alone, with the PM knowing nothing of his actions. Finally, as the debate seemed to swing more strongly against McBride, it was announced at about 4pm that McBride had finally resigned.
Instead of "immediately", it took about 20 hours. Instead of being "sacked", McBride resigned. You can piece it all together by searching the BBC News website, noting that each individual piece of the drama is time-stamped.
As a postscript, you might note that all answers to questions about McBride's subsequent contact with the No 10 organisation have been given in very carefully phrased, narrow language. It is also an absolute fact that McBride was noted, a full month after his nominal departure, still to be conducting some sort of business in the parliamentary lobby and that at that point he still retained his parliamentary security pass. I have not ever seen a news story indicating that McBride's means of access to parliament has been withdrawn.
Complain about this comment
"Ian_the_chopper wrote:
As anyone who knows football will tell you Sir Alex Ferguson, that well known supporter and donor to the Labour party, who got his Knighthood from the current government by the way"
I am sure you didn't mean to imply anything but the reason he got his knighthood had nothing to do with the government but because Manchester United won the treble in 1999 (which just happened to be under a Labour government)
Complain about this comment
"296. At 4:27pm on 10 Jul 2009, Susan-Croft wrote:
I do wish that until something is proved against Coulson the media and journalists would stop pursuing this man. Do we not remember what happened to Dr. Kelly weapons inspector, who was basically hounded to death. Have we learnt nothing."
Personally I don't think that Coulson could have any complaints about the media intrusion - I am sure under his Editorship the NotW also hounded the targets of their stories.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Now, having gone to the trouble of putting the facts without slant of any kind in post 297 (yellowbelly's message at 286 is also recommended reading), I will now offer some opinion.
The standard comparison being offered here is between Coulson and McBride. This is, of course, highly and intentionally misleading. The true comparison is between Coulson and the Prime Minister. Coulson had dubious activity being conducted, outside his knowledge but inside the organisation he was in charge of. He knew that reflected on his credibility in the job, on his capability as a manager and, to an extent, in the honour associated with the job. Therefore he resigned.
The Prime Minister also had dubious activity being conducted (by McBride) outside his knowledge but inside the organisation he was in charge of. He knew that reflected on his credibility in the job, on his capability as a manager and, to an extent, in the honour associated with the job. But he didn't resign.
I have respect for Coulson, as a man who knew when to quit and who has subsequently rebuilt his career in a highly honourable way. And I have respect for the Prime Minister, as a man who has clung onto his job by his fingernails, irrespective of his appropriateness for the job, his actions or the actions of those who work in his name. I think the PM's qualities of focus, drive and single mindedness, his determination towards a single objective, no matter the long term, deeply damaging consequences for himself or anyone else, are absolutely remarkable.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
290 Londonharris 266 FOM
Verbatim below from the TV licensing website - hope this helps !
You must be covered by a valid TV Licence if you watch or record television programmes as they're being shown on TV. It makes no difference what equipment you use - whether its a laptop, PC, mobile phone, digital box, DVD recorder or a TV set - you still need a licence.
You do not need a TV Licence to view video clips on the internet, as long as what you are viewing is not being shown on TV at the same time as you are viewing it.
If you use a digital box with a hi-fi system, or another device that can only be used to produce sounds and can't display TV programmes, and you don't install or use any other TV receiving equipment, you don't need a TV Licence.
Complain about this comment
#290, LondonHarris wrote:
"Re:266 fairlyopenminded wrote:
Comment was simply, if a "licence" is payable, it should attach to PCs as well as TV receivers as both can do the same job.
Firstly, why bring up the subject of TV Licences in the First-Place, just to dismiss it and tell a responder that it is not relevent to what you previously said, only to repeat the "same-as" asforementioned again.
The Point I am making is that in the U.K. threre should not be any needs to pay a Tax on watching Television, as the same currently applies to using a P.C."
LondonHarris,
I did not bring up the subject of TV Licences. I responded to an earlier post (which really was off topic and I was surprised the mods allowed it! They've binned a couple of mine because I seem not to have provided sufficient link back to the main thread...)
However, I did so, because it seemed to offer an insight into the lack of genuine forward thinking by government.
I quite like publc service broadcasting.
I think that BBC World News is more "neutral" than a lot of the stuff we get fed in the UK as "news". Most of our local stuff is heavily laced with speculation. Half of it isn't "news" at all.
Still interested in how a ation could allow public service broadcasting without it being funded directly by governments.
To be on topic - the Coulson, NoTW, phone tapping stuff is intriguing. There appear to be many papers who used the same source to delve into private data.
I just wonder why it's more more important than continued examination of why British troops appear underequipped and under-strength in Afghanistan. And our PM apparently blocked the increase of troops requested by the army on the ground, because of the cost. (That, of course, is only what I have read in the papers and heard on the BBC.)
Should Coulson have been hired? Probably not - it was a hostage to fortune. Should he be sacked for something he may (or may not) have done? Sounds like a fairly shaky basis in UK employment law...
Complain about this comment
"There will still be a Commons inquiry and there will be calls for an independent investigation into the police's handling of this affair."
All this to find out if a newspaper listened to the voice messages of some footballers two years ago?
Complain about this comment
Those people who say that Yates didn't mean what he said because they think he was only talking about a narrow strand of the investigation are clutching at straws. Its true that John Prescott and Nick Davies of the Guardian believe he held out a lifeline that would enable them to prolong their smear campaign but they are wrong.
Complain about this comment
jr @ 297
Instead of "immediately", it took about 20 hours. Instead of being "sacked", McBride resigned
yes but 20 hours is pretty much immediately, and a forced resignation is (in the political world) tantamount to a sacking - so, on balance and in the round ... all things duly weighted and considered ... I think we get back to McBride was sacked immediately
Complain about this comment
Post 298 re Sir Alex Ferguson yes he was given the knighthood for football however the following wouldn't have harmed his chances with Labour.
Si Alex saves Gordon Brown?
http://www.labour.org.uk/central/content?Mode=Content&ContentId=912
Oh and he apears to be on friednly terms with Alistair Campbell too
http://www.newstatesman.com/uk-politics/2009/03/football-politics-team-tony-2
This one has a lovely picture of Sir Alex and Gordon Brown and a football shirt
http://www.labour.org.uk/sport
Complain about this comment
Macbride sent an e-mail to his chums proposing a daft and pernicious idea to smear people. It didn't happen. He was sacked.
Coulson was in charge of a newspaper that did invade people's privacy. Either he knew and is in it up to his Eton collar or he didn't, in which case he is useless. Either way he needs to go... now.
No wonder all the Tory trolls that seem to be here attack the BBC for 'left wing bias'. They are obviously out there with Genghis Khan. That's what we'll get with a Tory government: don't be fooled by 'softy' Dave.
Complain about this comment
susan @ 296
The fact that he has stood by Coulson because nothing has been proved against him shows real character
yes, I know what you mean - not an obvious conclusion but by no means ridiculous - a bit like when Brown was holding out against the populist Ghurka clamour, isn't it? - that showed character too ... in a perverse way ... although he did, of course, cave in when Joanna Lumley got involved - along similar lines, Catch should also have stood up for his Moat Men, that would have impressed me - but he didn't
any case enough of that, I've got a dilemma I need your advice on! ... you're the only person I trust with this one ... thing is, my cleaner resigned a couple of weeks ago and I've just now found a possible replacement - trouble with this new one, Gladys, is she's 82 years old and none too steady on her feet - my first instinct was No Way but this Gladys (who's a very nice lady) is saying she actually likes the idea of cleaning my place once a week ... gets her out of the house, she says ... and she's happy to do it for about half the minimum wage
what do you reckon, Suze? ... I'm not sure what to do
Complain about this comment
Mark_We 299
I see your point, however I think it is a bit different being pursued by one newspaper, than having the whole of the media system on your back.
I do not like people being chased like this, especially when nothing has been proved against them.
Complain about this comment
303 strictly pickled
Well done Sir.
I have been trying to say the same but been prevented by the Mods. I wonder how long your post will last.
I can no longer work out this moderation.
If it is all "pre-moderated" why post comments and then remove them later ? Especially when there are loads of other posts relating to the same subject.
Imangine John Bercow shouting "off topic" and ending discusion in the House !!!
Complain about this comment
sagamix 307
Yes but saga, the problem is McBride is back working for the Government, therefore it was not much of a sacking.
Anyway, I thought you were floating.
Complain about this comment
Oh no, the thought of having to endure Cameron as Prime Minister is frankly tedious.
Could Cameron sack himself aswell as Coulson?
Complain about this comment
309. At 5:49pm on 10 Jul 2009, TNorie wrote:
Macbride sent an e-mail to his chums proposing a daft and pernicious idea to smear people. It didn't happen. He was sacked.
Coulson was in charge of a newspaper that did invade people's privacy. Either he knew and is in it up to his Eton collar or he didn't, in which case he is useless. Either way he needs to go... now.
No wonder all the Tory trolls that seem to be here attack the BBC for 'left wing bias'. They are obviously out there with Genghis Khan. That's what we'll get with a Tory government: don't be fooled by 'softy' Dave.
===
McBride wasn't sacked, he resigned.
Andy Coulson didn't go to Eton, he attended Beauchamps Comprehensive School on Beauchamps Drive from 1979-86.
But apart from that, well done with your facts!
It would seem from the above evidence that you are a Labour troll who likes to smear people, in the same way as McBride did.
Complain about this comment
307 saga
You miss the point entirely. "Immediately" can be taken to mean that there was never any intention to do anything else. But in fact, there was quite a concerted defence of McBride by the Downing Street bunker, in the form of the arranged spoiler story and the organised talking heads coming on all the TV news channels to support him. It was clear that until the pressure otherwise became too great, No 10's objective was to keep McBride in his job. Remember that all this was played out pretty openly and can be followed by searching news.bbc.co.uk.
I agree that the distinction between sacking and forced resignation is cosmetic (carefully selected word) but it very much did not happen immediately. To say that would be to give an account in terms of how Downing Street would like it to be seen now, not of how it really happened at the time. McBride's departure came only after a short but nonetheless substantial and significant drama had been played out before us all.
Complain about this comment
#305 HurstVanrooj
Are you suggesting that we just forget about it?
What, newspapers should be able to behave as they damn well please - just like the MPs and the bankers?
Whatever you say, there's a strong suggestion that the law has been broken and not just any old bye law either. This needs to be thoroughly investigated and if anyone is found to have broken the law they must be held accountable just like the rest of us plebs.
Complain about this comment
#311 Susan-Croft
Ok, nothing has been proved against him... fine. However, he was the boss, the man in charge, the head honcho!
He should either be sacked for his involvement or be sacked for being stupid - an editor not knowing where the stories come from, not have a vague idea what his hack are up to? Oh come on.
Even Honest Dave said in an interview that he's the Conservative boss so he takes responsibility (with numerous caveats of course).
Complain about this comment
Sagamix 310
My suggestion would be; marry her, you would not have to pay her the minimum wage (or less) and as a bonus, you would not have to worry about other men..........unless she likes "toy boys"!
Complain about this comment
318. At 6:17pm on 10 Jul 2009, extremesense wrote:
#311 Susan-Croft
Ok, nothing has been proved against him... fine. However, he was the boss, the man in charge, the head honcho!
He should either be sacked for his involvement or be sacked for being stupid - an editor not knowing where the stories come from, not have a vague idea what his hack are up to? Oh come on.
-----
He resigned over it.
Why should he be sacked again?
By your logic, once somebody resigns from a job, taking responsibility as the boss, they should be automatically sacked from any future job?
That means Mandelson should be out immediately.
Complain about this comment
On the topic of invading privacy
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8144906.stm
"We find it extremely upsetting to know that our house is occupied by squatters who appear to believe that they are entitled to do what they wish in our property."
Funny. I agree totally with the Keens that those in the House "appear to believe that they are entitled to do what they wish in our property."
Complain about this comment
Do politicians and the media not get it? This is utterly trivial and irrelevant - who cares if the NotW listened into the stufiyingly dull conversations of John Prescott or a minor celeb. A Westminster "plant" of a story by the Guardian of a recycled story to fill up a slow news month!
This week, my father, who is 71 years old, had to start a job washing dishes at a restaurant because his private pensions are worthless and, despite his being a qualified electrician, there's no work for a 71 year old sparks who's a bit slow. Because he contracted out, he's not entitled to a basic state pension, so he has to work until he's dead.
Compare this with the fat-cat salaries, now, of our civil servants and their copper-bottomed pensions who contribute nothing to the country's wealth creation, our rapidly contracting private sector whose wealth creation has to pay for these pensions, not to mention our astronomical national debt and it must surely be plain to everyone that our country is in really deep, deep trouble.
Really, is the most important thing we've got to talk about whether a newspaper tapped the phone of Vanessa Feltz or should we be having a serious and in-depth debate about how many hundreds of thousands, maybe even millions of workers we need to get out of the public sector and back into the private sector and how the public sector pensions scheme is going to have to be scrapped or seriously curtailed?
Do we have any professional journalists willing to engage in this kind of dialogue any more? It seems not!
Stuart
MIoD, MIBC, MAPM, MBCS, CITP
Complain about this comment
the perry man @ 316
You miss the point entirely
not sure about that, JR - I didn't get where I am today, or become what I am today rather ... i.e. an extremely important, floating voter ... by missing the point entirely - I'm feeling very Roger Reasonable at the moment ... as befits a CTP who's also a FV ... so let's just say he was sacked pretty damn quickly after a brief (and possibly ill advised) Downing St "hold the fort" operation - how's that?
Complain about this comment
320 Sterling
Yes, it's an interestingly Stalinist view of employment policy that our Labour friends are exhibiting today.
Complain about this comment
Surely the big story in all this is a part of the judicial system I didnt even know existed.
It appears that some deal was done in response to a writ or writs and "out of court settlements" were made. Nothing unusual about that.
But what is all this about the evidence that would have been used had the case(s) been heard now being "sealed" and not available.
Can someone explain please ?
Complain about this comment
susan @ 319
LOL ... you should unleash that SoH more often! ... wouldn't be dodging my point though, would you? ... you wouldn't do that, would you babe? ... you know, dodge my point
Complain about this comment
318. At 6:17pm on 10 Jul 2009, extremesense wrote:
#311 Susan-Croft
Ok, nothing has been proved against him... fine. However, he was the boss, the man in charge, the head honcho!
He should either be sacked for his involvement or be sacked for being stupid - an editor not knowing where the stories come from, not have a vague idea what his hack are up to? Oh come on.
Even Honest Dave said in an interview that he's the Conservative boss so he takes responsibility (with numerous caveats of course).
===
Totally agree with you on this. In the same way you will agree with me that the same applies to Brown, as McBride's boss, the head honcho, either he knew about "smeargate" and is complicit or he didn't and he is stupid, either way he should go.
Complain about this comment
299. At 4:40pm on 10 Jul 2009, Mark_WE wrote:
"296. At 4:27pm on 10 Jul 2009, Susan-Croft wrote:
I do wish that until something is proved against Coulson the media and journalists would stop pursuing this man. Do we not remember what happened to Dr. Kelly weapons inspector, who was basically hounded to death. Have we learnt nothing."
Personally I don't think that Coulson could have any complaints about the media intrusion - I am sure under his Editorship the NotW also hounded the targets of their stories.
-----
The Guardian, though, purports to take a higher moral position than papers like the news of the world. Yet, it is quite happy to see somebody being hung out to dry, whilst it stands on the sidelines.
If the Guardian has some evidence of wrongdoing by Coulson beyond that for which he has already taken responsibility, then it should publish it; if it hasn't, then it should make this clear.
Complain about this comment
extremesense 318
You have a point....if he was still in the job. However, he resigned, moved on and has another job.
Therefore are you advocating that if anyone in a management position, changes his job, then at some time in the future (ie retrospectively) it is found that indiscretions are allegedly to have occurred in a position held at some point in the past, they should resign from their current position which has nothing to do with the allegation?
If this is the case, the unemployment rate would certainly top 3 million!
Complain about this comment
#320 sterling-donefor
Yep.... Mandelson out.
As for Coulson, the fact that he's so close to the next Prime Minister and isn't free of these now wider and more serious allegations should mean him resigning.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
saga 323
I'll go with "He was forced to resign a day later".
[I only stuck to the point I was making because, having nothing better to do at the time, I watched all the gory detail of the story unfold and I have a strong memory of what actually happened. Also, I object to the oft repeated Labour spin of "He was sacked immediately", aimed at trying to obtain some sort of moral high ground. It simply is not historical fact, but pink airbrushing.]
Complain about this comment
319. At 6:25pm on 10 Jul 2009, Susan-Croft wrote:
Sagamix 310
My suggestion would be; marry her, you would not have to pay her the minimum wage (or less) and as a bonus, you would not have to worry about other men..........unless she likes "toy boys"!
----
Excellent.
I was thinking that Sagamix could become an MP and charge her to expenses, then it wouldn't matter how much you paid her since you could charge it on to the taxpayer. If you were a labour MP you could also demonstrate how you had reduced unemployment (narrowly defining the age group and probably using statistics and percentages to make it look like a really impressive number - maybe even comparing that to another European country's statistics).
But SC's response was better.
Complain about this comment
stuart @ 322
hi there - I'm impressed with your Qs and that's bad about your dad - just a couple of questions ...
1. in your summary of our big problems, why no mention of perhaps the biggest, the private sector excess in the banks?
2. that job your father is having to do sounds like Minimum Wage stuff, am I right? ... in which case, do you agree with me that he MUST be paid that at the very least? ... or do you agree with the likes of Susan Croft that there should be an opt out so that wages in these menial type jobs can drift lower in response to market forces?
Complain about this comment
pranah 322
That's a sad story about your Dad, but excuse me for being picky.
You said "Because he contracted out, he's not entitled to a basic state pension, so he has to work until he's dead."
My understanding is that "contracting out" would have disqualified a pensioner only from SERPS, not the basic state pension.
Perhaps you might like to explain. I would be very interested to know how someone really can be legitimately employed in the UK for many years but disqualified from the basic state pension.
Complain about this comment
Its_an_Outrage @ 243
It could be very useful to have a comparision website for political parties, for example:
Compare_the_Polecat.com
Neit! Neit!
Compare_the_Politician.com
Simples!
Complain about this comment
puranah 322
You cannot imagine how sad your post made me and how much I feel for your father. This is a situation many older people find themselves in now, I speak to a lot of elderly who have had to return to work because their pensions have failed them.
No I do not believe the public, polticians or media understand it until it affects them. To be honest they do not care.
This is something I have been banging on about for ages. Although Sagamix has made light of it, the fact is I come across elderly people doing these menial jobs for less than the minimum wage and are in fear of losing these jobs. How shameful we are as a society when this happens. Yes shame is a good word.
It seems to me that as a society we care more about this superfluous nonsence of celebrities, politicians and Newspaper sensationalism. However, hold fast because there are many of us out there campaigning for a better future for elderly people. Please let your father know he is not forgotton by some of us.
Complain about this comment
#322 puranah
Your post puts our politicians to shame - your Dad's generation is pushed to the back of the queue for everything.
I dare say all his life he has taken responsibility for his own welfare only to find it has all gone pear shaped because of a bunch of greedy bankers and incompetent politicians.
The disparity between public and private sector pensions for the middle earners has never been more galling. It is a myth that private pensions deliver for ordinary people these days and to be honest when you see how they perform you tend to look for other retirement options.
There has to be a review of public sector pensions they are a drain on our resources and the ridiculous hike in pay at the top end of the pay scale further burdens our public services.
Really, is the most important thing we've got to talk about whether a newspaper tapped the phone of Vanessa Feltz or should we be having a serious and in-depth debate about how many hundreds of thousands, maybe even millions of workers we need to get out of the public sector and back into the private sector and how the public sector pensions scheme is going to have to be scrapped or seriously curtailed?
Do we have any professional journalists willing to engage in this kind of dialogue any more? It seems not!
Stuart
MIoD, MIBC, MAPM, MBCS, CITP
Complain about this comment
#262 MarcoPongo
....Time for Nick Robinson to resign. Anyone agree with me ?....
Careful! Thought I'd just respond in the affirmative before those sensitive BBC souls or Robinson himself moof your words off these boards.
Whilst Robinson goes to ground today, having wasted at least two blogs yesterday in a very transparent and ham fisted attempt to associate David Cameron with the past indiscretions, (are they even that?), of his Director of Communications, children are being orphaned, parents are losing sons and daughters and families in all parts of the nation are laying to rest loved ones lost forever in an unwinnable war in Afghanistan. This is a real political story Robinson studiously ignores.
Because Robinson is unlikely anytime soon to offer up any constructive thoughts on that conflict, anyone here with more than a passing interest really should pick up a copy of "A Million Bullets" by James Fergusson, a book with no political axe to grind that is an excellent analysis of the British presence in Afghanistan.
Meanwhile, back on topic, (I'm not sure why I try to be so diligent, numerous post here are way off beam and allowed to stay), David Cameron has played this one perfectly correctly so far. I am convinced that the slightest whiff of impropriety by Coulson during his Conservative Central Office employment will be met by the only correct response, dismissal and quite rightly so. Cameron at this point in time is quite right to resist all the hot air emanating from not so reliable mouths, for example the dis-credited Mandelson and hypocritcal Prescott amongst others, demanding a resignation until such time as any accusations can be proven correct regarding Coulson. I apologise in advance for choosing two high profile Labour types, but the pair of them seem to have much to say on the issue whilst being some way from whiter than white themselves.
My interest in Robinsons offerings are quickly waning, all too often the contributions here from across the political divide are considerably better than those of the original author himself. If pro Labour or Tory contributors, for example the excellent post by grandantidote at #214, can offer up a thought provoking and well worded argument, why can't Robinson?
Complain about this comment
#336 JohnConstable
Best post on this thread!
Complain about this comment
Just announced by the BBC that another British soldier has been killed in Afghanistan-that's ten in ten days. Perhaps, Mr Robinson, you could start a thread on a really important scandal: Gordon Brown's failure over a ten year period as Chancellor of the Exchequer to provide our forces with adequate equipment to fight the wars this Labour government has got them into.
Complain about this comment
330. At 6:53pm on 10 Jul 2009, extremesense wrote:
#320 sterling-donefor
Yep.... Mandelson out.
As for Coulson, the fact that he's so close to the next Prime Minister and isn't free of these now wider and more serious allegations should mean him resigning.
-----
But that is all that they are - allegations. Allegations are very easy to make and very difficult to defend against.
Let's wait for the Guardian produce concrete proof, if it has it, upon which people can make an informed view.
Complain about this comment
Re: 304 fairlyopenminded
#290, LondonHarris wrote:
"Re:266 fairlyopenminded wrote:
Comment was simply, if a "licence" is payable, it should attach to PCs as well as TV receivers as both can do the same job.
Firstly, why bring up the subject of TV Licences in the First-Place, just to dismiss it and tell a responder that it is not relevent to what you previously said, only to repeat the "same-as" asforementioned again.
The Point I am making is that in the U.K. threre should not be any needs to pay a Tax on watching Television, as the same currently applies to using a P.C."
LondonHarris,
I did not bring up the subject of TV Licences. I responded to an earlier post (which really was off topic and I was surprised the mods allowed it! They've binned a couple of mine because I seem not to have provided sufficient link back to the main thread...)
However, I did so, because it seemed to offer an insight into the lack of genuine forward thinking by government.
I quite like publc service broadcasting.
fairlyopenminded.
Therefore, if you are NOW saying that you yourself were also off topic responding to another previous post, then how do you arrive at your previous comments in your post at:266, where you suggest that I like yourself having also commented upon TV Licencing has Quote: "strayed off topic so, likely to be chopped?
If you are unable to except that anyone can also make a valid point upon any pervious issues raised on what is Public Service Board Blog, then may I suggest that you re-name your handle to Re: fairlyclosedmined.
Complain about this comment
sophistic susan @ 337
Although Sagamix has made light of it, the fact is I come across elderly people doing these menial jobs for less than the minimum wage and are in fear of losing these jobs
I'm not "making light" of anything - I'm saying no job, in the UK in the year 2009 ... no matter how menial ... should ever pay less than a basic, living wage ... a.k.a the statutory Minimum Wage ... so let's not dilute it with "opt outs" which would allow vulnerable people to be exploited and paid a pittance
you say otherwise, for some reason, and your strange combination of loose logic, mealy mouthed sentiment and crocodile tears is just perfectly captured in this latest post, so thanks for putting it out there
Complain about this comment
341. At 8:21pm on 10 Jul 2009, tomsuthers wrote:
Just announced by the BBC that another British soldier has been killed in Afghanistan-that's ten in ten days. Perhaps, Mr Robinson, you could start a thread on a really important scandal: Gordon Brown's failure over a ten year period as Chancellor of the Exchequer to provide our forces with adequate equipment to fight the wars this Labour government has got them into.
-----
I think that nick prefers to prod chihuahua's with a stick than to bring pit bulls to heel.
Complain about this comment
JohnConstable 336
That very well may be true John that the main parties are dead in the water so far as people like us are concerned. However the simple truth is that if progressives vote for other parties you will see Labour returned to Government. The die hards of the Labour party, many of whom you have seen on here, will still vote Labour. This would be a worse outcome than voting for something less than you want in my opinion.
Believe me the Labour vote is still very much out there, because Brown has made sure that as yet, they have not felt the full force of the recession on benefits or in the public sector.
Complain about this comment
Sterling @ 328 said...
"If the Guardian has some evidence of wrongdoing by Coulson beyond that for which he has already taken responsibility, then it should publish it; if it hasn't, then it should make this clear."
Errr....I believe that is exactly what The Guardian has said...(to paraphrase)"they have no further evidence involving Coulson"
So..the story really does smell of dirty political games..doesn't it?
Sounds familiar eh?
Complain about this comment
.... ah the perils of cut and paste.
Doh!
Complain about this comment
Is the story generated by Labour and fed to it's favourite media contacts, or is it a Guardian story that has been picked up by Labour and then fed to media contacts?
I suspect the former as Guido Fawkes had a call the afternoon before it broke from a Labour contact telling him they were going to get Coulson.
Complain about this comment
sagamix 344
No one disagrees with your first point, including me, but for some unknown reason you keep insisting that I do. However the point is these people are already working for less than the minimum wage and it is better to know who they are in order to help, than them just being out there continuing and nobody knowing about them. As I have already written at length about this there is no point in keeping repeating it. It is you who keeps bringing it up. It was you who brought me into your post on this subject, you can hardly complain when I do the same.
If you doubt my sincerity about the elderly that is something I can do nothing about, however I do support and campaign for better conditions for the elderly, it is something I really care about.
Other than that I just say 'stay cool'.
PS Have you proposed yet.
Complain about this comment
344 sagamix
Be very very careful I said the same thing in a different way and got hearterly abused, but your made of sterner stuff than me so you can probably respond to it better than I could, Good Luck.
Complain about this comment
susan @ 350
Other than that I just say 'stay cool'
cool is overrated, let's keep it hot - and I'm sorry but I just do not get where you're coming from on this issue - when you say we don't know who "they" are, what sort of "they" are you thinking of? - elderly people working for less than the legal wage, you keep referring to - is that right? - or is it more illegal immigrants? - or handicapped people I think you said in other post, didn't you? - what sort of jobs are you talking about? - what type of employers are involved? - then you say they are "in fear of losing" these pittance paying jobs - so of course that's bad and sad, absolutely it is - it's called exploitation by most fair minded people - in which case why is it any part of any solution to legalise the exploitation? - please try and explain yourself a bit more clearly, if at all possible ... I'd appreciate it
Complain about this comment
#343, LondonHarris wrote:
"Therefore, if you are NOW saying that you yourself were also off topic responding to another previous post, then how do you arrive at your previous comments in your post at:266, where you suggest that I like yourself having also commented upon TV Licencing has Quote: "strayed off topic so, likely to be chopped?
If you are unable to except that anyone can also make a valid point upon any pervious issues raised on what is Public Service Board Blog, then may I suggest that you re-name your handle to Re: fairlyclosedmined."
=====
London,
I absolutely accept that you or anyone else can and do make valid points.
Maybe I was a bit tetchy, because a point I posted, which directly related to the thrust of the topic (and echoed earlier posts and followed additional comments by Nick Robinson on TV) had been pulled by the Mods as "off-topic"... So when I responded to you, it was with that concern in mind.
My original comments about TV licencing were in response to an earlier and definitely off-topic post (therefore mine was also off topic, but were accepted by the Mods...). So I was simply saying that posts were likely to be pulled for having drifted away from the central point.
I struggle to work out the logic of some of the mods' interventions.
I have no argument with you about the need for renewed discussion about the principles of and justification for the TV Licence approach.
I suppose the fundamental concern is whether there should be some "trusted" broadcaster NOT directly funded by government (which leads to political slants) NOR likely to die if advertising revenue drains away. Maybe we don't have one anyway.
The drift of political commentary gets far too much about personalities for my liking. That doesn't mean it's wrong - just not what I'd like.
I guess that Nick's now off for the weekend, the blog will stray all over the place. No issues.
Complain about this comment
332 purahner
I would also feel sorry for your Dad if this were true, whatever your employment whether self employed or contracted out or a bank executive, if you have paid you national insurance stamp then you get the state pension even if you have'nt and have only paid some stamps or even none, you will be paid income support or pension credit which will make up to exactly what you would have recieved had you had full state pension, No one in this country has to work untill they drop as you say, you tell your Dad to go to CAB or age concern and they will make sure that he will get at least the same as the state pension, among other things like rent or mortgage payments.Please do not mention pride to me because its his right and he is entitled to it.
Complain about this comment
The Royals got their own back on the News of the world. Now it looks as if some of the celebs whose privacy has been invaded may also be about to get their own back.
Good luck to them. But what about all the lesser mortals who have suffered similar abuse at the hands of red top journalists, and could not possibly finance a civil suit.
Privacy is not the most important issue. Reporting which is untrue or deliberately distorted is more serious. This is verbal assault and can be just as damaging as physical assault and should be a criminal matter, prosecuted by the CPS.
Complain about this comment
Sagamix 352
It is exploitation, I do not disagree with you, I never did. I also agree with the minimum wage. I have tried to elucidate as much as I can in my other posts, about the 'right to work'. If you go back over my posts maybe it will make more sense. I do not feel I can explain it any better than I have. I understand why you do not agree, so we will agree to differ on this. Its cool really.
I can assure you saga I would never support anything I thought would make low income people worse off.
No point in falling out over it.
Do I get an invite.
Complain about this comment
#354 grandantidote
That was my understanding of the rules as well.
However, given the impressive set of "qualifications" following Stuart's name "MIoD, MIBC, MAPM, MBCS, CITP" I assumed that either this was a spoof post or one from an extraordinarily selfish son on a good income.
Complain about this comment
o/t news just in 5 more of our boys lost their lives, total 8 today may they rest in peace, this government has serious questions to answer, with regards to providing our boys with the support and equipment they need. another very sad day.
Complain about this comment
susan @ 356
I do not feel I can explain it any better than I have
I think that's probably true ... ah well
Complain about this comment
352 sagamix
my response to you adversary on this subject was
"People in this country have been fighting for years to get the benefits that you and I enjoy, and to even consider that we should allow others to be prepared to do our work for less would set us back in the workplace
two or three hundred years, the minimum wage is their to protect the people you speak of not to discredit or disadvantage them."
for which I was heartily abused. make of that what you will.
Complain about this comment
grandantidote @ 351
Good Luck
why thank you! - in fact, all is well because it looks like the sheer lacerating force of my arguments have caused Susan to revise her opinion on the issue - she's not admitting it publically yet ... the girl has pride, after all ... but she HAS (believe me) changed her mind - exciting times!
Complain about this comment
360 & 361
Have you both been on the catnip tonight ?
Complain about this comment
Re: 353 fairlyopenminded.
I except your reasoning for trying to keep on topic without straying, however as you may have noted that many postings about Subjects do get added to with various difference additional other subjects that many people like me do sometimes feel a need to past comments on.
I know that this is not what others that just want to keep to the original theme of any Blog can except as being a valid input, but nevertheless this offen leads to many others also Blogging along with each other about some additional side Subjects between themselves and further other Bloggers.
This of course creates a mini Blog within a Blog, so that you get more coverage than you bargined for about different matters away from the original Theme, so if the Moderaters are happy with this you won't get any arguements from me, for if I believe a Subject how ever it is arrived at is worth my time commenting on then I like others will take the time to add comments.
As for any approach on the Subject of TV Licences, have you ever asked yourself, why is it that the following Countries have ABOLISHED TV LICENING:
[1]. Australia.
[2]. Belguim ( Flemish Region ).
[3]. Cyprus.
[4]. Gibraltar.
[5]. Hungary.
[6]. New Zealand.
[7]. India.
[8]. Malaysia.
[9]. The Netherlands.
[10]. Portugal.
and the following Countries have NEVER had TV Licences.
[1]. The United States.
[2]. Andorra.
[3]. Estonia.
[4]. Liechtenstein.
[5]. Luxembourg.
[6]. Moraco.
[7]. Canada.
[8]. China.
[9]. Hong Kong.
[10]. Iran.
[11]. The Philippines.
I wonder in how many of these Countries they watch Programmes made by the BBC that was originally paid for using our Licence Fee TAX Money?
Complain about this comment
"yellowbelly1959 wrote:
Andy Coulson didn't go to Eton, he attended Beauchamps Comprehensive School on Beauchamps Drive from 1979-86."
He works for the Tories so to a Labour drone he must have gone to Eton!
After all they work on the principle that Tory = toff (even though New Labour has their fair share of the silver spoon squad!)
Complain about this comment
"sagamix wrote:
I'm not "making light" of anything - I'm saying no job, in the UK in the year 2009 ... no matter how menial ... should ever pay less than a basic, living wage ... a.k.a the statutory Minimum Wage ... so let's not dilute it with "opt outs" which would allow vulnerable people to be exploited and paid a pittance"
If you believe that the minimum wage is the basic living wage then obviously you would not expect the government to tax someone who works a standard working week for the minimum wage. However, I believe the government taxes them fairly heavily.
Reading the EDM made by the Tory MP he suggested that people should be able to work for lower then the minimum wage if it took them out of the tax bracket.
I would bet my savings on the fact that there are people earning less then the minimum wage, however they will be people who have little choice and the work they do would be off the books.
I think the minimum wage is a good idea but I think it would be better if people who feel forced to work for less then the minimum wage could do so legally by opt-out as this would allow them the protection afforded by contracts.
Complain about this comment
344 sagamix
Before I retire for the night, I must say this post was just what was needed, there are times when some bloggers need their come uppance and you did exactly what was needed good on you lad, even if you have become a floating voter. Good Night All.
Complain about this comment
very noticable that those posting are of a certain ilk, on the worst day for losses of our boys, 8 in one day, not one post in respect.
Complain about this comment
sagamix 361
No I have not changed my mind and I have not heard any arguments from you on this subject except to say that you do not agree with me. I came to the conclusion that there was no point in flogging a dead horse. Sicilian gave me some good advice once and that is if someone has fixed views you will never change them no matter how good the argument. He also said never react to wind ups. He was right. Smart man.
If I am truthful, my guy has come round and as he looks like the mentalist, well.................
Complain about this comment
366. At 11:01pm on 10 Jul 2009, grandantidote wrote:
344 sagamix
Before I retire for the night, I must say this post was just what was needed, there are times when some bloggers need their come uppance and you did exactly what was needed good on you lad, even if you have become a floating voter. Good Night All.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
" Come uppance " ?????????
What is wrong with you and Saga, You are like a pair of grumpy old men actaully i'm sure there are a couple of situation comedies that have featured a pair like you two
Complain about this comment
Grandantidote & Sagamix
I now pronounce you man and wife
Complain about this comment
#363. At 10:43pm on 10 Jul 2009, LondonHarris wrote:
Re: 353 fairlyopenminded.
"...This of course creates a mini Blog within a Blog, so that you get more coverage than you bargined for about different matters away from the original Theme, so if the Moderaters are happy with this you won't get any arguements from me, for if I believe a Subject how ever it is arrived at is worth my time commenting on then I like others will take the time to add comments."
London,
I have often strayed way off beam when posting. Have no issue with that at all! It's just hard to work out the framework. Sometimes the boundaries are very eleastic, sometimes almost like an iron curtain! There has been a spat going on all day about the Minimum Wage. All good fun, but not too topical...
"As for any approach on the Subject of TV Licences, have you ever asked yourself, why is it that the following Countries have ABOLISHED TV LICENING..."
London,
I've no problem where the money comes from to fund an independent public broadcaster. In the end it comes from tax-payers/public, anyway.
I've been in plenty of countries where you just know that government funded outlets don't tell you anything that is not approved by - and frequently written by - some ministry of information. So plenty of dross and nothing too challenging.
I just get uneasy about directly funded public broadcasting, and if it's paid for by advertising then who ensures there is no soft-pedalling on the product manufacturers / service providers who provide the csah.
BBC is supposedly an independent source of information. I accept that at times of genuine national danger (such as WWII), they may have to be extremely circumspect. Otherwise, I expect them to be independent minded. BUT I lost that hope when Blair's mob tore the heart out of the organisation over the Dodgy Dossier affair. The Hutton Enquiry evidence said that information was "tailored" (and he summed up by concluding that government was entitled to optimise the presentation of material). But that's exactly what a BBC reporter said. Except he said "sexed up" rather than optimised...
So the passive and timid board of a once proud organisation bowed the knee before Alistair Campbell. I really didn't like that.
If the Beeb had been a commercially funded organisation, maybe it would be owned or part-owned by Rupert Murdoch. Would any strongly critical mention have been allowed about the News of the World stuff (which stinks)? I rather doubt it.
It could be a good topic for debate. I've no strong views, really. I wouldn't like a government-owned Chinese style TV system introduced here... Wouldn't really like one entirely owned by a single company.
There's some good news (main point of public service in my opinion) on US TV. And some complete twaddle. But the American attitude to the Fourth Estate is that they have to be allowed to say what they think as long as it is not illegal.
What's your answer to your own question?
Complain about this comment
Half the comments had been referred and found wanting, what happened to them?
Was someone embarrassed by the sheer volume deleted?
Complain about this comment
367 tisfedup
What can one say? I am sure that these lads and their families have the deepest sympathy of most people in the country, but that wont bring the lads back and will not be much consolation to the families, these lads have my greatest admiration for their courage and fortitude but then again what is that worth, but I thank them and hope that they rest in peace, maybe one day there will be no war but not in my life time sadly.
Complain about this comment
#367 tisfedup
"very noticable that those posting are of a certain ilk, on the worst day for losses of our boys, 8 in one day, not one post in respect."
You choose to make a political point out of 8 deaths. These were tragedies for their families, just as were those of the victims of the average daily death rate on UK roads of 7 people every single day of the year. Do you post in respect of these victims every day?
Complain about this comment
370 ghostworld
No thats not going to happen but I'll bet you and Susan don't invite Sag and I to yours.
Complain about this comment
369 ghostworld
Yes your probably right Casp, You and Susan could have a Mrs Bucket and her husband sort of thing, very similar relationship, she says jump you say how high. sadly her mentalist look alike has just arrived [ I am sure there's a joke in there somwhere]so that puts your nose out of joint old chap,but I still like you, but you are awful!.
Complain about this comment
ghostworld 369
Thank you for being such a gentleman, there are very few of you left now.
Complain about this comment
375. At 11:45pm on 10 Jul 2009, grandantidote wrote:
370 ghostworld
No thats not going to happen but I'll bet you and Susan don't invite Sag and I to yours.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
LOL ... I'm happily married to Mrs Ghostworld
Complain about this comment
susan @ 368
I have not heard any arguments from you on this subject
and therein lies the exact problem, doesn't it? - you haven't "heard" the arguments - fingers in ears, la la la la lah - that's it in a nutshell, right there - fascinating, you really are
Complain about this comment
377. At 00:08am on 11 Jul 2009, Susan-Croft wrote:
ghostworld 369
Thank you for being such a gentleman, there are very few of you left now.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
No worries... They want invites to our wedding now as well, cheeky beggers. Although i don't think Mrs Ghostworld will be pleased
Complain about this comment
Re 371.
What really angers me is what I touched upon in my first Post on the subject of TV Licening, and that is that we have to pay again if we wish to view T.V Programming on Sky to watch BBC Programmes, like on ie: the GOLD Channel, while by the same token we have what amounts to, two part time BBC Channels in the form of BBC3, and BBC4 where there is plenty of Dead Air-Time to fit in these same TV Programmes during the Day time that are over on the GOLD Channel where you will have to cough up an additional Fee to buy a Sky Package to view programming that you have already once paid for in your Licence Fee.
My view further is, that if the BBC won't scramble it Signal, after the abolition of the Licence Fee thus allowing everyone to pay just one payment for a Package of Channels of THEIR choice WHICH CAN INCLUDE THE BBC, then the BBC should have No Rights to lease OR hire out Programming that has been paid for by the Licence Fee payer's.
For just WHY on earth should we the Licence Fee payer's have to pay again more than once to view BBC Programming within the time of our Government enforced Subscription Licence Fee period, to view any BBC Programmes on any un-related BBC Channel that we have already paid for.
Complain about this comment
#367, tisfedup wrote:
"very noticable that those posting are of a certain ilk, on the worst day for losses of our boys, 8 in one day, not one post in respect. "
Tisfedup,
You are absolutely correct. Brave - and frequently very young - people are paying the ultimate sacrifice for trying to carry out tasks set by our political masters.
It amazes me that professional soldiers (troops of all services) are prepared to risk life and limb, when professional politicians fail to support them to the same extent that they have supported failed bankers.
It feels me with shame that the Westminster Village view of politics allows the nonsense (sick though it is) surrounding the News of the World to push the disgrace of underfunded troops and under-equipped troops off the front page.
Check the government's own figures. In real terms, the projected Defence budget for 2010 is slightly above that from 8 years ago. Some support, eh? Military hospitals have been closed. Support for ex-servicefolk with problems that don't occur in civilian life is frankly appalling.
The Secretary for Defence ranks 21st out of 23 cabinet ministers... Below the Secretaries for Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland - even the Olympics for goodness sake... That says a lot about the "value" placed on people "defending our way of life"...
Brown is happy to commit to stopping "global temperature" rising more than 2 degrees (which isn't possible, but will cost us a fortune). And to invest in agriculture in poor countries (which I agree with, but when did he offer to rid Zimbabwe of Mugabe?). But he stopped the Forces moving an extra 2,500 troops into Afghanistan on cost basis. (That, by the way, Mods, was reported on the BBC...)
We live in a sick world.
There are helicopters still sitting on the ground, years after being paid for, because they haven't been upgraded to cope with desert conditions. Why?
There are troop transport aircraft needing nursing into the air and no replacements in sight. Why?
There have been aircraft shot down because the MoD either hadn't the money, or the forcefulness, to introduce fuel tank protection that has been commonplace within the US fleet (and known about by the MoD) for years. Why?
If we hadn't wasted so much money with the typically complicated tax-credit system (good idea - but bad delivery) and other rediculous "initiatives", there may have been a bit more money to help protect the people we expect to protect us.
If Brown thinks it's important to drag his cabinet around the country to "feel" the people, let them stay in Wootton Bassett for a while. Like that, they could all be present as the next load of under-protected sons, husbands, fathers are brought home.
There's your next blog, Nick.
By the way, Mods, this is on topic, because it refers to the oddities of the focus on the News of the World, reaction to it and the relevance of such an insignificant matter while British troops die for you and me.
Complain about this comment
363 LondonHarris
Brilliant post!
You must be charmed or the Mods like the way you say the TV licence is an anachronism whereas they just remove my posts.
Complain about this comment
"sagamix wrote:
susan @ 368
I have not heard any arguments from you on this subject
and therein lies the exact problem, doesn't it? - you haven't "heard" the arguments - fingers in ears, la la la la lah - that's it in a nutshell, right there - fascinating, you really are"
Thats a blade that cuts both ways
Complain about this comment
mark WE @ 365
I think the minimum wage is a good idea but I think it would be better if people who feel forced to work for less then the minimum wage could do so legally by opt-out as this would allow them the protection afforded by contracts
but then we would no longer have the statutory minimum (would we?) and the MW would revert to being just what you say it is ... a good idea
in your scenario above, where the exploited worker opts out of the MW and is "rewarded" with a now legal and above board contract for say two pounds an hour, where does that leave the exploiting, and previously criminal, employer? ... are they off the hook because they are no longer breaking the law?
Complain about this comment
Britsh Soldiers Deaths in Afganistan
Remove this if you dare Mods.
It is an unwinable conflict. I have no real idea why our army is there.
I do know that nobody over the last hundred years plus has ever beaten the fighters from that country, their name changes- pathans, mujahadeen, taliban but it is the same indigenous people repelling an invader.
The Russians with unending cannon fodder gave up.
Our troops drive around in marked vehicles with uniforms etc, dubious equipment, whilst the Taliban look like the locals and have no fear of dying how can anyone beat that ?
Our soldiers are dying needlessly in not just a lost cause but in a fight without any legitimate reason.
Complain about this comment
#381, LondonHarris wrote:
Re 371.
"What really angers me is what I touched upon in my first Post on the subject of TV Licening, and that is that we have to pay again if we wish to view T.V Programming on Sky to watch BBC Programmes, like on ie: the GOLD Channel, while by the same token we have what amounts to, two part time BBC Channels in the form of BBC3, and BBC4 where there is plenty of Dead Air-Time to fit in these same TV Programmes during the Day time that are over on the GOLD Channel where you will have to cough up an additional Fee to buy a Sky Package to view programming that you have already once paid for in your Licence Fee.
My view further is, that if the BBC won't scramble it Signal, after the abolition of the Licence Fee thus allowing everyone to pay just one payment for a Package of Channels of THEIR choice WHICH CAN INCLUDE THE BBC, then the BBC should have No Rights to lease OR hire out Programming that has been paid for by the Licence Fee payer's.
For just WHY on earth should we the Licence Fee payer's have to pay again more than once to view BBC Programming within the time of our Government enforced Subscription Licence Fee period, to view any BBC Programmes on any un-related BBC Channel that we have already paid for.
==========
LondonHarris,
You've thought about this stuff far more than I have. I have no idea what a sensible arrangement could be.
Maybe my problem is that I can barely cope with the tripe from the most easily accessible, simple terrestrial output. And with all the Internet access it just takes too much time out of life.
Over the years, there's been some pretty good stuff commissioned or produced by the Beeb. Guess that's why I never minded too much paying for a licence, if I could also receive quite a few alternative commercially sponsored channels.
Never been tempted to go to satellite. (Not quite true. Many years ago we installed a satellite receiver to pick up French TV, as my children are French/English - I suppose that should be British... But that was a once off cost, no annual subs.)
Not really sure what I'd have chosen as pay-to-view. Maybe the Moon Landing (shows you how old I am... It's the only "scientifically-based" thing that happened in my lifetime that my kids haven't witnessed), although I'd have prefered to follow Christopher Columbus (but I'm not THAT old). The guys who went to the Moon had lots of technological help. Columbus had great hopes about where he was going. When he got there, he didn't know where he was. And when he got back, he really wasn't sure where he'd been. That would have been fun to watch!
I must be getting tired.
Hope you get some sensible people to help refine a better way of accessing TV on a more sensible basis. Good luck.
Complain about this comment
#386 xTunbridge
I totally agree.
The declared intention of Bush/Blair was to bring "democracy" to Afghanistan. In other words they wanted to change the entire culture of the Pashtun people to individualism instead of family/tribal loyalties.
The whole concept of Afghanistan and Pakistan as being "countries" in a Western sense is a nonsense anyway. They are constructs of the British Empire's intervention.
A short sharp surgical strike to take out Bin Laden was reasonable, but this interminable war against a different culture, who don't want Western values is insanity.
Complain about this comment
388 oldnat
If thee and me and many others posting on this site can see it why cannot the Government ?
Complain about this comment
"sagamix wrote:
mark WE @ 365
but then we would no longer have the statutory minimum (would we?) and the MW would revert to being just what you say it is ... a good idea
in your scenario above, where the exploited worker opts out of the MW and is "rewarded" with a now legal and above board contract for say two pounds an hour, where does that leave the exploiting, and previously criminal, employer? ... are they off the hook because they are no longer breaking the law?"
I don't think you are getting the point I was making. As I understand from reading the proposal it will allow people to work for less then the minimum wage if this takes them outside of paying tax.
E.g. Fred works 40 hours at a minimum wage of 5 pounds, getting paid 200 pounds a week. However the taxman takes x% of some of that money meaning his take home wage is really only 4 pounds an hour.
The proposal (again as I understand it) will allow Fred to work for 4 pounds an hour or above (Fred doesn't lose out financially, the company gains financially and the only loser is the government)
Fred may already be working for the company illegally for 4 pound an hour but as he is working illegally he doesn't have the right to paid holidays, sick days etc.
The concept behind the proposal has some merits - allowing currently illegal works to have greater protection under the law. However, it tries to fix the problem in the wrong way. It would be far easier to raise the tax threshold so that you don't pay taxes until you earn more then 40 times the minimum wage a week.
Complain about this comment
#374, oldnat wrote:
#367 tisfedup
"very noticable that those posting are of a certain ilk, on the worst day for losses of our boys, 8 in one day, not one post in respect."
You choose to make a political point out of 8 deaths. These were tragedies for their families, just as were those of the victims of the average daily death rate on UK roads of 7 people every single day of the year. Do you post in respect of these victims every day?
=====
Oldnat,
You must know that's a sick comment.
Any deaths are sad (although it will happen to all of us).
We have a volunteer force of soldiers, sailors, airmen/women. THEY do not choose where the government sends them.
Normally, people who get in a car are responsible enough to check that their vehicle is roadworthy, they are in a condition to drive and they pay attention to what's going on. They hope they can simply get in, turn on, carry on and arrive.
Force members go where they are told, whatever the state of their equipment, often not having confidence that the people "driving" their journey have the faintest clue about what they are facing or what the objectives are.
Maybe you don't like the military engagements. Maybe I don't. But IF I sent my son out in a car I knew was faulty, onto a road I knew hadn't been maintained for decades, without telling him how far he'd have to drive or the idiot drivers he'd come face-to-face with, I'd feel a little guilty and probably be culpable of some crime.
But, what the heck. The PM and multiple Secretaries of Defence (short-term postings...) have said that "sacrifices" will be made to defend our interests.
It's going to be a real sacrifice for some MPs to lose a comfortable billet next year. Not quite the same.
Nobody orders people to drive in a car without an MOT. Well...
Complain about this comment
#389 xTunbridge
"If thee and me and many others posting on this site can see it why cannot the Government ?"
I'm quite sure they do see it, but it's easier for them to let troops die than to admit that they got it wrong.
Complain about this comment
This type connection will not go away..if thi is how i believe you are acting when not in offie surrounding yourself with men like Mr Coulson...one can only inagine how you would be if elected to office Mr Cameron...Its a matter fof trust and there is no ay i would trust you with our country after this Mr Ten percent
Complain about this comment
#391 fairlyopenmind
Sick comment? Yes. I agree with what you say. My contempt is reserved not only for the politicians who sent soldiers to their deaths in a stupid, unwinnable war, but also for those who strike heroic poses that somehow their deaths in a stupid cause are somehow nobler than those who die on our roads.
Troops die in wars. Their deaths are not "the ultimate sacrifice for their country". They die because politicians send them into danger. If the cause is "worthwhile", then that price they pay may serve the country well. However, the mindless assumptions of those who glorify death in any conflict would suggest that the 159 British troops killed in Amoy on 12/13 August 1842, while trying to force China to accept opium imports, were engaged in a glorious enterprise.
Complain about this comment
When 25% of the postings above have been moderated, it says more about the lack of free speech than the supposed freedoms in our ever increasing creep that is the Stanilist state?
The real story of this blog is about those that have been censored than the ones that have been passed and filtered and homegenised for human consumption.
This story about hacking is such a non-story, particularly as the Labour Party is, sorry was, looking to pass a bill whereby tapping telephone calls was to become the order of the day in a bid to shut up those pesky terrorists (Terrorist: loose definition to include everyone who speaks out about the disgrace that is our current government)
If Gordano or his predecessor Toni (updated European spelling) Blair are complaining now about something about which there is no proof, let's move on, and you as well Nick; there's a lot of stuff hitting the fan about our economy or lack of it but somehow the sniff of manure is being recycled as fresh air.
Complain about this comment
Morning Nick is it safe to throw my hat in today ? I Noticed the board was occupied mainly by labour supporters yester day And no other comments were allowed Was it a bad day in the office or something?I aplaud moderation but this was over the top.
Complain about this comment
Thank you to all those who commented on my post. To respond to some of the specific points raised:-
1) The basic state pension is £95 per week, my father gets just £35 per week as he contracted out. That's less than a jobseeker gets. It hadn't occurred to me that he might be eligible for income support or any other form of benefit, so thank you to that poster, I'll investigate, although I agree on the point about "pride".
2) The scandalous fall in value of pensions, especially after Gordon Brown raided them some years ago means that I suspect many of us are in for a lean time when we retire. That has certainly been the case for my father. I have variously been in company schemes and had private plans, but because I've chopped and changed from freelance to employment and back again over the years, most of my pensions are probably worthless now. It was certainly true for my father, the most extreme example was a £10,000 policy, taken out in the eighties who's redemption value on retirement was.... £0! All taken up in administration fees, and frankly little more than a con.
3) The point I was making about the public sector was that under that moron Gordon Brown, the size of the public sector has massively increased and the average salary in the public sector has similarly grown disproportionately compared to the private sector over the past 10 or so years. I'm not saying people in the private sector shouldn't be decently paid, I'm saying that we don't have a private sector that is sufficiently sized to pay for it and to pay for the pensions the public-sector workers are expecting. This imbalance is going to topple our economy unless some politicians grasp the nettle and make significant reductions in the size of the public sector and address the public sector pensions issue. For Brown to be continuing to talk about "investment" is frankly ludicrous and is the "big lie".
4) I can assure the poster who queried my qualifications that both the accreditations and I are completely genuine. As it happens, I am a freelance IT consultant. As management consultants are only one-up from politicians and estate-agents for respect these days, the public sector has done quite a good job in cutting the number of consultants and contractors from their ranks - as a consequence of which I haven't been in work since February. With a smaller private sector, and the recession, there are many, many contractors in the same boat - between three and four hundred apply for every vacancy at the moment. As I said, because the state is large and the private sector contracted, there are fewer real wealth-generating jobs. - in short, Brown has really quite fundamentally screwed the UK economy, and I just don't think people realise how bad it is.
Finally, a poster made the assumption that the "family" aren't supporting my father financially. That assumption is, obviously, incorrect but getting my father to accept money from the family when we see MP's getting expenses for duck-houses and leaders of county-councils on £200K a year is, well, lets just say "a challenge"!
stuart
Member, Institute of Directors
Member, Institute of Business Consultants
Member, Association of Project Managers
Member, British Computer Society
Chartered IT Professional
Member of the British Academy of Composers and Songwriters
currently unemployed!
Complain about this comment
This non story is now off the front page of The BBC News web site and most daily newspapers. Far more concerning right now is the rising tragic death toll amongst our soldiers in Afghanistan. The Sky News web site roll of honour pays tribute to all those that have died with pertinent comments from commanding officers and close relatives. The solution is a massively difficult one. How we can we withdraw now having already lost nearly 180 lives? On the other hand can we continue to sustain such heavy losses? The deployment of more helicopters would help to ease the situation with regard to roadside bombs but how can we afford them in the middle of a Recesssion partly caused by The Government's mismanagement of the economy.
Complain about this comment
Japan bytes Once again thanks for the little jokes about a bit thin on the ground i haddent laugh so much in a long while.
Complain about this comment
#329 Susan-Croft
Yes, I think Coulson, if any of this turns out to be true, - there should be no place in British politics or senior management for felons regardless of the unemployment rate.
I know that Nick Hornby (ex-HBOS) is not a criminal but how did it make you feel to hear that he'd been appointed chief of Alliance Boots so soon after costing the taxpayer billions?
Our society feels more two-tiered by the day with disgraced former MPs joining the government via the Lords, bankers who are leaving a legacy of debt being appointed to other senior roles and ex-tabloid editors with dubious histories advising the government in waiting.
It has to stop.
Complain about this comment
393. At 01:27am on 11 Jul 2009, davidou1234 wrote:
This type connection will not go away..if thi is how i believe you are acting when not in offie surrounding yourself with men like Mr Coulson...one can only inagine how you would be if elected to office Mr Cameron...Its a matter fof trust and there is no ay i would trust you with our country after this Mr Ten percent
===
Be honest David, you were never going to vote Tory anyway.
How do you feel about Brown surrounding himself with men like McBride, by the way, does it put you off voting Labour?
Complain about this comment
@ 374 oldnat
The reason our army is in afganistan is political, and to compare our brave boys and girls, who volunteer to keep us safe, to protect our way of life, by giving the ultimate sacafice of their life, to people killed on the road is an absolute insult, and exactly what i meant about ilk, in my later post 365 was my reaction to the non reaction to this sad news. i posted at 358 when i heard the news, i was in shock and saddened and then angry, as at the time i was reading the blogs i felt the need to share my feelings with fellow brits.
Complain about this comment
A couple of statistics for Nick, if we ever do have the debate about something important (I note our Darling Chancellor has decided to be straight about the cuts - we'll see)...
This from the ONS
"Public sector employment increased by 15,000 (seasonally adjusted) in the first quarter of 2009 to 6.020 million.
Employment in central government increased by 12,000. Employment in public corporations increased by 1,000 and local government increased by 2,000.
The number of employees in the Civil Service increased by 3,000.
Employment in the private sector decreased by 286,000 in the first quarter."
[Unsuitable/Broken URL removed by Moderator]
Complain about this comment
WE @ 390
It would be far easier to raise the tax threshold so that you don't pay taxes until you earn more than, say, 4 times the minimum wage
I can agree with you there, Mark - if what we're concerned about is people on low incomes paying tax ... if that is the issue ... then the answer is to raise the personal allowance - to react to the problem by legalising sub poverty line wages would be super silly - so obviously crazy, in fact, that I suspect the driver for this "opt out" thing is something else entirely - been trying to get one or two people on here to shed a little light on those other motives but, sadly, it was not to be
Complain about this comment
puranah 397
Apologies for seeming to be "on your case", but I am very interested to chase down this business of how your father came not to be entitled to full state old age pension.
As I noted before, the "contracting-out" process only applies to SERPS. Contracting out does not reduce entitlement to the ordinary state pension. In fact, as far as I am aware, there is no kind of voluntary contracting out process at all that leads to reduction of basic pension entitlement at all.
The only process I know of that would lead to reduction of entitlement would be circumstances where one didn't pay NI at all. That would be - working in the black economy, working abroad, working below some hours-per-week threashold (20 hours per week, I think), not working at all, being in prison. All these would result in a reduced number of completed contribution years which would result in reduction of entitlement. It is a common misapprehension that the self-employed can suffer reduced pension entitlement, because self-employed NI is perceived to be optional, but that is absolutely not the case - self employed NI is not optional at all, as anyone who has had a contributions audit knows all too well! Basically, as far as I can tell, with few exceptions, none of which would apply to a professional electrician, working full time in the UK always obliges one to make NI contributions and there is no way out of that obligation, and therefore building up a full pension entitlement is inevitable.
If there is a NI/Benefits expert reading this, do feel free to put me right on benefits entitlement.
As I said, apologies for being so pointed in my questioning. I'm really trying to get you to say what loophole the Benefits Agency found to disqualify your father (who was presumably paying tax and NI throughout his career) from something that has been portrayed over the years as pretty much universal entitlement.
Complain about this comment
#398 sicilian29
You're right, the fact that British troops are being lost in Afghanistan is the an enormous issue - and a tragedy for the families of those killed.
Unfortunately, Afghanistan has been approached by the government in a chaotic manner with unclear objectives, lack of resources and a back to front strategy (sending small numbers of troops and having to increase numbers rather than larger numbers of troops at first that decrease).
Also, if the nation is going to want to pull troops out at the first sign of significant losses, we have to question whether we have the appetite to be in a brutal war - it's all or nothing otherwise troops suffer.
As for military hardward such as helicopters, sure sending more Chinooks might help, however, I read a book about the first tour by the Paras a few years ago and when some of their men got stuck in an uncharted Russian minefield, Chinooks were useless because the downdraft would set off the mines and they didn't have winch equipment.
The stranded and injured men had to wait 8 hours for an American Black Hawk helicopter with a winch - at least one of the men died and others were badly injured.
Our military is run by politicians, not by men of war (the Chiefs of Staff) - again, if we stay, this has to change. David Miliband defending the strategy is no good, he's not got a fighting bone in his body and the troops and rest of the nation know that. He inspires no confidence, he's a political scientist for god's sake.
With the exception of Special Forces who choose their own weaponry to an extent, the rest of our military is hobbled with political decisions such as inappropriate helicopters, armoured vehicles with inadequate armour and an assault rifle that now works but is basic at best.
Complain about this comment
374. At 11:45pm on 10 Jul 2009, oldnat wrote:
#367 tisfedup
You choose to make a political point out of 8 deaths. These were tragedies for their families, just as were those of the victims of the average daily death rate on UK roads of 7 people every single day of the year. Do you post in respect of these victims every day?
The deaths are obviously equally tragic for the victims and their families. But there is a difference that I don't think you've spotted. One group volunteers to risk their lives in order to protect their country and it's allies in the full understanding that there is a real risk of their own violent death. The other group die in traffic accidents. What is happening in Afghanistan is quite clearly an immediate geo-political issue. It is the result of governmental decision-making and responsibility. Traffic accidents are different.
Complain about this comment
fed up @ 402
the way one reacts to the death of people ... especially those other than close family and friends ... the emotional impact it has ... is quite a personal thing and I'm not sure it sits easily on a politics blog - for example (and at the risk of saying the wrong thing to you) although I think it's a scandal that soldiers are dying so far from home on such a dubious mission, the death of Michael Jackson is something I felt far more - not saying it was a greater tragedy (we shouldn't do that sort of comparison) I'm just saying I felt it more
Complain about this comment
Perhaps you might like to start a new blog discussing Wensley Clarkson's article 'Confessions of a tabloid hack', allied to Polly Toynbee's 'Murdoch's malign influence demeans British politics', both in todays Guardian?
You are after all a UK citizen who is neither employed by Mr Murdoch, nor by Mr Cameron (although the implication of one of the articles is that Mr Cameron has signed a memorandum of understanding with the non-taxpaying oligarch from New York) and your job as political correspondent at the BBC is to raise matters OF NATIONAL INTEREST IN THE SPHERE OF POLITICS. And I am sure you would agree that the debasement and disfigurement of the entire British economy and establishment through media terrorism to be totally suborned to the interests of an unelected, foreign oligarch is indeed worthy of such a description?
And I trust you understand that these words are entirely neutral, raise legitimate questions and are posed by a UK citizen.
They are therefore not worthy of censorship, are they?
And I remain 100% confident that BRITISH MPs, who owe their oath of allegiance NOT to Mr Murdoch, but to the Crown, will agree 100% with my contentions too.
Unless of course they wish their election manifestos to say otherwise and ensure that such otherwise implications are broadly, widely and clearly understood and, most importantly, printed in the UK-based-, if not UK-owned MEDIA......
Complain about this comment
409. At 11:07am on 11 Jul 2009, rjaggar
Good article in the Guardian. Especially the last paragraph, which highlighted the unhealthy relationship between Blair & Murdoch for a decade.
===
In his memoirs, John Major counts his downfall from the day Murdoch gave him the imperial thumbs-down. Blair fawned and obeyed, right from his shocking acquiescence to the Tory 1996 Broadcasting Act, which gave Murdoch total control of the digital future (later saved by Greg Dyke bringing in Freeview). The night before the crucial Iraq war vote, virtually the entire cabinet attended Sun editor David Yelland's farewell party. Brown loses his moral compass down the back of the sofa as he courts Murdoch. All Tory and Labour leaders canoodle with the Murdoch apparat with a social desperation that demeans them and their office. This political corruption is rather more alarming than duck islands."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/jul/11/rupert-murdoch-andy-coulson
Complain about this comment
Saga
In regard to your effort to smoke out some peculiar set of motivations for this criticism of the minimum wage, I have to say I think you are flogging a dead horse. When you examine practically anything from the frayed edges of politics, left or right oriented, you rarely find anything that amounts either to common sense or even a consistent strand of thinking.
Looking specifically at Conservative policy, I think there is a recognition that the minimum wage has proved to be an efficient way of resolving a number of problems in employment and wages policy, especially in relation to exploitation, and that some of the original suspicions of the downside that the minimum wage would cause have proven to be unfounded. In short, a mainstream Conservative view would be that the benefits of the minimum wage outweigh the disadvantages. That would surely be a case of intelligent people reviewing the arguments that were made quite a number of years ago, finding that they were wrong, or at least not as right as they seemed at the time, learning from that and moving on. The idea that the Conservatives, when in power, would remove the minimum wage (or even tinker with it) is basically rubbish.
You seem a little sniffy about the prospect of increasing tax allowances, to move low paid people out of the scope of income tax. Since this is also an efficient way of raising the incomes of less well off people, I should have thought it would be something you would be keen on. Do you have a problem with this?
Complain about this comment
409. At 11:07am on 11 Jul 2009, rjaggar
I have read both the Guardian articles you highlighted, and one thing puzzles me. You say:
"You are after all a UK citizen who is neither employed by Mr Murdoch, nor by Mr Cameron (although the implication of one of the articles is that Mr Cameron has signed a memorandum of understanding with the non-taxpaying oligarch from New York")
At no point in either article is there mention of any memorandum between Cameron and Murdoch or News International. In fact the only reference is:
"Cameron's office says there was "no contact with News International" about Ofcom but history should not be ignored."
So, you wouldn't just be making something up to try and smear Cameron and the Tories, would you?
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
412 yellow belly
#So, you wouldn't just be making something up to try and smear Cameron and the Tories, would you
He'd have a job to find a space between all the Gordon Brown and Labour smears from the Tories on these blogs.
Heaven forbid anyone should attempt to smear Cameron or the Tories.
Complain about this comment
#402 tisfedup
Thank you for your explanation. I accept that you weren't making a political point out of these deaths.
However, to describe our forces as "our brave boys and girls, who volunteer to keep us safe, to protect our way of life" is to totally misunderstand the motivation of many of my former pupils in this severely deprived area who joined the forces.
Complain about this comment
414 grandantidote
So weak! (copyright Ed Balls)!
Complain about this comment
410 yellow belly
Remind me again Yellow what newspaper in 1992 had the headlines
" If Kinnock wins will the last person to leave the country turn out the lights". Hardly a ringing endorsment fo labour from Cobber was it?.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
jrp @ 411
problem with that? ... no, I support a more progressive (and simpler) tax system - so the rich pay more, the poor pay less, the very poor pay nothing - all fine with that - more than fine - and I'm not saying the tories plan to abolish the MW - maybe they are, maybe they're not, I don't know - it would surprise me if they were, given (as you say) it's generally held to be a good law - no, it's this "opt out" thing I've been trying to get to the bottom of - a strange one, this - if it's about tax (as Mark says) then the solution (I think we all now agree) is to change the tax bands, not dilute the MW - but then my girl Susan keeps muttering darkly about other (no mention of tax) factors ... elderly, handicapped people and a general unknown "they" in fear of losing their jobs because of the minimum wage ... yes I know! ... some sort of idea that "their" interests will be promoted if they are able to opt out of the statutory protection ... I know I know! ... maybe, as a fellow C, you can ask her what she's getting at because she won't talk to me about it
Complain about this comment
374. 367. 407.
While the cost in lives increases, here are a few other costs to ponder:
Cost of new luxury office chairs for civil servants after the MoD HQ refurb: 1,000.000 GBP EACH
Estimated cost of basic equipment for operational soldier: 1,500.00 GBP
Cost to taxpayer for the refurb of the MoD Whitehall HQ: 2.3Billion GBP
Cost of the mothballed 8 Chinook Mk3 helicopters to enter service: 422M GBP (70% more than original cost due to MoD incompetence)
Complain about this comment
"rjaggar wrote:
Perhaps you might like to start a new blog discussing Wensley Clarkson's article 'Confessions of a tabloid hack', allied to Polly Toynbee's 'Murdoch's malign influence demeans British politics', both in todays Guardian?"
Shock horror! The Labour supporting Guardian are trying to imply that Cameron and the Conservatives have a secret deal with the owner of another media group. Of course neither article goes so far as to actually say it because there isn't any proof. In fact Polly Toynbee even admits:
"The timing and content of Cameron's speech may, of course, be purely coincidental. Former Murdoch man Andy Coulson may have nothing to do with it. I have no shred of evidence to the contrary."
So what we have here is a Labour supporting paper throwing mud in the direction of the Tories hoping that some of it sticks. I admit that she does bring in the recent New Labour love in with Murdoch and suggests that both parties want the backing of such a powerful media group.
The Guardian coming out for Labour is like the Daily Mail coming out for the Tories - no great shock.
"And I trust you understand that these words are entirely neutral, raise legitimate questions and are posed by a UK citizen."
Why is it a story now that the Murdoch group seem to be backing the Tories (and lets be fair Murdoch only really switched as New Labour no longer look like they have a chance). If the BBC try to make a story out of the Tories trying to court the Murdoch group then they will open themselves up to even more accusations of bias UNLESS they point out that New Labour have also gained from their close relationships with the Murdoch group
Complain about this comment
saga 419
Well, I'm glad to see you standing with most of the rest of us on taxation. Glad also to see the subtle distinction between your views and those of the Brownites. And further glad to see you distinguishing yourself from the ultra-left by avoiding mention of anything that could be interpreted as advocating a principal objective of taxation to be punishment. I'm sure any differences between us on tax are basically semantic.
I'm as interested as you to hear Susan-Croft build an argument about circumstances where the minimum wage acts sufficiently contrary to some employees' interests that some sort of relaxation would be appropriate. I share with you a concern that diluting the minimum wage might well act to promote exploitation, and it's up to Susan to allay that fear as she makes her case. Less needling of her might promote the debate, though!
One final point - neither of us should try to anticipate where Susan's political loyalties lie. That's a matter for her. I will point out however that I recall her saying that she is an English Democrat, rather than a Conservative.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Re: 397 puranah.
You make the most important point about the overall state of all our future Employment prospects where you state that there are by far "fewer REAL Wealth generating Jobs" left now today in the Private Sector, for what people choose to forget when we talk about Growth we somehow always have to fudge this issue to protect our own worth of lifestyles.
However, todays Job loses across the board are not discriminating in any areas of Employment circles, whereby if anything the term "Middle-Classes" is now set to disappear in this current down-turn that is now at a level not seen since 1945. With the gap between Rich and Poor widening, and a further gap also widening between North and South in the U.K.
This of course can only get far worse with the onset of thousands of School and University Leavers coming onto the Jobs market, and the "only" answer so far given to head off this crisis by Nu-Labour is to Guarantee in the future that anyone at or over 25 Years of Age will will receive a placement of an Apprentice-Ship, or Training to turn out Jack and Jills of ALL Trades and Masters of none if they have to keep changing Jobs in turn-style fashion, which means that if you find yourself within the Age bracket of between 18 - 25 Years of Age, you will become Britains next lost Generation.
When you add into this equation the fact that the State Retirement Age is set in the future to rise, then something make no sense somewhere when many will be starting upon the ladder to some kind of road into Employment after their 25th Birthday.
Add into this Pot the fact that nobody including Nu-Labour, or the Conservatives don't have a clue as to just what kind of NEW Industries will be required and needed in the future to beat the threat of the impending rise in Market Out-Puts by the Economies in China, India, Mexico etc: where their so called "Under-Class" Society can mass produce any Products far cheaper then we can in the U.K.
Here in the U.K. we have a still rising mounting Interest debts in both Personal and Government overdrafts which can only really be paid - off with a reduction in Public Expenditure, which will take many Years to pay off in Interest Fees, this will continue to be accumulated on a still rising Public Sector debt cycle.
So when, we do finally get into the game of re-starting growth we will then be many Years behind YES, China, India, and Mexico, and in this mean time of intervening peiod the London Stock Exchange will have lost out in its importants to our rivals.
Therefore, as things stand today, You've not seen nothing yet.
Complain about this comment
417. At 12:19pm on 11 Jul 2009, grandantidote wrote:
410 yellow belly
Remind me again Yellow what newspaper in 1992 had the headlines
" If Kinnock wins will the last person to leave the country turn out the lights". Hardly a ringing endorsment fo labour from Cobber was it?.
===
Ancient history.
Murdoch backed the winner then, Major, against Kinnock, or maybe he was the king maker. Just like he backed the winner in 1997, 2002 and 2005, Blair. Now he is backing Cameron, would you like to bet against him?
Complain about this comment
Nick Robinson and Andrew Neil seem to be relishing this issue appearing on news programmes and covering the matter in depth on the Daily Politics and This Week. Today's Telegraph gives a more objective assessment http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/mediatechnologyandtelecoms/media/5797090/Phone-tapping-row-analysis-of-The-Guardians-claims.html. Is Andrew Neil's interest anything to do with his own run-in with Rupert Murdoch at Sky and subsequent departure? Also why does the BBC not ever declare, when interviewing politicians such as Michael Howard and William Hague, that Andrew Neil is the Chairman of PFD agency and they are his clients?
Complain about this comment
jrp @ 422
glad to see you distinguishing yourself from the ultra left by avoiding mention of anything that could be interpreted as advocating a principal objective of taxation to be punishment
taxation as punishment for the wealthy, that's a new one on me! - no, we can leave all that to a higher power ... what is it they say? ... harder for a Camel to pass through the Eye of a Needle than for a Rich Man to enter the Kingdom of Heaven? ... something like that
Complain about this comment
420. At 12:53pm on 11 Jul 2009, TheBlameGame wrote:
374. 367. 407.
While the cost in lives increases, here are a few other costs to ponder:
Cost of new luxury office chairs for civil servants after the MoD HQ refurb: 1,000.000 GBP EACH
Estimated cost of basic equipment for operational soldier: 1,500.00 GBP
Cost to taxpayer for the refurb of the MoD Whitehall HQ: 2.3Billion GBP
Cost of the mothballed 8 Chinook Mk3 helicopters to enter service: 422M GBP (70% more than original cost due to MoD incompetence)
I'm aware that wars are expensive. Particularly when governments think that they can run them on a budget. I get the Al Quaida thing. Also the Taliban thing and the drugs thing and the American outsourced War-on-Terror thing. And I still don't know why our troops are there, because it has never been explained articulately, in my hearing at any rate. But although I don't necessarily support the war, I do support the British troops who are obliged to risk their lives in pursuit of its goals, whatever they are.
Complain about this comment
saga 427
Glad to hear it.
I notice you avoid the Brownite issue - that taxation of low earners must not be taken in isolation, but needs always to be considered together with their entitlement to benefits. It was, for example, a line the Great Helmsman essayed at a certain point in his defence of the 10p tax issue.
But maybe "here be demons"?
Complain about this comment
427 saga
Matthew 19:24 It is actually easier for the camel not harder.
Complain about this comment
tun @ 430
yes "easier", what did I say? - and furthermore ... and why, for example, clown to lab swing voters are so prized ... there is more rejoicing in Heaven over one sinner who repenteth than there is over a thousand righteous men who hath no need to repent
jrp @ 429
well, with our labyrinthine setup, you do have to look at both tax and benefits but, as a general rule, I'm not a fan of taking money off people only to give it back to the self same people - it should be noted, however, that we've only gone down that road because the public won't stand for something transparent like an increase in headline income tax rates for, say, 30k and over - if they want some (clear thinking) progressive redistribution ... which they do when they're asked ... but they won't wear the simple way of doing it, then this is what one gets - an overly complex T and B system and a raft of so called stealth taxes - it's not Brownite, it's "Publicite" when you think of it like that
Complain about this comment
Re: 428 its_an_outrage.
I agree War IS an expensive business, whereby because of the current fighting between our Boys / Girls, and Al Quaida / Taliban we will have to Pay the price of this War however long now it goe's on for, for sadly you cannot just switch a War off when you feel like it, once it has started.
The NEWS about the Operational side of events are now being micro-managed by the MOD News machine, whereby if past events are revised, we will be seeing like before during the Falkland War a Max Headroom type of muppet again appear giving us a watered down Daily Statements of events for Public constumption.
You would think that the current mess this Country is in would be enought for any Government to deal with, let alone in fighting a War on Terror with money we just don't have.
That is of course if the Government is not going to further go Gung-Ho in Printing even more Money to pay for something that they have ideas at all how long it will be before we can bring this Conflict to a permanent close.
The "Only" business therefore that has any future in it for the foreseeable period is for those that are performing the task of Quantitative - Easing, and while they are about it, perhap they can run-off a slice for everyone else in this Country, including our Soldiers currently fighting whom deserve it far more than any Bankers.
Complain about this comment
If the Chief of General Staff says he needs 2,000 extra troops sent to Afghanistan now to secure ground (the so-called inkspots) that is being taken from the Taleban in ongoing operations, then it is incumbent upon Gordon Brown to explain why he has refused this request.
You would think that a politician in Parliament, if they were'nt currently on 82 consecutive days holiday, would demand that Brown explains the rationale behind this decision.
The likely consequence of Brown's refusal to authorise the deployment of these extra troops is that the Taleban will regain this lost ground and far worse, those of our troops who lose their lives during these operations will have been sacrificed in vain.
That really is unacceptable.
Complain about this comment
jrperry 422
Reference your post regarding the right to work. Find below the link to the site and look under Mr. Christopher Chope (Christchurch) (Con): I beg to move
After reading this article that York1900 first provided the link to, I thought it was a reasonable way forward for those that are already working below the minimum wage in the black economy and for others who wish to work below the minimum wage for their own reasons. I have tried on a number of occasions to put my interpretation on how this can practically work. Unfortunately others have put their own opinions counter to what I am saying.
For reference I do not want to abolish the minimum wage but believe this would give greater flexibility to meet a number of needs.
It is now for you to read my posts, the link provided and make your own decision. Ultimately, there are no right or wrong answers just different views. It is up to you to form your own opinion as I have.
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200809/cmhansrd/cm090210/debtext/90210-0004.htm
Complain about this comment
Complain about this comment
John Constable #433
I agree but it shouldn't really matter if they are on holiday or not, they should all come together an demand an answer as it effects so many people.
I am pleased that one of the mothers have won a legal big to have an investigation in to the use of the lightly armoured snatch land rover in quite a serious conflict zone.
So many of our men have died because they do not have the right equipment or enough of the stuff they need, GB should either give them what they need or pull them out and more people should openly question the him about this at pmq's, this is more important than who's cutting what and who tapped who etc.
Complain about this comment
LittleMissQueenie @ 436
I do not think that if pressed, Gordon Brown could provide a satisfactory military-orientated explanation as to why he has refused the request from the Chief of General Staff for 2,000 more troops to be sent to Afghanistan.
Gordon Brown does not have any military experience whatsoever, therefore he cannot make a military judgement on this matter and in theory, should bow to the request.
Obviously, from Browns political and economic perspectives, there are many issues involved in this matter, for example, the Afghan campaign is generally unpopular at home and there are significant costs involved in sending more troops.
Nevertheless, Brown must be pressed to explain his rationale.
With leadership comes great responsibility and it should be a very heavy burden.
Complain about this comment
susan @ 434
thanks for that link - just read it and it's clear enough - my problem with you over this is NOT that we have differing opinions over whether it's a good or a bad idea ... differing opinions make the world go round ... no, what it is (being serious here, not trying to wind you up) is that you support this general right of opt out to the MW, whilst at the same time making great play of saying you support the retention of the MW! - but this law, if passed, would make it legal for an employer and employee to negotiate/agree a wage of less than the MW - so how's that materially different to not having a statutory minimum wage? - it isn't, is it? - if you were just to say that effectively repealing the minimum wage makes sense for all the reasons given by Christopher Clown (sic?) in the link, I would respect that - would strongly disagree but would respect a differing opinion - as it is, however, I feel you're not arguing the case honestly and that's why I'm trying to nail you - all you need to do to make me happy is admit that a general opt out to the MW is tantamount to abolishing it in those very sectors (catering, cleaning, labouring etc) where it has most relevance - that's all I need, Suze, then we can agree to differ on the rest ... you know, just like we usually do
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
432 LondonHarris
Yes I well remember the daily Falklands war bulletin, forgotton the chaps name, (Sir john ?), telling us only what the govt wanted us to know. Remember how they hated Max Hastings being the first person into Stanley as well.
But didnt they try the same thing with to 90/91 Iraq war ? And had to give up coz everyone with a satelite dish was watching live war on CNN ?
Complain about this comment
saga 431
I have to admit that I am struggling to see the logic behind what you are saying.
Low-paid people work, receive income, pay tax and then receive benefits to compensate them for the effects of being low-paid and paying tax. In other words, the recycling of money is all within the basic rate of tax: the low-paid only pay tax at the basic rate and the total collected at the basic rate exceeds the amount of benefit paid. The impact of the higher rate is irrelevant, because none of the low-paid benefit-receivers pay tax at the higher rate and none of the tax collected at the higher rate needs to be brought in to make up those benefit payments.
In fact, you can go further, because the amount collected at the 40% rate is small compared to the amount collected at the basic rate. So, raising the higher rate (e.g. to 45%) will not raise a significant amount of extra revenue, and so will not significantly reduce the demand for money (nett of benefits) from basic rate tax payers. The government is, indeed, about to take this particular piece of logic to its ultimate conclusion with the new 50% rate, which, even by their own most optimistic calculations, only collects the same as 3/4p added to the basic rate. In fact, it is more likely that its overall effect will be negative, because of the various schemes people will use to avoid it (I mean that measures to avoid the 50% rate will reduce tax take at 40% and 20% by more than the 50% rate band will collect).
The real logic is inescapable. The lowest threashold of tax should be increased sufficiently to enable a corresponding reduction of benefits. Raising the tax threasholds reduces the number of people whose tax payments have to be administered. It also puts money into the hands of the lowest paid, who therefore have less need of benefits: therefore the costly process of administering their benefits is no longer needed.
The important point is that since the tax and benefit economy is inefficient, in that it costs money to operate, then the choice to operate the economy in that way is made for reasons nothing directly to do with economics at all. (Note that it is only at this stage that party politics enters the argument!) By operating a tax and benefit economy, the government creates two cohorts of people who are dependent on it. They are the tax and benefits administrators and the low-paid over-taxed working benefits claimants. These two cohorts form a constituency who can be convinced that their livelihoods depend on the government, and they have the potential to form a block vote.
Call me cynical (I'm sure you will!) but tax-and-benefits has nothing at all to do with higher rate taxation: it allows the government to buy two blocs of people who are more likely to vote for it.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
# 439. At 6:06pm on 11 Jul 2009, nautonier
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
This 'moderation' just shows the BBC are more interested in their own survival and appeasement of political interests rather than dealing with the bigger story of the UK participating in the war in Afghanistan.
British soldiers are dying - who cares about phone tapping of attention seekers!
Complain about this comment
441 jrperry
Why does your inescapable logic evade the govt ?
In 5 and a bit lines you have made more sense than any finance bill.
Complain about this comment
441 jrperry - nice one!
I have argued on other posts that an admission that public sector cuts along with a temporary increase in standard rate tax is essential if we are to get out of the mess that the Government has gotten us into. The increase in tax to be mitigated by an increase in the personal allowance to assist the lowest paid.
If we can trust a Government to reduce the standard rate in due course and maintain a smaller Government, I do not think that this would lose too many votes
Complain about this comment
jrperry @ 441
I have to agree that the reasons for the tax-and-benefit system appear to be primarily political, as you say crudely allowing Government to buy two cohorts of voters, namely those who work within the tax-and-benefits system and the low paid.
The plight of the latter is very depressing, as the excellent financial journalist Ian Cowie points out in todays Telegraph, some of these people are suffering marginal tax rates of 70%.
Seems like these low paid people are just fodder for the politicians.
Complain about this comment
I hope someone taps Bob Ainsworth's phone and spills all of the government lies over Afghanistan and how the rising death toll of UK soldiers makes us safer in the UK, in the ongoing political and economic crisis.
Complain about this comment
jrp @ 441
5 lines tun? ... try 50 odd! ... anyway, JR, not uninteresting but also not much to do with what I said, or the strength (or otherwise) of my "logic" - all I was saying is a couple of things:
1. I don't like where we are on tax/benefits
2. we got here because we shy away from simple solutions
3. I believe in a clearer, and more progressive, tax system
so I don't know why you're presenting your well worked (although a little dense) mini thesis as some sort of rebuttal to me - for example, I have no problem whatsoever with 5p on the basic rate, combined with a lifting of the personal allowance to, shall we say, 12k
Complain about this comment
441. At 6:11pm on 11 Jul 2009, jrperry wrote:
Call me cynical (I'm sure you will!) but tax-and-benefits has nothing at all to do with higher rate taxation: it allows the government to buy two blocs of people who are more likely to vote for it.
You're right of course. But very few taxes are directly related to specific areas of expediture, which allows politicians to claim that they are intended to be used for anything that their focus groups view as being desireable, or even not undesirable. 'Hard Working Families', for example, was an inspiration. It doesn't mean anything but nobody except another cynic (such as myself) is going to vote against it.
443. At 6:19pm on 11 Jul 2009, nautonier wrote:
British soldiers are dying - who cares about phone tapping of attention seekers!
It is possible to care about both.
Complain about this comment
jaycee @ 446
I have to agree (with the perryman) that the reason for the tax-and-benefit system appears to be primarily political, as you say crudely allowing Government to buy two cohorts of voters, namely those who work within the tax-and-benefits system and the low paid
it is John, I agree, a rather crude analysis and you (and the others) shouldn't encourage him - the better one is mine, which says the main reason is that Labour wanted to (and did) redistribute a little bit, but were ashamed to be open about it ... smacked too much of that thing (9 letter word starting with an S) which dare not speak its name ... hence the undercover solutions, the complexity, the distinctly sub optimal system we now find ourselves grappling with - it's the public's fault in many ways
Complain about this comment
@415 old nat
thankyou for your understanding of my reasons,
but i stand by my description of, our brave boys and girls, because regardless of why they joined our army, the training, the ethos, the removal from their norm, educates, develops character, gives a discipline that probably wasnt present when say you knew who they we're, if these things was not taken on board they would fail, they would go awol, they would be gone...glasshouse etc.. so yes every single one of our armed forces for whatever reason they joined are brave, and i thank each and every one.
Complain about this comment
saga 448
You said in 431
"as a general rule, I'm not a fan of taking money off people only to give it back to the self same people - it should be noted, however, that we've only gone down that road because the public won't stand for something transparent like an increase in headline income tax rates for, say, 30k and over"
Need I say more? (Generally I do feel the need, but not this time!)
Complain about this comment
448 saga
Yes the best 5 and a bit lines in the middle !
Up the tax thresholds, this gives poorer more money, will reduce benefit claims and so admin costs . Seems ok to me.
Complain about this comment
jrp @ 452
need you say more? ... er dunno, but I sure don't spot anything untoward in what you're quoting - we agree that taxing, then giving back to the same people, is probably not the way to go, and we disagree about why it's been done - you say it's an ultra cynical and thought out strategy to create a "client state" and secure a structural electoral advantage - I say it's "redistribution by stealth" due to fear of the public reaction to clear/simple increases in headline tax rates - and then my example ... example only ... higher rates for 30k and over - where's the booby? - I don't make many mistakes, but perhaps I've slipped up this time - can't see it though
Complain about this comment
sagamix @ 450
You say that the main reason (for the tax-and-benefits system as developed by NL) is that Labour wanted to (and did) redistribute a little bit, but were ashamed to be open about it.
That is factually correct, if my memory serves me well, for the whole ten years that Tony Blair was PM, only once in all that time did he publicly mention the word 'redistribution', despite it being central Labour tenet.
As you say, they felt that they had to 'redistribute' by indirect means.
Admittedly it is a hard sell to tell the median earning cohort that some of their hard earned cash is going to be redirected towards those less fortunate.
However, I believe that the English public can no longer tolerate that sort of sleigh-of-hand in our politics and that politicians are going to have to tell it like it is - that is, be more honest.
So for example, if they believe in redistribution, then they are going to have to make the argument for it (usually framed in terms of social cohesion).
The English are basically fair people and if the argument for redistribution ala cross-subsidy to less-well off people is well put, then I believe it could be accepted, provided stringent controls are in place to avoid abuses.
The crucial point here is that monies 'redistributed' by Government must NOT end up in the pockets of the feckless and lazy.
Complain about this comment
38 Sagamix
Your knocking your head against the wall there Saga, the response I recieved for saying exactly what your saying was as follows.
#I cannot really be bothered to answer, but would suggest you read things properly and understand what is being said or do not comment.
#The benefits you enjoy you mean, we young people will enjoy very few benefits due to the spending culture of this Government. But hey you have already said you do not care about that as long as you are alright.
What a lovely genteel lady.
If your not winning be abusive.
Complain about this comment
456. At 8:26pm on 11 Jul 2009, grandantidote wrote:
38 Sagamix
Your knocking your head against the wall there Saga, the response I recieved for saying exactly what your saying was as follows.
#I cannot really be bothered to answer, but would suggest you read things properly and understand what is being said or do not comment.
#The benefits you enjoy you mean, we young people will enjoy very few benefits due to the spending culture of this Government. But hey you have already said you do not care about that as long as you are alright.
What a lovely genteel lady.
If your not winning be abusive.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is amusing
Because Susan puts ( IMHO ) her points across clearly and eloquently and doesn't resort to snide remarks or sarcasm, unlike you two .. You appear to be accsuing her of " not winning " and being " abusive "
Please do feel to expand and qualify ...How precisely
Complain about this comment
#451 tisfedup
I wasn't denying their bravery! I also agree that the Army provided many of them with the disciplined family that they lacked - why I encouraged some to join up!
The best sniper in my father-in-law's platoon once said to him "Sir, this is great! They'd hang me for this back in Glasgow". (I translate!) Amoral killers can make excellent soldiers, but they shouldn't be credited with high and noble motives, to cover for the amorality of the politicians (and those who support such politicians) who send them.
Complain about this comment
grand @ 456
ah but the bigger the challenge, the bigger the buzz - I've spent weeks doing the groundwork with Susan ... wining and dining, as it were ... and it's all been building to this - here's where I claim my reward - here's where Susan (finally!) comes back to my place and ... a truly thrilling prospect ... concedes a point to me - just this tiny little point - that a general opt out to the minimum wage is tantamount to abolishing it - that's all - I sense she's already decided to do it and is just mulling over the right time to tell me - pretty sure it's coming very soon - course if I'm wrong, I'll feel a bit silly ... would mean she's been playing me for a fool ... but I don't think I am
Complain about this comment
saga
The redistribution hypothesis is an interesting one. That the government was seriously trying to achieve it is defeated in reality by the government's record of achievements on iradication of poverty. Basically, any measure of distribution of wealth among the various strata of society is practically unchanged through the period 1997 to now. So redistribution has indeed been very, very stealthy.
The underlying problem is that there actually isn't much to redistribute. If you look at people on what we might call high earnings, depending on how you define the boundary between "high" and "not so high", there are either not very many people, or there is not much money available. Very few people earn over £100k, for example. Rather more people earn over, say, £40k, but they are the ones with big mortgages, car loans and so on, and the exchequer already has about half their disposable income through VAT and the various other slices of taxation that our retail industry produces. We are venturing into territory we have visited before: higher taxation hasn't worked so far and isn't going to work in the future because on national scales, there is hardly anything left to take.
You say, I paraphrase, that the problem was that Blair didn't want to upset his new constituency (Labour voting middle class); I say they didn't have that much to give. I suppose we could agree that it is very easy to be upset if you are being forced to pay tax you can't afford.
Complain about this comment
jrp @ 460
That the government was seriously trying to achieve it is defeated in reality by the government's record of achievements on iradication of poverty. Basically, any measure of distribution of wealth among the various strata of society is practically unchanged through the period 1997 to now
actually, I think they have done a fair amount of it - don't know about the various measures ... apparently some say there is greater inequality now than ever before ... but, in any case, I'd venture that's not because of a big failure to redistribute on the part of the government - I'd more say that the roaring global capitalism of the last decade and a half has naturally lead to massive inequalities (many people have got seriously rich, for example) and those inequalities (as far as this country goes) would have been a great deal WORSE if it wasn't for the government's efforts - albeit undercover efforts as I think we agree - well, apart from the inspired introduction of the 10p rate of course ... nothing undercover about that
Complain about this comment
So let me get this right the press AND the police are politicised. Is that official Mr Robinson and what side are you (and the BBC) on?
Is your use of the expression "Bermuda Triangle" a suggestion there is a rational and scientific explanation for the disappearance of any evidence, or where politicians, press and police are concerned in dirty dealings there is never any "incriminating" evidence left behind? Am I correct in presuming this phenomenon didn't exist before Hutton?
Complain about this comment
449. At 7:15pm on 11 Jul 2009, Its_an_Outrage wrote:
441. At 6:11pm on 11 Jul 2009, jrperry wrote:
Call me cynical (I'm sure you will!) but tax-and-benefits has nothing at all to do with higher rate taxation: it allows the government to buy two blocs of people who are more likely to vote for it.
You're right of course. But very few taxes are directly related to specific areas of expediture, which allows politicians to claim t