DEM not gonna CON dis NATION: Rolling UK politics in the short-lived Cleggeron era

Willetts was spouting a similar line on the radio earlier, the entire policy is Win-Win and contains no "regrettable" aspect whatsoever seems to be his message.

Churchwell basically got shouted down whenever she opened her mouth and was unable to finish a point. She looked incredibly fucked off and was tutting "unbelievable" to herself. Starkey is an arse obv.

Regrettable, maybe not - the word we are looking for is SHAMEFUL.

Churchwell caught in testosterone whirlwind on Newsnight, quelle surprise.

Don't think testosterone is Starkey's usual steez

it was just antediluvian snobbery and pissy interruptions really

yeah that's about right. sad thing is I enjoy some of his legit historical work.

it was just antediluvian snobbery and pissy interruptions really

You need testosterone to do 'manbags at dawn'...

Flip on to QT, people...

Never watch QT, doctor's orders.

QT over, let's see what Andrew fucking Neil has to say...

Best thing on the news this week was some Sky reporter stalking Sarah Teather from outside her front door and down her street as she did her best "Oh go away, I'm just popping to M&S" voice as if she was trying to get out of talking to a chugger and shoved her iPod on.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MOGbPbprWFc

David Dimbleby is joined in London by Liam Fox MP, Norman Lamb MP, Sadiq Khan MP, Aaron Porter and Janet Daley.

aw hell no

might be funny to see aaron porter getting owned, but no-one will. none of the three political parties can do anything but lie about this issue.

Aaron Porter was good when they got to WikiLeaks, but he's useless at being head of NUS.

Not sure how accurate Twitter is, but there's a bunch of people posting photos and whatnot of protestors being held on Westminster Bridge at 1AM.

A-ha ha ha. If Littlejohn wrote for the Independent he'd be bashing away on his "you couldn't make it up" keyboard shortcut macro:

Government must no longer "shy away" from acting to keep families together in a bid to stop children ending up in poverty, in prison or jobless, the Prime Minister will say today.

Anyone think of one good way to keep children with their families from the age of 18 through 21?

Not to mention 16-18. Did anyone read Gordon Brown bigging up EMA at the weekend?

Kids won't need EMA as they will be legally required to be in education until 18, so if they can't afford to go to college they can be fined or maybe, um, jailed. Always thinking.

Least surprising new story of the year.

new news.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2010/dec/13/social-survey-thatcherite-britain?CMP=twt_iph

So Thatcherbabies do exist...

does my society look big in this

h8 u britain

So Thatcherbabies do exist...

And they all get their comments in first on Guardian articles.

Buried in the body of an article about Ed Miliband's response to EMA demos today:

Mr Cameron faced angry claims by Tory MPs that they are being treated more harshly than Liberal Democrats in the coalition.

Senior Conservative David Davis said there was "hostility" towards the Prime Minister and Nick Clegg among backbench MPs over the vote to treble university fees.

One backbencher claimed that some Tory MPs considering rebelling were told that if they did they would not get help in finding a new seat when the number of MPs is cut by 50 following boundary changes. Government sources denied this threat had been made.

for ref, that article - http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23906448-sixth-formers-should-be-free-to-join-protests-says-ed-miliband.do

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2010/12/14/article-0-0C785063000005DC-829_306x499.jpg

unacceptable

One backbencher claimed that some Tory MPs considering rebelling were told that if they did they would not get help in finding a new seat when the number of MPs is cut by 50 following boundary changes. Government sources denied this threat had been made.

government sources are lying so-and-sos. the whole point of the boundary changes is to increase beyond its already absurd level the power of the payroll vote. it's not the sort of thing anyone demonstrates over and it sure as hell isn't something labour would oppose.

won't these boundary changes negatively affect labours chances in the next election?

yeah -- that's how it goes, labour did its own gerrymandering. this'll probably be worse; but my point was, labour continued the rise in the payroll vote.

labour did its own gerrymandering

Just out of interest - can you give examples?

it happens by inaction as well as positive action -- maybe i mean positive inaction, as when they overturned boundary commission reports (that's a long time ago). more recently population shifts benefitted labour so that they got a majority of seats with only a fractionally higher share of the vote, and they did nothing to change this (obviously). if the two parties had got an equal share of votes, labour would have trounced the tories. i don't think it's a field where you can really mount a high horse, and there are arguments on both sides, but in the radical spirit of 1832, equally sized constituencies sort of make sense, yes? and labour is said to be for voting reform, or was until it became government policy. i don't want it because the tories will benefit, but well, there is the case.

What is 'the payroll vote'?

junior minsters, pps's, etc, the number of whom has exploded in the last few decades

So are you saying the motivation behind the proposed reduction in the number of constituencies is to increase the proportion of MPs who make up the 'payroll vote'?

it's *a* motivation, yeah, and i think that report of the whips's threats in last week's vote is partial proof

So yeah, unemployment up 37,000 or so, and the government are still refusing to work on any kind of Plan B from what I can see.

http://blogs.ft.com/westminster/2010/12/downing-streets-response-to-the-riddle-of-plan-b/

The FT is right to highlight that quote, the kind of arrogance and complacency on show here is mindboggling. Would be a line of attack from Labour if of course they actually had a Plan A. As it stands they'll have to stand about and wait for things to fuck up.

jesus christ. sometimes the kneejerk reaction is the right one. these really are a bunch of inexperienced, arrogant, poxbridge cunts.

http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2008/05_04/035ostrich_468x538.jpg

“Ministers have not asked for any advice on alternative approaches because we are very clear that our approach for the economy is the right one.”

http://www.dankat.net/about/iraqi_information_minister.jpg

“Ministers have not asked for any advice on alternative approaches because we are very clear that our approach for the economy is the right one.”

http://www.fustar.info/wp-content/images/mclaren.jpg

“Ministers have not asked for any advice on alternative approaches because we are very clear that our approach for the economy is the right one.”

http://nhne-pulse.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/titanic.jpeg

“Ministers have not asked for any advice on alternative approaches because we are very clear that our approach for the economy is the right one.”

idk why i still f/w the guardian when the ft is (on this kind of thing, ie real news) so much better

paywall : /

http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2010/dec/14/tuition-fees-market

Also sad little lol at the very idea of this.

I really don't know where else to put this but disgruntled employees are getting very creative:

http://s3.amazonaws.com/data.tumblr.com/tumblr_ldgyh0scYK1qbwflao1_1280.jpg?AWSAccessKeyId=0RYTHV9YYQ4W5Q3HQMG2&Expires=1292527345&Signature=Q4K7uTZIzpH0rfeKMbIqqQxjbqA%3D

woah. is that real, suzy??

doh just checked the url

Thank you for closing my local library, sorry, not closing at all, merely stopping their funding to encourage good old Big Society to step in and volunteer

because a volunteer will be able to find a new location rent-free, acquire and maintain an up-to-date selection of books all catalogued and barcoded and run the stock database, and act as a one-stop community hub for information, cheap web access, scanning, photocopying

it's going to be lovely

I think the point of the Big Society will ultimately be that where The Community falls short in its delivery of essential services then private enterprise will take up the slack. Libraries, of course, won't come under "essential services".