Thought Id start this one going because its rather dead on this board at the moment and I suppose all my usual muckers are either at the Stella tennis event watching Dim Tim (lose again) or at Henly Regatta eating cucumber sandwiches (they wish,...NOT).

Anyway please feel free to just talk to yourself blast away and let it go on any company or subject you wish. Just wish Id thought of this one before.

cheers GF.

They cant gf, and that's probably the reason for introducing the charge.

Exactly.

Goldfinger

Waste of time he is bias. But Why did you thing it was such a threat to your thread if it was such a botched attempt . ?

I meant botched because of the number of posters you got on each thread on the 3 threads. i count 5 and 2 of them are you and me.

Always difficult no matter what to take on an established thread.

Anyway having taken note of your posts and Cynics i have updated the header,, so you cant blame me for not trying.

Their are people on here who are genuinely interested in the day today political scene.

Its up to you and others to mix the content up get post/subjects trending like we have on politics.

Now come on I cant be any fairer than that.

21 February 2014 Last updated at 03:58

UK floods: Damage 'could have been prevented'

Some of the damage caused by the recent floods could have been prevented if the correct water management techniques had been used, says a group of leading environmental and planning experts.

In an open letter, they urged the prime minister to adopt a clear strategy for future flood prevention.

The call came as shadow chancellor Ed Balls said a Labour government would make investment in defences a priority.

Downing Street said it was spending more than ever before on protection.

It comes a day after the Met Office confirmed the UK had seen its wettest winter in records since 1910.

Two severe flood warnings remain in place in the Somerset Levels, which has been one of the worst-hit areas, with prolonged flooding since the severe weather began in December.

There are 70 flood warnings, and nearly 120 less serious flood alerts, currently in place across England and Wales.

The Environment Agency has warned that with more unsettled weather on the way, the risk of flooding could be slow to disappear.

Urban landscape taken in the flooded Somerset village of Moorland
The experts said a special conference should be convened to discuss how to avoid a repeat of the recent floods


In the letter to the Daily Telegraph, experts from 17 environmental and planning organisations - including landscape architects, engineers, hydrologists and ecologists - made a plea for the government to listen to them when it came to devising a flood defence policy for the future.

"While we are pleased to hear that the prime minister will provide leadership and funding, it is essential that government actions are based on best practice developed over many years," they said.

"Water management techniques could have helped prevent the effect of flooding on villages, towns and over surrounding land seen recently.

"Emergency measures are in order for the immediate crisis. But in the long term, the management of water requires a clear strategy."

They suggested measures to cut the risk of future flooding, including:

Use of forestry and land management to hold back water in the upper reaches of rivers, as well as dredging for the lower reaches
Fitting sustainable drainage systems on existing buildings and new buildings
Buildings and land that cannot be properly protected should be made to withstand flooding

All new housing on flood plains must be resilient when built
More co-operation between experts, the water companies, internal drainage boards, local authorities, the Environment Agency, and Natural Resources Wales, as well as between them and landowners or residents
The letter urged David Cameron to hold a cross-departmental conference, similar to one set up to deal with ash dieback, and to include Whitehall departments, the Environment Agency and other experts to prevent a repeat of the scale of damage caused by recent floods.

Writing in the same newspaper, shadow chancellor Ed Balls accused the government of "short-termist salami-slicing" of budgets for flood defences.


We must... prioritise preventative spending that can save money in the long term”

Ed Balls
Shadow chancellor
He claimed 300 "shovel-ready" flood defence projects were shelved last year because of a lack of funding.

"Of course, if Labour wins the next election, there will need to be spending cuts... But how we make those cuts is vital," he said.

"Our zero-based review of public spending - a root-and-branch review of every pound spent by government from the bottom up - is clear that we must eliminate waste and inefficiencies, but also prioritise preventative spending that can save money in the long term.

"There can be few better examples than investment in flood defences."

Spending on defences was boosted after the 2007 floods, Mr Balls said, but the coalition government then cut it by 17% in real terms in 2010.

"Rather than the short-termist salami-slicing of budgets we have seen, we need instead to make long-term decisions now that can save money in the future," he said.

Grant scheme
In response to the letter, a Downing Street spokesman said: "We are looking at all potential options to tackle flooding and are spending £2.4bn on flood management and protection from coastal erosion. That is more than ever before.

"We have already announced a record level of capital investment at £370m in 2015/16 rising to over £400m in 2020/21 as part of our long-term plan to improve resilience.

"We need to employ a range of techniques to alleviate flooding, including dredging in some areas.

"We will look at the lessons to be learned to see where additional flood protection can help."

On Thursday, Mr Cameron announced the government's scheme to provide grants for homeowners in England hit by the floods would begin on 1 April.

Claimants will be eligible for payments of up to £5,000, to help cover future protection for properties.

Are you affected by flooding? If you would be willing to be interviewed by the BBC please fill in the form below.

Send your pictures and videos to yourpics@bbc.co.uk or text them to 61124 (UK) or +44 7624 800 100 (International). If you have a large file you can upload here.

I'm ashamed that this food bank crisis is happening in Britain
Feb 21, 2014

Trussell Trust chairman Chris Mould says people are at their wits' end thanks to rising food prices and bills, higher bus fares and cuts in benefits

Neil Atkinson/Sunday Mirror
Fighting poverty: Chris Mould
Food banks are big news. Yesterday’s open letter from church leaders talks of a national crisis... “a disgrace”.

All this concern from well-informed and respected leaders is vital in giving a voice to ordinary people who really are struggling.

We can add to that independent research in a report that was commissioned by the Government itself shooting down the idea that the food bank explosion is just “supply and demand”.

This study says all available evidence points in the opposite direction: it’s about real and growing need.

But amid all this, what I’m thinking about most is the doctor I spoke to yesterday who told me of patients who sit with their heads in their hands in “utter despair” because benefit cuts mean they can’t pay the rent and buy food.

He treats them on the NHS for anxiety and depression and sends them to the local food bank.

Then there’s a single dad I know who struggles on a zero-hours contract and needs his local food bank when his wages drop without warning.

The stress grinds him down. I hear him say he has not replaced his shoes for six years and I’m ashamed.

Trussell Trust food banks provided three days’ nutritionally balanced food to 738,000 people in 2013. But these figures are really about mums, dads and kids who can’t eat tonight.

Mums at their wits’ end thanks to rising food prices and power bills, higher bus fares and cuts in the benefits that used to bridge the gap. We must not forget the stories – we must to fight to get them heard.

The bishops are right to raise the alarm and it’s great to see politicians from all parties taking a lead to get an inquiry off the ground through the newly formed All Party Parliamentary Group on Hunger and Food Poverty.

We all hope for a future where fewer people need food aid. The consensus we have seen this week about the urgency and reality of the problem could be the point where the tide actually turns.



http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/trussell-trust-chairman-food-banks-3168066#ixzz2txx0GbxN
Follow us: @DailyMirror on Twitter | DailyMirror on Facebook

About 6,500 homes have been flooded during the last two months.

I bet you're glad it didn't happen to you! Now the rain has eased off quite a lot, here's the sort of problem(s) you'd now be facing:

What happens to a house when the water drains away?

e.g.

There can be subsidence - which causes foundations to "sink", and heave - which forces foundations upwards. Subsidence occurs when the ground under a building "shrinks" through lack of water, whereas heave occurs when the ground expands because of excess water.

Modern wiring can withstand a short period of flooding, but if a property has been flooded for more than a few hours, it will probably need rewiring - downstairs at least.
"My experience of flooding is that if water gets in, it never dries out completely, the plug sockets get saturated and have to be replaced and dampness goes into the cables,"

When it comes to internal walls, damaged plaster, plasterboard and wallpaper will have to go. Holes might also need to be drilled through plasterboards or dry linings to drain trapped water and aid ventilation, according to Knight. Timber partitions may rot if not dried properly. The Office of Public Works advises people not to redecorate for at least three months after walls have dried and repairs have been done.

And there's more.... MUCH MORE!

It must be truly awful ExecLine, I feel so sorry for these people.

What are the costs to Insurance Companies?

This will come back to haunt the torrid party!

(Read the whole findings of the new moral crusades of Cameron)

21 February 2014
Five lose housing benefit cut appeal


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-26288112

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-26288112

Bad enough just having your house robbed and the invasion of your privacy attacked.

God knows what it must be like for those poor devils on the Somerset Plains when its water that as destroyed your house and life to a certain extent.

Cant do with these people saying they should be allowed to flood. Thats bunkum.

Got to get all parties together and come up with LONG TERM solutions which start immediatly.

Cameron’s ‘mission’ is morally bankrupt 21/FEB/2014

When David Cameron stands up in all his hypocrisy and tells you that tearing apart the basic safety net that guaranteed people would not be left in hunger or destitution is part of his “moral mission”, even die-hard Tories should agree that the country has taken a turn for the worse.

When he defends an administration that has become so punitive that applicants who don’t get it right have to wait without food for months at a time, by claiming he is doing “what is right”, even die-hard Tories should agree that the man who claims he is Prime Minister has diverged from reality.

That is precisely what he has done, and you can bet that the Tory diehards will quietly go along with it because they think it is far better for other people to lose their lives than it is for their government to lose face.

Cameron has been responding after the Catholic Bishop of Westminster, Vincent Nichols, delivered a vehement attack on the social security “reforms” being forced on the country’s most vulnerable people by Iain Duncan Smith.

In the Daily Telegraph, Cameron smarmed: “Our long-term economic plan for Britain is not just about doing what we can afford, it is also about doing what is right… Nowhere is that more true than in welfare. For me the moral case for welfare reform is every bit as important as making the numbers add up.

“We are in the middle of a long and difficult journey turning our country around,” Cameron said. “That means difficult decisions to get our deficit down, making sure that the debts of this generation are not our children’s to inherit.

“But our welfare reforms go beyond that alone – they are about giving new purpose, new opportunity, new hope – and yes, new responsibility to people who had previously been written off with no chance.

“Seeing these reforms through is at the heart of our long-term economic plan – and it is at the heart too of our social and moral mission in politics today.”

Drivel. Any evidence-based analysis will find the exact opposite. Where are the opportunities in Workfare schemes that pay only benefits, meaning travel expenses alone put claimants out of pocket, and then send jobseekers back to the dole queue so rich companies can profit further by taking on more claimants on the same terms?

How can anyone derive hope from taking responsibility for their job search, when DWP staff at Jobcentre Plus are ordered to ignore their own responsibilities in favour of harsh sanctions for invented infringements of the Jobseeker’s Agreement?

And how is encouraging people to say they are self-employed, even though they have little chance of earning enough to support them and none of enjoying a holiday or a pension, different from writing them off with no chance?

Look at the new employment figures from the Office for National Statistics - the Coalition government has been making a song and dance about them ever since they came out. On the face of it, they seem reliable: In December 2013, 30.15 million people were in work of some kind, up by 396,000 from the same time the previous year; there were 2.34 million unemployed, down 161,000 from December 2012; and the Claimant Count (those on Jobseekers’ Allowance) was 1.22 million in January, down 327,000 from a year earlier.

However, the number of people marked as self-employed has rocketed to a record level, totalling one in seven of the workforce. That’s 437,000 – up 150,000 on the previous year. This is extremely suspicious, as the increase in the previous year totalled 25,000 – just one-sixth of this week’s figure.

Some of these people might be genuinely self-employed and making their new business work – but all of them? In an economy where productivity hasn’t increased since the Coalition took office? You’d have to be stupid to believe that.

Assuming the amount of real self-employment has increased in line with economic growth (at 1.9 per cent), that’s an extra 25,475 in 2013, leaving 124,525 in limbo. Are these really self-employed? Or were they told by Jobcentre advisors to say so and claim working tax credits (as we’ve seen in the past), leading to a huge debt when HMRC tells them they have been claiming fraudulently and have been overpaid?

How many of the unemployed have been wiped off the books due to sanctions? We don’t know, because we don’t have figures up to December 2013. We do know that 897,690 sanctions were enforced in the year to September 2013. We don’t know how many were for one month, how many for three months or how many for three years, but we do know that the rate was six per cent of jobseekers per month in the three months to the end of September 2013. Assuming that rate stayed solid, it suggests that 73,200 were off-benefit due to sanctions in December and should be added to the Claimant Count to give a more accurate figure.

How many of the unemployed have been wiped off the books due to Workfare? We don’t know. How many are unemployed but on Universal Credit, which isn’t included in the Claimant Count? We don’t know – 3,610 were on it at the end of November last year, but the DWP has not divided them into those in work and those without.

David Cameron has access to all of this information, and he doesn’t care. He also has access to the mortality figures for claimants of Incapacity Benefit/Employment and Support Allowance, that the DWP has been withholding from the rest of us, probably for fear of sparking an international outcry. He doesn’t care about that either.

His comments are therefore doubly outrageous – not only is he claiming that his Coalition’s changes are having a beneficial effect when the figures demonstrate the opposite, but he is also claiming the moral high ground when his actions are more appropriate to the populace of the Pit.

In terms of his morality, there can be only one description for him and his cronies:

Bankrupt.

Look at the new employment figures from the Office for National Statistics - the Coalition government has been making a song and dance about them ever since they came out. On the face of it, they seem reliable: In December 2013, 30.15 million people were in work of some kind, up by 396,000 from the same time the previous year; there were 2.34 million unemployed, down 161,000 from December 2012; and the Claimant Count (those on Jobseekers’ Allowance) was 1.22 million in January, down 327,000 from a year earlier.

However, the number of people marked as self-employed has rocketed to a record level, totalling one in seven of the workforce. That’s 437,000 – up 150,000 on the previous year. This is extremely suspicious, as the increase in the previous year totalled 25,000 – just one-sixth of this week’s figure.

Some of these people might be genuinely self-employed and making their new business work – but all of them? In an economy where productivity hasn’t increased since the Coalition took office? You’d have to be stupid to believe that.

Assuming the amount of real self-employment has increased in line with economic growth (at 1.9 per cent), that’s an extra 25,475 in 2013, leaving 124,525 in limbo. Are these really self-employed? Or were they told by Jobcentre advisors to say so and claim working tax credits (as we’ve seen in the past), leading to a huge debt when HMRC tells them they have been claiming fraudulently and have been overpaid?

How many of the unemployed have been wiped off the books due to sanctions? We don’t know, because we don’t have figures up to December 2013. We do know that 897,690 sanctions were enforced in the year to September 2013. We don’t know how many were for one month, how many for three months or how many for three years, but we do know that the rate was six per cent of jobseekers per month in the three months to the end of September 2013. Assuming that rate stayed solid, it suggests that 73,200 were off-benefit due to sanctions in December and should be added to the Claimant Count to give a more accurate figure.

How many of the unemployed have been wiped off the books due to Workfare? We don’t know. How many are unemployed but on Universal Credit, which isn’t included in the Claimant Count? We don’t know – 3,610 were on it at the end of November last year, but the DWP has not divided them into those in work and those without.

.

Cleggy pulls a fast one on Cameroon and Radar Millipeed. (both bottled it)





Nigel Farage agrees to EU debate with Nick Clegg

Nigel Farage and Nick Clegg will go head-to-head in a debate on the European Union.



By Peter Dominiczak, Assistant Political Editor

9:46AM GMT 21 Feb 2014




Nigel Farage will take on Nick Clegg in a debate on the European Union after the Ukip leader accepted a challenge from the Deputy Prime Minister.


Mr Farage told LBC radio that he has “no choice” but to accept Mr Clegg’s challenge.


He said that he would rather take part in a debate that also included David Cameron, the Prime Minister, and Ed Miliband, the Labour leader.


“I have absolutely no choice,” Mr Farage said. “I’ve got to say yes because we need to have a national debate on what I think is the most important issue this country has faced.


“The answer is yes, I will do it with Nick Clegg, but the other two, I’d like to see them there as well.”


The debate could lead to renewed calls for Mr Farage to take part in any leaders’ debates ahead of the 2015 general election.

Mr Cameron’s senior advisers are said to be against Mr Farage taking part.

Mr Farage added: "I nearly choked on my bacon roll when I heard Nick Clegg say he wanted to have a debate about the big European question because this was the guy three years ago advocating an in/out referendum who now says there shouldn’t be a referendum, but now wants a debate so he’s all over the place.



More: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/nick-clegg/10653279/Nigel-Farage-agrees-to-EU-debate-with-Nick-Clegg.html

FOOD BANKS
given the virtual monopoly of this thread by the rabids, i have no doubt that this little thought for the day will get quickly swamped, but hey ho

are food banks required?
it's an unfortunate fact, but yes they are

were food banks required say 12 years ago?
almost certainly - but they didn't even come into existence until 10 years ago

are an increasing number of people now availing themselves of food banks?
yes - patently so

does that mean that there is a growing proportion of the population that needs food banks?
not quite as simple an answer as you might think
food banks have only recently been given substantial airing
it is a matter of fact that the creation of food banks and their recent publicity has in itself created a growing demand for them as more and more people wake up to the fact they may be entitled to use them

is this growing demand or need the "fault" of the present government?
the rabids would give an affirmative knee-jerk answer
those who stop to think may register that 4 years ago this country was effectively bankrupt, so much of this increased demand can reasonably be said to be a direct or indirect lag effect of that situation

has this government exacerbated this situation?
the rabids would give an affirmative knee-jerk answer
those who stop to think may conclude that this government could possibly have done more for the lower echelons of society, but how that might have been sensibly achieved is virtually impossible to determine

would the previous incumbents have made a better job of this situation?
on their dismal record of managing the economy over the 10/12 years in which they were in power, the answer is almost certainly not

The present mob in control has done more harm to the economy and society in 4 years than the previous government did in 13years.

Look at the figures and start DYOH.

i see that as usual you do not answer or even contradict the Q's posed above, but just go off on some airy-fairy, sweeping statement tangent - but of course you don't/won't/never vote, so your opinion is of even less value than it might be

at least you managed to be succinct for a change

I was an observer for a large part of my life and highly paid for the few opinions I gave!

Consider yourself lucky that you have them now for nothing.

(Probably, what your and my opinions are worth.)


8-)