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.

UKIP polling between 17% and 13% in the polls labour looking for just 9%(thats a net figure aswel), looks like Labour will win with a small majority, and UKIP will certainly have at least 1 seat.

Max said.......

MaxK - 28 Jul 2014 10:06 - 44375 of 44379

gf,

The problem tho is that there is next to no difference between the cons and nulab............ENDS

Sorry Max no I disagree thats what Lynton Crosby and the Tories want the electorate to believe, theirs a massive difference between the 2 partys and you will see it once the parties publish their manifestos.

Labour for instance are going to go for rather than a income tax system of raising tax to an asset system of raising tax over a gradual period.

And all this talk of the lib/dems and UKIP cant influence policy whatsoever, absolute bile.

People with such short memorys, all you need to do is go back to the first 2 years of the coalition where each party traded 1 policy in exchange for the others policy and voted accordingly.

The lib/dems for example got the £10,000 without paying tax into the constitution, they exchanged it for a step down on proportional representation, their are many others aswel small ones which we dont see being passed.

And if you remember they voted with labour over the war in Syria, where Camoron had his ass kicked.

Dont tell me they dont have any influence because they do.

UKIP can poll any figures at present, but their support will disappear come the GE.

The Libs only had influence as part of a coalition. UKIP won't be in a coalition. After the GE, UKIP will revert to being the loony fringe. Max Hastings famously called the Libs 'the silly party'. UKIP are 'the very silly party'.

LOL. the truth is the Tories and the likes of Hays are scared shi-less what UKIP are going to do at the GE.

Their worst nightmare is that they will let labour in through the backdoor and so try to discredit UKIP at every chance they get.

Sorry hays keep trying but you wont shift people who have come to hate the Posh Boys.

In fact it was UKIP that put pressure on the Tories to call a referendum on Europe in 2017, now if that isnt influencing policy I dont know what is.

(Infographic) The Top 10 Regrets In Life By Those About To Die

1. “Never pursuing dreams and aspirations”
The number one regret we found that people have on their death beds is that they were never brave enough to pursue their dreams, but settled for what others expected of them. When they look back at their lives, they tend to recall their unreached goals and aspirations. They are often haunted by decisions that resulted in the lives they ended up with.

While you still have a lot of years to live, be sure to make some time for reaching your dreams. Start working toward your goals now; don’t keep putting things off until it’s too late.



2. “I worked too much and never made time for my family”
Excessive dedication to work causes a person to spend less time with their loved ones. Parents can even miss out on the lives of their children, because they spent their best years pursuing careers and making money.

Everybody needs to work to generate income, and money is necessary to sustain our lifestyles. But don’t ever sacrifice your family time just to make more money. It would do you good to determine what is really important. Do away with unnecessary expenses and things that only crowd your life – this will make room for improved relationships and better lifestyle choices.



3. “I should have made more time for my friends”
When health and youth have faded, people realize what are truly valuable – they find that all their income and achievements amount to nothing in the end. What really matters in those last few moments are the people who are dear to them. At that time, they tend to miss their friends.

It’s so easy to get lost in the daily grind that you forget to take care of your relationships. If you don’t intentionally stay in touch, you may lose contact with your friends through the years.



4. “I should have said ‘I Love You’ a lot more”
The importance of love becomes more pronounced towards the end of life. At this time, unreturned of love will also be more painful.

It can be hard to tell someone that you love them, especially if you fear rejection. But not being able to express those feelings will leave an unsettled need in you, and possibly affect all future relationships. If you are afraid of getting hurt, remember that it’s better to make your love known than to spend the rest of your life dwelling on what could have been.



5. “I should have spoken my mind instead of holding back and resenting things”
A lot of people choose not to confront those who offend them, thinking that this would keep things civil. In truth, suppressing anger breeds bitterness, which leads to various diseases. Harboring bitterness also makes you emotionally crippled and prevents you from fulfilling your true potential.

If you want to have healthy relationships, honesty and confrontation are necessary. The common misconception about confrontation is that it creates division. In reality, if it’s done kindly and constructively, confrontation deepens mutual respect and understanding. When you express negative emotions properly, it also allows you to let go of the resentment so you don’t have to carry it for the rest of your life.



6. “I should have been the bigger person and resolved my conflicts”
A lot of times, death beds and funerals are more miserable because of broken relationships that were never restored. Relationships are ruined when misunderstandings are not dealt with immediately; this may result in a lifetime of hostility.

Conflicts are a part of life; you can’t avoid them, but you should never let your anger last for more than a day. Choose to forgive. Right the wrongs that you can, while you can.



7. “I wish I had children”
As people age, they often feel lonely and long for the company of their sons and daughters. Those who never had children often have regrets about having no one to comfort them or inherit their legacy.

With today’s modern thinking, kids may be viewed as inconveniences or hindrances to pursuing your goals. But keep in mind that your children will be the ones to show you love when you are old. They will also be the ones to whom you will entrust everything you’ve worked hard for after you’re gone.



8. “I should have saved more money for my retirement”
Failing to plan for the retirement years leaves people destitute in their old age. When that happens, their last moments on earth can be very difficult and miserable.

While you are young, you might not yet grasp the reality of retirement, but it’s important to make a plan for yourself. Be careful not to spend too much on things you think you need now; think about providing a comfortable life for yourself in the future.



9. “Not having the courage to live truthfully”
Looking back, people would wonder whether things would have been better if they were truly honest about who they really are. They think about the distress they caused themselves and others by pretending to be someone they’re not. You will naturally have concerns about whether people would reject you or accept you if you came clean; you might find it easier to compromise yourself just to be liked or loved. There are some situations when things need to be kept hidden, but honesty is generally admired. If you are reviled for who you really are, then that’s how you can determine the people who really love you. If you don’t yet have the courage to be truthful to others, you can start being truthful to yourself.



10. “Happiness is always a choice, I wish I knew that earlier”
People rarely realize that they can choose to be happy. It’s so easy to play the victim of circumstance and prevent yourself from moving on in your life. You tend to settle for mediocrity because it’s familiar; you pretend to be content because you’re too afraid to explore.

Make a choice to have a happy life. Be unafraid of change, and don’t worry about what others think of you. Learn to relax and appreciate the good things.

From: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/ed-miliband/10994451/Ed-Wallace-Milibands-problem-is-that-hes-wearing-the-wrong-trousers.html

Ed 'Wallace' Miliband's problem is that he's wearing the wrong trousers
Ed Miliband is right that policies, not image, are what counts, but his ideas add up to nothing
by Boris Johnson July 28, 2014

Now you may think that a little bit rich coming from a guy who has just advertised for yet another “broadcast officer” on £80,000 a year, and who is apparently talking to professors of autism about how he can show more empathy when in public, but never mind. He is surely right.

It doesn’t matter, if you are a politician, whether you approach a bacon sarnie with the daintiness of Barbara Cartland or the carnivorous savagery of Luis Suárez. It doesn’t matter whether you look like Elle Macpherson or Jabba the Hutt – what counts is whether you have good, big ideas to tackle the many problems of a vast and mature Western democracy such as Britain.

So we were all naturally on tenterhooks when Miliband went on The Andrew Marr Show. We had heard the drum roll – now for the ideas! The substance! The gristly intellectual substrate beneath all this irritating media froth that he so rightly deplored. Perhaps he was going to explain why Marx had got some things right; perhaps we were going to get a definition of Ed Miliband’s baffling concept of “predistribution”, which seems to mean taking away people’s money before they have even earned it.

Even in the governance of London, the public question time is standard stuff. The London Mayor and Assembly members are constantly to be found in school gyms and church halls, month in and month out, inflicting our opinions on innocent members of the public who have wandered in and stuck up their hand. If anything, people need some measure of protection from the unremitting levels of interaction that we want to provide.

But I needed to be fair to Ed – we went to the same school, after all – and so I checked that this was really the best he could do. So unlike 99.9 per cent of the population, I have gone back to the text of his great let’s-have-ideas-not-spin speech. I have read every word. I have sieved it and strained it for the smallest crouton of substance, anything at all that you could get your teeth into. Have a look yourself: it’s there online.

It is not a rich minestrone of policies. It is a watery and flavourless consommé of nothingness. There is absolutely nothing that corresponds to an idea that is either new or big; just a couple of paragraphs in which he makes a passing allusion to some of his small, old, bad ideas – before he gets back to the subject that he thinks is really important, viz his so-called image problem, the size of his teeth, etc etc.

In so far as he is willing to discuss policy at all, he reminds us in a few short and verbless phrases that he wants to bash the banks with a new levy – a mindless solution to the problems of financial sector irresponsibility, which will damage one of the strongest bits of the economy. He wants to put up taxes for the rich – which might gratify the vindictiveness of the Labour Left, but which will achieve nothing of economic value for this country; quite the reverse. He wants to poke the energy companies in the eye – a measure that will not exactly help them build the power stations we desperately need. And he wants to give over-mighty press barons a kicking, you know, er, like his ludicrous apology for posing with a copy of the Sun, a paper read by millions of people including a great many Labour voters… and that’s it.

These are the things he has now been saying for years, and it is this approach that has left him with the worst ratings of any Labour leader since Michael Foot.

Where are the detailed plans to tackle educational inequality, to reform welfare, to give the country the homes it needs, to provide the infrastructure for Britain to compete? They are being driven forward by the Conservative-led coalition. Ask yourself: what concrete policies is Ed Miliband offering – large or small – that will help encourage the spirit of enterprise in this country, so that we can create the wealth to pay for the poorest and neediest?

How can you take this country forward if you are offering nothing but a handful of knee-jerk attacks on businesses of all kinds? The answer is that you can’t.

Ed Miliband’s problem is not so much that he looks like Wallace. He should look at the films of the great Nick Park to see what has gone wrong. As soon as he was elected leader of the Labour party, he woke up, pressed for assistance on his special gizmo, and then he was shot through a hatch in the floor into a sinister pair of automatic steel leggings that are moving him irresistibly away from Blairism and in a direction of Leftist irrelevance. He hasn’t got the wrong face – he’s wearing the wrong trousers! And who is the blinking-eyed penguin who is controlling him? It’s Len McCluskey and the unions, of course.



Ed Miliband is absolutely right to say that politics should be about ideas, and he is right to say that these should be more important than image. But the awful fact – confirmed by this speech – is that, frankly, Miliband’s image and photo-opportunities are the best things he has in his political programme.

"And who is the blinking-eyed penguin who is controlling him?"


LOL !

What would YOU ask David Cameron in Public Prime Minister’s Questions?

27 Sunday Jul 2014
Posted by Mike Sivier in Austerity


Mile-wide: Mr Miliband explained his idea to bridge the gulf between the public and the Prime Minister to Andrew Marr.

Ed Miliband engaged in a particularly compelling piece of kite-flying today (July 27) – he put out the idea that the public should have their own version of Prime Minister’s Questions.

Speaking to Andrew Marr, he said such an event would “bridge the ‘mile-wide’ gulf between what people want and what they get from Prime Minister’s Questions”, which has been vilified in recent years for uncivilised displays of tribal hostility between political parties and their leaders (David Cameron being the worst offender) and nicknamed ‘Wednesday Shouty Time’.

“I think what we need is a public question time where regularly the prime minister submits himself or herself to questioning from members of the public in the Palace of Westminster on Wednesdays,” said Mr Miliband.

“At the moment there are a few inches of glass that separates the public in the gallery from the House of Commons but there is a gulf a mile wide between the kind of politics people want and what Prime Minister’s Questions offers.”

What would you ask David Cameron?

Would you demand a straight answer to the question that has dogged the Department for Work and Pensions for almost three years, now – “How many people are your ‘welfare reform’ policies responsible for killing?”

Would you ask him why his government, which came into office claiming it would be the most “transparent” administration ever, has progressively denied more and more important information to the public?

Would you ask him whether he thinks it is right for a Prime Minister to knowingly attempt to mislead the public, as he himself has done repeatedly over the privatisation of the National Health Service, the benefit cap, the bedroom tax, food banks, fracking…? The list is as long as you want to make it.

What about his policies on austerity? Would you ask him why his government of millionaires insists on inflicting deprivation on the poor when the only economic policy that has worked involved investment in the system, rather than taking money away?

His government’s part-privatisation of the Royal Mail was a total cack-handed disaster that has cost the nation £1 billion and put our mail in the hands of hedge funds. Would you ask him why he is so doggedly determined to stick to privatisation policies that push up prices and diminish quality of service. Isn’t it time some of these private companies were re-nationalised – the energy firms being prime examples?

Would you want to know why his government has passed so many laws to restrict our freedoms – of speech, of association, of access to justice – and why it intends to pass more, ending the government’s acknowledgement that we have internationally-agreed human rights and restricting us to a ‘Bill of Rights’ dictated by his government, and tying us to restrictive lowest-common-denominator employment conditions laid down according to the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, a grubby little deal that the EU and USA were trying to sign in secret until the whistle was blown on it?

Would you ask him something else?

Or do you think this is a bad idea?

What do you think?

What would you ask David Cameron?

Would you demand a straight answer to the question that has dogged the Department for Work and Pensions for almost three years, now – “How many people are your ‘welfare reform’ policies responsible for killing?”

Would you ask him why his government, which came into office claiming it would be the most “transparent” administration ever, has progressively denied more and more important information to the public?

Would you ask him whether he thinks it is right for a Prime Minister to knowingly attempt to mislead the public, as he himself has done repeatedly over the privatisation of the National Health Service, the benefit cap, the bedroom tax, food banks, fracking…? The list is as long as you want to make it.

What about his policies on austerity? Would you ask him why his government of millionaires insists on inflicting deprivation on the poor when the only economic policy that has worked involved investment in the system, rather than taking money away?

His government’s part-privatisation of the Royal Mail was a total cack-handed disaster that has cost the nation £1 billion and put our mail in the hands of hedge funds. Would you ask him why he is so doggedly determined to stick to privatisation policies that push up prices and diminish quality of service. Isn’t it time some of these private companies were re-nationalised – the energy firms being prime examples?

Would you want to know why his government has passed so many laws to restrict our freedoms – of speech, of association, of access to justice – and why it intends to pass more, ending the government’s acknowledgement that we have internationally-agreed human rights and restricting us to a ‘Bill of Rights’ dictated by his government, and tying us to restrictive lowest-common-denominator employment conditions laid down according to the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, a grubby little deal that the EU and USA were trying to sign in secret until the whistle was blown on it?

Labour confirms Tory strategy: Vote Nigel, Get Ed

David Blackburn 28 July 2014 7:48



Talk to most Tory strategists about Ukip and Ed Miliband and they say something along the lines of ‘Vote Farage, get Miliband’. They hope that this will deter people from voting Ukip or win back those Ukip supporters who are not irreconcilable to the Tories.

The Telegraph has news that Labour’s private polling confirms the Tory view: Ed Miliband will win Downing Street if Ukip polls 9 per cent of voters, which it is more than capable of doing on current projections.

The Tories, I suspect, will be fairly pleased that Labour has published this information. It reinforces what we’ve known all along: an unpopular left-wing party will win power if the right remains divided. The challenge for Lynton Crosby et al is to fashion a strategy that splits those Ukip voters who might return to the Tories, if only for fear of Miliband and Balls, from the die-hards.

THE SPECTATOR

The Telegraph has news that Labour’s private polling confirms the Tory view: Ed Miliband will win Downing Street if Ukip polls 9 per cent of voters, which it is more than capable of doing on current projections.

A long way to go!

Your SWEATING HAYS.

Lord Ashcrofts Poll..............just out.

Labour were on 34 per cent with the Conservatives on 32 per cent, the Liberal Democrats on 9 per cent, and UKIP on 14 per cent. The narrower Labour advantage reflects that of other polls published over the weekend. This looks a temporary problem associated with Ed Millibands recent image.

I notice UKIP on 14% way above the labour target of 9%, so all is well in the labour camp. These being marginals it also means it gives extra weighting towards Labours thoughts that UKIP will get them in through the back door.

Theres nothing temporary about Millibandus's image problem.

Where are the boys in blue?



'Industrial-scale fraud’ in mayor’s victory

Labour rival of Lutfur Rahman, the extremist-linked mayor of Tower Hamlets, says he saw ballot papers at the count where a vote for him, or candidates supporting him, had been crossed out and a different vote written in





By Andrew Gilligan

9:00PM BST 26 Jul 2014

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10993065/Industrial-scale-fraud-in-mayors-victory.html



The extremist-linked mayor of Tower Hamlets, Lutfur Rahman, benefited from “industrial-scale” postal ballot fraud and may also have been helped by “organised fraud in the counting of the votes”, according to his Labour Party rival.


John Biggs, who was narrowly defeated in May’s highly controversial election, said he and party colleagues had seen a number of ballot papers at the count where a vote for him, or candidates supporting him, had been crossed out and a different vote written in.


He accused Mr Rahman’s supporters of a “considerable amount of election fraud, principally centred around the manipulation of postal votes” and said there were “very significant doubts about the integrity of the ballot”.


The accusations form part of a damaging dossier of evidence, some of which will be submitted to the High Court tomorrow as part of an attempt to overturn the election result.


In a separate article for a local newspaper Mr Biggs said: “I remain a good loser, provided it was a good competition. But I am becoming clearer by the day that, remarkably in this mother of democracies, it could ultimately be declared that the election was bent.”

The dossier, seen by The Telegraph, contains dozens of specific and detailed allegations of electoral malpractice, by and about named individuals, compiled by Labour and three other parties in the election. The dossier alleges that:

Þ Bengali voters, especially women, were intercepted by Mr Rahman’s supporters outside polling stations, then “accompanied” into the polling booths and “directed how to vote”.

Þ In Lansbury ward, Labour votes were “crossed out” on ballot papers and “Tower Hamlets First [Mr Rahman’s party] votes entered with a different colour pen”.

Þ In Weavers ward, the Labour votes “appeared to have been erased” on a “substantial number” of postal ballot papers.

Þ Count agents for Whitechapel ward “reported that many postal ballots [and the accompanying declarations of identity] appeared to have been completed in the same handwriting”.

Þ The counting venue, a converted cinema, was owned by the partner of one of Mr Rahman’s key allies.

The dossier also alleges that Rahman supporters were allowed to conduct “campaigning inside polling stations”, handing out leaflets and telling voters that the Labour candidates were racist or had “sided with a non-Muslim”.

Hundreds of Rahman leaflets were allegedly found inside the polling booths where people cast their votes, while “hostile and threatening” Rahman supporters mobbed polling station entrances, deterring Mr Rahman’s opponents from entering to cast their ballots. One Labour activist in Bow West said a Rahman supporter “came right up to her, shouting and wagging his finger in her face”.

According to the dossier, Labour supporters in a number of blocks and streets “especially those with external mailboxes… complained that their postal votes had not arrived”, while voters in the Prusom Street area had their blank postal ballot papers taken from them by Rahman supporters pretending to be from the Labour Party. It also alleges that a number of people came to vote at polling stations and found their votes had already been cast by someone pretending to be them.

The papers include witness statements from individual voters supporting many of the allegations. One, a commodity trader from the Isle of Dogs, stated that he witnessed a campaigner for Mr Rahman “blocking the route of three young women so they could not pass him into the polling station.”

According to the witness, the campaigner “then produced the very same [Rahman] leaflet I had removed from my polling booth and proceeded to forcibly tell the ladies who they had to vote for” before taking them inside the polling station and registering them with the clerk.

Another white voter, from Bow, stated that she was approached by a Bengali family on the street who said they had been “bullied” by a crowd of Rahman supporters outside their polling station. They asked her to escort them for their safety.

“I went inside the polling station and found a police officer who came out to escort the family safely through in order to vote,” she said.

Sanu Miah, a Labour council candidate in the St Peter’s ward, came top in the first count, with 2,270 votes. However, Mr Rahman demanded a recount to take place the following day, with the votes stored at Tower Hamlets’ headquarters, Mulberry Place, overnight. In the recount Mr Miah dropped from first place to fifth, with his vote falling by a quarter to 1,722 votes.

Some Labour sources believe the first count was a genuine mistake, since there was another candidate with the same surname. However, in his statement, Mr Miah alleges that the seal on one of the ballot boxes was “tampered with and opened” overnight and that “something took place with the ballot papers whilst they were held at Mulberry Place”.

He added: “On the first count, I saw many single votes for myself with other [parties’] candidates, ie many mixed ballots. However, in the second count these were not there. If my ballots had been kept [overnight] in the police station [as another recounted ward was], I am confident I would have won.”

In the chaotic count, which took more than five days to return final results for all contests, senior Labour Party sources said that, as well as ballot paper tampering, the way the votes for the mayoralty had been counted was also suspect. Votes for each candidate are normally sorted into bundles of 50, with the tellers then counting the number of bundles to give each candidate’s total vote.

However, according to the Labour sources, some of the bundles for Mr Rahman contained only 47 or 48 votes, resulting in him getting more bundles than he deserved. Meanwhile, some bundles for Mr Biggs contained 52 or 53 votes, resulting in him getting fewer bundles than he should have. With around 64,000 first-preference votes cast between the two men, a difference of five or six votes in each bundle may have been enough to affect the result, the sources said. Mr Rahman’s majority after second preferences were included was 3,252 votes.

Mr Rahman, who was expelled from Labour in 2010 after The Telegraph exposed his links with an Islamic extremist group, the IFE, won re-election as an independent despite his council being under two separate investigations, one by the Government for alleged misuse of funds and another by the police for fraud.

The High Court hearing tomorrow is to consider an application by Mr Rahman to “strike out” the petition, which he claims is an “abuse of process.” If this is defeated, the full hearing on the petition, which seeks a rerun of the election, will take place in September, when the full evidence will be presented.

Separately, auditors in the Government investigation of Tower Hamlets’ finances are believed to be focusing closely on deals where lucrative council assets were transferred to close associates of Mr Rahman at a fraction of their true value.

An official council report seen by The Telegraph reveals that Mr Rahman appears to have been closely involved in a decision to sell the Old Poplar Town Hall, valued by council officers at £1.5 million, to a company called Dreamstar for £875,000. Dreamstar’s principal shareholder is Mujibul Islam, the owner of Mr Rahman’s 2010 election campaign website, who admitted that he had “had an affiliation” with the mayor and had “helped” him in the election.

In official answers, the council appears to have lied that Dreamstar’s was the “highest bid”. In fact, the report shows, it was only the fifth highest. Dreamstar missed the deadline at the “best and final offer” stage altogether but was allowed to submit a higher “late” bid after all the others, though it did “not comply with the council’s procedures”.

Even Dreamstar’s revised bid was still only the third highest and was recommended for refusal. Instead, it was entered into a “contract race” which saw the two higher offers rejected.

Dreamstar has now received planning permission to turn the listed building, on Poplar High Street, into a 25-room hotel, expected to raise its value to around £3.5 million. The lucrative permission was given in secret by Mr Rahman’s officers, though applications of this scale would normally be decided in public by elected councillors.

The council claimed that the report on Old Poplar Town Hall found “no evidence of illegality or maladministration causing injustice” and that “no elected individuals have been involved in the processes investigated”. The Government audit report into Tower Hamlets is now expected after the summer.

Mr Rahman said that allegations of electoral misconduct were the unfounded claims of “sore losers.”

SUN SAYS
The Sun Says
Last Updated: 28th July 2014

THE NHS is one of Britain’s proudest innovations. Nearly 70 years old, it is now in a state of collapse. It needs radical reform to survive.
The Government trumpets that it has just been voted the world’s best healthcare system. Why then do so many of us say it has got markedly worse in the past year?