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.

By Hannah Furness, Arts Correspondent
10:08AM GMT 28 Oct 2014
Chairman of Department for Culture, Media and Sport committee, says licence fee must be 'tweaked' immediately, with BBC funding methods changed altogether in coming decades

The BBC licence fee is "worse than the poll tax" and is "unsustainable" in the long term, a Conservative MP has said.

John Whittingdale, chairman of the Department for Culture, Media and Sport committee, said the licence fee must be "tweaked" immediately, with BBC funding methods changed altogether in the coming decades.

Speaking at a TV Question Time-style event held at Bafta, as part of a panel, he said the licence fee should now take into account viewers' wealth and reflect their changing viewing habits.

Earlier this year, culture secretary Sajid Javid suggested the licence fee could be cut if the Conservatives were in power after the next election, saying £145.50 a year is a “large amount” of money and “needs to be looked at”.

Mr Javid also raised the prospect of a fundamental reform of the flat-rate licence fee to reflect changing technology and viewing habits, saying "nothing is ruled out” for the future.

The future of the licence fee will be debated in full after the next general election, after the BBC has been compelled to make cuts to its spending.

Mr Whittingdale, who appeared on a panel alongside the BBC's controller of drama Ben Stephenson, has now made clear his support for fundamental change to the way the corporation is funded.

Saying he did not believe the licence fee would survive in its current form in the next few decades, he said: "I think in the long term it's unsustainable.

"I think most people, almost everybody, accepts that the licence fee as it currently stands need some tweaking to sort out anomalies.

"People's viewing habits have changed and it needs to reflect that. That's a very simple change and I think people see that.

"You then have the question of whether or not it should remain a flat poll tax, collected through some fairly draconian measures, and whether it should still be criminally enforceable.

"Government has already announced consultation on decriminalisation. I've been looking at other countries and I think there's quite an attractive option of linking it to a specific household tax - maybe council tax.

"I think in the longer term we are potentially looking at reducing at least a proportion of the licence fee that is compulsory and offering choice."

He added BBC-commissioned research showing the public overwhelmingly support the licence fee had been the result of the corporation setting its own questions, as he called for a wider "package" of options to be presented to viewers.

"It's a question of introducing choice," he said. "I'm not saying I wouldn't pay the licence fee - I would go on paying the licence fee.

"[But] It is a poll tax. It's actually worse than a poll tax because under the poll tax, if you were on a very low income you would get a considerable subsidy.

"The BBC licence fee, there is no means-tested element whatsoever; it doesn't matter how poor you are, you pay £145.50 and go to prison if you don't pay it."

He added the era when "everybody either watched or listened to the BBC" was becoming "less true", in the face of the catch-up services, online streaming, and more choice.

Mr Stephenson, controller of drama commissioning at the BBC, warned the corporation would not be able to maintain the same quality of output if its funding was cut, adding it was currently the "envy of the world".

TANKER

As far as i can remember all the care workers charged with abusing and neglecting the elderly in care homes were British. Filipino workers don't like working with the English because they are mostly lazy and uncaring and always going missing for fag breaks.

By Sarah Knapton, Science Editor
11:41AM GMT 28 Oct 2014
The University of Montreal has found that men who had sex with more than 20 women lower their prostate cancer risk

Sleeping with more than 20 women protects men against prostate cancer, a study has suggested.

Men who had slept with more than 20 women lowered their risk of developing danced by almost one third, and were 19 per cent less likely to develop the most aggressive form.

In contrast, men who slept with 20 men doubled their risk of developing prostate cancer compared with men who have never had sex with another man.

Researchers at the University of Montreal believe that intercourse protects men, and men who are more promiscuous have more sex than those in monogamous relationships.

However, for homosexual men the benefit is lost because of the increased risk of picking up a sexually transmitted disease, and the damage to their bodies from intercourse. However gay men with just one partner are at no greater risk.

"It is possible that having many female sexual partners results in a higher frequency of ejaculations, whose protective effect against prostate cancer has been previously observed in cohort studies," said lead researcher Dr Marie-Elise Parent.


But when asked whether public health authorities should recommend men to sleep with many women in their lives Dr Parent added: "We're not there yet."

The study looked at more than 3,200 men over a four year period between 2005 and 2009.

Overall, men with prostate cancer were twice as likely to have a relative with cancer. However, the researchers were surprised to find that the number of sexual partners also affected the development of their cancer.

Men who said they had never had sexual intercourse were almost twice as likely to be diagnosed with prostate cancer as those who said they had.

When a man has slept with more than 20 women during his lifetime there was a 28 per cent reduction in the risk of having prostate cancer, and a 19 per cent reduction for aggressive types of cancer.

On the other hand, those who have slept with more than 20 men are twice as likely to be diagnosed with prostate cancer of all types compared to those who have never slept with a man.

And their risk of having a less aggressive prostate cancer increases by 500 per cent compared to those who have had only one male partner.

Dr Parent said that she could only formulate "highly speculative" hypotheses to explain the association.

"It could come from greater exposure to STIs, or it could be that anal intercourse produces physical trauma to the prostate," she said.

Previous studies have found that sexual intercourse may have a protective effect against prostate cancer because it reduces the concentration of carcinogenic crystal-like substances in the fluid of the prostate.

The study, published in the Journal Cancer Epidemiology is the first to find a link between the number of sexual partners and the risk of developing cancer.

"We were fortunate to have participants from Montreal who were comfortable talking about their sexuality, no matter what sexual experiences they have had, and this openness would probably not have been the same 20 or 30 years ago," said lead researcher Dr Marie-Elise Parent.

"Indeed, thanks to them, we now know that the number and type of partners must be taken into account to better understand the causes of prostate cancer."

I remember they done research with Monks, that was about 30 years ago and found it was low . And also recent research says Masturbation helped to prevent it. So the best way is to take it into your own hands.

48697 - i think that technically, a uk citizen should also get free health care across eu, but might easily be wrong on that .... anyway, that was not really the issue

other than uk, almost every other country across eu has far worse unemployment problems, and that applies to both the qualified and the semi-literate, so it's no great surprise that unskilled jobs in the rest of europe are difficult to come by ..... however, the world is much bigger than just europe

in uk, there is no question that across the service industries of all fields, the majority of workers are "non-british"
this tells you several things ...... (a) employers see these people as hard workers (generally true) ..... (b) they will often work for low wages, because they see it better than not working at all ..... (c) these low wages are often significantly more than they can earn in the in home countries

do they "steal" jobs from their "british" counterparts? ..... in all honesty, probably not

''So the best way is to take it into your own hands''. Or you could tell the missus that you are a few short of the 20 women needed for optimum safety.---------ps good luck with that.
2517

I've just been counting and I reckon I'm quite a few short of 20!!

and 16ozs

Cynic

It is theoretically exactly the same for UK citizens to journey and work anywhere in the UK, you imply.

WRONG! You are not comparing like for like. Your comparison criteria is/are incorrect and a fallacy.

Our streets are comparatively paved with gold. That's why we have a massive influx of immigrants in and a mimimum level of numbers of our own people going out.

It's far better here and that's why they come and in very large numbers too. But that is not the important thing: It's the fact, that we have no control of our own borders that is the most important thing. This lack of power is utter daft. Over 400m people can come here without us having any power over the numbers and scale of it.

EL - i don't see that either my comment is wrong, nor yours

i concur that uk should have at least a modicum of control over its borders, and i have always been in favour of the australian points system ..... however, given the peculiarity of eu membership or even close cooperation per switzerland and norway, imposing this is not quite as easy as it may seem, unless one is also prepared for others to impose their own restrictive and protective measures

it is however of little benefit to uk economy if these gastarbeiter merely pocket their wages and then send 90% of it back home
there is a similar parallel in dubai where virtually all taxi drivers come from the indian sub-continent and hotel workers from se asia
though these people earn very little, they also spend little of it
a taxi driver to whom i spoke was typical in that he only spent AED 1,000 pm (about £135) on subsistence, the balance being repatriated to his family

the uk public will vote ukip in their millions their will be no over all power to any party . and the answer shold be another vote but only for the two partys with the most votes then a proper government to govern and challenged by the voters if they do not honour their election promises

for sure that won't include ukip then, but it also gets quite close to PR

I know the old reactionaries loved Churchill for his efforts in WW2, but really do we have the lights out for XMAS?

"When the lights go down over London town."

Back to 1943, with poverty at the same levels!

naughty boy fred!
the current shortage of energy reserves is totally different from when you were a nipper or even in 1973

didcot b and some nuclear sources not due to back to 100% until the new year, and that is a major cause of the problem
old coal stations shut down for very good environmental reasons also has quite an impact

What recession?


Civil service snaps up crushed polystyrene cup in £100,000 art spree

Government Art Collection buys series of modern British works in first purchases since austerity measures imposed



Clockwise from left: Ritual for Reconiciliation set by Marcus Coates, The Consumptive Sublime by James Balmforth and Ripped Cup and Cups by Shan Hur



Matthew Holehouse
By Matthew Holehouse, Political Correspondent

10:00PM GMT 27 Oct 2014



A bronze model of a crushed polystyrene cup and a video of flowers being burnt with intense rays of light are among modern works of art that have been bought for display in Whitehall.


Curators at the Government Art Collection, the Civil Service’s private art collection, spent £118,000 on classical and modern artworks, in the first round of spending since a moratorium on purchases was imposed in May 2011.


Curators also bought a set of five resin jewels, and a series of scrunched-up ricepaper wildlife portraits, in a collection the Government said would help promote cutting-edge British art around the world. Works are installed in Government offices, military bases and in Britain's overseas embassies.


Among the pieces bought by the collection were ‘Ripped Cup’ and ‘Cups’, life-size painted bronze sculptures of polystyrene office coffee cups by Shan Hur, the Korean-born 34-year-old sculpture known for appearing to punch holes in gallery walls. The pair of works cost £1,500.


Officials spent £22,500 on Metal Box (Hong Kong), a wall installation by Glasgow’s Jim Lambie, made of bent metal sheets, coloured in gloss paint.


A digital print, bearing the slogan ‘Are you the right size for your world?’ on an orange background by the artist Melanie Jackson was bought for £500. A set five of resin and celluloid ‘gems’ from Lucy Skaer’s ‘Me’ collection was bought for £19,500. They have been displayed in the Department for Culture, Media and Sport.

Some £21,777 was spent on a set of paintings of kestrels, ostriches and iguanas on crumpled rice paper by Marcus Coates.


The Consumptive Sublime, an 11 minute video of flowers being burnt through by intense rays of light by James Balmforth, was bought at a cost of £2,850.


More : http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/art/art-news/11191460/Civil-service-snaps-up-crushed-polystyrene-cup-in-100000-art-spree.html

Manuel.

When we were nippy as child, we had candles, gas mantles and cigarettes to keep us lit up and warm!

But I suppose it is future planning, trying to make the Debt look better and not thinking about the cost of doing so.

All in all, and be honest, don't you think this has been one of the worst post war administrations we have suffered as a country.

I find, I have got old man's disease of shaking my head whenever I look at the next bit of information coming out of No 10.

there is no question but that this present lot has been "accident prone", though i remain firmly of the opinion that tough medicine was far and away better than a a slow drip drip drip as offered by others

i don't think there is any doubt either that the last admin left the most appalling mess, though how much of that was truly avoidable is another question ..... i don't know!

unfortunately, the present parliament is full of vacuous nonentities and nincompoops, none of whom should be allowed to cross the road on his/her own.

i certainly wonder how good DM would have turned out as leader of the labour party
he certainly has presence and presentability, but ultimately the pm does truly need a lot more than that ..... plus of course a good slab of luck (DC has EM as his!)

Calais Mayor says migrants see Britain as a soft touch , BBC NEWS.

Manuel,

"there is no question but that this present lot has been "accident prone", though i remain firmly of the opinion that tough medicine was far and away better than a a slow drip drip drip as offered by others"


To me it is like one having a car in the garage without fuel in it, or needing a minor repair and unable to drive it 20 miles to work, because one is not prepared to borrow the money for the fuel or repair.

"One" then decides to walk the 20 miles to work, but is too knackered to do the job and is sacked, having of course worn the soles of his shoes out and in difficulties going out.

"One" then sits at home waiting for handouts which he has to walk to, and of course can't afford the petrol to go the job which he could so and be productive.

Money is the "oil" of the economy.

Not to wasted but utilised sensibly.

============

My father in the 20s walked from Cardiff to Camarthen for and interview for a job.

The miners were called shirkers even then who couldn't break a lump of coal to put in on their own fire.

---------------------

Not sure about which is the most able, and was surprised by the labour leadership result, Also thought at time, that Ed might have a difficulties with the media and expected the Hazeone's type of smearing to occur. (Common practice resorted to by some parts of the tory party. (They called it the smearing pack.)

I am interested in the outcome of GE and if, as I expect, Ed will just make it, would expect him to revert to government by Cabinet, rather than the type of governments we have had with Maggie and, Blair and the present idiot.

Remember, Attlee was low profile and effective, Wilson similar, Macmillan in some ways likewise. (He got us out of the Empire without too much bloodshed.)

It would be good to see a government thinking of the Future of the Uk rather than their own future.

I would like to be around to watch.

====

Immigrants 'ready to die' to get to Britain because of the 'huge amount' handed out in benefits, says the Mayor of Calais
Natacha Bouchart in Parliament amid growing illegal immigration concerns
France has announced plans for a new centre for migrants in Calais
Fears raised new centre will become another Sangatte attracting migrants
The number of migrants in Calais is now 2,300 – up from 1,500 in August
Violent clashes between rival migrant gangs an almost daily occurrence
Mrs Bouchart: 'What Britain is offering is understood around the world'


more facts for you cynic immigrants just want free benefits and that is it
we need to arm our army and shoot on site if they cross the border