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.

Andy Burnham: I knew ‘spiteful’ mansion tax was toxic when mum phoned to complain
Labour leadership frontrunner says his mother warned policy was return to 1970s



By Rosa Prince, Assistant Political Editor10:10AM BST 21 Jun 2015 Comments75 Comments
Andy Burnham, the frontrunner for the Labour leadership, has described Ed Miliband’s flagship mansion tax policy as “spiteful” and disclosed that his mother telephoned him to warn it was a vote-loser.
ADVERTISING
In an interview, the 45-year-old suggested that his party had become “toxic” by the time of the last election, and promised that if he became leader he would return Labour to the mass appeal it enjoyed under Tony Blair.
His words are being seen as a bid to escape being pigeonholed as the Left-wing, union candidate in a contest which has become a three horse race, with rivals Liz Kendall representing the Right and Yvette Cooper the centre ground. Jeremy Corbyn, on the far-left, is seen as a rank outsider.
Rejecting the characterisation that he is the “Ed Miliband continuity” candidate, Mr Burnham took a series of swipes at the former leader, saying that he was not consulted about the party’s infamous “mansion tax” plan to charge those living in homes worth more than £2 million a levy of thousands of pounds a year.



Andy Burnham is seeking to distance himself from Ed Miliband
Describing the policy as “spiteful” and anti-aspirational, he said he knew it would lose votes when his mother Eileen phoned and told him it represented a return to the 1970s.
“It felt spiteful and went against the grain," he said. “We need to get back to communicating simple policies that will make a real difference to people.
“Labour looks like an elitist Westminster think-tank talking in language that people don’t understand. We lost our mooring.”
Under his leadership, Mr Burnham said, renters would be offered help to buy their home.



n a damning assessment of Labour under Gordon Brown and Mr Miliband, Mr Burnham went on: “We’ve lost our way in the last decade. A sense has built up that we aren’t in favour of people getting on. That is toxic.


“‘Labour said one thing to one group and something else to another. It is a bad habit that we have to break.
“People want the same things everywhere. It’s not rocket science. You don’t need thousands of policies, just credible ones. In its early days New Labour spoke to people at all levels of society. We have to get back to that.”
Contrasting himself with Mr Miliband, Mr Burnham said he had: “‘never been part of a golden set, never spent my weekends in London. I don’t live and breathe politics.”
Asked if, like Mr Miliband, he would agree to be interviewed by the left-wing comedian Russell Brand, he said: “I won’t be beating a path to his door.”
Despite his condemnation of Mr Miliband, Mr Burnham said he would still offer the former leader a seat in his shadow cabinet.
And he told the Mail on Sunday he was tired of speculation that he wears mascara on his famously long eyelashes, adding: “I’d get rid of them tomorrow if I could.”




comments
It seems as though a majority of the Labour Shadow Cabinet didn't believe in a word of Miliband's policies. Either they are dishonest or they are spineless or both! What is the point in having a Shadow Cabinet if none of the members take any responsibility for the decisions that are taken? If they didn't speak up to point out Miliband's many errors when they hd the chance what confidence can anyone have that they have any credible leadership qualities?


Funny how ALL of these labour candidates claim that they were against the Labour policies held just a couple of months ago and secretly thought that Miliband was a complete idiot, but wholeheartedly supported him in public. Were they being dishonest, lying hypocrites then, or are they being dishonest lying hypocrites now?



The idiocy of the 'mansion tax' was in its name. By all means tax houses/flats worth more than £10 million, especially if owned by non-residents, but to suggest that at 3 bedroom terraced house in, say, Fulham, is a mansion is simply absurd. The real vote loser for Miliband was his crawling to see Russell Brand. Yesterday's hate-filled march showed why the Labour left is unelectable.



"Andy Burnham, the frontrunner for the Labour leadership, has described Ed Miliband’s flagship mansion tax policy as “spiteful” and disclosed that his mother telephoned him to warn it was a vote-loser."

It is somewhat worrying that the front runner for the Labour leadership didn't realise the mansion tax policy was a vote loser until his mother told him.
5 • Reply•

It's a bit rich for JK Rowling to cry 'racist' now
The Harry Potter author is right that the SNP can be nasty. But it was the Labour Party she funded that put them where they are



By Simon Heffer8:10AM BST 21 Jun 2015Comments173 Comments
When my children were small I endured a seven-hour car journey violated by an unabridged Harry Potter audiobook, and ever since I have had negative feelings about J K Rowling. However, she is right to highlight the vicious, anti-English nature of some in the Scottish National Party. It is an extension of the intimidation SNP supporters pretend the Yes campaign did not deploy in the referendum.


It is not only English people I know in Scotland who tell me of the racist hostility towards them, but also ethnic Scots considered to be a bit too “north British” for some separatist tastes. I heard just last week of several such people who are selling up and moving south because of the toxic climate: and the more the Sturgeons of this world brush this loathsomeness under the tartan hearthrug, the worse it will get.
But Miss Rowling should recall that it was a party she helped fund and a man to whom she was politically devoted, Gordon Brown, who let the SNP genie out of its bottle, believing devolution would create a permanent Labour fiefdom in Scotland. He was wrong, as we knew he would be.
I do hope she reflects on this as she drowns in her loch of anti-Sassenach bile.



Of course the Palace of Westminster, Pugin’s and Barry’s masterpiece, must be evacuated and renovated, whatever the cost or inconvenience. England is the Mother of Parliaments. The image of the palace on the Thames symbolises more, however, than just our country, but a culture celebrated last week with the 800th anniversary of Magna Carta.
Parliament’s rebuilding after the Blitz in 1941 was about this, too. Let MPs meet in Methodist Central Hall, or the QEII centre for a few years: we don’t want the expenses binge contingent on the stunt of their convening in some futuristic hangar in the West Midlands.



If British citizens join Isil, they are committing treason
Mr Cameron is right to deplore the connivance of some of our Muslims at radicalising young people to go on jihad and then, if they survive, to import jihadi ways into our society. Words, however, will not make the slightest difference. We keep being told that people such as the three women who have taken their children to Syria are “British”. So they are.



They are, however, in league now with an organisation committed to the overthrow not just of our society, but of all western societies. By going abroad to assist the terrorism that would achieve these ends – or, indeed, to assist it here – is, given they are British, an act of treason.
Why, then, has none of those arrested on the return from the war zone for involvement with Isil been charged with treason? It is not just about retribution, or finding a charge which, if they are convicted, merits a very long sentence: it is about showing this community that, being British, their first loyalty is to our society and to its values. We are all equal under the law, aren’t we? So let’s have it implemented equally.
simon.heffer@telegraph.co.uk



comments


The article unfairly blames Ms Rowling for the rise of the SNP, because of her support for Labour and its devolution policy. It is arguable that Scotland would be independent now if devolution had not occurred. Only the Scottish voters take responsiblity for the result of an election, or referendum. They will make their own bed and lie in it, for better or worse.
Also Ms Rowling has been on the end of personal abuse from extreme nationalist sympathisers, so she has a moral right to answer back.



Isn't it strange, how left wing, socialist minded nationalists, hate success.
JK Rowling is one of the most successful authors in the world. We should be proud that she has chosen Scotland to live in.
Instead, narrow minded Nats, continue to criticise her, for wanting to stop the UNITED KINGDOM from being destroyed. Incredible really



The people of Scotland will decide when to have a new referendum, not any one politician. With 56 [out of 59] SNP MPs elected post-referendum a new vote for Scotland regaining its independence will occur very soon.



Yeah, I am sure all those comfortably off, well pensioned , mainly public sector employed , middle class scots will vote for UDI proclaimed by a marxist socialist SNPee administration. The middle classes champagne socialism and greed won't stretch that far,


As a Unionist I think another vote in the short term is a good idea. I am not in the least bit phased by the current SNP strength. The economic case last time was shambolic and it has only worsened since. Two No's in fairly short space of time really do put it to bed for a long, long time.

In short, bring it on. Let's see what actually happens though, shall we!?


"Two No's in fairly short space of time really do put it to be for a long, long time." Nope.


How's that NSO revenue that will finance an IScotland looking?

What's plan B for funding this northern Nirvana?


could have sworn the result of the election was a majority Conservative government. It's absolutely beautiful :)



The SNP won 95% of the Westminster seats in Scotland

'Scotland does not need a referendum on independence, she just needs to send a majority of nationalist MPs to Westminster to have a mandate for independence.'

..........Margaret Thatcher


LOL - how funny to see a ScotNat actually quote Margaret Thatcher.

The futile 56!

Labour will come back in Scotland as will the other parties. The GE was an oddity. I don't think it was such a landslide for SNP. You must remember that it was not such a long time since the referendum. My take on what happened, was that the referendum produced a monumental turnout. The GE maintained that level of voter turnout but only for the Scotland Out faction, which was SNP in the main. The other voters reverted to their usual turnout levels. This gave a huge bias towards SNP. When the Scots gets bored with elections again as most of the UK are, there will be a resurgence of voting for other parties. Although the SNP did get a landslide in terms of seats, they didn't win many with large majorities. It may be relatively easy to overturn many seats. History has shown that parties that gain so much success so quickly, often crash and burn later.

The Butchers from Tory Land

I can never understand what all the fuss is about Stonehenge ?....mystery...nobody knows what it's all about ?......I keep on looking at it and you know ..: I've come up with the conclusion that it must have been a center for failed stone carving pyramid trials !....

I think it's a clock .

Probably called it the henge(X) factor.........oh dear....oh dear...sorry...

There are hints about the place of some optimism and it would seem that 'they' are 90% of the way forward towards a Greek deal.

The Greeks will concede 'a little' and they will then gain 'some kind of' debt relief.

What game is Boris playing?



Greek catastrophe shows EU’s promised trade-offs are hot air

Losing sovereignty was supposed to be a price worth paying but it has ended in humiliation





By Boris Johnson

9:01PM BST 21 Jun 2015




I sometimes think we are missing the main point of this Greek crisis. We talk of deadlines and deadlocks and dénouements. We go on about the personalities and politics involved – and yet they are all irrelevant next to what has emerged as the one gigantic conclusion from which only a cretin would seriously dissent. It would make no difference to this conclusion, now, if the Greek government were a load of neo-Marxists in motorbike leathers or a junta of Frankfurt bankers.


It doesn’t matter – for the purposes of this argument – whether the whole thing collapses tomorrow, or next month, or next year. They can “kick the can” even further down the road, or just watch as that battered object is finally steamrollered by the logic of the markets. They can keep the Greeks locked for ever in the procrustean torture of the euro or they can allow them suddenly to print billions of new drachmas on the back of cereal packets.



Whatever happens, nothing can change the fundamental truth: the Greeks should never have joined the euro.


They were mad to abandon the safety valve of an independent monetary policy, and they are paying for that folly in a daily and escalating human tragedy: of falling life expectancy, of rising suicides and mass unemployment; of medicines they can no longer afford, of operations cancelled and hope extinguished.



More: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/11690200/Greek-catastrophe-shows-EUs-promised-trade-offs-are-hot-air.html

Boris is right. Even more important, is that Greece should not have been allowed to join. They faked all the convergence criteria an the EU knew it.

Yes, true!

But Boris is actually undermining Cameroon, effectively saying the renegotiations are a waste of time.


And it looks like they have come up with a nu fake fix for the land of €l Greco.

I don't' think he is undermining Cameron. He is supporting our position of not having the Euro.

Dogwalking this am...

"Did you enjoy your holiday? Where did you go?"

"Yes. We went to Skiaphos for a week. It was pretty quiet but it was relaxing. We took plenty of Euros, just in case the banks closed down for any withdrawals, etc."

"Got any comments about how the Greeks feel about things?"

"Well, some do realise they have to change some of their ideas, particularly on things like retirement. They expect to retire at age 50, don't contribute to their pensions and expect to take 100% pension on retirement. Apparently, the Italians are pretty much the same."

"Hmmm?"

What is Andy Burnham’s experience of the private sector?

Two years as a trade journalist

Labour leadership contender’s wife Frankie’s marketing business dissolved after three years


By Rosa Prince, Assistant Political Editor

7:00AM BST 22 Jun 2015


Andy Burnham, the frontrunner for the Labour leadership contest, has claimed he has experience of living in the “real world” - because his wife used to run her own business.


The 45-year-old Liverpudlian has put his claim to understand the lives of ordinary people outside the “Westminster bubble” at the heart of his campaign for his party’s leadership.


Challenged by Sky’s Dermot Murnaghan to relate his own experience of the private sector, Mr Burnham hesitated before responding: “Well, I worked in the private sector when I left university, albeit not for long but I did.




More: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/andy-burnham/11689938/What-is-Andy-Burnhams-experience-of-the-private-sector-Two-years-as-a-trade-journalist.html

Grossly unsuitable': Mid-Staffs hospital whistleblower's verdict on ex-Health Secretary who is hot favourite to be Labour leader

Labour leadership favourite Andy Burnham labelled 'grossly unsuitable'
He was Health Secretary at height of the Mid Staffs hospital scandal
Whistleblower Julie Bailey said he showed no remorse over NHS neglect
She claimed Mr Burnham presided over a culture of denial and cover-ups

Labour's leadership front-runner was last night condemned as a 'grossly unsuitable candidate' by the whistleblower who exposed the Mid Staffs hospital scandal.

Campaigner Julie Bailey said she was 'shocked and appalled' that Andy Burnham – who was Health Secretary when the true scale of neglect at the NHS Trust emerged – had put himself forward to succeed Ed Miliband.

Mrs Bailey also accused him of showing no remorse and giving no apology over the scandal.

She told The Mail on Sunday: 'While Health Secretary, Andy Burnham presided over a culture of denial and cover-up over NHS care scandals that cost lives in failing hospitals across the country.

'From ignoring repeated warnings about high hospital death rates, to dodging calls for a public inquiry, Andy Burnham put politics before patients every time.

'Worse still, several experts have independently testified that under his leadership there was political pressure to present good news rather than expose poor care.

'Still today, he shows no remorse, has offered no apology and accepts no wrongdoing.

'We believe him to be a grossly unsuitable candidate. It would be a disaster for patients if he was ever to become Health Secretary again, let alone assume any higher public office.'

Last night, the Burnham campaign rejected the claims.

His spokesman said: 'Mr Burnham ordered the first and second inquiries into the terrible care failings at Mid Staffordshire, against civil service advice at the time.'

Mr Burnham, 45, faced fierce criticism last year after suggesting that the official report into the deaths should not have been published because of the damage it did to the hospital's reputation.

He's got to be a shoo-in with a record like that...also unemcumbered by any real work experience...classic nu lab!

He is not new lab. He is the union choice.

Similar to Cameron and Osborne being in the pockets of and puppets of the hedge funders, tax dodgers and bankers.