So the Shadow Foreign Secretary in deemed incompetent. Please remind me, who is the actual Foreign Secretary having a strong influence on Brexit negotiations?
We haven't really talked about the housing crisis on here, but take a look at the below. The numbers of rough sleepers on our streets are a very obvious indicator of things going wrong in the housing market:
From Inside Housing today:
New rough sleepers in London soar by 15%
2 May 2017 3:14 pm | By Sophie Barnes
The number of new rough sleepers in London is 15% higher than a year ago, the latest figures from the Combined Homeless and Information Network (CHAIN) reveal.
From January to March this year, outreach teams recorded 1,370 people sleeping rough in London for the first time, a 15% increase compared to last year.
There were 2,751 people sleeping rough overall, a 7% increase. There were 1,081 rough sleepers who were prevented from spending a second night on the streets, a 22% increase in prevention from the previous year.
CHAIN is funded by the mayor of London and managed by St Mungo’s.
More than three-quarters of the new rough sleepers (79%) spent just one night sleeping rough, 19% slept rough for more than one night but did not continue to live on the streets, and 2% were living on the streets.
Out of the 2,751 rough sleepers, 54% were from the UK and 24% from Central and Eastern Europe. Half had mental health issues, 45% had alcohol support needs and 40% had drug support needs. There were 20% with no alcohol, drug or mental health support needs.
There was a 1% increase in the number of people found to be living on the streets – 377 – since last year. This is 6% higher than the previous three months from October to December.
Rough sleeping in England has risen by 16% in the past year and has more than doubled in the past five.
Inside Housing’s Cathy at 50 campaign is calling on all the main political parties to commit to ending rough sleeping by the end of the next parliament in 2022. Labour, the Liberal Democrats and Plaid Cymru have backed the campaign but the Conservatives and the Scottish National Party have refused.
Labour and Diane Abbott proving yet again that maths really isn't their strong point.
Utopia costs money don't you know.
If you look at the figures since Tory austerity, so does living in the seventh circle of hell...
Possibly because we were paying for Labours punt at running the country previously?
That is complete rubbish - the GLOBAL credit crunch would have happened under any government - and Labour actually managed the econmy well before it and in the immediate aftermath. So much so, that the Americans parised us for leading the way. I think Darling was the best chancellor we have had for years!
Austerity was not the way out of trouble, but if you don't understand national finances, it makes sense because it is how you would manage your home finances.
It's worth remembering that a few rounds of QE have taken place under the Tory government as well. This has been used as a way to stimulate the economy, to be paid back at a later date. We're yet to reach that date. They've benefited from this stimulus imo when taking into account their perceived 'strong management of the economy'
We haven't really talked about the housing crisis on here, but take a look at the below. The numbers of rough sleepers on our streets are a very obvious indicator of things going wrong in the housing market:
From Inside Housing today:
New rough sleepers in London soar by 15%
2 May 2017 3:14 pm | By Sophie Barnes
The number of new rough sleepers in London is 15% higher than a year ago, the latest figures from the Combined Homeless and Information Network (CHAIN) reveal.
From January to March this year, outreach teams recorded 1,370 people sleeping rough in London for the first time, a 15% increase compared to last year.
There were 2,751 people sleeping rough overall, a 7% increase. There were 1,081 rough sleepers who were prevented from spending a second night on the streets, a 22% increase in prevention from the previous year.
CHAIN is funded by the mayor of London and managed by St Mungo’s.
More than three-quarters of the new rough sleepers (79%) spent just one night sleeping rough, 19% slept rough for more than one night but did not continue to live on the streets, and 2% were living on the streets.
Out of the 2,751 rough sleepers, 54% were from the UK and 24% from Central and Eastern Europe. Half had mental health issues, 45% had alcohol support needs and 40% had drug support needs. There were 20% with no alcohol, drug or mental health support needs.
There was a 1% increase in the number of people found to be living on the streets – 377 – since last year. This is 6% higher than the previous three months from October to December.
Rough sleeping in England has risen by 16% in the past year and has more than doubled in the past five.
Inside Housing’s Cathy at 50 campaign is calling on all the main political parties to commit to ending rough sleeping by the end of the next parliament in 2022. Labour, the Liberal Democrats and Plaid Cymru have backed the campaign but the Conservatives and the Scottish National Party have refused.
I started a thread earlier in the year Evesham. In my opinion it's a runaway train that will take some drastic action to help bring it under control. There are so many things wrong with how governments have let it get to this point (I have the least faith of this current government over any of their predecessors).
It would be a key voting criteria of mine but I'm not sure any of the parties have a viable way to tackle it, certainly in London.
At the start of the thread I said it would take the state meddling in the free market, which is pretty drastic and likely to be unpopular, but I still stand by that. In addition, I would even advocate limiting 2nd home ownership, or capping rents. Certainly slapping huge taxes on overseas buyers. Just my opinion
Labour and Diane Abbott proving yet again that maths really isn't their strong point.
Utopia costs money don't you know.
If you look at the figures since Tory austerity, so does living in the seventh circle of hell...
Possibly because we were paying for Labours punt at running the country previously?
There are numerous articles that address the myth that Labour overspent during its time in office. Like this one which references that car crash tv moment when the audience all groaned at Miliband during one of the debates...
They groaned not at the answer, because they really hadn't heard it yet, but because what he had started to (badly) explain was not what they wanted or expected to hear. Labour completely failed to counter the Tory's narrative that they were economically illiterate and somehow responsible for a global recession.
And they still aren't doing so hence comments like yours.
This is not to say they were brilliant and got everything right, they obviously didn't and I've never seen anyone say so.
All the stats and commentary you need around the economic performance of the parties is available in seconds these days. If voters are voting on that basis shouldn't they take a more rounded view than taking as gospel what one party (or newspaper) tells you about the other?
How complex can it be? They can't afford food. Mainly because nurses are having to work ludicrous hours in horrendous conditions for terrible pay and it's getting worse under this government.
But your bloke don't like gay sex
Why, do you?
Hadn't realised that about you, but as a lib.Dem. kinda guy myself, I have no issue with it at all.
You're welcome
I'm happy to admit that I ain't got anything against people indulging in it either and not the kind of thing you should be joking about imo
you mean you were being serious with your comment? You seriously think the leader of the Lib Dems is "against gay sex"?
We should not need food banks in the 21st century. End of as far as I am concerned.
And before 2010, we didn't need them.
Except in the boom years......2009 - 41,000. Apart from that, crack on.
You are right of course food banks did exist pre-austerity.
I believe your petard is well and truly hoisted, Arthur!
(Hahaha. Brilliant!) Why? BA's post confirms my point that 41,000 was the number in 2009 - as opposed to what was stated by Evesham, which was that they werent needed pre 2010 - do explain. WTF is there to argue about? Jeez some people.
It is amazing how the Prime Minister's general ineptness in this campaign (e.g. she thinks it is OK NHS workers survive on food banks, humiliation in Scotland, refusing to let people take her photo etc.) is barely being reported by the media.
Whilst Diane Abbott makes a fairly minor gaffe regarding paying for a policy and by teatime every news outlet, including the BBC, is trying to see who can have the biggest and most colourful 'DIANE ABBOTT IS A FAT IDIOT LET'S LAUGH AT HER' graphic at the top of their front page.
Apart from the fact it wasn't "a fairly minor gaffe" was it? It was a genuine display of incompetence from one of the major players who was being asked to outline a pledge.
This is what frustrates me with the left. If something doesn't go in their favour, which lets be frank, that Abbott interview couldn't have gone any worse thanks to her inability - then there is always the knee jerk reaction from the left to blame the "right wing/bias" media.
One of Labour's leaders has shown herself up massively to the nation ahead of a general election, that's why it's a headline. Nothing to do with some sort of 'bias' that you're trying to suggest.
We should not need food banks in the 21st century. End of as far as I am concerned.
And before 2010, we didn't need them.
Except in the boom years......2009 - 41,000. Apart from that, crack on.
Why do you describe 2009 as a "boom" year?
Because Labour were in power and all was rosy.
Though the Independent cast doubts....
It was still a record breaking year, and not in a nice way. Britain has had its worst single year, economically, since 1921; the economy will not return to the normal levels of output until 2011 at the earliest. Most, if not all, of the extra spending the Government has ploughed in to public services since 1997 will be wiped away in the next few years.
The UK is the only major advanced economy to remain mired in recession, contracting by almost 5 per cent by the time growth is predicted to return in the New Year. We've lost £75bn in output, or twice the national schools budget.
Unemployment rose to reach 15-year highs: 2.5 million out of work, a million of them young people. New Labour, its critics argue, is creating its very own "lost generation", just as Margaret Thatcher did before them. Only the depressed state of wages and co-operative industrial relations prevented more idleness and strife.
It will go down as the year that we all lost out. Savings rates shrunk, mortgages became almost impossible to get, and loan rates climbed. Meanwhile, investment prospects proved harder than ever to predict, pension pay-outs proved paltry and energy bills soared. Adding to the misery, insurance costs went up and the banks won the court case against people complaining against excessive overdraft charges.
It is amazing how the Prime Minister's general ineptness in this campaign (e.g. she thinks it is OK NHS workers survive on food banks, humiliation in Scotland, refusing to let people take her photo etc.) is barely being reported by the media.
Whilst Diane Abbott makes a fairly minor gaffe regarding paying for a policy and by teatime every news outlet, including the BBC, is trying to see who can have the biggest and most colourful 'DIANE ABBOTT IS A FAT IDIOT LET'S LAUGH AT HER' graphic at the top of their front page.
Apart from the fact it wasn't "a fairly minor gaffe" was it? It was a genuine display of incompetence from one of the major players who was being asked to outline a pledge.
This is what frustrates me with the left. If something doesn't go in their favour, which lets be frank, that Abbott interview couldn't have gone any worse thanks to her inability - then there is always the knee jerk reaction from the left to blame the "right wing/bias" media.
One of Labour's leaders has shown herself up massively to the nation ahead of a general election, that's why it's a headline. Nothing to do with some sort of 'bias' that you're trying to suggest.
I voted Tory at the last election so I'm hardly 'the left'. But even I can see the blatant media bias in this country.
In the grand scheme of things, it is a minor gaffe, at least compared to the Prime Minister making a complete embarrassment of herself and our country in front of 27 other leaders. Yet that barely got a tenth of the coverage Diane is getting for fluffing an interview.
Tories never seem to have to give details of their policies, how they are going to be costed and what impact they will have, yet other parties are expected to have fully costed policies, fully fleshed out, what timeframes they are going to be executed in and so on. All the Tories are doing is banging on about 'strong and stable'.
For all her debatable merits, Abbott is on a national if not local scale pure electoral poison at this point and even those who believe at all in Project Corbyn would surely have to accept she belongs on the back benches.
However, what's wrong with at least making noise about boosting public services? It means that, given power, she'd have to follow through on her pledges. I mean, the British public punish broken promises, right?
How complex can it be? They can't afford food. Mainly because nurses are having to work ludicrous hours in horrendous conditions for terrible pay and it's getting worse under this government.
But your bloke don't like gay sex
Why, do you?
Hadn't realised that about you, but as a lib.Dem. kinda guy myself, I have no issue with it at all.
You're welcome
Could you just remind us of your top three pro Liberal posts? I think they must have escaped us among your investment and wine and other noisy posts.
Dozed off in front of the TV tonight with the dog on my lap, only to wake up to an item on newsnight. Can I please ask everybody considering voting Conservative to watch that item. In it an American woman (sorry I was asleep for the first bit) absolutely destroyed a Conservative treasury spokesman. I think it provided an economics lesson that we need to hear, at least it may encourage people to find out more.
Basically, IFS figures out today show the Conservatives have implemented - in numerical terms at least - Ed Milliband's plans prior to the last general election. The desire of the treasury spokesman to relate to a snapshop post credit crunch where the Labour party and other governments basically saved the system in this country as a point of where it left us in a mess is the biggest confidence trick in political history. Watch it please. She may come over as a bit arrogant but she knows her stuff.
Countries who spend more post crunch have smaller deficits - that includes Italy. The money that we are injecting into the system is all going to the over 60's. It is a chaotic policy designed for an electorate that doesn't undertsand how economics works in the big world and likens it all to their own household accounts. Watch it on I Player - she is much brighter than me and you might see the light that cleverer people than I have shone on me!
It is amazing how the Prime Minister's general ineptness in this campaign (e.g. she thinks it is OK NHS workers survive on food banks, humiliation in Scotland, refusing to let people take her photo etc.) is barely being reported by the media.
Whilst Diane Abbott makes a fairly minor gaffe regarding paying for a policy and by teatime every news outlet, including the BBC, is trying to see who can have the biggest and most colourful 'DIANE ABBOTT IS A FAT IDIOT LET'S LAUGH AT HER' graphic at the top of their front page.
Apart from the fact it wasn't "a fairly minor gaffe" was it? It was a genuine display of incompetence from one of the major players who was being asked to outline a pledge.
This is what frustrates me with the left. If something doesn't go in their favour, which lets be frank, that Abbott interview couldn't have gone any worse thanks to her inability - then there is always the knee jerk reaction from the left to blame the "right wing/bias" media.
One of Labour's leaders has shown herself up massively to the nation ahead of a general election, that's why it's a headline. Nothing to do with some sort of 'bias' that you're trying to suggest.
I voted Tory at the last election so I'm hardly 'the left'. But even I can see the blatant media bias in this country.
In the grand scheme of things, it is a minor gaffe, at least compared to the Prime Minister making a complete embarrassment of herself and our country in front of 27 other leaders. Yet that barely got a tenth of the coverage Diane is getting for fluffing an interview.
Tories never seem to have to give details of their policies, how they are going to be costed and what impact they will have, yet other parties are expected to have fully costed policies, fully fleshed out, what timeframes they are going to be executed in and so on. All the Tories are doing is banging on about 'strong and stable'.
If you voted Tory, I'll ride a kilted monkey across the Gobi desert. With your recent reasoning you could only have voted Liberal, unless you have no conscience, in which case you voted Labour. Or you've received a big knock on your head. Or this whole thread s a bag of bollocks with ranting on all sides achieving nothing..
It is amazing how the Prime Minister's general ineptness in this campaign (e.g. she thinks it is OK NHS workers survive on food banks, humiliation in Scotland, refusing to let people take her photo etc.) is barely being reported by the media.
Whilst Diane Abbott makes a fairly minor gaffe regarding paying for a policy and by teatime every news outlet, including the BBC, is trying to see who can have the biggest and most colourful 'DIANE ABBOTT IS A FAT IDIOT LET'S LAUGH AT HER' graphic at the top of their front page.
Apart from the fact it wasn't "a fairly minor gaffe" was it? It was a genuine display of incompetence from one of the major players who was being asked to outline a pledge.
This is what frustrates me with the left. If something doesn't go in their favour, which lets be frank, that Abbott interview couldn't have gone any worse thanks to her inability - then there is always the knee jerk reaction from the left to blame the "right wing/bias" media.
One of Labour's leaders has shown herself up massively to the nation ahead of a general election, that's why it's a headline. Nothing to do with some sort of 'bias' that you're trying to suggest.
This is true. Abbott is useless all on her own and does not need media help.
It is amazing how the Prime Minister's general ineptness in this campaign (e.g. she thinks it is OK NHS workers survive on food banks, humiliation in Scotland, refusing to let people take her photo etc.) is barely being reported by the media.
Whilst Diane Abbott makes a fairly minor gaffe regarding paying for a policy and by teatime every news outlet, including the BBC, is trying to see who can have the biggest and most colourful 'DIANE ABBOTT IS A FAT IDIOT LET'S LAUGH AT HER' graphic at the top of their front page.
Apart from the fact it wasn't "a fairly minor gaffe" was it? It was a genuine display of incompetence from one of the major players who was being asked to outline a pledge.
This is what frustrates me with the left. If something doesn't go in their favour, which lets be frank, that Abbott interview couldn't have gone any worse thanks to her inability - then there is always the knee jerk reaction from the left to blame the "right wing/bias" media.
One of Labour's leaders has shown herself up massively to the nation ahead of a general election, that's why it's a headline. Nothing to do with some sort of 'bias' that you're trying to suggest.
I voted Tory at the last election so I'm hardly 'the left'. But even I can see the blatant media bias in this country.
In the grand scheme of things, it is a minor gaffe, at least compared to the Prime Minister making a complete embarrassment of herself and our country in front of 27 other leaders. Yet that barely got a tenth of the coverage Diane is getting for fluffing an interview.
Tories never seem to have to give details of their policies, how they are going to be costed and what impact they will have, yet other parties are expected to have fully costed policies, fully fleshed out, what timeframes they are going to be executed in and so on. All the Tories are doing is banging on about 'strong and stable'.
And all Labour bang on about is the Tories. That's all I ever hear from the current hard left involved with Labour - "Tories this, scum that".
So much so that today when Abbott was asked to discuss a policy she couldn't do it without completely falling on her arse.
She didn't merely fluff up the interview. She demonstrated that she is fundamentally incompetent at this sort of thing. Had that been a Conservative party member then it would have been absolutely lambasted by Labour probably x10 more than you're suggesting the media are pushing it.
Dozed off in front of the TV tonight with the dog on my lap, only to wake up to an item on newsnight. Can I please ask everybody considering voting Conservative to watch that item. In it an American woman (sorry I was asleep for the first bit) absolutely destroyed a Conservative treasury spokesman. I think it provided an economics lesson that we need to hear, at least it may encourage people to find out more.
Mariana Mazzucato, she's an Economics lecturer at UCL - just seen this clip on twitter, and think I'll have to watch the whole thing tomorrow.
I agree Abbot is useless, but that is not relevant. May is about to lead us into the abyss - Labour can't win the election, but we have to send May the message that she can't follow the course she wants. I wouldn't vote for Abbot if she was in my constituency, but a lot of decent Labour, Liberals and some Conservative prospective MPs who undertsand May's folly will be standing in yours. They deserve our vote - for the sake of our country. Conservatives like Kenneth Clarke, who undertsand that no Brexit deal would be a total disaster!
Comments
New rough sleepers in London soar by 15%
2 May 2017 3:14 pm | By Sophie Barnes
The number of new rough sleepers in London is 15% higher than a year ago, the latest figures from the Combined Homeless and Information Network (CHAIN) reveal.
From January to March this year, outreach teams recorded 1,370 people sleeping rough in London for the first time, a 15% increase compared to last year.
There were 2,751 people sleeping rough overall, a 7% increase. There were 1,081 rough sleepers who were prevented from spending a second night on the streets, a 22% increase in prevention from the previous year.
CHAIN is funded by the mayor of London and managed by St Mungo’s.
More than three-quarters of the new rough sleepers (79%) spent just one night sleeping rough, 19% slept rough for more than one night but did not continue to live on the streets, and 2% were living on the streets.
Out of the 2,751 rough sleepers, 54% were from the UK and 24% from Central and Eastern Europe. Half had mental health issues, 45% had alcohol support needs and 40% had drug support needs. There were 20% with no alcohol, drug or mental health support needs.
There was a 1% increase in the number of people found to be living on the streets – 377 – since last year. This is 6% higher than the previous three months from October to December.
Rough sleeping in England has risen by 16% in the past year and has more than doubled in the past five.
Inside Housing’s Cathy at 50 campaign is calling on all the main political parties to commit to ending rough sleeping by the end of the next parliament in 2022. Labour, the Liberal Democrats and Plaid Cymru have backed the campaign but the Conservatives and the Scottish National Party have refused.
I started a thread earlier in the year Evesham. In my opinion it's a runaway train that will take some drastic action to help bring it under control. There are so many things wrong with how governments have let it get to this point (I have the least faith of this current government over any of their predecessors).
It would be a key voting criteria of mine but I'm not sure any of the parties have a viable way to tackle it, certainly in London.
At the start of the thread I said it would take the state meddling in the free market, which is pretty drastic and likely to be unpopular, but I still stand by that. In addition, I would even advocate limiting 2nd home ownership, or capping rents. Certainly slapping huge taxes on overseas buyers. Just my opinion
theconversation.com/fact-check-did-labour-overspend-and-leave-a-deficit-that-was-out-of-control-41118
They groaned not at the answer, because they really hadn't heard it yet, but because what he had started to (badly) explain was not what they wanted or expected to hear. Labour completely failed to counter the Tory's narrative that they were economically illiterate and somehow responsible for a global recession.
Alan Johnson admits the same here:
https://theguardian.com/politics/2015/apr/30/question-time-leaders-cameron-miliband-clegg-election
And they still aren't doing so hence comments like yours.
This is not to say they were brilliant and got everything right, they obviously didn't and I've never seen anyone say so.
All the stats and commentary you need around the economic performance of the parties is available in seconds these days. If voters are voting on that basis shouldn't they take a more rounded view than taking as gospel what one party (or newspaper) tells you about the other?
you mean you were being serious with your comment? You seriously think the leader of the Lib Dems is "against gay sex"?
Apart from that, crack on.
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/may/02/uk-cuts-tax-deficit-ifs-austerity-public-spending?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
Why?
BA's post confirms my point that 41,000 was the number in 2009 - as opposed to what was stated by Evesham, which was that they werent needed pre 2010 - do explain.
WTF is there to argue about?
Jeez some people.
This is what frustrates me with the left. If something doesn't go in their favour, which lets be frank, that Abbott interview couldn't have gone any worse thanks to her inability - then there is always the knee jerk reaction from the left to blame the "right wing/bias" media.
One of Labour's leaders has shown herself up massively to the nation ahead of a general election, that's why it's a headline. Nothing to do with some sort of 'bias' that you're trying to suggest.
Though the Independent cast doubts....
It was still a record breaking year, and not in a nice way. Britain has had its worst single year, economically, since 1921; the economy will not return to the normal levels of output until 2011 at the earliest. Most, if not all, of the extra spending the Government has ploughed in to public services since 1997 will be wiped away in the next few years.
The UK is the only major advanced economy to remain mired in recession, contracting by almost 5 per cent by the time growth is predicted to return in the New Year. We've lost £75bn in output, or twice the national schools budget.
Unemployment rose to reach 15-year highs: 2.5 million out of work, a million of them young people. New Labour, its critics argue, is creating its very own "lost generation", just as Margaret Thatcher did before them. Only the depressed state of wages and co-operative industrial relations prevented more idleness and strife.
It will go down as the year that we all lost out. Savings rates shrunk, mortgages became almost impossible to get, and loan rates climbed. Meanwhile, investment prospects proved harder than ever to predict, pension pay-outs proved paltry and energy bills soared. Adding to the misery, insurance costs went up and the banks won the court case against people complaining against excessive overdraft charges.
In the grand scheme of things, it is a minor gaffe, at least compared to the Prime Minister making a complete embarrassment of herself and our country in front of 27 other leaders. Yet that barely got a tenth of the coverage Diane is getting for fluffing an interview.
Tories never seem to have to give details of their policies, how they are going to be costed and what impact they will have, yet other parties are expected to have fully costed policies, fully fleshed out, what timeframes they are going to be executed in and so on. All the Tories are doing is banging on about 'strong and stable'.
However, what's wrong with at least making noise about boosting public services? It means that, given power, she'd have to follow through on her pledges. I mean, the British public punish broken promises, right?
I think they must have escaped us among your investment and wine and other noisy posts.
Basically, IFS figures out today show the Conservatives have implemented - in numerical terms at least - Ed Milliband's plans prior to the last general election. The desire of the treasury spokesman to relate to a snapshop post credit crunch where the Labour party and other governments basically saved the system in this country as a point of where it left us in a mess is the biggest confidence trick in political history. Watch it please. She may come over as a bit arrogant but she knows her stuff.
Countries who spend more post crunch have smaller deficits - that includes Italy. The money that we are injecting into the system is all going to the over 60's. It is a chaotic policy designed for an electorate that doesn't undertsand how economics works in the big world and likens it all to their own household accounts. Watch it on I Player - she is much brighter than me and you might see the light that cleverer people than I have shone on me!
With your recent reasoning you could only have voted Liberal, unless you have no conscience, in which case you voted Labour.
Or you've received a big knock on your head.
Or this whole thread s a bag of bollocks with ranting on all sides achieving nothing..
So much so that today when Abbott was asked to discuss a policy she couldn't do it without completely falling on her arse.
She didn't merely fluff up the interview. She demonstrated that she is fundamentally incompetent at this sort of thing. Had that been a Conservative party member then it would have been absolutely lambasted by Labour probably x10 more than you're suggesting the media are pushing it.
Probably why she keeps getting invited onto the BBC or LBC, they know they can have an easy Labour own-goal.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b08plth0/newsnight-02052017