Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Whirlwind wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Well, some good news from The Commons. The utter bollocks that was Leveson part 2 has been shot down in flames, and good riddance to it.

Anybody who believes in a free press should celebrate. The minute the press needs accreditation from the government to operate, is a slippery slope from which there is no going back.

A lot of naysayers will bang on about Murdoch and Dacre getting away Scott-free, but this had the potential to hurt small regional newspapers, investigative journalism, and also, to damage magazines like Private Eye.

Shame on Ed Miliband for pushing this amendment.

My view on this is that the reasons behind the changes are sound, the implementation less so. It largely depends on who does the accreditation. IIRC that was likely to be farmed out to organisations owned or led by people that have a vested interest in the outcome. I would prefer to see an independent body that had more powers to, for example force papers to retract false statements at the same location (type font etc) as the original article. I also think that all media organisations pay to support this and where there are circumstances where, non-frivolous, legal action is requested to be taken then this is done by this organisation on the individuals behalf free or at a reduced fee depending on the means of the person requesting the action. If the media companies lose then larger fines should be levied as a disincentive. An element of the fine then goes to the individual and an element to the monitoring body.

There needs to be a balance between free press and just making **** up about people (or using underhand tactics) where that individual has little ability to take reasonable action because of the costs of losing.

Like you, I don't want to see innocent people dragged through the mill, and a tiny paragraph on page 23 or whatever is no way to apologise for mistakes, blunders and falsehoods. There does need to be a balance, but it needs to be better than the half-baked nonsense that was rightly booted out of the Commons yesterday.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Why do we keep sending in acts that actually care about their positioning? Either hoping to launch a career or resurrect one?

Why can't we just send in a bunch of lads and lasses there to make their noise and have a good time? Those more than happy to faintly glow before blinking out, with the off-chance of being such outrageously good fun, they actually win the thing?

We are Great Britain. We've given the world not just bands like The Beatles, but entire genres of music. For a tiny island, our output of quality music and lasting bands is immense. Why are we then just pumping out stage school oiks for Eurovision?

We haven't got anything to prove, unlike most European countries.

You just gave me a laughing fit on the plane. I needed that, much appreciated.

Britain is arguably a cultural superpower.

And I’m glad that Leveson 2 was defeated. All that deserved was a sack, a rope, a breeze block and the canal. Yes the press has been out of control at times but that was nothing but an opportunistic attempt to silence it by a cabal of rich shady donkey-caves. I’m surprised the commons did vote against it though, as I imagine they’re still smarting over the expenses scandal.

 Inquisitor Gideon wrote:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Why do we keep sending in acts that actually care about their positioning? Either hoping to launch a career or resurrect one?

Why can't we just send in a bunch of lads and lasses there to make their noise and have a good time? Those more than happy to faintly glow before blinking out, with the off-chance of being such outrageously good fun, they actually win the thing?

We are Great Britain. We've given the world not just bands like The Beatles, but entire genres of music. For a tiny island, our output of quality music and lasting bands is immense. Why are we then just pumping out stage school oiks for Eurovision?

We haven't got anything to prove, unlike most European countries.

You just gave me a laughing fit on the plane. I needed that, much appreciated.

To be clear, I'm talking about Music, not making a wider political point. Stop reading into this more than there actually is.

 Future War Cultist wrote:
Britain is arguably a cultural superpower.

I'd even strike the "arguably" and make it an "indisputably". IIRC you're the second-biggest exporter of music in the world (after the US) and British culture is pervasive throughout the world.

Well I like Eurovision, so there. Watch it every year and even the semi finals; although it's been a long time since the UK entered a song I liked and I'm not fussed about winning.

Netherlands this year please! Everybody's got a little outlaw in 'em...

Pervasiveness of British music culture is part of why we have to field such crap - I don't think we're allowed to field anyone that'd be recognized and biased.

That said, I thought the general point was to be crap, and we're one of the few that takes it seriously.

I hosted a Eurovision party last year, too. Good laugh but I remember nothing about the actual contest.

BoingBoing article on why you should watch Eurovision.

https://boingboing.net/2018/05/09/how-to-win-friends-and-convinc.html

https://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/written-questions-answers-statements/written-question/Lords/2018-04-24/HL7214/


to the great relief of us all eh ?

 Kilkrazy wrote:
BoingBoing article on why you should watch Eurovision.

https://boingboing.net/2018/05/09/how-to-win-friends-and-convinc.html

I only need one reason not to watch it....

 Kilkrazy wrote:
New Home Office rules prevent visa applicants from seeing the accusations against them by the Home Office.

Wow, Star Chamber, anyone?

May splits cabinet to work out rival customs options.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-44077847

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/may/11/theresa-may-sets-up-cabinet-teams-to-thrash-out-customs-plan

This is a pretty clever idea. May's cabinet is fairly evenly split between Remain and Leave supporters (reflecting the democratic balance of the nation as a whole, in a way.)

She's split them into their respective teams, each leavened with someone from the opposite team. Then she's making each team work on the customs option it doesn't like.

This has several possibilities. One is that someone will come up with a workable plan (unfortunately, it will be a plan they think is workable but probably isn't in reality.)

More likely, both sides will rubbish the plans and everyone will realise we've got to do something else.

The last possibility is that there will be deadlock all around, allowing May to kick the can down the road a bit longer.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Leave.EU campaign fined £70,000 for breaking election law

The Electoral Commission has determined that the Leave.EU campaign run by Arron Banks and Nigel Farage overspent its legal budget by 10% during the referendum campaign.

The EC has imposed the maximum fine it is allowed to, and has referred a top Leave.EU official to the police for possible criminal prosecution.

Banks has vowed to fight the fine in court.

Let’s see how that goes.

I still say the answer to the Irish question is to just stick the boarder in the Irish Sea. I wouldn’t mind having to flash the passport at the airport or ferry. And it’s ok for the individual countries of the uk to diverge on law because they already do. If only May had guessed this from the start instead of fething around and calling an election. Also, we should have started work on building the future port or ports for handling future trade by now. So much lost time.

Yep. You have not been well served by the Tories in this. I think a fairly painless brexit was possible at the start of the process, but it's been botched from the get-go.

I'd also be pretty calm about an Irish sea border. It makes sense because there is already infrastructure for checks at ports and airports so it would not cause as much disruption as trying to put checkpoints on the border. I know the Unionists don't like it, but their hand is played and they don't have as much leverage in the talks as RoI now.

 Future War Cultist wrote:
Let’s see how that goes.

I still say the answer to the Irish question is to just stick the boarder in the Irish Sea. I wouldn’t mind having to flash the passport at the airport or ferry. And it’s ok for the individual countries of the uk to diverge on law because they already do. If only May had guessed this from the start instead of fething around and calling an election. Also, we should have started work on building the future port or ports for handling future trade by now. So much lost time.

That's probably what you'd have got if May didn't call a GE and need to rely on the DUP to get a majority. It's by far the bet solution but the kingmakers don't like it.

Seeing as the referendum was a sham, and seeing as we're not actually leaving the EU, why the feth is anybody getting fined?

Anybody who contributed funds to the referendum, be they Remain or Leave, should be reimbursed.

The day Britain actually leaves the EU, is the same day I change my name to Jean-Claude Juncker.

So it's OK to cheat if it doesn't matter? Tell your next opponent that.

Also, I hear that Nigel Farage and Arron Banks could be planning to join the DUP.

https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/nigel-farage-could-join-dup-amid-speculation-he-could-be-making-another-bid-for-parliament-36896730.html


Heheheehehehehe....

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Seeing as the referendum was a sham, and seeing as we're not actually leaving the EU, why the feth is anybody getting fined?

Because they broke the law and are part of the reason the referendum was a sham. That sort of thing cannot be encouraged by ignoring it.

So I see Empress May is trying to revive her wet dream idea of Grammar Schools again...

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/grammar-schools-theresa-may_uk_5af4a800e4b032b10bf8ce7d?utm_hp_ref=uk-homepage

Despite the majority of state schools crying out for more money she is allocating £50m to a tiny fraction of Grammar schools that predominantly benefit middle and high earners as shown in all the scientific reports. That's also despite the idea being widely panned at the last election.

Definitely hearing what the people want on this one. To be honest the most foul and noxious solids that come out of my ass have better political skills than Empress May.

Usual MO, wait for a bit after the election then try and sneak in all those unpopular polices when you hope everyone has forgotten about them/is too distracted by something else. I wouldn't be surprised to hear rumblings about a free vote on hunting with dogs again.

The worrying thing is that moar grammer and fayth schools is not an unpopular policy but that it is popular enough to get through with a minority government.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
The worrying thing is that moar grammer and fayth schools is not an unpopular policy but that it is popular enough to get through with a minority government.

Has it actually gone through parliament though or is it just May pushing her own personal agenda of making sure the wealthy stay in the top positions? A minority government can still push through brain dead ideas if there is no possibility of a vote against it (and the funding is probably being channelled from a large approved pot of money).

In other news. Even the UN is now saying we the UK government is making the environment for non-white, non-british citizens more difficult and potentially breaches international human rights laws. Well done May...bigotry and racism to the fore...

A £50M spending decision doesn't have to go through parliament. It's a tiny amount of money, worth about 0.5% of the whole education budget, according to Radio 4.

Faith schools should be getting dedicated funding allocated and the whole ‘free schools’ thing should be scrapped. It’s either used for middle class enclaves to take local money from the state schools keep out the oiks, or it’s used by those of somewhat dubious religious/political inclination to get their own school.

Free schools are not ‘free’ to the taxpayer, they’re a money sink that can’t justify themselves academically. They fail financially and through inspections more frequently, despite the political agenda to promote them.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37833390
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2014/apr/29/free-schools-ofsted-failure-rate-higher-state

 Kilkrazy wrote:
A £50M spending decision doesn't have to go through parliament. It's a tiny amount of money, worth about 0.5% of the whole education budget, according to Radio 4.

That's what I thought, but I was slightly confused by your statement saying it was popular enough getting through a minority government but that in this case such an issue would have no effect anyway?

 Inquisitor Gideon wrote:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Why do we keep sending in acts that actually care about their positioning? Either hoping to launch a career or resurrect one?

Why can't we just send in a bunch of lads and lasses there to make their noise and have a good time? Those more than happy to faintly glow before blinking out, with the off-chance of being such outrageously good fun, they actually win the thing?

We are Great Britain. We've given the world not just bands like The Beatles, but entire genres of music. For a tiny island, our output of quality music and lasting bands is immense. Why are we then just pumping out stage school oiks for Eurovision?

We haven't got anything to prove, unlike most European countries.

You just gave me a laughing fit on the plane. I needed that, much appreciated.

Why do we even send acts to Eurovision?

 Mr Morden wrote:

Why do we even send acts to Eurovision?

Because it allows us to kill off acts that we never, ever, want to hear from again?

 Whirlwind wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
A £50M spending decision doesn't have to go through parliament. It's a tiny amount of money, worth about 0.5% of the whole education budget, according to Radio 4.

That's what I thought, but I was slightly confused by your statement saying it was popular enough getting through a minority government but that in this case such an issue would have no effect anyway?

What I meant is that if the opposition wanted to put up any opposition to this, by tabling a debate on it, for example, the Tories plus DUP could push it through anyway. None of the Tory MPs will break ranks on this kind of middle-class pleasing issue.

Of course it would be fair to say that Corbo has bigger fish to fry, but part of Labour policy is building a "National Education Service" so he might have thought about it.

Apart from the money there are grave concerns about creation of more single-faith schools in a society where we are already worried about social inclusion and division.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
In vaguely politics related news, I saw Mrs May going into my local dry cleaners in Henley this morning.

 Kilkrazy wrote:


Automatically Appended Next Post:
In vaguely politics related news, I saw Mrs May going into my local dry cleaners in Henley this morning.

Probably trying to work out which chemicals to use to get rid of what she considers brown stains...

 Whirlwind wrote:
So I see Empress May is trying to revive her wet dream idea of Grammar Schools again...

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/grammar-schools-theresa-may_uk_5af4a800e4b032b10bf8ce7d?utm_hp_ref=uk-homepage

Despite the majority of state schools crying out for more money she is allocating £50m to a tiny fraction of Grammar schools that predominantly benefit middle and high earners as shown in all the scientific reports. That's also despite the idea being widely panned at the last election.

Definitely hearing what the people want on this one. To be honest the most foul and noxious solids that come out of my ass have better political skills than Empress May.

Okay out of curiosity what are the grammar schoolsakd why you are against them? I presume they aren't grammar schools as in linquistic term so what?