Jezbollah
Member
They do. The core principles will form part of an extension, with slight changes made to the process framework. Basic communication logs will be kept, with legal warrants required to inspect the content of that communication.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
UK PoliGAF thread of tell me about the rabbits again, Dave.
- Thread starter Chinner
- Start date
They do. The core principles will form part of an extension, with slight changes made to the process framework. Basic communication logs will be kept, with legal warrants required to inspect the content of that communication.
CyclopsRock
Member
I read an interesting thing earlier which said that 80,000 members of the Civil Service went on strike today (which is the lowest ever for a national strike apparantly), and that they lose 3,000,000 work days per year on sick leave. There are about 340,000 civil servants in the country, which means they take an average of 9 sick days each a year. That's pretty mental. Must be a very high-stress environment!
AtomnayaKlubnika
Member
What are you thoughts on Farage? Is he leading one the few conservative eurosceptic parties that doesn't fall in the far-right category? who is he? What is his plan?
CyclopsRock
Member
Yeah. I think a lot of people who don't like him would like to categorise him as far right, but that's really not accurate at all, I think. As for his plans, I don't think it matters - if Cam wins this election (and I think he will), he's done. The referendum will rip UKIP apart, whoever wins.
There tends to be a lot less pressure around sick days in the public sector, encouraged even, to avoid lawsuits. It's a different world to the private sector in that regard.
Getting out of the EU preferably, getting concessions around immigration will do. The rest is just fluff, apart from getting the smoking ban in pubs repealed. He'd like that.
Nicktendo86
Member
I have had 3 sick days in 9 years. What is wrong with people?
anonymous_abc
Member
Without knowing how old you are or what you do for a living. I doubt you are a good case for the average person. Like how older people tend to have significantly more sick days. It shoots up significantly with 40+ and increases till retirement. Which is hardly surprising.
http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/lmac/...---sickness-absence-in-the-labour-market.html
With a in work population of roughly 27e9 the average of sick days is roughly 5 p.a.
And it wouldn't surprise me if the public sector has significantly stricter rules on when you have to stay at home. I've always found it baffling how obviously sick people drag themselves to work just in order to be a unproductive and b spread their illness around the office. Just stay home for a day which as we all know is often enough to get over the hump.
Jezbollah
Member
So a day after Labour refuse to support or condemn the public service strikes, they are now very vocal about the Royal Mail selloff for the umpteenth time.
Have they actually got something new, and of substance to allow them to try and be the opposition that their core voters want them to be?
Have they actually got something new, and of substance to allow them to try and be the opposition that their core voters want them to be?
CyclopsRock
Member
The slightly baffling thing is that they don't seem opposed to the sell off even, just the specific value at which the shares were originally placed. Which is possibly a legitimate complaint, but it's so razor thin in terms of a differentiating factor between the parties. Is that really going to be the deciding reason that people vote one party over another?
Nicktendo86
Member
We all know they wanted/tried to sell it off in office as well. Or Mandy did anyway.
anonymous_abc
Member
(Potentially fake, I guess)
I'm sceptical unless I hear if from the drivers.
Mind you I'm surprised such things don't happen far more frequently.
CyclopsRock
Member
There deffo is a reshuffle happening though, and I've heard the IDS rumour elsewhere. Nicky Morgan (a junior minister in the Treasury) is getting a promotion, but I don't know where to yet.
Nicktendo86
Member
I've heard IDS and Pickles could be out.
anonymous_abc
Member
Nicktendo86
Member
Me neither tbh. I can't see why he would get demoted though, I heard his department was always one of the first to agree to spending cuts and local government has improved. Hope it doesn't have any effect on the LB Tower Hamlets investigation!
QuicheFontaine
Member
Erm, 27e9 is 27 billion. The UK ain't that big mate.
I'm guessing you meant 29 million, which is what the link says 
OT: when I worked in the public sector, I was shocked when an email went round the office saying the average number of sick days per year per employee was 8. Really? That's the average??
anonymous_abc
Member
Erm, 27e9 is 27 billion. The UK ain't that big mate.
I'm guessing you meant 29 million, which is what the link says
OT: when I worked in the public sector, I was shocked when an email went round the office saying the average number of sick days per year per employee was 8. Really? That's the average??
mea culpa 27e6 indeed.
CyclopsRock
Member
Ladbrokes odds for Scottish ref has moved again to 82:18.
Sorry for my ignorance, but what does that mean? Does the 82% represent their expected no vote or what exactly?
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
No, 82% probability the NO vote will have a majority of the vote versus an 18% probability the YES vote will have a majority of the vote, given the current situation. As the event draws nearer, you'd usually expect to see this tends towards 100:0 in favour of one side or the other as events become more certain.
EDIT: I don't think the odds on political betting are very accurate, for what it's worth. Too many people bet based on what they want to happen or personal allegiances, so it distorts the market and offers inaccurate odds. This is especially true of relatively small betting markets like politics-related betting.
WayneMorse
Banned
Doesn't Osborne really dislike IDS? I wouldn't be surprised if Cameron moves him, it'll let a fresher face get the opportunity to show unflinching cruelty towards the poor and disabled.
CyclopsRock
Member
Haha. Last time he just flat out refused to go - obviously Cam could have sacked him but that doesn't send a good message when you sack one of your senior ministers. That said, I've heard that Hague might step down voluntarily so that someone can be promoted to "the top three" since that's been totally static for the entire parliament. Not entirely sure why, though, since we haven't had any foreign policy nightmares (EU Notwithstanding, which isn't really Hague's responsibility) and Hague is generally pretty popular. Maybe he'll be put to "better use" performing some party function in the run up to the election, I dunno. Or maybe that's just bullshit and not going to happen at all.
Nicktendo86
Member
Cameron really has terrible judgement doesn't he. I don't think he should take all the blame for this enquiry fiasco but still, get a grip.
CyclopsRock
Member
I agree - predictably, I guess - with Hodges on this one again. I don't see the point of a public enquiry. I thought the police were meant to investigate crimes? Public enquires should be for when problems occur and a cause (and solution) need to be found but which aren't actually crimes - like how Leveson wasn't about finding out if journalists committed crimes (that was down to the police) but rather about the culture that lead to it and about ways to preventing that occuring again. This doesn't seem to be that, and it's ludicrous that it occur before a criminal investigation.
Nicktendo86
Member
I would agree Cyclops except I am not sure we can really trust the police to investigate themselves. It is very similar to the phone hacking thing and the whole hacked off campaign, we don't need any new regulation or laws as what they did WAS ILLIGAL, what should happen is the police actually investigate rather than be on the take.
CyclopsRock
Member
But in this case, I don't think it's really the police that are being investigated. It's not against the law to not report a crime (though that might not be the case for long) and having evidence of a crime and not sharing it is only illegal if you're in court and not telling the truth (or otherwise lying when asked by police, ie perverting the course of justice). Maybe the police knew more than they're letting on and didn't act but imo that should be a discussion for after a criminal investigation has occured. I don't think you can really have a public inquiry into whether or not the police helped cover up something that we don't even know happened.
zomgbbqftw
Banned
The investigation is into the alleged cover up of a paedophile ring within Westminster, there absolutely needs to be one. A conspiracy to protect high ranking politicians and Lords involving the police and other branches of government needs to have the light of day shone on it and the people involved prosecuted.
Not having an investigation would be negligent, and I don't believe the investigation into the voice mail shit was necessary, the existing laws were more than enough to get a conviction of the perpetrators, and nothing has been done about bent coppers after all of the fall out. This time though, there definitely needs to be one, a state sponsored cover up of paedophilia in Westminster is explosive stuff and the government can't afford to kick the can down the road.
So far we have Westminster, the Catholic church, the BBC, local government and the NHS involved. There are implications that the police hushed it all up as well so we can count Scotland Yard in as well. Hodges, unsurprisingly, is wrong.
QuicheFontaine
Member
I'm shocked as well! I was convinced they weren't going to budge on this one. Who's replacing?
CyclopsRock
Member
If we can't trust the police of 2014 to investigate something that occured in the early 80's, then something a bit more significant should be done than a public inquiry, surely? I agree that we need an inquiry, but it seems to me that it'd make far more sense to do it after a criminal investigation; That's not kicking the can down the road, that's allowing the state institution tasked with investigating crime time to investigate a potential crime.
The biggest question for me - as highlighted by Butler-Sloss' stepping down - is who is there out there who is simultaneously qualified to head an inquiry like this but also wasn't around in the establishment in the 1980's themselves or by association? IMO You're more likely to find someone like that in the police rather than running down a list of Lord this or Lady that, and that's inevitably who a public inquiry will appoint.
Nicktendo86
Member
Unfortunately, I just don't know if we can. Officers were implicit in phone hacking, then you have Steven Lawrence, Hillsborough etc. Teresa May didn't get as many plaudits as she should have for her police federation speech.
Problem with 2014 police investigating the 1980's is it wasn't so long ago that officers could still be there and they seem to have a culture of looking out for their own. I was a big supporter of the police but the sheer amount of scandel has left my faith in them shaken.
CyclopsRock
Member
Then who? In a scandal that potentially involves literally every British institution, who's left that's unconnected to it all?
Fuck it, let's get Channel 4 to do it. Tell them they can only interview those involved whilst they do drugs live in TV in a giant box made for televised sexual intercourse.
Nicktendo86
Member
It is tough, I really don't know what they should do tbh. I just don't really trust anyone to do a proper investigation, too many vested interests and such. I forgot to add plebgate to add to the police's greatest hits by the way!
I really, really hope that everything comes out in the open and all victims get the justice they deserve. But I don't know the best way to achieve that at all.
I really, really hope that everything comes out in the open and all victims get the justice they deserve. But I don't know the best way to achieve that at all.
Nicktendo86
Member
ICM poll has Tories with a one point lead today.
Con 34
Lab 33
Lib 12
Ukip 9
*reshuffle alert*
David Jones - Welsh sec - sacked
Ken Clarke - mwp - "retired"
Con 34
Lab 33
Lib 12
Ukip 9
*reshuffle alert*
David Jones - Welsh sec - sacked
Ken Clarke - mwp - "retired"
CyclopsRock
Member
Alan Duncan falls on his sword!
JonathanEx
Member
Is this reshuffle like the bit at an end of a football match where they do lots of swaps so everybody gets a go before the end of the governme- match.
That or preparing for the penalty shootout!!!
#footybantz
That or preparing for the penalty shootout!!!
#footybantz
CyclopsRock
Member
I think it genuinely is the latter - this is all being done with an eye on the election - not so much people's roles in the election campaign, but trying to walk the fine line between presenting a brand new, untested team to the electorate vs presenting a stale gang that are exactly the same as in 2010. Neither will be particularly appealing to the electorate, insofar as they care at all.
Nicktendo86
Member
Plus, women. Lots of women. Have to appear inclusive and not not just a boys club.
phisheep
NeoGAF's Chief Barrister
Well that's arguable for starters. Sure, there's no specific law requiring people to report crimes they may become aware of after the event if they were not involved themselves. But on the other hand, concealing shredding and perhaps tacitly acquiescing in a continued course of criminal behaviour comes awfully close to conspiracy or joint enterprise or even aiding and abetting.
Maybe not. To investigate a crime you need at least a suspect, or a victim, or some sort of evidence - and there's very little of this around here. An inquiry might just throw up the right sort of things to form the basis of an investigation.
(There are other ways of course, one of which would to throw up a website asking for evidence from anyone who was abused by anyone else and follow the names from there - but something tells me that's not a great way of going either.)
I still reckon one of the three Lord McAlpines will show up in this somewhere.
On gut feel, I'd go for Baroness Trumpington. In her 90s now, bless her, but sharp as a whip and suffers no fools and no masters.
For God's sake, not Esther Rantzen.
Nicktendo86
Member
Fuck me Haugue gone. Hammond to replace him.
jamieson87
Member
Liam bloody Fox?!
Guerrillas in the Mist
Member
I bet Michael Gove is safe as well...
Gah, I was hoping for May. James May.
CyclopsRock
Member
Hammond is a bit fucking useless, but maybe that's the point - we have no big foreign policy objectives, so maybe Cam just wants someone that won't do anything mad or say anything too dumb, and since the military utterly loathe Hammond it gets them a bit happier.
Nicktendo86
Member
Jeremy Clarkson for foreign sec, just for shits and giggles.