[Messianic Trees]

A ruthless Tory takeover of Quangoland? If only it were true!

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/artic ... z2sF7mOES5" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[O]ne Conservative ruefully admitted to me: 'Labour are brilliant at manipulating the appointments process in order to get their people into key jobs.'

Part of that is down to the fact that the panels which run the selection process tend to be dominated by people within the public sector; that is a world where support for Labour is much higher than in the country as a whole.

The criteria for these appointments are also cleverly arranged to favour what might be described as a Left-wing agenda.

I have seen the documentation for a number of such vacancies and it is clear that no applicant will be considered suitable unless he or she can point to a substantial record of 'encouraging diversity'.

This is the standard reference to the promotion of people from ethnic or sexual minorities — a feature much more of the public than the private sector.

Yet at a time of reduced public sector budgets, quangos desperately need people with private sector experience of running a tight ship, of improving services while simultaneously cutting costs.

This was brought home to me by a recent appointee from the private sector to a very large quango, who told me 'despite the big cut in our budget, there was nothing on the board meeting agenda about how to do things more efficiently with fewer staff.

'When I suggested we should make this a priority, it was as if I had sworn in church'.

This is why it is so important to have chairmen with some sense of urgency in such matters: he (or she) is in charge of the board, and hence the agenda.

[The Weeping Angel]

Haven't heard from Lawson in a while but he had this rubbish about Labour dynasties as well as having a dig at Tony Benn.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/artic ... leged.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Tim's on to it

http://zelo-street.blogspot.co.uk/2014/ ... -fail.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Messianic Trees]

Why Max Clifford's greatest PR coup was to get the Left to fall for his lies

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/artic ... z30pASLLcs" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[The Weeping Angel]

So he opposed the Tory government in the run up to the 97 general election he has a quote from a New Statesman from 2000 and one from a left-wing website and that means wait for it the left were complicit in his wicked crimes.

[The Red Arrow]

Classic 'Look over there!'

Edit:This just up from Mr Fenton.

Monday, 5 May 2014
Max Clifford – Max Dacre Pundit Grovel
http://zelo-street.blogspot.co.uk/2014/ ... rovel.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[The Weeping Angel]

Skewered by Tim Fenton

http://zelo-street.blogspot.co.uk/2014/ ... rovel.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Messianic Trees]

Why the BBC's arrogance over TV debates could threaten its future

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/artic ... z3Ts7MEHmC" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

To 'empty chair' the Prime Minister [...] would be an unprecedentedly hostile act by any broadcaster, but especially by the BBC, with its particular obligation, as an organisation funded by a form of television poll tax, to behave impartially.

Speaking as a friend of the BBC — and one who treasures much of its political output — I beg it not to endanger its own future, and for such a petulant gesture.

Intriguingly, when Channel 4 ran an item on this last week, with the Conservative MP Jacob Rees-Mogg, the BBC turned down the opportunity to debate with that most articulate of Tories — as he gleefully pointed out, to the visible irritation of the presenter Krishnan Guru-Murthy.

[Big Arnold]

His behaviour was reprehensible, but as a fellow glutton I totally understand why Clarkson flew into a rage when denied a steak supper, writes DOMINIC LAWSON

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/artic ... z3UY4JlW4F" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[youngian]

Its a pity for him he lives off scraps to fill his column.

[Samanfur]

Did anyone see a print version of this article?

A UK Columnist Suggested Female Doctors Are Hurting The System. They Had The Perfect Response

When Sunday Times columnist Dominic Lawson claimed this weekend that female doctors are to blame for England's department of health problems, expect a great Twitter hashtag to be born, stat.

#LikeALadyDoc took off on Twitter Monday as people responded to Lawson's sexist article, which claimed that an increasing number of women doctors are the reason England's NHS is having trouble with its contract for doctors.

Lawson referred to the "feminization of medicine" and said that "increasing numbers of female graduates will create a major shortfall in primary care provision."

[Malcolm Armsteen]

No words...

[youngian]

So in essence Corbyn is bribing middle class voters with tax cuts. Ask your dad where Labour picked that trick up from

Why do middle-class youngsters support Corbyn? Because they think they're entitled to anything they want, writes DOMINIC LAWSON

This latest YouGov poll shows a mere 12 per cent of 18 to 24-year-olds backing the Conservatives, with a thumping 60 per cent supporting Labour.

But here’s the remarkable thing: when the figures are broken down on class lines, it transpires that the Conservatives have more support among the lower socio-economic groups (C2DE) than they do among the upper social groups (ABC1).

Labour — ostensibly the workers’ party — polls significantly better among higher socio-economic groups than it does among those on lower incomes.
To put this at its clearest: Jeremy Corbyn is a magnet for the young — but most especially those from well-to-do backgrounds.


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/artic ... z4mQLOeWm8" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[davidjay]

The funniest thing about the election result was the sight of furious Tories saying how terrible it was that Labour had policies that would benefit their voters.

[Bones McCoy]

The funniest thing about the election result was the sight of furious Tories saying how terrible it was that Labour had policies that would benefit their voters.

Yeah, classic "storming off in a huff" stuff that.

Have they ever contemplated whether they offer anything positive to the 18-24 age group?
* Deregulated work environment.
* Expensive "no frills" education.
* Housing crisis.
* The few of that age who clearly benefit, and say so loudly on the television, come across as the type of braying wanker that nobody in their right mind would be associated with.

[youngian]

I heard the 6% interest rate hike on students debt as raising tax on those they don't vote. Got that one wrong.