Psychoactive Substances: Rolling UK Politics in The Neo-Con Era

No, it's just bollocks.
It's not total bollocks though, is it? I'm sure London is less dense even in inner zones because majority of housing is low-rise.

He skirts round the reason for all the empty bedrooms being all the boomers squatting in their giant empty-nest family homes i notice.

(xp) I used that quote so I could execute a painful and obvious pun on the word "dense". Obviously the whole article is garbage, not just that quote.

Well, OK this is from 2007, but if anything London will be even more dense now, and it puts the only European cities denser than London as Athens, Madrid & St Petersburg:

http://www.citymayors.com/statistics/largest-cities-density-125.html

He was talking about occupation density though, not population density, obv. it's stuffed to the gunwales populationwise.

... it is where I live anyway.

Improving occupation density is the favoured hobby-horse of the nimbyish paternalistic Tory. It isn't entirely without value as an aim but let's not pretend it's about anything other than not wanting any more beastly high-rises blocking his view of St Paul's Cathedral. Well, that and letting Zone 5 residents keep the view of the nice field at the bottom of the garden.

🗻

There are about a million reasons why it might be useful for the UK to have a steel industry at some point in the future, once it's gone then starting up afresh will be even less economical than running it at a (hopefully temporary) loss. The current steel glut isn't a permanent state of affairs, if Port Talbot really is losing £1m a day then nationalisation is going to cause its own problems later down the line if there isn't a recovery, but it's still better than letting the whole thing go to the wall.

going back a few posts here - isnt the point that UK has agreed to cheap steel influx from an overproducing china in order to get them to bail out edf risk fears over hinkley point fiasco? huge amount of capex investment, which you expect wth nuclear power, high, almost double power cost, which you don't, and a massive decomissioning poison pill. at which "too much invested to fail" altar Port Talbot jobs have been sacrificed.

There are wider reasons for not wanting to impose punitive anti-dumping tariffs on steel, I think. There is a risk of a much wider trade war with a further devaluation of the Yuan and the imposition of wider tariffs on imports. China has recently imposed tariffs on steel imports but that could be read as a warning shot to countries that have already put tariffs in place. If China wanted to turn the screw (bearing in mind it produces over half the world's steel and has little use for lots of it at the moment) it could make it much harder for the EU to export other things, which would arguably hit the UK and Germany harder than the rest of the EU. Germany has a much larger steel industry to protect though.

peak '80s Tory sort of headline here:

https://www.byline.com/column/51/article/950

A senior Labour MP confirmed that he had seen Whittingdale with a prostitute at the House of Commons, although was unaware if it was Ms. King. When pressed on how he was aware of this, he told Byline that she was giving out business cards to other MP’s.

INSERT PHOTOS OF HER AS DOMINATRIX

ha ha. quite. tube crepe shots not enough

Sajid Javid has an interesting courting technique:

In January 2015 Sajid Javid, then culture secretary and now business secretary, was invited to choose and introduce a film for members of parliament’s new crossbench film society to watch. Javid’s choice caught the audience by surprise. No Star Wars, no Godfather, no Brief Encounter for him. Instead Javid picked the 1949 movie The Fountainhead, directed by King Vidor and starring Gary Cooper as the defiant architect Howard Roark. Why? The important clue, Javid explained, was the script, which had been adapted by the implacable libertarian Ayn Rand from her novel of the same name.

Javid admitted that The Fountainhead was not his favourite movie, but he said that it was the most important to him. When he first saw it, he said that evening, he thought it was “a film that was articulating what I felt”. So taken with its message was he that Javid even, he remembered, read the movie’s courtroom scene aloud to his future wife, Laura, when they were courting – a scene I find difficult to banish from my view of Javid. And still today, he went on, he made sure to read that same scene to himself twice a year.

holy shit

well there you go

hah

Given that Whittingdale allegedly took her TO THE MTV AWARDS it's not like he was exactly trying too hard to conceal anything.

Chinese government apparently determined to finish off Port Talbot once and for all.

It justified the move by saying imports from abroad were causing substantial damage to its domestic steel industry.

http://ichef-1.bbci.co.uk/news/660/cpsprodpb/13672/production/_89047497_de24.jpg
Cameron desperately trying to look all pensive and statesmanly while doing fuck all, in the next frame Xi is mockingly holding up a hand for him to talk to.

first the steel chaos, now schools :

http://www.theguardian.com/education/2016/apr/02/backbench-pressure-on-osborne-academy-scheme

i am loving watching this meltdown.

Private Eye had an interesting theory, that before the last election they agreed with Clegg not to actively campaign 50 seats so filled the candidate lists with duffers. But come the election they got the majority, and now the 50 are campaigning for Brexit, et al.

Pretty sure that theory is bollocks, the new MPs are just power drunk and Cameron has engineered a situation in which he has no control of them.

these factions have existed within the Tory party since forever, and Cameron has never exerted the unquestioned control of the party that, say, Blair had over his

plus miniscule majority... a fact that rarely got mentioned in the euphoria (barf) of their election victory

‘Any indirect adverse effect on women is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim.’ Said the Department of Health.

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/apr/01/female-doctors-new-contract-medical-royal-colleges?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

Papers going in heavy on Cameron tomorrow. Heavier than I expected, until I figured they see this as their chance to discredit him before referendum.

Except, oddly, the Sun. Too soon to turn after their leader yesterday attacking Corbyn for calling for investigation on Cameron?

"The controversial offshore fund founded by the Prime Minister’s late father is failing to pay off for its wealthy backers after losing thousands of dollars in value this year due to a string of bad bets. "

he might be better off having a dabble on the Grand National. I love it when corrupt Tory twats are crooked and incompetent.

Well that is the story they are telling anyway.

Moreover, Mr Cameron can probably rely on the Labour Party to fumble its political opportunity. Under Jeremy Corbyn the opposition has honed an ineffectual routine for such occasions. It starts with a quixotic call for a resignation (tick). That is often accompanied by a petition, which is duly signed by people who already dislike Conservatives. Then comes the parliamentary showdown, where Mr Corbyn—a plodding, inflexible orator—misses an open goal and is outshone by a back bench MP, typically one hostile to his leadership. In the meantime the news rolls on and the moment dissipates. Short of drastic new revelations, Mr Cameron can reasonably expect the coming days to confirm to this pattern.

Ouch, wheres that from?

Economist which figures, but still...

The open goal thing is not without truth and it's becoming pretty frustrating. I would genuinely like to know what his rationale is for deciding not to press things like the IDS resignation. Maybe understandable distaste for the whole PMQ as bearpit theatre thing, but then again McDonnell has shown himself to be enjoying that side of things rather a lot.

The moment doesn't just dissipate though - this is yet another of the drip drip of nasty revelations and endless cock ups on the conservative side which is surely and steadily changing public opinion. Not everything depends on a single parliamentary showdown.

^^^

Under Jeremy Corbyn the opposition has honed an ineffectual routine for such occasions.

Makes a change from the previous routine of agreeing with everything the govt said.

it's a sad world when fuckers are addicted to Question Time soap opera bullshit

sorry no disrespect intended to any of the fuckers on this thread

not sure about this "quixotic call for a resignation " thing either, calling for a Minister's resignation has been part of Westminster lolz since time immemorial hasn't it?

I mean Brown government presided over a massive economic collapse, made a load of completely avoidable unpopular decisions and faced consistent negative headlines over a period of years, and STILL the Tories were only able to cobble together a government with the aid of the LibDems, when conventional wisdom would have suggested a landslide victory. You can't rely on an unpopular government to tank things for themselves, because there's still no guarantee that enough of the electorate will trust the opposition more.

Obviously the Blairites would have fucked this up in a different way, that much goes without saying.

But given that right now there are two Tory parties, will the Brexit camp knife the other? Might figure better to go into the ref with Gove or Boris in charge. Or perhaps a weakened Cameron will be better for them. Eugh.

That's certainly more likely, although I doubt there's even time to commit regicide and elect a new leader before the referendum without neglecting the Leave campaign. Not without making the whole thing look ridiculous at least. Better to throw mud at Cameron for two months instead.

Watched Danton's Death, a play for Today from '78 (Alan Clark directing and Ian Richardson in the title role which was pretty much a pre-House of Cards role as Robespierre) and we were wondering at just these questions. Would a Corbyn who could deliver on the rhethoric that we were watching in the play by these powerful orators (Saint-Just, and then Danton in his own defence too) be able to Bulldoze this government. The Economist certainly wouldn't like it. On the flipside the rhethoric as we saw was a nonsense - it produced a brutal, unneccesary outcome for the Republic.

Corbyn is a quiet incorruptible. I'd say in the current situation - Cameron as a crook - that could even be enough (Cameron is a hopeless bluffer who has pulls out the hoodie hugging stuff now and then to appear likeable to the public - and hated by his party). Labour, as a party, are in no fit state to do anything. Robespierre and Saint-Just were killed 3 months after Danton, and that's what I'd give an unlikely Corbyn administration.

Corbyn unquestionably the best guy to have on point at this moment I'd have thought

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/jeremy-corbyn-endorsed-by-danny-devito-for-prime-minister-a6974646.html

All this moaning about a pro-EU leaflet and all I've received is a pro-leave leaflet. Who funded that?

racists

Useful distraction from all the Panama stuff though, eh? For a day anyway.

i got two pro-leave ones as well, one of which was very plain and just said "EU Referendum: The Facts" and inside very soberly detailed the main points in favour of leaving

Happening just around the corner from me, outside the Conservatives' spring conference:

https://scontent-lhr3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xta1/v/t1.0-9/12961475_622494017900536_4530802684583480806_n.jpg?oh=92a0242663b15e9f770495dd4b715e63&oe=5788F748