My problem with it wasn't the report on the Blackburn incident it was it's lack of detail. No explanation was given as to the cause of the delays or the lack of heating in the cathedral (as I highlighted) and that is still the case. I'm assuming you've read the report and therefore know of any reasons for the problems encountered, unless the newspaper in question, failed to give any reasons because of the lack of information from the NHS or because of shoddy journalism. You see I'm becoming less tolerant of the media as time goes by. They want to scrutinize to the nth degree looking for the minutest diversion from perfection and I'm doing the same to them. They seem to want to control the rules so they have to expect the rest of us to apply these rules to them. They can't have it both ways. We have an elected opposition to the government in this country and it is not the media.
I can see to a certain extent why they do it because our elected opposition is as weak as piss and never seem to be able to offer an electable alternative, or that is how the electorate see it. As a member of the Labour party I must take partial responsibility as it is us members who have allowed the party to become unelectable and, by association, have presented Power to the Government on a plate.
On the bold Boris, you are perfectly entitled to your opinion on the man but the danger lies when that dislike spills over to others. (Not that I'm accusing you of that stance). As I have said on numerous occasions I neither like or dislike Johnson but my lifelong belief in democracy tells me that my fellow countrymen have given him a job and I accept their right to do so but he wouldn't get an invite to dine with me either for what it's worth.
However I said at the beginning of the outbreak that, as far as I was concerned, political point scoring should be frowned upon until we'd conquered the problem and, in his first speech as Labour leader, Starmer echoed that. At last I thought but he didn't stick to it. I don't know where the pressure came from to make him revert to type but revert to type he did.
I've also said this on several occasions, until the Labour party become electable and are trusted by the electorate to manage the country, Boris is in for as long as he likes or as long as his party want him or until the Tories make a big mistake.
We don't really want a situation where government is changed because of a series of clangers but because the alternative is so attractive to the electorate that it can't be ignored.
The big question is who is responsible, or is willing to take the responsibility to facilitate that.

[quote="derwent"][
However I said at the beginning of the outbreak that, as far as I was concerned, political point scoring should be frowned upon until we'd conquered the problem and, in his first speech as Labour leader, Starmer echoed that. At last I thought but he didn't stick to it. I don't know where the pressure came from to make him revert to type but revert to type he did.

the odd thing about this was that starmer seemed a breath of fresh air after taking over from the unelectable corbyn. and seemed quite popular with the general public. now he has gone down the point scoring line his popularity has wained. it might have gone up with the activists but these of all party,s do not elect their party into government. his recent actions may be seen as a big OG in a few years time.

Starmer is a Barrister not a politician. He is middle of the road on nearly every issue, and you know what they say about people who stay in the middle of the road for too long. Corbyn was very electable IMO, it was the voters who thought otherwise, having had their heads turned by the media with slurs, lies and untruths, but thats western democracy for you.

On topic, the government now hope to vaccinate over 50s by May rather than October, which if it comes off is good news.

It depends how you interpret electable. Miners turned away from him in droves, as did traditional heartlands. He never even put a dent in SNP's dominance in Scotland and that didn't go down well. The membership were told don't worry we'll get Scotland back.........yeah right.
The media had no effect on the decision by the people in the red wall and Scotland. Corbyn had three cracks at it and by the third he was found out and crushed. Maybe his refusal to hold back his thoughts on brexit had the biggest effect. Nobody knew where he stood on brexit. I don't think he really knew himself.
In Bassetlaw time and time again miners were saying things like " I hate what I am doing by not voting Labour but I just can't vote for a government run by Corbyn". It was the same in Don Valley, I witnessed it day by day in the run up. I live at the edge of both those constituencies and that is what happened. We're now being told we'll get Don Valley and Bassetlaw back. Will that be another Yeah right.

His policies made him electable, in my eyes anyway. He wasn't perfect and probably got worse as he went on , no doubt brow beaten from the constant bullying of him by the media, for someone who they said was too old and weak to be a PM, the bloke deserves a medal for staying the course.We know why people didn't vote for him , especially in the former industrial areas, in the main the media brainwashed , and the hostility that has always been shown towards all Socialists in Britain + a lot of them are as thick as pig shit as well. That's not to say he wasn't right though. Unfortunately the party and leader we need to sort the mess out that is the UK , the electorate will never vote for, that's just the way it is, this is what happens when you have 40 years of one ideology and little opposition to it. One thing for certain, Starmer and shifting back to the right isn't the answer. Bliar was in the right place at the right time in 1997. Even he, the great messiah wouldn't win an election or get 100% support in the NE now.

The result told us what the electorate thought about his policies and electability.
After ten years of austerity the door was open for change and was an amazing opportunity for Labour and they produced their worst performance in decades. Of course people can blame who they like or what they like but unless and until they convince the electorate to trust in them, they remain unelectable.
Who is going to trust a party to manage the country's problems when they can't even recognise their own problems never mind solve them.
Keep blaming the media if you like but the media ain't going anywhere, so what is the policy to overcome that bias, if indeed any bias exists.
We seem to have moved from blaming neo liberals within the party for our woes to saddling the media with the blame.
One day we might start looking at the real problems. Meanwhile the Tories have a field day.
Talk about self destruct, you couldn't make it up.
Maybe one day......Maybe.

You are like a broken record Derwent. I don't know why the prospect of Socialism fills you with so much dread, maybe its because you own your own business and you might have to start paying your workers more. You can live with the tories in power, but your preferred choice would be a tory lite neo-liberal Labour Party, I get that, but that won't sort out the deep rooted problems created by both the tories and neo liberal Labour Party of the last 40 years, it won't help those already suffering or about to suffer the consequences of those two political parties. It was the media to blame, but unlike other elections we also had the fallout from Brexit to contend with as well as a general across the board dislike of politicians, it was the perfect storm, and seeing as how it was of their own making, they had it coming. Whoever is in power whether it be Johnson or Starmer, people are going to get seriously shafted. The country has changed and the current Labour Party isn't fit for purpose. I always wonder if Socialism is such a flawed ideology why is so much money spent on defeating it?. I always thought Corbyn was nothing more than the embers catching fire, I could never see the people of the UK electing a Socialist MP , he came close though, and that sent shock waves through the establishment. They know only too well, if a Socialist ever did manage to jump through all the hoops, and have several terms in office , the people might like what they see, thats why they throw everything but the kitchen sink to make sure it never happens, if it did, I'm sure there would be a military coup soon after, thats western democracy for you. If I'm lucky I might have another 25 years left on this earth, so why should I worry, not my problem, I do worry about future generations though, thats where Socialism is different to Capitalism.

Jeremy Corbyn and Hugo Chavez ..what a dream team they would make,mr horden ?

"His policies made him electable"

Pure delusion Mr H, nothing more or less and you're not alone in that cloud cuckoo land. Theres around 250'000 Labour members who hark back to a time when the unions brought the country to it's knees. It ain't nearly enough.

Comrade Corbyn had open goals against May and failed. His anti Semitism and his terrorist hugging history was against him as well as his look and his 70's policies. Frankly I don't believe Labour will ever be in power again. Boris has the keys for three terms. In that time Labour will split again or a new centre left party will emerge.

I will say one more thing on this subject, as its been done to death in the past, and whatever is said, no one will change their entrenched views.

What evidence do you have of anti semitism or terrorism? I thought so, NONE!

Thanks to Socialism , we have two things left that basically keep this country from going into the abyss, the NHS and the benefits system , even most tories realise the NHS is a good thing now, though they would still like to privatise large parts of it, to rip off the taxpayer and put money into the pockets of their friends.

I agree about Labour, I said as much in my previous comment, when I said they are not fit for purpose

However I don't really want the sort of Labour government in power that Derwent approves of either, they wouldn't change much for the better, actually I probably would, but only because it would mean the tories weren't in power, but thats not much of an ambition.

In the meantime good luck to you and your tory chums, in creating jobs, and keeping people out of poverty and off the streets in post Brexit Britain. I will watch with interest as the UK disintegrates and continues to decline, whilst the rest of the world kicks on.

A broken record is it. Thanks for that. On the record lable is written the title......REALISM. And it is still playing and it will keep on playing until the Labour party sorts itself into being electable, so it is very far from being broken.
"I could never see the people of the UK electing a Socialist MP" you said. Assuming you mean Corbyn as PM, is that not the same as saying he is unelectable but I'm willing to accept your description for the sake of it. Unelectable is a simpler way of putting it though.
True to form Mr H you resort to red herrings on "maybe" my record of employing people, which you know nothing about. If I paid my employees the best rates of pay known to man it still wouldn't have any effect on whether or not Corbyn was electable to the role of PM.

You say that the present Labour Party isn't fit for purpose which is another way of saying they are unelectable. Who in their right mind would ELECT a party not fit to be ELECTED but, once again, I'll go along with not fit for purpose for the sake of peace.

Mr H, you are hardly the person to accuse people of having entrenched views. For the record, are your views anywhere near being entrenched??

corbyn had good policies but he was on a hiding to nothing because of who he was on top of the media assasination of him at every opportunity. would another labour leader with the same policies have been more of a success who did not have the corbyn baggage with them. brexit was more or less a 50/50 issue so he could not hide behind that either for his defeat. like all modern politics i really find it difficult to support any party after the last 20 years. would love to support labour as my left wing views outweigh any right wing ones i have but i have a real feeling that i could not really afford financially to do so. throught my working life i have always found that there was more money left in my pocket under the tories than the labour party. wish it had been the opposite but it was not for me.

When I hear a scientist explain issues like the South African mutation I am often reassured and can put the issue in context. However when BoJo or Hancock speak after on the same subject I become very uncomfortable and confused. Would it be anti democratic for these two daft lads to be banned from the airways?

It's because when a scientist explains it he sounds like a scientist and when a politician explains it he sounds like like like errm....he sounds like a politician.
Use yer mute button, that might help you.
On a more reassuring note just be grateful it isn't Corbyn or Abbott.
Nigel Farage wants To put Tony Blair in charge of the vaccination roll out.
It must be going too well !!!!!

You must almost certainly be rich then Mr A?

Personally I would vote for the party that put more money in the majority of peoples pockets rather than just my own.

I don't see the point of having all that extra money in a unequal society, that meant I had to spend the extra on the installation of an electric fence around my home, dogs, alarms and cameras in order to keep all those in poverty out , but that's the way its heading, the 51st state of America.

no i,m not rich and when i worked due to all the overtime i did i suppose i was slightly above average wage. same as my old man and son in this respect. from this i learned that it was up to me to earn money as no one else was going to do it for me. have very few interests that cost me money apart from family, dogs , football and cars, so my expenditure is lower than most. as what i regard as being an average type of person i have found that any extra expenditure i ever have had has been onder a labour government. this is another reason for the unpopularity of labour policies with many like myself. do not mind in anyway of helping those less fortunate than me but that does not mean i want to help the workshy or lasses that have no work, no partners and still pop out kids without any thought to their futures.

You must almost certainly be rich then Mr A? Quote Horden.

Why must he almost certainly be rich???? I don't follow that at all.
He is suggesting he is richer under the tories but being richer is different to being rich.
Having a penny more is richer than you were before but it hardly makes you rich.

You must almost certainly be rich then Mr A?

Personally I would vote for the party that put more money in the majority of peoples pockets rather than just my own.

I don't see the point of having all that extra money in a unequal society, /quote]






Comrade Derek is waiting your call mr horden.


https://www.theargus.co.uk/news/1863203 ... evolution/

God love them !

Unfortunately the majority of people don't want a revolution, they have embraced Capitalism, whether that was voluntarily or through being brainwashed is a matter for debate, most people just want a mix of the two ideologies, the best of both worlds so to speak, aka caring Capitalism. Unfortunately we haven't got that at the moment and it looks unlikely that we will have it in future either, it will make for a depressing future for millions of ordinary decent British people. Quite tragic don't you think , in a country the 5th richest in the world.

someone should write an article on what privatisation has ever done for the average family in the street. there certainly would be more people in work without it and could imagine there would be better public transport links and cheaper at that. same with the water, gas and electric suppliers. having to change the latter two on a regular basis to save a few quid a year is a ball ache for a start. the railways are a good example. take two towns of a decent size, hartlepool and huddersfield. i could afford this journey and at least get a direct train one way between these towns. now i could not afford it and have not the time with all the changes involved. not everone wants just to go to bleeding london all the time.

After reading your comments about rail travel to Hudds from Hpool I wondered how many changes there were and rather than be a lazy bastard and ask you about the changes I convinced meself to do it for meself. I was surprised that there are 15 journeys going there tomorrow. Five have one change and ten have two changes. I didn't think that was bad considering I didn't expect very many people in Hpool waking up tomorrow breaking their necks to travel to Hudds by train. You can get a train every hour from around 7-30 until after 10pm. That is not a bad service. I expected it to be a lot more arduous than that.
Interesting but I'm a railway buff and usually travel a lot by train. My wife and I have a two together rail card and get a third off each ticket. We get some great deals, especially if we can plan ahead. Buying tickets on the day of travel is usually prohibitive on pricing and we avoid that as much as possible.

You can get a direct train to Huddersfield from Thornaby I think. I tend to go via York though, 2 changes either way. Of course the car is generally cheaper, unless you book up 10 weeks in advance. This booking up in advance mullarkey saves money for those who could probably afford the full price in the first place, and have the money sitting doing nothing in their bank accounts, to be able to pay up front. For example a £40 journey , they might get for £20 , but the train company get their money back by charging the poor person, who hasn't got the money to book in advance or isn't computer savvy, therefore has to pay on the day £60. For this reason few poor people travel by train. Energy prices are the same, for those in the prime of their life, there are savings to be made, as long as you keep on the move, changing supplier every so often ( even though your new supplier is probably owned by your old supplier but with a different name to make you think you have got a good deal ) but the suppliers recoup their money by exploiting the poor, who may not be computer literate or even literate, can't use a computer or can't afford a broadband connection, and older people who tend to be loyal and rarely change suppliers.

The whole thing is immoral, but as I say, as many do well out of it as don't , so it is likely to continue in this I'm alright Jack , bollocks to my neighbour society we now live in.

What I found strange once, was how it took so long to get to Huddersfield from Halifax, and it involved a change. You can see them both as you travel along the M62, one on the right of you , one on the left , yet it took about 40 minutes on the train with a change at Dewsbury I think.

Death rate is still horrendous.
Over 1000 for Monday nTuesday .
Long Long way to go before restrictions get lifted.
Boris Road Map to recovery due out about 22nd Feb.

Because the ordinary person on the street is always better off under Labour (unless they sell drugs, are a funeral director or rent houses out) and those already rich get richer under the tories , well until it all goes tits up, which it always does.

Been thinking that myself. We are over the peak, but it looks like being a long plateau, rather than the figures suddenly going downhill rapidly.

Got an email from a pub yesterday, asking me if I want to cancel a booking I had made for late March, was hoping to see my daughter and grandkids. Sounded ominous, as though they in that sector have got wind of something we don't yet know. I cancelled, no point staying in a pub f you can't use the facilities. Will see what our glorious leader has to say next week before re-booking, but as it stands I can't see any pubs selling alcohol before May or crowds at football until August. What a great time to be alive

think they have gone down slightly this week. in some ways i find this a worry, apart from those who have friends and family that are affected that is. once numbers start going down there are those in a mad rush to get some normality back and a curse on anyone that cancels foreign holidays for a start. just hope the government has learned its lesson from last year and not give in to some public opinions and we could end up where we are in 12 months time and 12 months after that.

Have you ever thought that its the Tories and the neo-liberals in the Labour Party, that might have actually contributed to those problems? people without jobs, not workshy, people without jobs, not single lasses popping out kids for an extra 25 quid that has de-valued marriage? Selling off council houses, and not replenishing the council housing stock, meaning that single lasses with kids get first dibs? Don't fall for the propaganda Mr A, you are better than that.

no those changers are not bad i agree. the thing is that the direct train that i used years ago either started in manchester and went on to newcastle and not just from and too the places i mentioned. the other one was that i had to aunts at one time that lived in harrogate and regularly went back home as we call it on a direct train without seeing york station. another bad example of modern railways is the journey from skipton to manchester. by all account there are quite a number of people living there that work in manchester. they either have to travel via leeds or bradford and walk across the city to the other station. all for a few miles of track closed to traffic. but do n ot worry we,ll have HS2 sometime in the future.

Now that communication technology is being used more and more instead of face to face meetings, I sometimes wonder that by the time HS2 is up and running will that technology have advanced to such a degree that very few people will be travelling at high speed up and down the country to attend face to face meetings. Face to face shopping is dying on it's feet, will face to face meetings follow suit.

I'd bet my life that if covid happened 10 years ago, the UK's death toll would of been halved. Sadly the government saw fit to stop funding the NHS.

Of course the media never says this, instead we're told to blame conspiracy theorists who never leave the house, people having house parties (but not going on holiday?) and people who want the lockdown to end because its mentally killing them.

[quote="horden"][


? Selling off council houses, and not replenishing the council housing stock,
don,t get me going on that one. it wasn,t as if they were sold off for near market value either which started the rot. it left many people like me having to rely upon housing associations and even worse private landlords that i have now. never bought into this owning your own house thing after i try in my first marriage. being a non DIY er i found it a complete money pit where i seemed just to be working all hours godsend on the mortgage and tradesmen. was one of only a handful when i worked in coventry who was not a home owner but at least i had other topics of talk in the canteen away from home improvements and the next DIY task. lads could never grasp the fact that there house has gone up in value but so had its replacement and they never actually made anything on it unless they bought something worse and cheaper. that with human nature just never happened and were taken in by the tory dream hook, line and sinker.

Buying or renting has always been a topic of conversation and at the end of the day it's down to individual choice. I opted for the buying route and have never regretted doing that. The net result is that me and the wife live in a two bedroom bungalow rent free. In 2004 we sold the house we had built up to, paid off the mortgage and bought this one with what was left and even put some money away. We now have a choice of continuing to live rent free or selling up and renting a flat somewhere with a bundle of money to enjoy ourselves with.
I once had the conversation with my dad, who rented. He said he wasn't really in favour of either option but what swayed him towards renting was the fact that a big fat twat called Goering was round every night trying to blow the housing stock to bits.
A lot of buyers downsize when their offspring leave the nest which gives them financial benefit as well as living in a property that is easy to manage. Nowadays they also have the option to release some cash through equity release, a method which is getting ever increasingly popular. We opted for downsizing but, like I said, it's a fella's choice and there are merits both ways.
I do think there should be more council properties available for rent though but I suppose the bugbear is convincing Governments and Councils to go down that route. The current council owned property round here is managed by a housing association because councils fight shy of the hassle.

There should be a choice, there isn't much of a one now. Councl housing was a great idea, many other things though, the subsequent changes that have taken place since their conception, has somewhat skewed the merits of the idea. Originally built for families, they now seem largely the sole preserve of some would say the feckless , and single mums etc.

Back in the 70s, when life was much simpler and clearer, my dad would say it was a choice between, scrimp and scrape to buy your own house ( in other words don't spend every night in the pub or club) and be able to leave something for your kids, or live in a council house, live for the day ( spend every night in the club ) and have nothing to leave your kids. My dad bought his own house , but had no problem with those who chose the other option, as a Socialist he strongly believed in council housing, but also in the right of the working class to improve their lot as well, by aspiring to own their own property. In council estates in Blackhall in those days, you had a right mix as well, some riff raff who never worked and pit deputies on good wages who chose to live in a council house. In a mining village a council house was looked upon as better than a colliery house ( the terraced streets owned by the coal company, later the NCB)

The poor,single mums and the 'feckless' of the south-east are in a bigger queue for social housing mr horden, it's not their fault we joined the EU.

Hard left,greeny Brighton council have relocated 130 of their homeless in hotels in Eastbourne 20 miles away without asking EBC.What do you make of this mr horden ? Out of sight......?

And your problem with that is? Why would they have to ask EBC for permission to put them up in hotels?

So many,in the matter of a couple months,in less than a square mile?..why wouldn't you consult a neighbouring town's council first ffs!!

Even Jacob Rees- Mogg is having a pop at the model that Brighton council is mr horden..

And you bankrupt Croydon council.

In my humble view the lady’s mistake with council housing was not to replace what had been sold. Nothing wrong with people being allowed to buy their council house but we should have rebuilt 1 for 1.

I agree with you on that Mr I. The repercussions we see before us today. Great for the people who initially bought and then sold, but not much good after that for future generations. By all accounts the selling of council houses was an idea stolen from Labour, who had it in one of their manifestos in the mid 70s, but it either never got off the ground or they where slow out of the blocks on it, not sure which, but its true. Had they done so, I'm sure they would've back filled any housing stock sold off.

[quote="horden"][


There should be a choice, there isn't much of a one now. Councl housing was a great idea, many other things though, the subsequent changes that have taken place since their conception, has somewhat skewed the merits of the idea. Originally built for families, they now seem largely the sole preserve of some would say the feckless , and single mums etc.

thand places ink there is a stigma attached to council houses that somehow forcee those who can just about afford it to go down the buying route. when built these estates looked quite nice, clean and modern. however in some areas they have become the new slum areas and places to avoid living unless your choice is zero. the question must be how places got into the state they are in. councils, tennants or both.

Beer gardens open in April.
In the SUN so take it with a pinch of salt.
Forecast 14C next satday

Yippee only 46 sleeps to go!!!

Looks like the schools may be open from 8th March.
Total lunacy to open germ factories so soon.
At least close all schools then for 3 weeks and reopen on 1st April when most over 50 jabbed.
Reduce summer holidays by 3 weeks to make up for lost learning.

Any alcohol in them though?

There was a rumour going around in the industry that the gov may open pubs in April but not serve alcohol

Now what would be the point of that ?

After that it might be restaurants without food and swimming pools without water, wouldn't put anything past this government.

There's been a record number of alcohol related deaths in the past year,how many social drinkers of the past have crossed the line in lockdown.Just another problem the NHS faces in the future.

Can only speak for myself. I am a social drinker, but rarely drink in the house. Personally the lockdown has helped me, as my social drinking often led to binge drinking. The lockdown has given me a chance to order and try beers I would never have got to try under normal circumstances.IMO The worst thing they ever did in this country was all day opening , especially on a Sunday.