Lord Duckhunter

Whcih is why the Portuguese police went so hard on the McCann's. They did make a right balls up of the investigation, but the McCann's and media line seemed to be "how dare they suspect us". I have noticed a marked difference in the treatment of this family compared to McCann's by the media. All the ex jail bird Grandad and Grandmothers boyfriend "interviwed" and a general nod and wink . The most likely outcome will be a family member or friend and they maybe "wrong uns", but it's heartbreaking. I keep drumming it into my kids not to accept lifts from friends/collagues of mine or my Mrs' friends or work mates. It's a really sad state of affairs, but kids are wary of strangers they have never met before, but most of the time they will know their attacker in some way or other. Look at Huntly, that was their teaching asst's bloke. Have you noticed the difference in the media's treatment of this family with the McCann's.

My oldest wanted a Man U/Wigan ticket and as I was off I said I would ring the TO for him. I was all ready to spend ages and ages getting the engaged tone or not being able to get through, like last year. Got through stright away and sorted tickets out by 9.08am. I dont know whether people haven't realised they are on sale , Man U being a sky game, or more season tickets holders meaning less queues , but I was surprised how easy it was compared to previous years. One of the reasons I got a S/T despite having to miss about 6/7 games a season, was to aviod hours and hours trying to get tickets for big games. It's not been the case with the Man U game, which I find a bit strange.

If I had the chance to impress a potential employer, by working in one of the schemes I would jump at the chance. I could also go into interviews telling the interviwer that I had joined one of these schemes whilst unemployed, and personally I think that would give me an advantage over some body who just sat on their arse picking up their dole.

How does working for your state handout demean people?

If used correctly these sort of schemes can benefit both employers and employees, but like anything it can be abused and that's when the problems start. From an employers prospective you can get a feel for someone and whether you would employ them full time. I used to use agencies like this. I would request staff and then cream off the best ones to work permanently.It's so costly to employ and then get rid of useless layabouts. The problem obviously comes when employers are using this as cheap labour, and have no intention of taking people on. My opinion is this is counter productive. I would rather pay a higher wage and get a committed and dedicated member of staff ( and we're only talking min wage levels, not massive £'s) , than keep having to retrain loads of different bods sent down by the dole office. I would also look more favourable on someone who had been on one of these schemes, than someone who had sat on their backsides picking up their dole. It would have a bearing on any recruitment decisions I made. What do the employees get from it? 3 things in my opinion; It looks better on their CV, they get something to get up to do and will keep them out of a downward spiral (which can happen) and they also get a chance (however remote) to impress someone. We haven't recruited full time people for a number of years, but I took a guy on for 3 months fixed term to do a job for me. He was fantastic, hardworking, reliable, keen and a decent guy. I persuaded the top brass to keep him on and offer him a F/T contract, even though that was never the intention.I did not want him walking out and felt he could add real value to our business. That could happen with these schemes.

Clegg and the Lib/Dems are talking Pony yet again, with this tit for tat approach to boundray reform. The Government put a set of proposals to parliament and whipped their MP's to vote for it. I cant see how that is breaking the coalition agreement as MP's individual votes are not in the gift of any party leader. MP's are perfectly free to defy the whip even if the proposal was in the manifesto. It is up to the party whether they deselect backbench MP's who do so, and up to the Electorate whethere their voting pattern means re election if they stand again. What is not possible is for members of the Govenrment to vote down a Government measure. They are either sacked or they resign. This is what happened to junior members of the Government who voted against Lords reform. Therefore Cameron needs to bring forward the boundray changes and Clegg needs to act in the same manner Cameron did with Lords reform. That is; whip his MP's to vote for it (however half hearted) and all members of the Government need to vote for it,be sacked, or resign (Angie Bray was sacked as PPS and Conor Burns resigned for voting against house of Lords reform) . If Clegg, Cable or anyone else votes against boundrey changes, they will have to leave the Government. Their backbench MP's are free to vote how they want, but Government members are not. That has always been the case over many years and over Government's of every colour .This was certainly the case with Lords reform, and Cameron needs to spell this out to Clegg and grow a pair.

Spot on. Our youngsters are being conned. They are leaving uni with huge debts and terrible job prospects. When I went to school only the very brightest went to uni, and therefore it was funded by and large by the tax payer. Now it is just a extension of school and kids that should be working are being brainwashed into going to uni. It maybe a good laugh and **** up, but it's a pretty expensive one.

The Lib/Dems knew that it is impossible to send nearly 50% of students to uni and not raise fees. They did not for one minute believe that they would be in Government so signed these stupid pledges knowing that they could appear "principled" and gain lots of votes in the Uni towns and Cities. They tried to play politics with a serious issue and ended up getting their fingers burnt.

I'm sticking up for MP's that stand by their principles and dont change them in a rush to the "centre ground", whether left or right. Perhaps you could explain the "nutty right". Who are these charactors and what are some of their nutty right policies?

Some people need reminding that the Lib/Dems lost seats in the last election and are polling rock bottom at the moment. The proposed bill is also a dogs breakfast of a bill, that appears to be worked out on the back of a fag packet. They have been found out. They fight Tory seats as a right leaning party and Labour ones leaning to the left. Had they been in coalition with Labour, the exact same politicans would be following completely different policies, they are unprincipled and only interested in power. I'm sure we'll see a 1970's type election return for them in 2 years time. I did find the post "the nutty right of the tory party are not honourable people who prefer ideology and want cameron to follow their agenda rather than appeal to the centre ground." rather funny. The poster seems to say that abandoning your ideology and giving up your agenda, to appeal to the middle ground is somehow honourable. Whereas following your ideology, sticking by your pricicples and wanting the PM to follow you, is somehow dishonourable. I suppose in solentstars eyes, people like Tony Benn are not honourable but Tony Blair was? Personaly I would rather there were more MP's that stick to their agenda and try to get the PM to follow it, rather than the lemming like rush based on focus groups, we've had the past 20 years.

I disagree. He needed to gain the confidence of the markets. By paying of 25% of the deficit and sticking to a plan, he’s kept interest rates low. He’s now using those low rates to inject some stimulus into the economy.

He would have had one, just wasn't sensible to announce you have one. As Alistar Darling said in an interview with the Economist, "If you announce a plan but also say you have a stand-by plan, you might as well throw your first plan away."

Southampton have every right to be pleased with their signing of Crystal Palace's Nathaniel Clyne - positive statement of intent. @philmcnulty

It's the plan B, that Labour said he didn't have.

We're in the same boat, really struggling at the moment.The Mrs went back to uni to follow her dream of being a midwife so we only had one wage coming in for the past 3 years. We're just lucky that our mortgage is so cheap, I dread to think what would happen if it wasn't. We've just cut back on nights out ect, she's qualified now, so fingers crossed she get a job on decent money. It'll take a couple of years to repay the credit cards that have helped get us through.

They really have some ****ing idiots amongst their support. This was posted on another forum. "We have some fantastic trialists at the club atm, I would be ecstatic if we could sign them all + make up the rest of the squad with accademy players. McLeod (22 league goals last year) and Luke Rodgers (100+ goals in 300 fl appearences) upfront, Gillet and Lloyd Sam on the wings, Brian Howard and Ashley Harris in CM, Harley at left back, Magri and Webster at CB, and Dumbuya at right fall back/right wing back... MINUS 10, WHO GIVES A ****, WE'RE SUPER POMPEY, AND WE'RE GOING UP! It may not even be -10 , but both Scum and Leeds have proved that it's possible to up near the top after a deduction". I dont know if this has been posted, but here's the run down on their trialists. http://pompeypages.com/2012/07/16/the-full-low-down-on-pompeys-trialists/ I love this bit; "With over 300 appearances in the Football League and over 100 goals to his name, the 30-year-old Englishman, who is a former strike-partner of Thierry Henry, is a proven goalscorer and could front Pompey’s strike-force next season if the trial goes well.Although Rodgers has a slightly dodgy past, with a criminal record for hitting a 16-year-old girl with a firework, causing a disturbance in Nottingham city centre after a night out with his Notts County team-mates, and assaulting Hartlepool defender Chris Westwood"

i dont see much differance between kill the pompey scum and what they sing to each other . Or what about the german bomber song so beloved by english supporters . 20 odd years ago i was up north on king billys day and watched the parade , the pubs were open all day (this was before all day opening ) and they were packed with orange men . They were playing their flutes and drums ect and singing their songs in the pubs , all the songs were obviously offensive and about slaughtering catholics ,but i dont think many of them meant anything by it , it was just a **** up . I got talking to a bar man and he was a catholic , his take on it was , they have filled my till they can sing what they like . I dont think any of them really wanted to kill anyone as it would have interfered with their singing and drinking and it was certainly a memorable and enjoyable day and night for me . I have heard some pretty bad things at football over the years but most stuff is just banter

"TOO FAR and too fast" is a meaningless Labour slogan. Andrew Neil monstered Rachel Reeves over this on The Daily Politics. His question "if 1.5% of GDP is too far, what is the right %." All she did was waffle and bluster. He also pointed out that if they acceptted cuts were necessary, why have they oppossed every cut so far in this parliament including cuts to family benefit for millionaires.

I couldn't give a monkeys whether DD was in the TA, SAS, SBS or Boy Scouts. He talks more sense than those upper class private educated *** ts Cameron, Osborne, Balls and Milliband. Him and AJ should be leading the 2 parties imo, and the sandal wearers should have Tim Farron.

Contrast Aly McCoist's statement just released with clowns like Appy, Clotterill, Birch, Grant and other assorted bell ringers. "I fully accept the decision of the SFL today and thank them for allowing us into the SFL. "Clearly, starting again from the bottom league is not ideal and makes the task of rebuilding Rangers a longer one but the SFL was placed in an impossible situation and I respect its decision. "I fully supported the fans views that starting again in Division 3 maintains the sporting integrity that the SPL clubs were so keen on." ****ing hell, there's not one Skate who could match the dignity of McCoist.

Anybody who doesn't think we need deep spending cuts is living in cloud cuckoo. Our present spending levels are unsustainable. Not one of our major parties is being honest and the public are not prepared to accept any cuts in living standards despite the obvious hole we're in. We are just passing the debt down to future generations. Government spending is 50% higher in real terms than it was 10 years ago, the cut in expenditure in 2011-12 is just 1.5% of GDP. I read an article that chilled me to the bone. Our debt is at about 75 per cent of GDP. But if public sector pension liabilities are included, the private finance initiative is included and the guarantees given to the banking sector were ever called upon, it would rise to more than 240 per cent. It's Skate economics. Our political leaders are the Peter Storrie's, never telling us the truth and and carrying on spending someone elses money (ours).And the public are the Blue Few, putting our head in the sand and trying to convince ourselves that it really is sustainable.

The exit without a CVA was the vehicle used to punish Leeds -15. Boscombe got -15 for that and an extra 2 for multiple admins. It makes the Skates punishment seem very very lenient, for what is basically the same offense. It seems that having a CVA, but not paying it gets you a 5 point deduction over not having one, and past admins are not taken into account.

You posted that the Mail was for Hitler AGAINST our country, where is your proof of that, because the above isn't it.

I look forward to seeing your proof of the Mail's support of Hitler AGAINST our Country.

How does that work with drug dealers, surely they show no income but are loaded.