´óÏó´«Ã½

The Glass Box for Tuesday

Comments

1. At 04:48 PM on 02 Oct 2007, wrote:

   The BoE offers the high street banks money again today. They all refuse it - according to ´óÏó´«Ã½ Ceefax 'cos of the stigma of admitting they need it.

   So Barclays would rather risk going broke than admit it needs a loan.

   With Cittibank now acknowledging LOSSES in its Private Equity dealing not even the scape goating of Northern Rock and poor Americans will do.

   Even the markets in New York and London know that its their mis - pricing of their own assets that is in real crisis. Both are down today.

2. At 05:06 PM on 02 Oct 2007, An Orcadian wrote:

   Having heard the trailer, I seem to remember that the Tories announced entry into the ERM in the middle of the 1998? Labour conference.

   Hope you're going to ask John Major about that Eddie!

3. At 06:07 PM on 02 Oct 2007, Alun Thomas wrote:

   How does Al Fayed get away with his ludicrous comments about Prince Philip? Are there no libel or slander laws left in this country?

4. At 07:14 PM on 02 Oct 2007, Chris Ghoti wrote:

   Alun @ 3, the Royal family aren't allowed to do what anyone else would and sue him for defamation. It's always been safe to be horrible about them.

   If Prince Philip *were* in the business of bumping off people who annoy him, Fayed (no al, that's a self-elected title, like calling himself "sir" would be) surely wouldn't have been around making this fuss for ten years!

5. At 08:08 PM on 02 Oct 2007, Gillian wrote:

   I don't understand why so much time was given to John Major. Okay, he was a bit miffed, but he himself is making use of an opportunity to ''spin''. He's a politician. It's what they do. Have I missed the point?

6. At 09:02 PM on 02 Oct 2007, wrote:

   I was interested that your report on nuclear energy failed to mention that Gordon Brown's brother Andrew is a press officer and lobbyist for EDF energy.

   "In November 2005, EFD's Chief Executive, Vincent de Rivaz, told a parliamentary committee that new nuclear power stations could be built within ten years if planning and licensing laws are relaxed"

   And we all know who happens to be a medical adviser to COMARE, a government committee who reports of enviromental radiation.

   It's enough to make a conspiracy theorist foam at the mouth.

7. At 10:39 PM on 02 Oct 2007, Piper wrote:

   
   Alun @ 03

   Mr Al Fayed gets away with his ludicrous comments because "we" the British public SEEM to love a conspiracy theory rather than the plain, un-varnished truth

   I, for example, gave-up on the French after Agincourt. However, they are, in my opinion, neither liars, nor fools

   The French investigation of the "Accident" (call it what you you will) is, from all available evidence, entirely accurate and - for what it's worth, substantiated by later investigations including those of UK "Experts"

   I guess, simply put, Mr Al Fayed, cannot accept that his own organisation was/is responsible for the death of both his son and "Diana"

   Very sad... But, nonetheless, TRUE

   But hey, as ever, there has to be someone else to blame... Surely?

   Of more import, might be an investigation into the source of funding for Mr Al Fayed's acquisition of Harrod's... That REALLY is an un-resolved issue

   Even "Tiny Rowlands" didn't get that matter resolved. And, IT should have been

   Had Mr Al Fayed not acquired Harrods..?

   Who knows..?

8. At 02:51 AM on 03 Oct 2007, Alexandra Upton wrote:

   I thought it was useful to have John Major on tonight's programme to give an opposing view of the announcement of the troop withdrawal but did anyone else spot his glaring error ? He said something to effect that he welcomed the announcement in one respect that it was good to see our young men out of harms way. Good grief, does he still live in a world where he thinks only men serve in the armed forces. How infuriating and insulting for all those women who are toiling alongside the men in Iraq.

9. At 11:35 AM on 03 Oct 2007, Vyle Hernia wrote:

   Alexandra (8)

   He was probably using "Men" inclusively.

   10:43 and all's slow.

10. At 02:08 PM on 03 Oct 2007, wrote:

    I missed the name of your correspondent who clearly hadn't listened to Gordon Brown's statement.

    "We used to have 5,500, we're reducing that by 1,000 to 4,500 by Christmas" How does this translate in his head to "They've announced an extra 1,000 troops are going home" pray?

    Whilst I'm glad the troops are coming home, and hope the remaining 4,500 leave soon, I hope even more that the other victims of this "war" - the Iraqi's - manage to stop killing each other as well as killing our troops.

    To be honest, I don't care if it's electioneering or not - accusing Brown of electioneering before there's actually an election is pretty rich - it's a step the right way. Perhaps it should be announced in Parliament first, but announcing it whilst in Basra to the people that will be going home isn't entirely unreasonable is it?

11. At 03:18 PM on 09 Oct 2007, wrote:

    Eddie - When Gordon Brown said he wanted a government of all the talents we didn’t know that would include a section of George Osborne’s brain!

12. At 08:50 PM on 30 Oct 2007, Abigail Macdonald wrote:

    I was shocked to hear the report on Tuesday's PM that immigrants have taken the majority of newly-created jobs.

    This seems to me to be a prime example of skewed reporting.

    Immigrants have not "taken" jobs. They have applied for and been offered jobs by British employers, accepted them and presumably work at them.

    Rather than identifying "immigrants" as "culprits", perhaps your reporters would be better to investigate the reasons why employers offer jobs in such large numbers to immigrant workers; whether equal numbers of British citizens apply for such jobs, and if not, why not.