Nope - as Hague says:
'now that the treaty is going to become European law and is going to enter into force, that means that a referendum can no longer prevent the creation of the President of the European Council...'
The referendum was about the treaty, it was always said in the 'cast-iron' guarantee that if the treaty had been ratified then they couldn't do anything, there is no 'U-turn' or reneging here, I believe it is in fact, worse than that
Maybe they have honestly been scuppered by the final ratification, or, as I theorise, this was the plan all along, promising a referendum in the Sun, of all places, to get the backing of the eurosceptic majority in this country two years ago - while knowing full well they would never have to go through with such a dangerous idea
Now time will tell how this pans out - he will suffer an initial backlash for seemingly 'betraying' people, but what he will be betting on is having made enough anti-EU noise to keep the support of the voters, while not actually having to do anything but make a few vague sentiments about 'repatriating powers' - clever, huh?
Cameron just wants power, anyone who actually bought that he had any intention of giving us a referendum on the treaty was being played for a fool
Maybe people WANT a new TV
Apparently the digital switchover in the North-West, which will affect 7.2 million people, may cause 'chaos' as TVs are needlessly thrown away
I remember talking about this back in 2007, when a YouGov survey revealed that 57% of people believed that the government had provided 'insuffiecient or no information' about the switchover, and 83% did not know when the switch would be in their region (survey at YouGov archives, Society - 2007)
Neither do I in fact...but does it really matter, because in 2007 '80% of adults [had] digital television in their home'
So while a majority don't have a clue about how and when (like me), they are already completely covered and already watch digital - surely all that matters is that they have digital
The fear is that people will throw away a perfectly good tv when they could just buy a set-top box
In the past year in Cumbria, 50,000 TVs wee recycled - 'This represents an increase of nearly 70 per cent compared to same period last year.' (so that's an extra 20,500 TVs), in the south west they had an increase of just under 40,000 TVs - so we can say 60,000 extra TVs were recycled
Of the ones in Cumbria, 30,000 could have been converted - so that's at least ten thousand TVs that would have been recycled anyway, curiously the Mail do not report how many could have been saved in the South-West
So we have 20,000 'wasted' TVs reported - is that a bad amount? Does that indicate that people are confused, after adverts every five minutes saying 'all you need is a set-top box' for what, five years?
I happened to throw away a convertible (?) TV last year, it even had a digi-box on it, the reason I got rid of it? - because it was crap and we got a new LCD, it was damaged and of no use to anyone, but this would've been counted as a TV that could have received digital and was 'needlessly thrown away' - plug it in and you would throw it away too
And when the switchover happens, would you not expect a few people to think, 'time to update the TV' - maybe they don't actually want a box on their old TV and decided to get a new one - I can't honestly believe little old ladies haven't had it drilled into their skulls that they don't need a new TV, I've never met anyone who thought they need a new one - but I know plenty who bought a new one - a little upswing in dumping TVs is surely expected
It could also be explained by the chucking of bedroom tvs - I have a little old sony, I have no intention of upgrading it - would you seriously go out and get 3 or 4 boxes for every tv in the house? No, I'd just buy a new one, it's 200 quid either way - I'm not surprised if a few of those get chucked out (mine isn't btw, it can be put to other use)
I can't find good figures for the populations of the TV regions, but you can assume there are at least 1 million households in the South-West and Cumbria combined, so that's 60,000 extra TVs thrown away - 6% of households threw away more TVs than the previous year, at a ridiculously conservative guess, and assuming they were all compatible (and how many TVs are there in the regions, let alone houses)
Is that such a catastrophe?
The Mail really do need to stop trying so hard
More BBC controversy - they attacked the Queen!! (again!!1!1!!)
Miranda Hart, on HIGNFY, described the Queen and the DoE as 'that Greek twit and his Kraut wife'
ooh, nasty racist jibe there - which in fairness it is, stinks of hypocrisy after they pulled that silly Hobnob joke doesn't it?
Only, the Mail left something out until a bit further down the story (after the outrage comments...)
At a Buckingham Palace event in honour of Indian president Pratibha Patil, Philip said to businessman Atul Patel: 'There's a lot of your family here tonight.'
Miss Hart joked: 'There is no place for racism in the modern world and the sooner that Greek twit and his Kraut wife realise it, the better.'
Now, does that not make a teeny bit more sense? It's satire - I am not foolish enough to believe the writers at the Mail actually think it's offensive in any way, but if anyone actually found that offensive they need a humour-rectomy
It's not actually racist, so it doesn't become an inconsistent piece of handling or 'double standards', as the Mail conclude, once again they wilfully mislead their readers in their attacks on the Beeb
There are of course some that feel that the Queen is out-of-bounds for humour - fortunately most people are not annoying royalists
...only Rebecca Adlington is granted such status