They had different hats for different ‘status’ of workers. My snood was orange because i was scum sent in from an agency – it was mooted (by a union steward i was on the line with) that the difference in colours was there to show that there was a disposable army of labour availible and therefore those on (pitifully waged) permanent positions had less job security and could be replaced at any time.
I never witnessed an undercutting of wages, just (alledged) passive intimidation of the existing workforce.

Do you know anyone who has ever worked in a meat packing factory?

Our people? That is such an UnBritish phrase…

A bit of context might help. The Daily Express was the UK’s best selling newspaper from the early 1930s to the early 1960s. The owner, Beaverbrook, was considered as a political king maker by the establishment, and its gossip columnists made and broke careers. Its significance in 20th century UK society should not be forgotten.

The paper’s decline was very rapid initially (and this was in the era when people actually purchased newspapers) and circulation has been stagnant throughout my adult life. Bizarrely, this implies that the old readers who pass away are being replaced.

For those who purchase the Daily Express title rather than copies, perhaps there is some deluded thought that they might restore it to its former glory and inherit the mantle of Beaverbrook. However, as Unity implies in his comment about _Yes, Prime Minister_, that is a vain conceit.

“[9] Er, about 50p each.”

OK. So somewhere along the line I made an error on a scale of a thousand…

I correct, that’s not a lot each, although it is a lot…

Mind you, I’m probably now qualified to be an Express journalist. That level of intellectual rigour is exactly what seems to be required.

Curiously, the Express was the only established national newspaper that wasn’t mentioned in the classic ‘Who reads the papers?’ sequence in Yes Prime Minister.

At the time that episode originally aired, the Indy could only have been going for six months t best and although the Daily Star has been going since 1978 it was still seen very much as a Northern tabloid and not part of the Fleet Street establishment.

Back in my days as a stereotypical Mail reader I could never see the point of the Express.

Tch! Typical sneaky Poles, eh? Coming over here, having (59) abortions on the NHS, when they should be doing their patriotic duty and placing their lives and fertility at risk with a good, HONEST “illegal ­backstreet ­termination” in their own country!

As usual, there’s one rule for the politically correct, and another for the gone mad.

But the Daily Express…What exactly is the point of it?

The latest conspiracy about Princess Di(ed)?

Not only is it venomous, but also it’s dull as shit.

To me it’s the equivalent of a bitter, splenetic, non-sweet, curtain-twitching old hag making up old bollocks about neighbours who kicked the bucket decades before and no-one gives a shit about anymore.

At least the Daily Mail’s type of bollocks, though also atrocious and posionous, is slightly juicier. I mean, if you have to read crap, make it some juicy crap.

Or, at least with the Daily Star you know what to expect, lots of tits and “vixens” and “babes”. Again, I despise it, it’s demeaning, cheap, etc but at least it’s got a point – it’s designed for masturbatory purposes.

As for The Sun…general populistic shit for a) the British equivalent of bible belters…b) chavs who don’t get he irony of being insulted day in day out by the very same paper they are reading c) people whose lives would be without purpose if they didn’t read about paedos all the time d) lynch mob vigilantes who like tits and war games on PSP2.

But the Daily Express…What exactly is the point of it?

The only difference is that I do not (or should not, thanks Mr Brown) pay if a bank has a shortfall, but I do pay towards the NHS. And if the £22 million is accurate, that’s a lot of money I personally have to pay…

To put that in perspective, the projected NHS budget for 2010/11 is a £102.3 billion making that a 0.02% default rate.

Jeebus, the banks would think all their Christmases has come at once if their level of defaults was that low.

There is obviously an issue with people having healthcare then not paying, but I can’t see this being a major concern for anyone with brain cells and the correct information.

This post was mentioned on Twitter by libcon: Now the Poles are nicking our abortions http://bit.ly/9Q8pby...

“The Department of Health is trying to recover £22 million from foreign nationals who have had NHS treatment in the past two years and not paid their bills.”
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/health/article7042750.ece

Likewise, I beleive that the costs of the abortion – which no doubt caused “outrage” – are claimed back from the Polish Govt. Utter non-starter unless you’re a bit racist/xenophobic.

the Excess is trying to find a gap in the market between the Wail and the Sin. There is no such gap.

Latest figures from ABCs suggest otherwise…
672,951 readers apparently.

Anyway, the Express has told an outright lie in this story (“thousands” of Poles rather than, ahem, 59); who do we complain to?

The basic problem is that the Excess is trying to find a gap in the market between the Wail and the Sin. There is no such gap.