politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Portsmouth South would make an interesting by-election but

System

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Portsmouth South would make an interesting by-election but Hancock, surely, will hang on in there

Lots of talk tonight about Portsmouth South. This is what happened at GE2010 pic.twitter.com/2J7dmAzNbF

Read the full story here

CarlottaVance

First!

Easterross

Does anyone seriously expect Mike Hancock to fall on Nick Clegg's sword? He has resisted all temptation to walk so far and frankly why should he. Not as if he is being promised a peerage. To suggest UKIP would have any chance is just fanciful. Its a straight Coalition battle.

Pulpstar

Seriously ?!!!!!!!!!

The Lib Dems might hold, Hancock SURELY will not if it is a by-election.

CarlottaVance

On topic - agree with OGH, Hancock will hang on until the GE, given how decisively and adroitly the Lib Dems manage sex scandals.....

JosiasJessop

The Lib Dems have behaved terribly in Portsmouth South.

That should effect the result of any by-election. Of course, it won't.

(As an aside: I got married in the constituency, on HMS Warrior)

dr_spyn

Sleezey broken Tories on the slide...not but upright, unbroken Lib Dems on the slide.

If Hancock hung on, despite his penchant for exotic 'researchers', inferences about his odd interest in navel matters, sexting, texting and Russia he must be one hell of a guy. Well smoke me a kipper.

As Peter Cook might have said, a man with a colourful political past, but not a political future.

MikeK

JosiasJessop said:

The Lib Dems have behaved terribly in Portsmouth South.

That should effect the result of any by-election. Of course, it won't.

(As an aside: I got married in the constituency, on HMS Warrior)

Did you dance the Hornpipe?

TOPPING

It's all part of the transition of the LDs from NOTA* to party in power.

They can't skulk along in the shadows conducting vile borderline racist mini-campaigns all over the country with behaviour to match by their MPs.

Where they go from here will be critical. I saw NC on the radio (!) talking to "White Dee" and thought he was impressive but he is no Hercules.

*note: calling the LDs a NOTA party does not mean that every vote they receive is a NOTA vote. It means that hitherto they have been the comfortable repository of those who dislike the main two parties and also politics itself and have had no strong political opinion but have wanted to participate nevertheless.

Talking to you Corporeal.

SimonStClare

Matt on Hancock.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/matt/

JosiasJessop

MikeK said:

JosiasJessop said:

The Lib Dems have behaved terribly in Portsmouth South.

That should effect the result of any by-election. Of course, it won't.

(As an aside: I got married in the constituency, on HMS Warrior)

Did you dance the Hornpipe?

Nah, I'm silly enough as it is, without adding (intended) silly dancing to my crimes ... ;-)

[Deleted User]

This will be a fascinating test tube environment for how local organisation plays against national trends and perceptions. The Yellows are in a world of deep doodoo overall with single figures in some polls - but have a pocket of local capability.

A 5k majority looks hard to break but that's only 7% of the electorate.

Mike - Pulpstar below is right re your headline. HANCOCK will not be hanging on, even if the LDs do.

FattyBolger

Test

[Deleted User]

Slightly strange day for me on taxes. Just paid my UK tax outstandings of 1k but also got an NL tax rebate of 8k - feels like I'm a conduit from the Dutch Treasury to No 11.

AlastairMeeks

In the absence of criminal charges, there won't be a by-election. But will Mike Hancock stand as an independent at the next general election? He appears to have a substantial personal standing.

JosiasJessop

antifrank said:

In the absence of criminal charges, there won't be a by-election. But will Mike Hancock stand as an independent at the next general election? He appears to have a substantial personal standing.

He'll probably be too ill:
http://order-order.com/2013/09/02/handycock-too-sick-for-court-but-not-portsmouth-council/

I can't describe how much I utterly despise him. Those texts - assuming they are genuine - show a worrying mix of genuine concern, and physical menace, towards a vulnerable constituent.

foxinsoxuk

HMS Warrior is a marvelous ship to visit, easily the equal to HMS Victory. The engine room is a fascinating piece of Victorian engineering.

A by election in Portsmouth South would be a very interesting one, but I cannot see it happening. Hancock has the backing of his local party, and in the absence of a criminal conviction I cannot see why he would resign. Retirement at the next election must surely be on the cards, and could the the LDs hold it then? Maybe one for the Jack W dozen?

Elevating him to the Lords would show a contempt for the upper house that would not be in keeping with HoL reform.

Incidentally, Stella Creasy was good on the subject of sexual harrassment in the workplace last night on Newsnight. I can see the issue being a vote winner for Labour. One thing that I notice in the polls is that women are more likely to list themselves as undecided than men. UKIP trails with women, and Tories do not do well either. The Rennard/Hancock issue does make the LDs look as if sexual harrassment in the workplace has been far too tolerated in their organisation.

I can see the issue being quite close to the experience of many women, and one Labour should be able to trash the other parties on with the support of a key Mumsnet demographic.

JosiasJessop said:

The Lib Dems have behaved terribly in Portsmouth South.

That should effect the result of any by-election. Of course, it won't.

(As an aside: I got married in the constituency, on HMS Warrior)

RodCrosby

When I were a lad, I was told guilt or innocence was determined by the courts.

Now it seems it is determined by mass hysteria and stalinist "reports".

foxinsoxuk

There is a lot of behaviour that is not criminal but very worthy of condemnation.

Has Hancock denied the texts and conversations in the report? Or does he think them acceptable?

They may be legal, but they are certainly seedy at best.

RodCrosby said:

When I were a lad, I was told guilt or innocence was determined by the courts.

Now it seems it is determined by mass hysteria and stalinist "reports".

JosiasJessop

RodCrosby said:

When I were a lad, I was told guilt or innocence was determined by the courts.

Now it seems it is determined by mass hysteria and stalinist "reports".

Are you saying the text messages are false?

Are you saying that their contents are acceptable for an MP?

Slackbladder

RodCrosby said:

When I were a lad, I was told guilt or innocence was determined by the courts.

Now it seems it is determined by mass hysteria and stalinist "reports".

When you were a lad, politicans would have resigned way before any of these scandals got to the point they are now.

Life_ina_market_town

RodCrosby said:

When I were a lad, I was told guilt or innocence was determined by the courts.

Now it seems it is determined by mass hysteria and stalinist "reports".

It is a worrying trend. What is an even more alarming development, however, is the tendency of successive governments to water down the rules of criminal evidence and procedure to secure more convictions, or to apply special rules of evidence and procedure to certain classes of case, such as sex, where there is a particularly strong ideological drive to increase the number of convictions.

Morris_Dancer

Good morning, everyone.

Coming so soon after the Rennard affair (which hasn't died down) it doesn't look good.

F1: some info on Kobayashi has emerged. He's apparently annoyed Ferrari by going to Caterham, and is driving for free in 2014.
http://www1.skysports.com/f1/news/24223/9128580/caterham-recruit-kamui-kobayashi-reveals-ferrari-wanted-him-to-stay-with-them

I hope he can do well. He's a good driver, and an entertaining one to watch.

JosiasJessop

Utterly agree about HMS Warrior - it's fascinating, and was a great place to get married. I was annoyed when they did not let me climb the rigging, though. ;-(

Labour will need to be careful about sexual harassment in the workplace. It's closely tied to harassment and bullying in general, and Labour have a very nasty track record in that regard.

From what went on in the treasury under Brown, Balls and Miliband, to Falkirk. Labour would be more likely to allow bullying and harassment than ban it ...

foxinsoxuk said:

HMS Warrior is a marvelous ship to visit, easily the equal to HMS Victory. The engine room is a fascinating piece of Victorian engineering.

A by election in Portsmouth South would be a very interesting one, but I cannot see it happening. Hancock has the backing of his local party, and in the absence of a criminal conviction I cannot see why he would resign. Retirement at the next election must surely be on the cards, and could the the LDs hold it then? Maybe one for the Jack W dozen?

Elevating him to the Lords would show a contempt for the upper house that would not be in keeping with HoL reform.

Incidentally, Stella Creasy was good on the subject of sexual harrassment in the workplace last night on Newsnight. I can see the issue being a vote winner for Labour. One thing that I notice in the polls is that women are more likely to list themselves as undecided than men. UKIP trails with women, and Tories do not do well either. The Rennard/Hancock issue does make the LDs look as if sexual harrassment in the workplace has been far too tolerated in their organisation.

I can see the issue being quite close to the experience of many women, and one Labour should be able to trash the other parties on with the support of a key Mumsnet demographic.

JosiasJessop said:

The Lib Dems have behaved terribly in Portsmouth South.

That should effect the result of any by-election. Of course, it won't.

(As an aside: I got married in the constituency, on HMS Warrior)

Tissue_Price

RodCrosby said:

When I were a lad, I was told guilt or innocence was determined by the courts.

Now it seems it is determined by mass hysteria and stalinist "reports".

So you were naive then and you're hyperbolic now.

Quincel

It depends if you mean criminal guilt or political guilt. The former still requires a jury, the latter never has.

Morris_Dancer

Man who has pension conditional on being nice about the EU says EU membership is very important for Britain: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-25851491

Millsy

How much of the Lib Dem support is for Hancock (who has been a candidate in the seat since 1983) and how much is the result of party loyalty or local street-pounding?

foxinsoxuk

I agree that sexual harrassment does form a part of the spectrum of workplace bullying and victimisation and the Brown/Balls/McBride saga does not put the Labour party in good light. However sexual harrassment is more personal than a lot of victimisation, and going by conversations with women of a variety of generations a very common experience. I can see that it is a vote winner with a key undecided demographic, better than harping on about toffs.

JosiasJessop said:

Utterly agree about HMS Warrior - it's fascinating, and was a great place to get married. I was annoyed when they did not let me climb the rigging, though. ;-(

Labour will need to be careful about sexual harassment in the workplace. It's closely tied to harassment and bullying in general, and Labour have a very nasty track record in that regard.

From what went on in the treasury under Brown, Balls and Miliband, to Falkirk. Labour would be more likely to allow bullying and harassment than ban it ...

foxinsoxuk said:

HMS Warrior is a marvelous ship to visit, easily the equal to HMS Victory. The engine room is a fascinating piece of Victorian engineering.

A by election in Portsmouth South would be a very interesting one, but I cannot see it happening. Hancock has the backing of his local party, and in the absence of a criminal conviction I cannot see why he would resign. Retirement at the next election must surely be on the cards, and could the the LDs hold it then? Maybe one for the Jack W dozen?

Elevating him to the Lords would show a contempt for the upper house that would not be in keeping with HoL reform.

Incidentally, Stella Creasy was good on the subject of sexual harrassment in the workplace last night on Newsnight. I can see the issue being a vote winner for Labour. One thing that I notice in the polls is that women are more likely to list themselves as undecided than men. UKIP trails with women, and Tories do not do well either. The Rennard/Hancock issue does make the LDs look as if sexual harrassment in the workplace has been far too tolerated in their organisation.

I can see the issue being quite close to the experience of many women, and one Labour should be able to trash the other parties on with the support of a key Mumsnet demographic.

JosiasJessop said:

The Lib Dems have behaved terribly in Portsmouth South.

That should effect the result of any by-election. Of course, it won't.

(As an aside: I got married in the constituency, on HMS Warrior)

another_richard

I see that Avery, having already included the Royal Mail pension fund assets as negative borrowing whilst ignoring Royal Mail pension liabilities, is now treating items from a cash flow statement as balance sheet.

Let us remember the government's borrowing plans:

"As a result of the measures I will announce today, public sector net borrowing will be: £149 billion this year, falling to £116 billion next year, then £89 billion in 2012-13, and then £60 billion in 2013-14. By 2014-15 borrowing reaches £37 billion, exactly half the amount forecast in the March Budget."

I'm offering evens that government borrowing is over £500bn for those five years. That's more than 10% higher than what Osborne promised.

Are the Osborne fans willing to put their money where their keyboards are or are they conceding that their hero has failed on his main target ?

Morris_Dancer

Mr. Richard, it's worth mentioning that the recession was worse than originally thought, and that the first half of the Parliament was affected significantly by the eurozone sovereign debt crisis.

Wulfrun_Phil

There won't be a by-election in Portsmouth South.

But what this does do is to badly hole the Lib Dems' chances at the GE in 2015. The outcome is far worse for them than if they had booted Hancock out of the party for good:
- If Hancock did end up standing as a Lib Dem, his positive incumbency boost would turn into a negative one. (And if they end up sticking by Hancock there could be national implications for the LDs as well).
- From the statement yesterday, the local Lib Dems are for now still standing by Hancock whatever has been foisted on them by the national party, so he's not going to be deselected any time soon. But assuming that Hancock does get replaced as the civil case eventually forces their hand in 2015, such further delay robs the LDs of an opportunity to groom an alternative candidate for the seat with next to no time left before the GE by then.
- As commented earlier, it's possible that a deselected Hancock could split the remaining LD vote by standing as an independent.
- The local LDs have themselves become implicated in their efforts to try and cover this up, by trying to boot it into the long grass from when it broke in 2010 until the pathetic attempts earlier this week to try and suppress publication of the QC's report. The mud may not stick only on Hancock.

The LDs have been taking some comfort from the responses to Lord Ashcroft's polling using the alternative VI prompt of "thinking specifically about your own constituency and the candidates who are likely to stand there", as demonstrating that they can still appeal to Lab tactical voters. In the case of Portsmouth South, they should be hoping that voters don't do such thinking.

JosiasJessop

another_richard said:

I see that Avery, having already included the Royal Mail pension fund assets as negative borrowing whilst ignoring Royal Mail pension liabilities, is now treating items from a cash flow statement as balance sheet.

Let us remember the government's borrowing plans:

"As a result of the measures I will announce today, public sector net borrowing will be: £149 billion this year, falling to £116 billion next year, then £89 billion in 2012-13, and then £60 billion in 2013-14. By 2014-15 borrowing reaches £37 billion, exactly half the amount forecast in the March Budget."

I'm offering evens that government borrowing is over £500bn for those five years. That's more than 10% higher than what Osborne promised.

Are the Osborne fans willing to put their money where their keyboards are or are they conceding that their hero has failed on his main target ?

It's almost as if the Eurozone crisis never happened ...

SquareRoot

another_richard said:

I see that Avery, having already included the Royal Mail pension fund assets as negative borrowing whilst ignoring Royal Mail pension liabilities, is now treating items from a cash flow statement as balance sheet.

Let us remember the government's borrowing plans:

"As a result of the measures I will announce today, public sector net borrowing will be: £149 billion this year, falling to £116 billion next year, then £89 billion in 2012-13, and then £60 billion in 2013-14. By 2014-15 borrowing reaches £37 billion, exactly half the amount forecast in the March Budget."

I'm offering evens that government borrowing is over £500bn for those five years. That's more than 10% higher than what Osborne promised.

Are the Osborne fans willing to put their money where their keyboards are or are they conceding that their hero has failed on his main target ?

£50 billion.. over 5 yrs= small change..

david_herdson

another_richard said:

I see that Avery, having already included the Royal Mail pension fund assets as negative borrowing whilst ignoring Royal Mail pension liabilities, is now treating items from a cash flow statement as balance sheet.

Let us remember the government's borrowing plans:

"As a result of the measures I will announce today, public sector net borrowing will be: £149 billion this year, falling to £116 billion next year, then £89 billion in 2012-13, and then £60 billion in 2013-14. By 2014-15 borrowing reaches £37 billion, exactly half the amount forecast in the March Budget."

I'm offering evens that government borrowing is over £500bn for those five years. That's more than 10% higher than what Osborne promised.

Are the Osborne fans willing to put their money where their keyboards are or are they conceding that their hero has failed on his main target ?

If you want to play that game, go and look at Labour's projections and assumption from 2006-8. Or are you saying the government should have cut more? Perhaps you'd criticise Osborne for under-predicting growth too. Stuff happens and economic prediction isn't an exact science. getting the big policy framework right is the important thing.

TGOHF

Has anyone seen any polling regarding tax returns and VI ?

Suspect a few voters will be filling in a tax return this year for the first time if they did not cancel child benefit.

Would explain why Cons getting no quick reward for economic rebound.

another_richard

Conservatives would be well advised not to place too much faith in falling unemployment as a vote winner.

What I think is of more relevance is increases in earnings.

Three million unemployed didn't stop Thatcher winning two election landslides because earnings for those in work were rising strongly at the time.

Similarly boasting about GDP rises etc wont impress people who are feeling poorer year on year. Instead its likely to make them angry that someone else is geting 'their share' of an improving economy.

The rise in employment may be linked to this fall in living standards as more people are forced into work, not out of choice but to make ends meet, eg people with second jobs or pensioners forced to delay retirement.

On a macroeconomic view increasing employment may also be linked with weak business investment and the collapse of productivity growth. And also the continued shift towards a low value added welfare consumerist society that began under Brown and continues under the Cameroons.

david_herdson

On topic, I wouldn't be so sanguine about the Lib Dems' chances in a by-election forced by a serious scandal. For all the local footsoldiery and alleged pledges, it'd be an excellent opportunity to give two fingers to the political establishment.

If the Lib Dems have any sense, they'll deselect Hancock for 2015 and aim to avoid any byelection, which ought to be possible. If he fights the seat at the GE, he ought to lose with the right campaign against him - and it would be against him.

Pulpstar

Morris_Dancer said:

Man who has pension conditional on being nice about the EU says EU membership is very important for Britain: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-25851491

Davos - the biggest jolly of the lot. Thought it would be a link to Mandelson when I clicked though

another_richard

And finally an interesting piece from Larry Elliott warning that we may be 'due' another world financial crisis next year:

http://www.theguardian.com/business/economics-blog/2014/jan/20/next-financial-crisis-here-soon-history

Likewise we will be 'due' another recession in around 2018.

The complacent assumptions that we have at leat 15 years steady growth to look forward to are very dangerous.

Morris_Dancer

Mr. Pulpstar, to be fair to Clegg I do suspect he's a true believer in the divinity of the EU.

Then again, he wanted us to join the eurozone too. I don't think he's dishonest, just endowed with all the judgement of a one-legged man applying to join the cast of Riverdance.

Carnyx

JosiasJessop said:

MikeK said:

JosiasJessop said:

The Lib Dems have behaved terribly in Portsmouth South.

That should effect the result of any by-election. Of course, it won't.

(As an aside: I got married in the constituency, on HMS Warrior)

Did you dance the Hornpipe?

Nah, I'm silly enough as it is, without adding (intended) silly dancing to my crimes ... ;-)

But getting married on the Warrior most certainly is not a silly idea. It's lovely and imaginative - especially for an engineer.

Pulpstar

One thing I don't get - how is Mike both a councillor and an MP ?

I thought you couldn't be both, certainly the chap I know running for MP will resign his position as councillor...

another_richard

david_herdson said:

another_richard said:

I see that Avery, having already included the Royal Mail pension fund assets as negative borrowing whilst ignoring Royal Mail pension liabilities, is now treating items from a cash flow statement as balance sheet.

Let us remember the government's borrowing plans:

"As a result of the measures I will announce today, public sector net borrowing will be: £149 billion this year, falling to £116 billion next year, then £89 billion in 2012-13, and then £60 billion in 2013-14. By 2014-15 borrowing reaches £37 billion, exactly half the amount forecast in the March Budget."

I'm offering evens that government borrowing is over £500bn for those five years. That's more than 10% higher than what Osborne promised.

Are the Osborne fans willing to put their money where their keyboards are or are they conceding that their hero has failed on his main target ?

If you want to play that game, go and look at Labour's projections and assumption from 2006-8. Or are you saying the government should have cut more? Perhaps you'd criticise Osborne for under-predicting growth too. Stuff happens and economic prediction isn't an exact science. getting the big policy framework right is the important thing.

It was me who first pointed out the increase in government borrowing of HALF A TRILLION between the budgets of 2008 and 2009.

And Osborne OVER-PREDICTED growth in his 2010 budget.

I think I'm being fair - I'm giving him his full five years as a comparison.

You can only judge someone by what he predicted and the actual outturn, that's what I'm doing.

And do you think the 'big policy framework' is being done right ? How much 'economic rebalancing' has occurred.

Now its work for me.

another_richard

JosiasJessop said:

another_richard said:

I see that Avery, having already included the Royal Mail pension fund assets as negative borrowing whilst ignoring Royal Mail pension liabilities, is now treating items from a cash flow statement as balance sheet.

Let us remember the government's borrowing plans:

"As a result of the measures I will announce today, public sector net borrowing will be: £149 billion this year, falling to £116 billion next year, then £89 billion in 2012-13, and then £60 billion in 2013-14. By 2014-15 borrowing reaches £37 billion, exactly half the amount forecast in the March Budget."

I'm offering evens that government borrowing is over £500bn for those five years. That's more than 10% higher than what Osborne promised.

Are the Osborne fans willing to put their money where their keyboards are or are they conceding that their hero has failed on his main target ?

It's almost as if the Eurozone crisis never happened ...

It was already happening when Osborne made his 2010 budget speech.

If you're saying he didn't take that into account then he's an incompetant.

Now stop being pathetic.

david_herdson

Speaking of by-elections, there is a serious one today, rather than the town council fare we're served most Thursdays:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cowdenbeath_by-election,_2014

It should be a good test of the extent to which Labour has recovered since its 2011 nadir. Other things to watch for will be the extent (if any) of Conservative and Lib Dem recovery, and how well UKIP poll.

Of those, the Conservatives have been enjoying a modest recovery in Scotland recently. Whether they'll be able to improve on their 7% with UKIP standing in the constituency is questionable. The Lib Dems, on the other hand, have been bumping badly along the bottom but their sub-4% poll in 2011 there was well down on previous comparable elections there. UKIP have struggled to gain much traction in Scotland but while polling nowhere near as well as England or Wales, have still been on the up recently. Anything top-side of 3% for them should be a good result; fourth place or better, very good in the context.

TOPPING

another_richard said:

JosiasJessop said:

another_richard said:

I see that Avery, having already included the Royal Mail pension fund assets as negative borrowing whilst ignoring Royal Mail pension liabilities, is now treating items from a cash flow statement as balance sheet.

Let us remember the government's borrowing plans:

"As a result of the measures I will announce today, public sector net borrowing will be: £149 billion this year, falling to £116 billion next year, then £89 billion in 2012-13, and then £60 billion in 2013-14. By 2014-15 borrowing reaches £37 billion, exactly half the amount forecast in the March Budget."

I'm offering evens that government borrowing is over £500bn for those five years. That's more than 10% higher than what Osborne promised.

Are the Osborne fans willing to put their money where their keyboards are or are they conceding that their hero has failed on his main target ?

It's almost as if the Eurozone crisis never happened ...

It was already happening when Osborne made his 2010 budget speech.

If you're saying he didn't take that into account then he's an incompetant.

Now stop being pathetic.

It's wood for trees isn't it. Of course he under-predicted this and over-predicted that and there may well be another recession in 2018 (despite of course your friend's NMBOB declaration).

But the direction of travel, as they say, is right and the electorate, as has been mentioned before, will begin to focus on this as GE2015 approaches. And, funnily enough, their renowned short-sightedness will benefit the Tories. They won't remember the details of how that recovery was brought about, the mood music will be Lab=economic basket case, Con=recovery.

You are also right about earnings but that will come.

Now off you go to help our GDP.

Pulpstar

david_herdson said:

Speaking of by-elections, there is a serious one today, rather than the town council fare we're served most Thursdays:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cowdenbeath_by-election,_2014

It should be a good test of the extent to which Labour has recovered since its 2011 nadir. Other things to watch for will be the extent (if any) of Conservative and Lib Dem recovery, and how well UKIP poll.

Of those, the Conservatives have been enjoying a modest recovery in Scotland recently. Whether they'll be able to improve on their 7% with UKIP standing in the constituency is questionable. The Lib Dems, on the other hand, have been bumping badly along the bottom but their sub-4% poll in 2011 there was well down on previous comparable elections there. UKIP have struggled to gain much traction in Scotland but while polling nowhere near as well as England or Wales, have still been on the up recently. Anything top-side of 3% for them should be a good result; fourth place or better, very good in the context.

Hmm

Labour 51
SNP 35
Con 5
Lib Dem 3
UKIP 3

Slackbladder

Remember all those times when people said crime would rise due to the cuts:

BBC Breaking News ‏@BBCBreaking 2 mins
Crimes against households and adults fell by 10% in England and Wales in year to September 2013, ONS survey shows http://bbc.in/1c6dqlj

TGOHF

Sky News Newsdesk ‏@SkyNewsBreak 5m

School league tables: 250,000 fewer children in England taught in failing secondary schools compared to 2010

DecrepitJohnL

Slackbladder said:

Remember all those times when people said crime would rise due to the cuts:

BBC Breaking News ‏@BBCBreaking 2 mins
Crimes against households and adults fell by 10% in England and Wales in year to September 2013, ONS survey shows http://bbc.in/1c6dqlj

Is that because more people are stuck indoors so they can't be mugged and their houses can't be burgled?

Carnyx

Pulpstar said:

david_herdson said:

Speaking of by-elections, there is a serious one today, rather than the town council fare we're served most Thursdays:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cowdenbeath_by-election,_2014

It should be a good test of the extent to which Labour has recovered since its 2011 nadir. Other things to watch for will be the extent (if any) of Conservative and Lib Dem recovery, and how well UKIP poll.

Of those, the Conservatives have been enjoying a modest recovery in Scotland recently. Whether they'll be able to improve on their 7% with UKIP standing in the constituency is questionable. The Lib Dems, on the other hand, have been bumping badly along the bottom but their sub-4% poll in 2011 there was well down on previous comparable elections there. UKIP have struggled to gain much traction in Scotland but while polling nowhere near as well as England or Wales, have still been on the up recently. Anything top-side of 3% for them should be a good result; fourth place or better, very good in the context.

Hmm

Labour 51
SNP 35
Con 5
Lib Dem 3
UKIP 3

That's a prediction I assume - in which case you're expecting a loss of about a fifth/quarter in the Tory and LD votes and a smaller drop in the SNP vote. But it is in Labour heartland with the candidate being a local Labour council leader and Mr Brown's reputed protege. I doubt it will be worth betting on this!

I would not be sure how to interpret any vote for UKIP at all given what UKIP has been doing in Glasgow of late - and the distinctive elements of the West Central Belt are, it's fair to say, not entirely replicated in most of the rest of Scotland.

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/home-news/ukip-chair-claims-glasgow-council-for-gays-catholics-communists-in-online-rant.23212831

JackW

Thanks to @JamesM @fitalass @Tissue_Price @Pulpstar and @RichardNabavi for their overnight suggestions of constituencies to be included in the ARSE 2015 General Election "JackW Dozen"

To recap I'm looking to add to the four seats already selected - Watford, Broxtowe, Northampton North and Ipswich - and I'm especially on the look out to include from England two northern Con/Lab marginals, one marginal London, one LibDem/Con marginal in the west and one Lab/Con marginal in the south.

Two marginal seats will also be allocated from both Wales and Scotland to make up the thirteen.

Thanks.

david_herdson

another_richard said:

And finally an interesting piece from Larry Elliott warning that we may be 'due' another world financial crisis next year:

http://www.theguardian.com/business/economics-blog/2014/jan/20/next-financial-crisis-here-soon-history

Likewise we will be 'due' another recession in around 2018.

The complacent assumptions that we have at leat 15 years steady growth to look forward to are very dangerous.

That really is a stupid article. Financial crises don't happen like peaks and troughs of sine waves but as a result of excessive systemic strain. It *might* be that there is another crisis soon but if there is, it'll be very different from all the other ones he quotes, which were caused by over-reaching and bubbles bursting; a crisis in the next two years is far more likely to be caused by a failure to adequately clear up the last one and a renewed outbreak of *the same* problems. Or China. That said, the warning against complacency is valid. We should always beware complacency.

SandraM

Pulpstar: not only is Hancock a Portsmouth City councillor as well as an MP but he was also a Hampshire County Councillor until 1997.

Richard_Tyndall

OT

This may have already been posted but this is a link to the annual Bill Gates letter where he refutes (very effectively in my view) some of the myths about aid and improving the lives those less fortunate than ourselves. Very well worth reading and certainly inspiring. It would be nice to see some of this used to counter the arguments about overseas aid being 'wasteful'

http://annualletter.gatesfoundation.org/?cid=bg_pt_ll0_012122/#section=home

Pulpstar

JackW said:

Thanks to @JamesM @fitalass @Tissue_Price @Pulpstar and @RichardNabavi for their overnight suggestions of constituencies to be included in the ARSE 2015 General Election "JackW Dozen"

To recap I'm looking to add to the four seats already selected - Watford, Broxtowe, Northampton North and Ipswich - and I'm especially on the look out to include from England two northern Con/Lab marginals, one marginal London, one LibDem/Con marginal in the west and one Lab/Con marginal in the south.

Two marginal seats will also be allocated from both Wales and Scotland to make up the thirteen.

Thanks.

Pudsey for a northern(ish) Con/Lab

david_herdson

JackW said:

Thanks to @JamesM @fitalass @Tissue_Price @Pulpstar and @RichardNabavi for their overnight suggestions of constituencies to be included in the ARSE 2015 General Election "JackW Dozen"

To recap I'm looking to add to the four seats already selected - Watford, Broxtowe, Northampton North and Ipswich - and I'm especially on the look out to include from England two northern Con/Lab marginals, one marginal London, one LibDem/Con marginal in the west and one Lab/Con marginal in the south.

Two marginal seats will also be allocated from both Wales and Scotland to make up the thirteen.

Thanks.

I nominate Morley and Outwood for one of the northern Con/Lab marginals. Perhaps one the other side of the Pennines might be appropriate for the other?

[Deleted User]

Look at this wonderful chart:

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/pollingobservatory/100256123/the-tories-are-edging-closer-to-defeat/

It shows two mirror images: Lab/Lib and Con/UKIP.

There is a lefty vote that Labour and the LibDems fight for. Labour are winning this hands down and the LDs very future looks at threat.

There is a righty vote that shows UKIP steadily chewing away at the Tory vote.

If Dave is to recover and stay in power he desperately needs both a reversal in the UKIP / Con picture AND in the lefty one.

Morris_Dancer

Mr. Herdson, if that's accepted it should also (perhaps) be considered a constituency of useful value in measuring UKIP's success. Balls had a majority of about 1,000 last time, and I think the UKIP vote was circa 6,000.

AlastairMeeks

@JackW It doesn't fit any of your profiles, but surely Norwich South should be in the mix somewhere? Or are you worried about an excessive East Anglian bias?

Crewe & Nantwich would be a good seat to include. Formerly fairly safe Labour, now with an incumbent Conservative with a 12% majority.

Pulpstar

Labour will win Pudsey by the way, Truswell had a strong personal vote from Lib Dems (On a long voting holiday) they will return to Labour now.

Stuart Andrew has incumbency however.

CON has more chance there than Morley surely though ?

Easterross

Morning Jack, I would suggest Argyll as a potential 4-way marginal in Scotland and either Stirling as a potential 3-way marginal now the sitting MP is retiring or if as I expect Alistair Darling announces his retirement after 18th September, Edinburgh SW.

TCPoliticalBetting

Is Hancock actually up for election in May?

In the local elections of 2010, Hancock (and wife) were re-elected as Councillors. Presumably they are standing again? Or maybe not if Mike Hancock is no longer a LD member? Or will he be standing as an independent?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portsmouth_Council_election,_2010

Pulpstar

antifrank said:

@JackW It doesn't fit any of your profiles, but surely Norwich South should be in the mix somewhere? Or are you worried about an excessive East Anglian bias?

Crewe & Nantwich would be a good seat to include. Formerly fairly safe Labour, now with an incumbent Conservative with a 12% majority.

Terrrrrrrrrrible night for the tories if Crewe goes...

Pulpstar

I can't see Crewe being anything other than a Conservative win tbh.

david_herdson

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Herdson, if that's accepted it should also (perhaps) be considered a constituency of useful value in measuring UKIP's success. Balls had a majority of about 1,000 last time, and I think the UKIP vote was circa 6,000.

UKIP finished fifth in M&O, behind the BNP (who kept their deposit). The Lib Dems however polled nearly 17% so there's quite a bit for Con, Lab and UKIP to squeeze.

That said, Pudsey (or any Con-held marginal) is probably a better choice for inclusion. Keighley is another - it's one of those bellweather seats that I think has only once since 1945 gone against the party to form the national government.

rcs1000

Richard_Tyndall said:

OT

This may have already been posted but this is a link to the annual Bill Gates letter where he refutes (very effectively in my view) some of the myths about aid and improving the lives those less fortunate than ourselves. Very well worth reading and certainly inspiring. It would be nice to see some of this used to counter the arguments about overseas aid being 'wasteful'

http://annualletter.gatesfoundation.org/?cid=bg_pt_ll0_012122/#section=home

wow. excellent letter

RichardNabavi

Lloyd Evans provided an extremely pithy summary of the 2015 election battleground in his PMQs sketch yesterday:

Miliband is running out of arguments. And today his attack boiled down to this.

‘Ok, rich-boy, you fixed the economy but I’m a still a better person than you.’

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2014/01/pmqs-sketch-miliband-begins-to-run-out-of-arguements/

CarlottaVance

Charles Moore singing Osborne's praises:

The top level of government isn’t riddled with personal hatred – thanks to Osborne

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2014/01/osborne-deserves-praise-for-ensuring-the-top-levels-of-government-arent-riddled-with-personal-hatred/

Richard_Tyndall

rcs1000 said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

OT


This may have already been posted but this is a link to the annual Bill Gates letter where he refutes (very effectively in my view) some of the myths about aid and improving the lives those less fortunate than ourselves. Very well worth reading and certainly inspiring. It would be nice to see some of this used to counter the arguments about overseas aid being 'wasteful'

http://annualletter.gatesfoundation.org/?cid=bg_pt_ll0_012122/#section=home

wow. excellent letter

Over the years he has slowly developed into one of my heroes. It is great to see someone of his stature and influence directly challenging and refuting the Malthusian paradigm of inevitable poverty for the majority of humanity.

AndyJS

david_herdson said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Herdson, if that's accepted it should also (perhaps) be considered a constituency of useful value in measuring UKIP's success. Balls had a majority of about 1,000 last time, and I think the UKIP vote was circa 6,000.

UKIP finished fifth in M&O, behind the BNP (who kept their deposit). The Lib Dems however polled nearly 17% so there's quite a bit for Con, Lab and UKIP to squeeze.

That said, Pudsey (or any Con-held marginal) is probably a better choice for inclusion. Keighley is another - it's one of those bellweather seats that I think has only once since 1945 gone against the party to form the national government.

Keighley was held by Labour in 1979 by 78 votes thanks to Bob Cryer's personal support, (although he wasn't able to hold on in 1983).

Pulpstar

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Herdson, if that's accepted it should also (perhaps) be considered a constituency of useful value in measuring UKIP's success. Balls had a majority of about 1,000 last time, and I think the UKIP vote was circa 6,000.

6000 ?????!!!!!!!

David Daniel UKIP 1,505

We're becoming as bad as an average pleb polled for previous VI here, UKIP were nowhere near 6000 in Mr Balls seat. 1505 votes, 3.1%.

There was a 3500 BNP vote however, that will dissipate I think probably to NOTA. Some to UKIP some to Labour, some to CON - but mainly to NOTA. A real rum choice if you are a Lib Dem in that seat, perhaps CON can have a lend us your vote to oust Balls campaign again ?
"You may want a Lib-Lab coalition but do you really want Ed Balls as CotE ?" "Only Conservatives can win here" "Vote conservative, keep Ed Balls hands off the till"

Or maybe UKIP - hold for Balls though as those messages will be split between UKIP and CON and he'll still get some Lib Dem votes (But not as many as other Labourites I reckon)

Morris_Dancer

Mr. Herdson, my memory must be playing tricks on me. I recall the BNP vote outweighing Balls' majority, but thought UKIP were ahead. A quick check on the old Wiki entirely agrees with you:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morley_and_Outwood_(UK_Parliament_constituency)

Edited extra bit: Mr. Pulpstar, you're quite right.

RodCrosby

Sky: Clegg declared Hancock case closed two years ago.
Seems Mr Hancock should be looking for an injunction also...

Pulpstar

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Herdson, my memory must be playing tricks on me. I recall the BNP vote outweighing Balls' majority, but thought UKIP were ahead. A quick check on the old Wiki entirely agrees with you:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morley_and_Outwood_(UK_Parliament_constituency)

UKIP are doing well so everyone misremembers them.

I think Keighley is a better choic than Pudsey now I look at it actually. But I think Labour take both Pudsey and Keighley personally...

Lennon

@JackW - It's slightly off-beam, but Brigg & Goole for a Northern Lab/Tory marginal which historically swings more than the average and likely to have a large UKIP vote?

Pulpstar

UKIP might have half a shot in Brigg and Goole... but I can see it being a Labour gain again with swing from Lib Dem to Labour and net Con peeling off to UKIP.

CarlottaVance

Labour List comment on the Wythenshawe short list:

All five are local. All five have been local councillors (4 are currently councillors). And four are women.

Not your average by-election sort list, when you look at it like that….

http://labourlist.org/2014/01/wythenshawe-and-sale-east-the-shortlist/

I guess there's a SPAD or two weeping into their latte.....

Morris_Dancer

F1: Williams reveals ant-eater nose:
http://www1.skysports.com/f1/news/12476/9129218/williams-release-first-front-on-shot-of-2014-f1-car-and-unveil-the-fw36-anteater-nose

JackW

Well done to all those who this morning have suggested seats for inclusion in the "JackW Dozen". Keep them coming please.

I'm off until later this afternoon but will review further nominations when I return.

Thanks again.

Pulpstar

What I want to know is when does the ludicrous price of 7/2 head out for a Conservative majority head out. If its still there come election week I'm just going to lay it with the remainder of my betfair bank.

MikeSmithson

JackW said:

Well done to all those who this morning have suggested seats for inclusion in the "JackW Dozen". Keep them coming please.

I'm off until later this afternoon but will review further nominations when I return.

Thanks again.

Permission to have rest of the morning off not granted

AndyJS

I think UKIP would have a good chance of winning Portsmouth South in a by-election which is why there probably won't be one. The Labour vote would be slightly higher than in Eastleigh last year which would probably make the difference.

I expect UKIP to top the poll in the whole of the Portsmouth council area in this year's Euro election (which is how the results are declared). Last time the result was as follows:

Con 27%
UKIP 19%
LD 16%
Green 11%
Lab 10%

See bottom of document:

http://www.parliament.uk/documents/commons/lib/research/rp2009/rp09-053.pdf

OblitusSumMe

rcs1000 said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

OT

This may have already been posted but this is a link to the annual Bill Gates letter where he refutes (very effectively in my view) some of the myths about aid and improving the lives those less fortunate than ourselves. Very well worth reading and certainly inspiring. It would be nice to see some of this used to counter the arguments about overseas aid being 'wasteful'

http://annualletter.gatesfoundation.org/?cid=bg_pt_ll0_012122/#section=home

wow. excellent letter

Agreed. I hope a few backbench Tory MPs will read it.

JackW

MikeSmithson said:

JackW said:

Well done to all those who this morning have suggested seats for inclusion in the "JackW Dozen". Keep them coming please.

I'm off until later this afternoon but will review further nominations when I return.

Thanks again.

Permission to have rest of the morning off not granted

LOL

Ok ... you may have until 11.00am when I expect Mrs JackW to be in full regalia for lunch in the smoke.

rcs1000

AndyJS said:

I think UKIP would have a good chance of winning Portsmouth South in a by-election which is why there probably won't be one. The Labour vote would be slightly higher than in Eastleigh last year which would probably make the difference.

I expect UKIP to top the poll in the whole of the Portsmouth council area in this year's Euro election (which is how the results are declared). Last time the result was as follows:

Con 27%
UKIP 19%
LD 16%
Green 11%
Lab 10%

See bottom of document:

http://www.parliament.uk/documents/commons/lib/research/rp2009/rp09-053.pdf

Personally, I think there won't be one because Mr Hancock is about as likely to resign as I am to become Pope.

Pulpstar

AndyJS said:

I think UKIP would have a good chance of winning Portsmouth South in a by-election which is why there probably won't be one. The Labour vote would be slightly higher than in Eastleigh last year which would probably make the difference.

I expect UKIP to top the poll in the whole of the Portsmouth council area in this year's Euro election (which is how the results are declared). Last time the result was as follows:

Con 27%
UKIP 19%
LD 16%
Green 11%
Lab 10%

See bottom of document:

http://www.parliament.uk/documents/commons/lib/research/rp2009/rp09-053.pdf

Can you see yourself trudging off to the polling booth and voting Lib Dem right now if you're a Labour voter ?

Mind you they did in Eastleigh. Problem is that was just Huhne, who is gone. Rennardgate is hanging over the Lib Dems like a bad smell at the moment and Hancock's behaviour looks to be vile and reprehensible. Hancock will be gone so that will be fine, but Rennard remains. Not sure they will get so many Labour tactical votes at the moment...

volcanopete

antifrank said:

@JackW It doesn't fit any of your profiles, but surely Norwich South should be in the mix somewhere? Or are you worried about an excessive East Anglian bias?

The only interesting question in Norwich South is the size of Labour's majority in 2015.UEA is in the constituency and the current L/D incumbent 310 majority disappeared over tuition fees.They face a fight with the Greens for 2nd place.The Greens' rise has come to an end too with Labour picking back seats from them and regaining control of the council.Ukip have no base and only fielded one candidate in last year's county elections in Norwich South.(Norwich North is different).
As well as the east bias Norwich South would also be very boring.

isam

JackW said:

Thanks to @JamesM @fitalass @Tissue_Price @Pulpstar and @RichardNabavi for their overnight suggestions of constituencies to be included in the ARSE 2015 General Election "JackW Dozen"

To recap I'm looking to add to the four seats already selected - Watford, Broxtowe, Northampton North and Ipswich - and I'm especially on the look out to include from England two northern Con/Lab marginals, one marginal London, one LibDem/Con marginal in the west and one Lab/Con marginal in the south.

Two marginal seats will also be allocated from both Wales and Scotland to make up the thirteen.

Thanks.

A southern LabCon marginal is Thurrock,and ukip also have a good chance there iMO

Sean_F

RodCrosby said:

Sky: Clegg declared Hancock case closed two years ago.
Seems Mr Hancock should be looking for an injunction also...

Behaviour can be immoral, without being criminal. Hancock's behaviour seems to fall into that category.

isam

Pulpstar said:

AndyJS said:

I think UKIP would have a good chance of winning Portsmouth South in a by-election which is why there probably won't be one. The Labour vote would be slightly higher than in Eastleigh last year which would probably make the difference.

I expect UKIP to top the poll in the whole of the Portsmouth council area in this year's Euro election (which is how the results are declared). Last time the result was as follows:

Con 27%
UKIP 19%
LD 16%
Green 11%
Lab 10%

See bottom of document:

http://www.parliament.uk/documents/commons/lib/research/rp2009/rp09-053.pdf

Can you see yourself trudging off to the polling booth and voting Lib Dem right now if you're a Labour voter ?

Mind you they did in Eastleigh. Problem is that was just Huhne, who is gone. Rennardgate is hanging over the Lib Dems like a bad smell at the moment and Hancock's behaviour looks to be vile and reprehensible. Hancock will be gone so that will be fine, but Rennard remains. Not sure they will get so many Labour tactical votes at the moment...

I would have thought swapping driving points has nothing on sexual harassment when it comes to losing votes

AndyJS

Just occurred to me that the 2009 Euro election results by council area (or constituency in Scotland) could prove to be a usual indicator of how and where UKIP might do [well] at the general election in 2015 if they're heading for around 15% (which I accept is very much on the high side at present). There would of course be some differences in the distribution of UKIP support between 2009 and 2015, but arguably not to a huge extent.

Sean_F

another_richard said:

Conservatives would be well advised not to place too much faith in falling unemployment as a vote winner.

What I think is of more relevance is increases in earnings.

Three million unemployed didn't stop Thatcher winning two election landslides because earnings for those in work were rising strongly at the time.

Similarly boasting about GDP rises etc wont impress people who are feeling poorer year on year. Instead its likely to make them angry that someone else is geting 'their share' of an improving economy.

The rise in employment may be linked to this fall in living standards as more people are forced into work, not out of choice but to make ends meet, eg people with second jobs or pensioners forced to delay retirement.

On a macroeconomic view increasing employment may also be linked with weak business investment and the collapse of productivity growth. And also the continued shift towards a low value added welfare consumerist society that began under Brown and continues under the Cameroons.

The fall in unemployment/rise in employment is unequivocally good news.

The rate of employment has risen by 1.6% since May 2010. That's equivalent to 500,000 more people in work.

isam

Farage is the guest of the day on Daily Politics, Priti Patel also a guest... He should try and convince her to defect

Sean_F

Jack W, Hampstead and Kilburn is an interesting London marginal, as it's a three way split. Although if the Lib Dem vote plummets here, it's probably safe for Labour.

Scrapheap_as_was

Just when you think the Lib Dems week is hitting bottom...

http://order-order.com/2014/01/23/police-called-to-mike-hancocks-house/

AndyJS

isam said:

Farage is the guest of the day on Daily Politics, Priti Patel also a guest... He should try and convince her to defect

Her father contested a seat for UKIP in Hertsmere in last year's local elections.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/ukip/10028858/Priti-Patels-Ukip-candidate-father-says-Ukip-is-not-racist-party.html

philiph

Lifted from Guido, so don't know if it is accurate:

UKIP have found the perfect man to run in the Wythenshawe and Sale East by-election. John Bickley is ex-Labour, grew up in the constituency, is a self-made businessman and the son of a trade unionist

Richard_Tyndall

philiph said:

Lifted from Guido, so don't know if it is accurate:

UKIP have found the perfect man to run in the Wythenshawe and Sale East by-election. John Bickley is ex-Labour, grew up in the constituency, is a self-made businessman and the son of a trade unionist

Yep it is accurate.

Richard_Tyndall

OblitusSumMe said:

rcs1000 said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

OT

This may have already been posted but this is a link to the annual Bill Gates letter where he refutes (very effectively in my view) some of the myths about aid and improving the lives those less fortunate than ourselves. Very well worth reading and certainly inspiring. It would be nice to see some of this used to counter the arguments about overseas aid being 'wasteful'

http://annualletter.gatesfoundation.org/?cid=bg_pt_ll0_012122/#section=home

wow. excellent letter

Agreed. I hope a few backbench Tory MPs will read it.

There are plenty of us in UKIP who are hoping our own leadership will read it as well.