Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » A 2014 by-election in Lansley’s Cambs South would be a bat
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » A 2014 by-election in Lansley’s Cambs South would be a battle to relish – and there’s a reasonable chance it could happen
One of the big decisions that the coalition government has to take in the next few months is who should be the next UK EU Commissioner to the take up office in Brussels in the autumn. Lots of names have been mentioned and last week Ladbrokes opened a betting market.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
As for Lansely, is he a sufficiently serious politician? The man occupies the retirement-in-waiting post of Leader of the House of Commons, after a less than successful tenure as Secretary of State for Health. Appointing him might be seen as a profligate use of valuable patronage by the Prime Minister.
It should also be noted that under EU law, only a 'committed European' can be appointed to the post. It is thus illegal in theory (although probably not in practice) for a genuine Eurosceptic to serve as a Commissioner.
If the politics is too hard the safe move here would be to persuade Ashton to serve another term. Failing that surely there must be somebody in a country of 60 million who is right-wing, not obviously bonkers and not currently sitting as an MP for the Conservative Party?
A question: have the Lib Dems or Labour picked candidates for 2015 in CS yet?
Some solid and reassuring January figures from The Visa UK Consumer Expenditure Index compiled by Markit and based on aggregate spending on Visa payment cards held by consumers.
The data show consumers haven't been suffering from a post-Christmas hangover. Spending levels in January have continued to rise on both an annual and month-on-month basis. Growth rates are solid but not alarming.
Headline findings:
• Year-on-year spending rose solidly in January (+1.5%), following a slight increase on the year in December (+0.8%).
• Month-on-month consumer spending increased at the quickest rate since September 2012 in January (+1.8%) following a similar sixed reduction in December (-1.8%).
• Quarterly spending figures signalled that underlying expenditure was relatively unchanged in January (-0.1%), following a slight improvement in December (+0.2%).
• Non-seasonally adjusted year-on-year expenditure increased solidly through Online spending channels (+4.8%) and moderately in Face-to-Face and Mail/Telephone Order categories (+1.4% and +1.3%, respectively).
On a sectoral level, the growth in expenditure was broadbased with positive figures in five out of the eight sectors measured. Notable high growth was recorded in 'Hotels and Restaurants' (+10%) and 'Household Goods' (+5%) with the main faller being 'Food, Beverages and Tobacco' (-3.6%).
ONS showed a higher December Retail Sales figure (+6.1% annual, +2.6% monthly, both value) than anticipated by last month's Visa Index. A number of reasons may account for this. Visa measures a broader range of expenditure than ONS (the ONS equivalent would be the more 'buried' figure of 'Household Expenditure'); the two surveys use slightly different reference periods (ONS has a later cut off); and, Visa neither seasonally adjusts its figures nor takes account of the impact on shopping patterns of bank holidays falling on different days each year. Even though the two metrics are not directly comparable, they remain strongly correlated as demonstrated by various tracking charts in the Visa Report series.
Part of the recent inconsistency may be explained by Visa's January monthly growth of 1.8% offsetting an identical fall in their December Index. If phasing is the main reason for the difference then we might anticipate a lower ONS Retail Sales figure for January.
The overall picture, setting aside any difference arising from reference periods and seasonal adjustments, indicates continuing growth consistent with economic recovery as shown in other current economic data and surveys.
Yellow Box to follow.
“A cautionary note, however, is that spending volumes still remain down on pre-financial peaks, and sustained growth remains highly dependent on a reversal of the real-wage squeeze that has been evident in recent years.”
However, such caution is somewhat undermined by the summary conclusions in the main body of the report which states;
... expenditure growth continues to be threatened by relatively stagnant or falling real wages, though this constraint on spending appears to be easing in recent months.
Key questions therefore for PB Leftoids:
1. Is the fall in consumer spend on food attributable to growth in the market share of Food Banks?
2. What "cost of living" crisis?
The green levies and charges imposed by politicians on final prices have nothing to do with it, no way, not at all, never have; just like waving mergers through. Must be some sort of election in the offing.
"One of his proposals is to give parents the power to "call in" inspections at schools they think are failing.
Mr Miliband will say parents should be able to instigate school inspections when a "significant number" agree."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-26114419
Photo should end up as a caption contest at Guido or pb header.
PS If they're really floating Lansley it could be the tactic Obama uses when people don't want to confirm his nominees: Give them a disposible nominee to shoot down, then give them the person you really want. They can't shoot down two on the trot without looking obstructive.
The explanation for the apparent fall is that the composition of the work force has been changing with more lower paid, less productive workers. This has driven down average wages below inflation and made the productivity figures look bad too.
This explanation of the figures is much more consistent with both the level of consumption and the amount of deleveraging we have seen in household debt. In short the squeezed middle does not really exist except in the minds of the economically illiterate and the plain dishonest. In some cases these categories are not mutually exclusive of course.
The definition of optimism, Mike!
All the Ukip council seats are in north Cambridgeshire? - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambridgeshire_County_Council_election,_2013
I think it would be a Con hold so close to the general election.
Cameron has to act on the assumption that he will continue as PM after 2015 and that his planned renegotiation of the UK's relationship with the EU and the subsequent 2017 referendum will take place as promised.
This being the case, the appointment of a new EU Commissioner will be one of the most important personnel decisions Cameron will take this parliamentary term.
The new Commissioner will need to be someone who is fully behind the Cameron/Osborne/Hague renegotiation; who is trusted fully; has sound pairs of eyes and ears; and who has a track record of strong negotiating and diplomatic skills. This applies even though the formal and legal role of an Commissioner is to act on behalf of the EU rather than their appointing Member.
All this rules out a reappointment of Baroness Ashton, in spite of her success with the Syrian and Iranian negotiations. It probably also rules out Clegg as a successor, although Conservative party issues would probably be more of a decider here than trust or policy alignment.
Another issue may be the office of the appointee within the Commission. I would not be surprised if Osborne wanted to wrest responsibility for the Internal Market brief back off the French as a means of protecting UK interests, particularly in the City, but, given the 2015-17 renegotiation agenda, this may need to be a second priority to holding on to Ashton's role at Foreign Affairs. Short of getting hold of the Presidency, which appears well beyond Cameron's reach, the role of High Representative probably offers the UK government the most leverage in any renegotiation of membership process.
I think you are wrong to dismiss Lansley as a "failed politician". His reforms of the NHS, controversial and difficult though they were at the time, have now bedded in and perception of the success of his reforms is growing rapidly. With Cameron being a former protégé of Lansley the personal trust between the two will also be high. However, if Lansley has a weakness it is in his ability to manage the political fallout of complex and difficult negotiations. But then he won't be spearheading the renegotiations from within the Commission: that is Cameron and Hague's job.
LIAMT's point about Andrew Mitchell needing to clear the decks of outstanding litigation before he can be appointed is persuasive. As well as being lower down than Lansley on the No 10 'trust' list, he looks a potential successor to Lansley as Leader of the House than the new EU Commissioner.
All in all the shortening of the odds on Lansley makes sound sense and is a good spot.
I don't really buy this idea that they are all going to drop their protests and vote Labour in Lab/Con seats but still be all tactical in Con/Lib seats. The Labour vote at the next election will be less efficient than it was in 2010 with more wasted votes in seats like this.
In reply to Richard N on the last thread - yes, the Swiss were extensively briefed on the potential consequences, not least by business, who were of course strongly opposed. The UKIP-like SVP, who were behind the proposal, eschewed xenophobic arguments and focused on protecting jobs and wages, which undermined the business argument - the bosses want you to vote no so as to enable them to import more low-wage people to take your job, etc. They also stressed the urbanisation of the countryisde (Switzerland is of course much smaller than Britain) due to population growth, and whether for that reason or others the cities voted heavily "no" and the rural areas voted heavily "yes".
http://www.paddypower.com/bet/politics/other-politics/european-politics?ev_oc_grp_ids=1616833
That is a good blog article by David Smith.
I remember a few weeks ago I made a comment about an interviewee at a Durham (?) car parts factory visited by George Osborne, He was asked about the "cost of living crisis", dutifully made a few comments about rising prices and the difficulty of keeping up with the costs of living, then paused a moment and said: "But we have been well treated here, with a 3%, 4% and 4% pay rise over the last three years and a lot of increased overtime".
It was no surprise then when the most recent Economic Review published by the ONS (and referenced by David Smith) revealed that, in the manufacturing sector, productivity hasn't really fallen at all and that pay rises have more than kept place with inflation. If you are working for a manufacturer that is doing well (and the motor industry is an obvious example) then you are certainly surviving and doing much better than the 'burger flippers' and 'benefit scroungers'.**
This is an area you covered in previous posts, but it is good to see the granularity of data coming out from the ONS and various economic think tanks that supports this interpretation.
If manufacturers are benefitting then this should have an impact on voting the key Midlands marginals.
Maybe that is why Mr. Brooke has been appearing so smug and Dr. Palmer so downbeat these past few weeks?
[** inserted to damn you by association and thereby to stop you becoming "owned" by the PB Leftoids!]
In political terms you are probably right. But it might change the media narrative if used properly.
This is one of the great all-time PB comments.
All those people feeling that they are struggling to make ends meet each and every month are just making it up. They are, in fact, thriving. How very dare they not vote Tory!!!!
We know that vast numbers of public sector workers, for example, have been subject to nominal wage cuts never mind real terms' cuts.
I'm pretty sure that despite being told they are illiterate or dishonest for believing so there is a sizeable number of people for whom cost of living is a significant issue.
Covered on the pair with a small loss on Patterson now...
I think UKIP have a serious chance of Cambridge South if a by-election goes ahead there.
If the EU law requires its commissioners to be solely dedicated to 'the project' then it is not a democracy. Democracy requires that the people can from time to time choose something different. If the EU law requires no change of policy ever then that is a tacit admission that they cannot tolerate the people actually choosing their government's direction of travel.
Really, imagine if in some alternate universe Dave actually made Hannan the commissioner - well what grounds would they have to refuse this?
In reality the wages of those in work have kept up with inflation but the top ups they were getting in equity withdrawal and easy credit are no longer available.
Some people have lost well paying jobs of course and the increase in employment is too much biased towards the subsidised end with the result that in work benefits have cancelled out the reduction we ought to have seen with over 1m more people employed.
This is not a perfect scenario by any means. But given where we started it could have been worse.
It doesn't necessarily mean you shouldn't advocate for the constitution to be changed, and constitutions usually include a method for changing themselves , but in this case I suppose you'd be going against the oath if you advocated countries unilaterally ignoring the treaties they've signed, which some people of a British Eurosceptic persuasion seem to want.
http://www.heraldscotland.com/comment/columnists/let-us-sing-from-camerons-hymn-sheet-on-the-union.23365716
The Tories will also have to hope that Mr Carney will continue to accommodate the man who appointed him with regards to interest rates.
Be grateful you're not French. Industrial production sank 0.3% in December, worse than the 0.2% expected. Business sentiment also dropped marginally to 99 (against an expectation of a small rise).
The German current account balance was slightly smaller than expected - which is probably a marginal benefit to the periphery.
Finnish industrial production dropped in December, falling 2.2% from November. How much of this is due to Nokia is an interesting question.
Japanese consumer confidence also weakened unexpectedly, falling to 40.5. Despite massive money printing, Abenomics seems to be stalling.
Thanks for this clarification. So nothing actually that would stop a Eurosceptic staying within the law AND defending his principles.
Countries, towns, villages, etc. etc. etc., are just human constructs. And they will come and go over the millennia.
(For the record, I suspect that the UK will last longer than the EU. But I have no doubt that, over a sufficiently long timespan, they will both be gone.)
Perhaps a few names from the recent past might pass muster :
Michael Howard .. Michael Forsyth .. Gillian Shepard .. Virginia Bottomley
It's not the kind of market I'd like to build a comprehensive book on. Could easily be an outsider no bookies even thought to list.
http://www.lefigaro.fr/conjoncture/2014/02/10/20002-20140210ARTFIG00046-eurostat-jette-un-froid-sur-les-chiffres-officiels-du-deficit-en-grece.php
BTW does it have to wait until they're confirmed before it settles? Could be a while...
Longer-term, of course, labour market reforms lead to lower unemployment and faster economic growth. But politicians with long time horizons are rare. Hollande could be that man - but it does seem unlikely.
Of course, if Germany continues to be relatively strong, and Italy, Spain, and the Netherlands continue their recent improvements, France can put off reform for now. And, fortunately for the French, personal and debts are very modest, and their banks are (by and large) strong and under-levered. But I tend to agree with you that the future of the Euro rests on France.
The Paddy Power market just says "next EU commissioner after Catherine Ashton". That might imply confirmation required for settlement but I wouldnt be surprised to see them settle on the announcement of their candidate.
@Carlotta
Chris Smith was probably just super angry with the BBC for revealing the secret EU directive to flood Somerset.
F1: nice of Ecclestone to set a market rate for whistleblowing:
http://www.espn.co.uk/f1/motorsport/story/144787.html
Catch someone breaking a budget cap, get €1m. Or, tell the team you know and ask them for more.
For reference, two weeks of Schumacher's salary at Ferrari (about a decade ago) would come to around €1m.
Mr. Brooke, I find it hard to believe Greece or the eurozone generally would misreport figures or fail to follow fiscal guidelines. I'm sure there's no precedent for such a thing.
Mr. 1000, I must disagree. Certain identities, such as the English and French, are very old and firmly entrenched. Even if you disregard that sort of thing, the economic, cultural and demographic differences between the constituent parts of the eurozone (as well as recent history) make it abundantly clear it's a creation of folly. I concur with you that the EU will crumble to dust whilst the UK (perhaps in a smaller form) will remain.
And, of course, the UK/England will pass one day too. Unless we manage to avoid a Big Freeze or Big Crunch that's a certainty. But it's been a very resilient entity.
http://tinyurl.com/pqe9nsf
BTW Monica, how many sweaties have you phoned to persuade to stay in the Union?
Fold down all your cards who are not senior Conservatives - David Cameron has to be seen to be rewarding one of his own on this particular appointment. So farewell Nick Clegg, Baroness Ashton etc.
Fold down all your cards who are the least bit suspicious to your mainstream Eurosceptic. David Cameron cannot afford to be seen to be risking sending someone who would go native. Former members of the SDP, such as Andrew Lansley, are non-starters.
Fold down all your cards where the consequence would be an awkward by-election. Though I note the point upthread that there might not need to be a by-election for this appointment, given timings. This is important, so it needs to be investigated further.
Look very carefully at people who David Cameron might want out of the way or who he might well feel he owes something.
That seems to me to leave just three plausible candidates: Andrew Mitchell, David Davis and Liam Fox. I find it very hard to look past Andrew Mitchell.
"European commitment" seems vague enough to mean whatever anybody wants it to mean.
The EU institutions that decide who gets to be in the Commission are the heads of the member states and the EU parliament, which are both elected. If the voters vote for national governments and MEPs who want to dismantle the EU, they'll have no problem interpreting that to mean people who want to dismantle the EU can be Commissioners in the interim.
As it stands none of the heads of state want to dismantle the EU, and only a small minority of MEPs do, so it would be a bit surprising if they approved someone like that.
Take action to increase the frequency of flooding to deliver benefits locally or elsewhere,
(which may constitute an overall flood risk reduction, e.g. for habitat inundation). Note: This policy option involves a strategic increase in flooding in allocated areas, but is not intended to adversely affect the risk to individual properties.
http://www.tauntondeane.gov.uk/irj/go/km/docs/CouncilDocuments/TDBC/Documents/Forward Planning/Evidence Base/Parret Catchment Flood Management Plan.pdf
What the policy now is:
we will take action with others to store water or manage runoff in locations that provide overall flood risk reduction or environmental benefits.
By adopting this policy and redistributing water some areas will be subject to increased flooding while others will benefit from reduced flooding. The aim is to achieve a net overall benefit.
http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/static/documents/Leisure/_CFMP_Parrett_2012.pdf
Sounds like the same policy sugar coated - but contrary to what Chris Smith said on R4 planned increases in flooding are part of the Environment Agency plan.
Broxtowe voters may enjoy your latest 4-pager so much that they'll want to avoid electing you as MP so that you keep up the good work !!
Hhhmmm ....
CCHQ readers you can contact me via the website owner. ;-)
Some stats from latest BoE published figures This supports DavidL's claims that households have been deleveraging. Net Secured lending has risen but only in the last quarter of 2013, as up 'til then households were paying off more mortgage debt than they were in receipt of new lending. Even so the net rise of 1.9% over two years is minimal.
With unsecured lending the main change has been an offsetting shift from overdraft finance to credit card lending with very limited net impact. Personal loans have risen this year mainly due to increased finance for new car purchase. The net impact though is of a small reduction in overall unsecured lending.
More movement on the deposits side though. There has been much talk of consumption being financed by a reduction in the Savings Ratio, but although the BoE figures show movement of funds out of interesting bearing term accounts a very large proportion has gone to the more tax efficient ISA savings products rather than to consumption expenditure.
All in all these figures show a very healthy (almost too healthy) position in household finances.
"Cost of Living Crisis"! What cost of living crisis?
Con 9349 LD 8109 Lab 4648 UKIP 3999 Green 2054 Ind/Other 828
Just checking.
Actually, if I were a BOO Conservative, I would have thought Nick Clegg was the perfect candidate. You want to ensure the EU is held in as great a level of contempt as possible. David David would probably go native. Liam Fox is off to NATO. Andrew Mitchell is insufferable. Clegg would ensure nobody took the EU seriously. Plus it would mean that the LibDems were engaged in civil war (Lefties vs Orange Bookers) ahead of the next GE, increasing the chances of Tory gains from the Libs.
However, I may be over-thinking this :-)
http://www.heraldscotland.com/comment/columnists/forget-the-postcard-dave-its-time-to-pay-us-a-visit.23360160
I was actually quite taken aback when my intelligent-and-thoughtful-but-neutral friend delivered a devastating attack on Mr Cameron's speech last time I saw him for coffee. The most polite word he used was 'drivel'. If that is the impact it has had on him ...!
Or maybe it is just four pages of saying how very, very sorry you were for screwing up Britain last time?
That could seriously damage Conservative prospects in the south-west. Or, it could make things harder for Labour overall. Tricky to try and predict.
It would be a battle to relish only in terms of observing the scale of the collapse in the Lib Dem vote.
The same thing is now happening in the Thames Valley. The cries of anger and disgust on the BBC and Sky this morning is only yet a shadow of those further west, but it is rising now to cast a dark stain on this government. While some may forgive, they won't forget in a hurry.
(a) the government has been negligent
or
(b) climate change is real
Labour has been saying both (a) and (b), so they may be the biggest beneficiaries.
It will be interesting to see if there is a significant regional variation in the local elections this coming May. I suggest there will be, with the Tory position unchanged in London & SE and losing seats fairly heavily elsewhere.
For someone who was so abused on appointment I think she has a fair bit to be smug about now that her term is apparently coming to a close.
Still if it gives the haters a moment with their Kleenex then carry on..
"Of course, those Tories were incompetent and failed to do enough about potential floods. What's worse, those Tories and UKIP are in denial about climate change. That flood outside, that's clear and incontrovertible proof that global warming is real. If you want to get flooded again, vote Conservative or UKIP. If you want to be safe and happy, vote Labour."
Option (b) is more interesting. A greater acceptance of man-made climate change is still unlikely to lead to massive public support for low-carbon policies (etc) because of the global nature of the problem, and the reluctance of your average voter to take any personal pain to solve a wider problem. The desired response from government isn't more windmills, but better flood defences (regardless of whether that actually works).
Where it may get interesting is if the accusation can be made that this government has cut funding for schemes to mitigate the harmful impacts of climate change because of the extreme ideological positions of some Tory politicians who will not admit the climate is changing and therefore deprioritise spending to combat its impact. Provided there are no embarrassing skeletons in the closet, Labour should go with this line - there's clearly evidence of cuts to flood defence schemes, and accussing the Tories of being more interested in ideology than protecting people's homes is a tabloid-friendly message.