If UKIP were secretly working for Ed Miliband, would they be doing anything differently?
I sometimes find myself wondering if the Cameroons are secretly working for Ed Miliband. They certainly seem committed to doing everything they can to see him in No 10 after the next GE.
I am seriously think the best Liberal strategy now is to cut and run - pull the plug on the Coalition, sack Clegg and Danny and put a social democrat in charge. They have nothing left to lose.
Edit: re tuition fees/Nick Clegg "lying".
"It was a pledge made with the best of intentions – but we should not have made a promise we were not absolutely sure we could deliver. I shouldn't have committed to a policy that was so expensive when there was no money around. Not least when the most likely way we would end up in government was in coalition with Labour or the Conservatives who were both committed to put fees up."
That seems to sum it up quite well for me. He was shooting off his mouth because he became over-excited. Then the cold, harsh reality of government revealed itself to him.
Topping, the political reality is that for his voter base they see it as an abject betray and they aren't going to be budged from that. If Clegg didn't understand that then he deserves the whupping his party is getting.
I sometimes find myself wondering if the Cameroons are secretly working for Ed Miliband. They certainly seem committed to doing everything they can to see him in No 10 after the next GE.
What do you think they should do differently?
A genuine question. People often say stuff like that, but are remarkably coy about what exactly they would do differently.
Mr. Divvie, the Scots are defined by nationality, not race.
I'm very concerned that the possibility of Scotsmen being on the UK side of the negotiating table. If it comes to that, we'd have a morally indefensible situation that could be permanently detrimental to the UK.
Happily, it is at the outer edge of realistic possibilities (requires a Yes win, then Labour to win an outright majority without any provision to prevent the aforementioned crazy situation). If Yes win I suspect the Conservatives will do much better south of the border.
The General Election's timing could be pretty awful, though. Imagine a Labour Government (perhaps contingent upon Scottish MPs for the majority). Could we really have Scots both sides of the negotiating table? It would be absolutely indefensible.
Any deal would have to be passed by the House of Commons which, of course, will have a large majority of English MPs representing English constituencies. They can always vote for RON (Re-Open Negotiations) if they are not happy with the deal negotiated.
Secondly, I really think that it is unthinkable that Scottish electors will send MPs to Westminster at the 2015GE if the vote is YES for independence. Scottish electors will have chosen in the referendum to be represented by their MSPs at Holyrood, and there would be no further need for them to send MPs to Westminster.
I would expect that legislation would be passed before the GE in 2015 excluding MPs that represent Scottish constituencies from the Commons. Anything else would be absurd.
Mr. Divvie, the Scots are defined by nationality, not race.
I'm very concerned that the possibility of Scotsmen being on the UK side of the negotiating table. If it comes to that, we'd have a morally indefensible situation that could be permanently detrimental to the UK.
Happily, it is at the outer edge of realistic possibilities (requires a Yes win, then Labour to win an outright majority without any provision to prevent the aforementioned crazy situation). If Yes win I suspect the Conservatives will do much better south of the border.
If we have a situation of a 'YES' win, then a labour win, but without a majority excluding Scottish seats, then that would be a very difficult situation.
Topping, the political reality is that for his voter base they see it as an abject betray and they aren't going to be budged from that. If Clegg didn't understand that then he deserves the whupping his party is getting.
Fair enough. The LD voters were as naive as Nick Clegg. Also understandable.
Mr. Me, that would clearly be common sense. In the same way an English Parliament or English votes for English laws is common sense. I lack faith in politicians, although your comment about a non-Scottish majority does seem plausible.
I'm not sure that any of the parties can really be pleased with this result. Of course it's a solid win for Labour as expected, and by all accounts they ran a good campaign with a good candidate. However, the very low turnout implies that Mike Kane was over-egging it when he said that "the people of Wythenshawe and Sale East have sent a very clear message they want a government to stand up for us all - a one-nation Labour government.". The message is more that they can't really be bothered.
UKIP's performance was, in itself, very good, but they somewhat blew it by messing up the expectations game, making a good performance look poor. It would be interesting to know where their voters came from - did they make much progress amongst former Labour voters?
The Conservative performance was poor, but not a big surprise.
As for the the LibDems, I imagine they didn't try terribly hard. Again it would be interesting to know where their vote went.
So Labour got a "solid win" after a "good campaign" with a "good candidate". In the meantime, no sign of life from the "poor" Tories or Lib Dems and UKIP "messing it up".
Labour should be pleased. Not sure what more they could have done in February. If anything low turnout provided UKIP with a golden opportunity.
Labour received enough votes (13,000) to have won the seat in the 2010 GE, even though the overall turnout was nearly halved.
A great result for the Can't Be Arsed Party last night!
(Actually, an even better result for the I Can Only Be Arsed If You Stick A Postal Vote Under My Nose - Then Come And Collect It From Me Party.)
Utterly dire for the LibDems. Without the Eastleigh result to cling onto, their Parliamentary fortunes would be peering into the box marked "apocalyptic". Clegg has to go. Somebody new has to come out fighting with a clear message that people are prepared to at least listen to; they have turned deaf on Clegg.
But there is no great groundswell of excitement about a Labour victory either. You have to think that with the right leader, the LibDems could start appealing to the Sensible Left. Continually claiming they have been date-raped by the Tories isn't a message that people are listening to; they need to go for Labour's jugular.
Just shows the dangers of making it a crime to offend religious sensibilities. Religion is a belief system and deserves to be held up to the same debate and scrutiny as any other.
Even France managed to grow 0.3% in Q4 meaning that they did not have a technical recession. Italy managed its first growth since 2011 all 0.1% of it. Greece, however, continues to nose dive and its economy is now as small as it was a decade ago.
Overall a return to growth in the EZ is good news for our exporters and should help exports make a positive contribution (if only by being less bad) in the early part of this year. I am still fairly stunned by the BoE forecast of 3.4% for this year though.
Mr. Divvie, the Scots are defined by nationality, not race.
I'm glad you accept therefore that Daily Telegraph blathering about 'anti English racism' is exactly that. However ethnicity doesn't refer exclusively (or even at all) to race.
I sometimes find myself wondering if the Cameroons are secretly working for Ed Miliband. They certainly seem committed to doing everything they can to see him in No 10 after the next GE.
What do you think they should do differently?
A genuine question. People often say stuff like that, but are remarkably coy about what exactly they would do differently.
They should say clearly what they would like to repatriate from the EU. If they were sufficiently muscular about it, they would eat a lot into UKIP's vote. But that would mean being genuine tough with our EU buddies, and Cameron doesn't want to frighten the horses.
That was a seriously underwhelming performance by UKIP after all the bluster.
Grow up and read the result properly.
Wasn`t there talk of them taking the seat at the start?Looks like they struggled into second place.You would have expected them to do better on a low turnout.
No there wasn't talk of ukip winning the seat at the start, I'd be surprised if you could find any. There also wasnt a prediction of 30% of the vote from Nigel Farage as Lucy Powell said... where on earth did she get that from?
Share of vote up 500%, actual votes up 300%, 5th to 2nd in a seat they could not win. Ashcroft only under estimated by 2%! Personally háppy with that, the papers are all saying its a great result for ukip, I fear it's only LibDem and Labour a spinners that are trying to paint another picture
If the Scots vote to end the Union it will be "a pity" but not "a disaster".
I suspect most south of the border will shrug their shoulders and think "oh well, if that's what they feel..." Then it will be time to get on with the divorce -with little sentiment or sympathy for those who brought it about.
Labour's recession was almost as great an impact on GDP as Scottish separation would be - we survived one, we'll certainly survive another.
Mr. Divvie, the Scots are defined by nationality, not race.
I'm glad you accept therefore that Daily Telegraph blathering about 'anti English racism' is exactly that. However ethnicity doesn't refer exclusively (or even at all) to race.
Aren't ethnicity and race both socio-cultural constructs to create communities of (alleged) common descent? I accept both are different to national identity, but race and ethnicity seem highly related. Ethnic groups just seem like subsets of racial ones.
"It was a pledge made with the best of intentions – but we should not have made a promise we were not absolutely sure we could deliver. I shouldn't have committed to a policy that was so expensive when there was no money around. Not least when the most likely way we would end up in government was in coalition with Labour or the Conservatives who were both committed to put fees up."
That seems to sum it up quite well for me. He was shooting off his mouth because he became over-excited. Then the cold, harsh reality of government revealed itself to him.
When both Labour and the Conservatives are saying A and the LibDems then say B, they have EITHER given up any expectation of ever being in power and are just saying what the voters want to hear, knowing you will never be found out OR they are political idiots. Neither of these options paints the LibDems in the best light...
I sometimes find myself wondering if the Cameroons are secretly working for Ed Miliband. They certainly seem committed to doing everything they can to see him in No 10 after the next GE.
What do you think they should do differently?
A genuine question. People often say stuff like that, but are remarkably coy about what exactly they would do differently.
They should say clearly what they would like to repatriate from the EU. If they were sufficiently muscular about it, they would eat a lot into UKIP's vote. But that would mean being genuine tough with our EU buddies, and Cameron doesn't want to frighten the horses.
There's a reason why they haven't done that. It would either totally disappoint their supporters or collapse into BOO.
I sometimes find myself wondering if the Cameroons are secretly working for Ed Miliband. They certainly seem committed to doing everything they can to see him in No 10 after the next GE.
What do you think they should do differently?
A genuine question. People often say stuff like that, but are remarkably coy about what exactly they would do differently.
Forget UKIP and remember the centre vote got them into Downing St.
They should say clearly what they would like to repatriate from the EU. If they were sufficiently muscular about it, they would eat a lot into UKIP's vote. But that would mean being genuine tough with our EU buddies, and Cameron doesn't want to frighten the horses.
No, irrespective of what they said, it would just invite a shower of scorn from all sides, with the Europhiles saying that what they wanted was completely impossible, and the Europhobes agreeing that it was impossible and also saying it wasn't enough anyway. Sounds like an excellent way to lose support, not win more support.
As I have pointed out before, we shouldn't be starting from here, but that's not Cameron's fault.
Mr. Divvie, the Scots are defined by nationality, not race.
I'm glad you accept therefore that Daily Telegraph blathering about 'anti English racism' is exactly that. However ethnicity doesn't refer exclusively (or even at all) to race.
Aren't ethnicity and race both socio-cultural constructs to create communities of (alleged) common descent? I accept both are different to national identity, but race and ethnicity seem highly related. Ethnic groups just seem like subsets of racial ones.
The terms are deeply intertwined, and certainly not objective measures (much like 'nation', 'state', 'country' and 'people'). My starting point was that describing someone as ethnically obsessed in this context didn't really have anything to do with race.
Labour's recession was almost as great an impact on GDP as Scottish separation would be - we survived one, we'll certainly survive another.
PB Tory says 'Labour recession' wasn't a disaster. You heard it here first folks.
The Labour recession was chiefly due to the Scottish banking disaster. The fact that it didn't become a national disaster was due to the benevolence and generosity of the Union.
I'm not sure that any of the parties can really be pleased with this result. Of course it's a solid win for Labour as expected, and by all accounts they ran a good campaign with a good candidate. However, the very low turnout implies that Mike Kane was over-egging it when he said that "the people of Wythenshawe and Sale East have sent a very clear message they want a government to stand up for us all - a one-nation Labour government.". The message is more that they can't really be bothered.
UKIP's performance was, in itself, very good, but they somewhat blew it by messing up the expectations game, making a good performance look poor. It would be interesting to know where their voters came from - did they make much progress amongst former Labour voters?
The Conservative performance was poor, but not a big surprise.
As for the the LibDems, I imagine they didn't try terribly hard. Again it would be interesting to know where their vote went.
Who messed up the expectations? Mike Smithson kept saying that 2nd wasn't good enough etc, but that was to distract from the Lib Dem embarrassment...
Matthew Goodwin (@GoodwinMJ) 14/02/2014 08:32 Also worth noting what Farage told me on #Ukip result pre by-election: anything around 10% he'd worry, over 15% happy, over 20% delighted.
No, irrespective of what they said, it would just invite a shower of scorn from all sides, with the Europhiles saying that what they wanted was completely impossible, and the Europhobes agreeing that it was impossible and also saying it wasn't enough anyway. Sounds like an excellent way to lose support, not win more support.
This is a cop out of an argument. Whether or not you get attacked is irrelevant. What matters is if those attacks have resonance for your potential voters. And those attacks do have resonance because it's pretty pathetic of the Tories to say "we'll fix the EU situation by renegotiating stuff" but then refuse to say what stuff. How can anyone judge whether it will actually fix the situation sufficiently if you won't say what you're aiming to do? "Trust in your betters" doesn't play any more, but that's what we're expected to do.
Labour's recession was almost as great an impact on GDP as Scottish separation would be - we survived one, we'll certainly survive another.
PB Tory says 'Labour recession' wasn't a disaster. You heard it here first folks.
The Labour recession was chiefly due the Scottish banking disaster. The fact that it didn't become a national disaster was due to the benevolence and generosity of the Union.
The lexicography of Unionism: UK riots, Irish Troubles, Scottish banks and now, apparently, the English pound.
Regarding Clegg and his divorce from LibDem voters, I stand by my earlier accusation that he actively lied. Guardian article in November 2010 (from leading LD cheerleader Nick Watt btw) is very clear that whilst Clegg was campaigning hard on fees he had already secretly agreed to bin the policy at the first opportunity.
This is why the LibDems have had such a battering. Clegg is a liar. His party protest loudly against various things they morally object to then loyally trot through the government lobby. Whereas Tory MPs protest and vote against the government in large numbers on repeated occasions. The MPs most loyal to Tory policies smashing the disabled, the poor, students etc are LibDems. Disagree we me as you like, this is what their former voters say when asked why they will never again vote for them.
I've posted this before but I think that voters will have to be registered individually from May 2014 for postal votes. Declarations from householders of voter numbers will no longer be enough, if I;ve grasped the new rules correctly. Proof of identity via National Insurance numbers etc will be needed.
It's not perfect, but its better than the current system, surely.
This is a cop out of an argument. Whether or not you get attacked is irrelevant. What matters is if those attacks have resonance for your potential voters. And those attacks do have resonance because it's pretty pathetic of the Tories to say "we'll fix the EU situation by renegotiating stuff" but then refuse to say what stuff. How can anyone judge whether it will actually fix the situation sufficiently if you won't say what you're aiming to do? "Trust in your betters" doesn't play any more, but that's what we're expected to do.
I'm just pointing out that it wouldn't work, in purely electoral terms, as a means of gaining support.
Does anyone know what the eventual result of this was?
At Glenrothes in 2008, the neighbouring seat to Gordon Brown’s at Kirkcaldy, there was a fourfold increase in postal ballots and Labour’s opponents demanded to see the marked official register which showed whether individuals had voted or not. Unbelievably, the Sheriff ’s Clerk’s Office in Kirkcaldy had to explain, after five months, that the register had ‘gone missing’.
IIUC they recreated the marked register from the original ballots, after which presumably the skulduggery everybody was hoping for failed to materialize, or we'd have heard about it.
IIRC the authorities also wrote a report about the losing of the marked register, which concluded that they should be more careful in future, and try to avoid leaving important electoral documents in a basement in a bag that looked similar to some rubbish that they were throwing out.
Mr. Divvie, the Scots are defined by nationality, not race.
I'm glad you accept therefore that Daily Telegraph blathering about 'anti English racism' is exactly that. However ethnicity doesn't refer exclusively (or even at all) to race.
Aren't ethnicity and race both socio-cultural constructs to create communities of (alleged) common descent? I accept both are different to national identity, but race and ethnicity seem highly related. Ethnic groups just seem like subsets of racial ones.
The terms are deeply intertwined, and certainly not objective measures (much like 'nation', 'state', 'country' and 'people'). My starting point was that describing someone as ethnically obsessed in this context didn't really have anything to do with race.
That's fair enough. I was just pointing out that if you have English ethnicity (as opposed to national identity) that means you're white. Of course, you can have Yoruba or Punjabi ethnicity and be as English as any white person in terms of nationality and national identity, which is what's important.
Labour's recession was almost as great an impact on GDP as Scottish separation would be - we survived one, we'll certainly survive another.
PB Tory says 'Labour recession' wasn't a disaster. You heard it here first folks.
The Labour recession was chiefly due the Scottish banking disaster. The fact that it didn't become a national disaster was due to the benevolence and generosity of the Union.
The lexicography of Unionism: UK riots, Irish Troubles, Scottish banks and now, apparently, the English pound.
You forget
Britain's Andy Murray wins and Scotland's Andy Murray loses.
Though if Andy Robinson was still Scotland coach I'd have no problems with Scottish Rugby fans describing their team as Englishman led Scottish Rugby team.
If I was to be cheeky, I would dispute Mike's comment that there are no prizes for coming second. There are - you get your deposit back.
Well I suppose that technically you could come second whilst still getting below 5%, but it would be an pretty unusual set of circumstances. (Manchester Central 2012 came pretty close of course)
It's possible but I don't think it's ever happened. The Haltemprice and Howden election in 2008(?) is another near-miss. The required level was 12.5% until (I think) the early 1980s, which would produce more instances, especially with more parties on the scene these days.
Labour's recession was almost as great an impact on GDP as Scottish separation would be - we survived one, we'll certainly survive another.
PB Tory says 'Labour recession' wasn't a disaster. You heard it here first folks.
The Labour recession was chiefly due the Scottish banking disaster. The fact that it didn't become a national disaster was due to the benevolence and generosity of the Union.
The lexicography of Unionism: UK riots, Irish Troubles, Scottish banks and now, apparently, the English pound.
"It was a pledge made with the best of intentions – but we should not have made a promise we were not absolutely sure we could deliver. I shouldn't have committed to a policy that was so expensive when there was no money around. Not least when the most likely way we would end up in government was in coalition with Labour or the Conservatives who were both committed to put fees up."
That seems to sum it up quite well for me. He was shooting off his mouth because he became over-excited. Then the cold, harsh reality of government revealed itself to him.
When both Labour and the Conservatives are saying A and the LibDems then say B, they have EITHER given up any expectation of ever being in power and are just saying what the voters want to hear, knowing you will never be found out OR they are political idiots. Neither of these options paints the LibDems in the best light...
I know. It's exquisite isn't it.
Look, a protest party has to start somewhere. We know the LDs pre-election had a bunch of off the spectrum bonkers lefty whackjob policies.
Fine.
They allowed the NOTAs to put a tick there and feel good about their saving planet tendencies.
But government is a different kettle of chickienobs. And the LDs are finding out just how different and that's fine also. They will emerge a more mature party with more mature policies and a more mature attitude to power. And as a result, possibly, a greater chance of achieving that power (within a coalition context).
But you are half right. They are getting punished by their ostrich-like supporters. It is a shame as there is a real chance to move politics forward. But it seems even reformers and LD-ers are determined to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
Overall a return to growth in the EZ is good news for our exporters and should help exports make a positive contribution (if only by being less bad) in the early part of this year. I am still fairly stunned by the BoE forecast of 3.4% for this year though.
One way we could achieve 3.4% growth next year would be with quarterly growth rates of 1.0%, 0.9%, 0.8% and 0.7% in each quarter in that order.
That would compare with last years quarterly growth rates of 0.5%, 0.8%, 0.8% and 0.7%. So looked at in this way it would only require a modest acceleration from last year's quarterly growth rates.
However, if the floods put a dent into the first quarter's growth figures that will have a disproportionate impact on the growth figure for the year as a whole. If we reverse the quarterly growth figures I posit for 2014, to be 0.7%, 0.8%, 0.9% and 1.0% for Q4, then although the 2014Q4 GDP figures will be identical in both cases, the different shape of growth through the year means that the 2014 growth figure would be +3.1% in the second case.
This is part 37 in an occasional series of posts on why you should not pay too much attention to the GDP figures.
That's fair enough. I was just pointing out that if you have English ethnicity (as opposed to national identity) that means you're white.
Does it? What if your genes include 13th century Moor or 18th century Lascar? I'm pretty sure Cliff Richard, if he cares about these things, would consider himself ethnically English.
Labour's recession was almost as great an impact on GDP as Scottish separation would be - we survived one, we'll certainly survive another.
PB Tory says 'Labour recession' wasn't a disaster. You heard it here first folks.
The Labour recession was chiefly due the Scottish banking disaster. The fact that it didn't become a national disaster was due to the benevolence and generosity of the Union.
The lexicography of Unionism: UK riots, Irish Troubles, Scottish banks and now, apparently, the English pound.
You forget
Britain's Andy Murray wins and Scotland's Andy Murray loses.
Though if Andy Robinson was still Scotland coach I'd have no problems with Scottish Rugby fans describing their team as Englishman led Scottish Rugby team.
Fckn hell, now you've made me nostalgic for Andy Robinson, a deeply disturbing sensation.
Labour's recession was almost as great an impact on GDP as Scottish separation would be - we survived one, we'll certainly survive another.
PB Tory says 'Labour recession' wasn't a disaster. You heard it here first folks.
The Labour recession was chiefly due the Scottish banking disaster. The fact that it didn't become a national disaster was due to the benevolence and generosity of the Union.
The lexicography of Unionism: UK riots, Irish Troubles, Scottish banks and now, apparently, the English pound.
Labour's recession was almost as great an impact on GDP as Scottish separation would be - we survived one, we'll certainly survive another.
PB Tory says 'Labour recession' wasn't a disaster. You heard it here first folks.
The Labour recession was chiefly due the Scottish banking disaster. The fact that it didn't become a national disaster was due to the benevolence and generosity of the Union.
The lexicography of Unionism: UK riots, Irish Troubles, Scottish banks and now, apparently, the English pound.
You forget
Britain's Andy Murray wins and Scotland's Andy Murray loses.
Though if Andy Robinson was still Scotland coach I'd have no problems with Scottish Rugby fans describing their team as Englishman led Scottish Rugby team.
Fckn hell, now you've made me nostalgic for Andy Robinson, a deeply disturbing sensation.
Blimey, I didn't realise it was that bad.
No England fan has ever pined for the return of Andy Robinson.
That's fair enough. I was just pointing out that if you have English ethnicity (as opposed to national identity) that means you're white.
Does it? What if your genes include 13th century Moor or 18th century Lascar? I'm pretty sure Cliff Richard, if he cares about these things, would consider himself ethnically English.
Generally people's ethnicity is what the dominant strains of traceable descent are. I don't know Cliff Richard's background that well, but my limited knowledge would have classed him as Anglo-Indian. Think of Australians that are ethnically Greek or Americans that are ethnically English. That goes generations back.
A genuine question.Why do people often start a statement by saying "A genuine question" and then ask an even more fatuous question than they would have asked if they had not said "A genuine question"?
''Fckn hell, now you've made me nostalgic for Andy Robinson, a deeply disturbing sensation.''
Having experienced him with Wales, I could have told you SJ is not a good choice as a head coach. He's a good lieutenant, but not a good head man.
That said, Scotland haven't had a good back division for a very, very long time. Other teams know it and reckon that if they can contain the forward endeavour, they've cracked it.
Also, the rule changes militate against the Scots. They were a great rucking team, and the ruck is completely depowered these days. It's a shame.
IIUC they recreated the marked register from the original ballots, after which presumably the skulduggery everybody was hoping for failed to materialize, or we'd have heard about it.
"We'd have heard about it"? Really? If it hadn't been for the single BBC reporter looking into flagrant abuse of proxy votes in Mirpur, we wouldn't have heard of that. I have a lot less faith in the media covering everything that needs covering that you do.
IIRC the authorities also wrote a report about the losing of the marked register, which concluded that they should be more careful in future, and try to avoid leaving important electoral documents in a basement in a bag that looked similar to some rubbish that they were throwing out.
So a tap on the wrist and no-one getting into serious trouble? Makes sense.
A genuine question.Why do people often start a statement by saying "A genuine question" and then ask an even more fatuous question than they would have asked if they had not said "A genuine question"?
Irony.
In the same way people preface a statement/question with "With the greatest respect" when in fact their true sentiment is
"Are you effing joking, I couldn't have less respect for you even if you said Jade Dernbach is a world class bowler"
A genuine question.Why do people often start a statement by saying "A genuine question" and then ask an even more fatuous question than they would have asked if they had not said "A genuine question"?
You've set yourself up for lots of replies starting with "A genuine question".
Does anyone know what the eventual result of this was?
At Glenrothes in 2008, the neighbouring seat to Gordon Brown’s at Kirkcaldy, there was a fourfold increase in postal ballots and Labour’s opponents demanded to see the marked official register which showed whether individuals had voted or not. Unbelievably, the Sheriff ’s Clerk’s Office in Kirkcaldy had to explain, after five months, that the register had ‘gone missing’.
IIUC they recreated the marked register from the original ballots, after which presumably the skulduggery everybody was hoping for failed to materialize, or we'd have heard about it.
IIRC the authorities also wrote a report about the losing of the marked register, which concluded that they should be more careful in future, and try to avoid leaving important electoral documents in a basement in a bag that looked similar to some rubbish that they were throwing out.
Ah, the great Glenrothes scandal, now that has me coming over all nostalgic!
IIUC they recreated the marked register from the original ballots, after which presumably the skulduggery everybody was hoping for failed to materialize, or we'd have heard about it.
"We'd have heard about it"? Really? If it hadn't been for the single BBC reporter looking into flagrant abuse of proxy votes in Mirpur, we wouldn't have heard of that. I have a lot less faith in the media covering everything that needs covering that you do.
We don't have to rely on the media, the parties have people on the ground and they know how to post here or on Twitter.
This is a cop out of an argument. Whether or not you get attacked is irrelevant. What matters is if those attacks have resonance for your potential voters. And those attacks do have resonance because it's pretty pathetic of the Tories to say "we'll fix the EU situation by renegotiating stuff" but then refuse to say what stuff. How can anyone judge whether it will actually fix the situation sufficiently if you won't say what you're aiming to do? "Trust in your betters" doesn't play any more, but that's what we're expected to do.
I'm just pointing out that it wouldn't work, in purely electoral terms, as a means of gaining support.
Reality is a tough task-master.
I disagree. I think the whole exercise comes across as spin rather than substance when you don't give it detail. It's the genuine impression of a lot of those who are deserting the Tories, and the leadership isn't doing much to address it. Same with immigration. How much can they really be cracking down on it if fraud as blatant as the test examiners reading out answers isn't caught by the government until Panorama does a documentary on it? It just seems like they want to pacify the concerns rather than actually address them. That has electoral ramifications.
That's fair enough. I was just pointing out that if you have English ethnicity (as opposed to national identity) that means you're white.
Does it? What if your genes include 13th century Moor or 18th century Lascar? I'm pretty sure Cliff Richard, if he cares about these things, would consider himself ethnically English.
Generally people's ethnicity is what the dominant strains of traceable descent are. I don't know Cliff Richard's background that well, but my limited knowledge would have classed him as Anglo-Indian. Think of Australians that are ethnically Greek or Americans that are ethnically English. That goes generations back.
Trump and Murdoch used to be Scottish but they aren't anymore. Things change.
A genuine question.Why do people often start a statement by saying "A genuine question" and then ask an even more fatuous question than they would have asked if they had not said "A genuine question"?
You've set yourself up for lots of replies starting with "A genuine question".
"as a matter of interest...."
99% to be followed by a question that the smart arse posing it thinks wins him the argument
IIUC they recreated the marked register from the original ballots, after which presumably the skulduggery everybody was hoping for failed to materialize, or we'd have heard about it.
"We'd have heard about it"? Really? If it hadn't been for the single BBC reporter looking into flagrant abuse of proxy votes in Mirpur, we wouldn't have heard of that. I have a lot less faith in the media covering everything that needs covering that you do.
We don't have to rely on the media, the parties have people on the ground and they know how to post here or on Twitter.
Not all local parties are effective in doing these things, people move on to other seats/leave politics etc, and then it doesn't happen. Or something gets mentioned, but debate is on some other topic so it gets glossed over.
''Fckn hell, now you've made me nostalgic for Andy Robinson, a deeply disturbing sensation.''
Having experienced him with Wales, I could have told you SJ is not a good choice as a head coach. He's a good lieutenant, but not a good head man.
That said, Scotland haven't had a good back division for a very, very long time. Other teams know it and reckon that if they can contain the forward endeavour, they've cracked it.
Also, the rule changes militate against the Scots. They were a great rucking team, and the ruck is completely depowered these days. It's a shame.
Yep, I think the problems are so institutional and affected by external circumstances, it's difficult to see how any individual could turn it around. Not sure if SJ is doing much for team morale & cohesion though, which should be a basic during these nadirs.
That's fair enough. I was just pointing out that if you have English ethnicity (as opposed to national identity) that means you're white.
Does it? What if your genes include 13th century Moor or 18th century Lascar? I'm pretty sure Cliff Richard, if he cares about these things, would consider himself ethnically English.
Generally people's ethnicity is what the dominant strains of traceable descent are. I don't know Cliff Richard's background that well, but my limited knowledge would have classed him as Anglo-Indian. Think of Australians that are ethnically Greek or Americans that are ethnically English. That goes generations back.
Trump and Murdoch used to be Scottish but they aren't anymore. Things change.
I'm pretty sure I've heard Donald Trump mention both his Scottish and German heritage. No idea about Murdoch. But I agree that they're not Scottish any more. They just have (some) Scottish ethnicity. To actually be Scottish would mean nationality.
IIUC they recreated the marked register from the original ballots, after which presumably the skulduggery everybody was hoping for failed to materialize, or we'd have heard about it.
"We'd have heard about it"? Really? If it hadn't been for the single BBC reporter looking into flagrant abuse of proxy votes in Mirpur, we wouldn't have heard of that. I have a lot less faith in the media covering everything that needs covering that you do.
We don't have to rely on the media, the parties have people on the ground and they know how to post here or on Twitter.
Not all local parties are effective in doing these things, people move on to other seats/leave politics etc, and then it doesn't happen. Or something gets mentioned, but debate is on some other topic so it gets glossed over.
Right, like the Tories or the SNP wouldn't have known how to communicate a high-profile electoral fraud if they found one. Come off it, British politics is fuelled by indignation at the skulduggery of the other side, it would have been all over here for starters.
A genuine question.Why do people often start a statement by saying "A genuine question" and then ask an even more fatuous question than they would have asked if they had not said "A genuine question"?
How do you know what question they would have asked if they had not said "A genuine question"?
Actually there were claims of all sorts all over here. Total nonsense unsupported by any evidence but if you polled pbc at the time I bet a sizeable percentage (maybe even a majority) would have said something fishy happened.
IIUC they recreated the marked register from the original ballots, after which presumably the skulduggery everybody was hoping for failed to materialize, or we'd have heard about it.
"We'd have heard about it"? Really? If it hadn't been for the single BBC reporter looking into flagrant abuse of proxy votes in Mirpur, we wouldn't have heard of that. I have a lot less faith in the media covering everything that needs covering that you do.
We don't have to rely on the media, the parties have people on the ground and they know how to post here or on Twitter.
Not all local parties are effective in doing these things, people move on to other seats/leave politics etc, and then it doesn't happen. Or something gets mentioned, but debate is on some other topic so it gets glossed over.
Right, like the Tories or the SNP wouldn't have known how to communicate a high-profile electoral fraud if they found one. Come off it, British politics is fuelled by indignation at the skulduggery of the other side, it would have been all over here for starters.
It won't be all over here unless there's a public report that can be cited. If the report is out there, why can't we find it now?
Doesn't say anything about recreating the marked register. It links to the link below to find the report, but searching for "Glenrothes" doesn't bring it up:
Actually there were claims of all sorts all over here. Total nonsense unsupported by any evidence but if you polled pbc at the time I bet a sizeable percentage (maybe even a majority) would have said something fishy happened.
There was loads here about the loss of the marked register, but it seemed to go quiet after they recreated it from the original votes.
A genuine question.Why do people often start a statement by saying "A genuine question" and then ask an even more fatuous question than they would have asked if they had not said "A genuine question"?
How do you know what question they would have asked if they had not said "A genuine question"?
my favourite is when people say 'with all due respect' which means that what they say next will not respect the person it is aimed at!
Actually there were claims of all sorts all over here. Total nonsense unsupported by any evidence but if you polled pbc at the time I bet a sizeable percentage (maybe even a majority) would have said something fishy happened.
Of course it was unsupported by any evidence. The necessary evidence went missing, and no-one got in trouble for it.
Actually there were claims of all sorts all over here. Total nonsense unsupported by any evidence but if you polled pbc at the time I bet a sizeable percentage (maybe even a majority) would have said something fishy happened.
IIRC it was an SNP council that lost the register?
A genuine question.Why do people often start a statement by saying "A genuine question" and then ask an even more fatuous question than they would have asked if they had not said "A genuine question"?
How do you know what question they would have asked if they had not said "A genuine question"?
my favourite is when people say 'with all due respect' which means that what they say next will not respect the person it is aimed at!
This is quite a good link about what we really mean
Actually there were claims of all sorts all over here. Total nonsense unsupported by any evidence but if you polled pbc at the time I bet a sizeable percentage (maybe even a majority) would have said something fishy happened.
Of course it was unsupported by any evidence. The necessary evidence went missing, and no-one got in trouble for it.
But people felt justified in implying skullduggery on Labour's part anyway. Go figure.
@TSE - yes it was an SNP council but it appears to have been the court service that was most to blame for it going missing.
IIUC they recreated the marked register from the original ballots, after which presumably the skulduggery everybody was hoping for failed to materialize, or we'd have heard about it.
"We'd have heard about it"? Really? If it hadn't been for the single BBC reporter looking into flagrant abuse of proxy votes in Mirpur, we wouldn't have heard of that. I have a lot less faith in the media covering everything that needs covering that you do.
We don't have to rely on the media, the parties have people on the ground and they know how to post here or on Twitter.
Not all local parties are effective in doing these things, people move on to other seats/leave politics etc, and then it doesn't happen. Or something gets mentioned, but debate is on some other topic so it gets glossed over.
Right, like the Tories or the SNP wouldn't have known how to communicate a high-profile electoral fraud if they found one. Come off it, British politics is fuelled by indignation at the skulduggery of the other side, it would have been all over here for starters.
It won't be all over here unless there's a public report that can be cited. If the report is out there, why can't we find it now?
It did go quiet in the end but I don't think the SNP or I suppose the LDs and Tories were ever happy about it - if only because of the potential for abuse which such sloppiness revealed (as in other aspects of the UK election system discussed in this thread). The reconstruction was done under a protocol agreed by the Scotland Office - Wikipedia has a reference to Hansard for that. Don't know more than that.
Actually there were claims of all sorts all over here. Total nonsense unsupported by any evidence but if you polled pbc at the time I bet a sizeable percentage (maybe even a majority) would have said something fishy happened.
Of course it was unsupported by any evidence. The necessary evidence went missing, and no-one got in trouble for it.
But people felt justified in implying skullduggery on Labour's part anyway. Go figure.
@TSE - yes it was an SNP council but it appears to have been the court service that was most to blame for it going missing.
Apparently it was put in a room where outside contractors had access, so it could have literally been anyone responsible.
I've also searched for Edmund's recreated marked register, and can't find any evidence for it. There's one document that says they are going to do it, but nothing saying they did it.
Actually there were claims of all sorts all over here. Total nonsense unsupported by any evidence but if you polled pbc at the time I bet a sizeable percentage (maybe even a majority) would have said something fishy happened.
Of course it was unsupported by any evidence. The necessary evidence went missing, and no-one got in trouble for it.
But people felt justified in implying skullduggery on Labour's part anyway. Go figure.
@TSE - yes it was an SNP council but it appears to have been the court service that was most to blame for it going missing.
Apparently it was put in a room where outside contractors had access, so it could have literally been anyone responsible.
It was put in that room by the court service. So they were indeed most to blame.
"It is not a spectacular success in the same tradition of other campaigns that we have witnessed over the past two years, but make no mistake – this is still a solid advance. In fact, this was UKIP’s fourth best by-election result in their entire history."
Labour's recession was almost as great an impact on GDP as Scottish separation would be - we survived one, we'll certainly survive another.
PB Tory says 'Labour recession' wasn't a disaster. You heard it here first folks.
The Labour recession was chiefly due the Scottish banking disaster. The fact that it didn't become a national disaster was due to the benevolence and generosity of the Union.
The lexicography of Unionism: UK riots, Irish Troubles, Scottish banks and now, apparently, the English pound.
It was the English pound. It existed before 1707, which is one reason why the UK's central bank is called the Bank of England. Scotland had its own currency.
I sometimes find myself wondering if the Cameroons are secretly working for Ed Miliband. They certainly seem committed to doing everything they can to see him in No 10 after the next GE.
What do you think they should do differently?
A genuine question. People often say stuff like that, but are remarkably coy about what exactly they would do differently.
Honesty and realism. One of the things that I believe turns voters off from Cameron is that he wants to be all things to all men (and women). In particular with his dealings with the issue of the EU he has been utterly dishonest about what is achievable. In an age when the electorate are far better informed about what politicians in other countries are saying he can no longer afford to pretend that he can get some great result from his negotiations when everyone knows they will be meaningless.
Obviously that is just one example but it seems to be a fault that permeates all his inner circle's dealings with the public. Defence is another area where the say one thing/do another syndrome is all too prevalent. Local Government as well. In fact almost all areas of governance to a greater or lesser extent with the possible exception of education and perhaps (just to annoy the left on here) the economy where realism and the willingness to upset people by being honest about the mess we are in have been obvious and welcome.
This dishonesty is not, of course, limited to the present government. But after all the claims that they would change the way we do politics I am afraid the Cameroons have fallen far short of what was required.
Honesty and realism. One of the things that I believe turns voters off from Cameron is that he wants to be all things to all men (and women). In particular with his dealings with the issue of the EU he has been utterly dishonest about what is achievable. In an age when the electorate are far better informed about what politicians in other countries are saying he can no longer afford to pretend that he can get some great result from his negotiations when everyone knows they will be meaningless.
Obviously that is just one example but it seems to be a fault that permeates all his inner circle's dealings with the public. Defence is another area where the say one thing/do another syndrome is all too prevalent. Local Government as well. In fact almost all areas of governance to a greater or lesser extent with the possible exception of education and perhaps (just to annoy the left on here) the economy where realism and the willingness to upset people by being honest about the mess we are in have been obvious and welcome.
This dishonesty is not, of course, limited to the present government. But after all the claims that they would change the way we do politics I am afraid the Cameroons have fallen far short of what was required.
That's just meaningless guff. Are you saying they should spend more on Defence? OK, fair enough, but financed how? Similarly with local government - what do you actually want done differently?
The fact is, these are all trade-offs. What you call 'dishonesty' is the tough job of actually governing, which of course means balancing conflicting aims and making difficult choices in what is currently an extremely difficult financial position.
(I've already dealt with your first point in my reply to Socrates).
Edit: Also, the idea that Cameron wants to be 'all things to all men' is absolutely absurd. He has taken very strong stands on gay marriage, on the EU (not to your taste, but he has taken a consistent position right from the start), on the deficit, on Libya, on Syria, on supporting Gove and IDS in education and welfare reforms, etc.
That's fair enough. I was just pointing out that if you have English ethnicity (as opposed to national identity) that means you're white.
Does it? What if your genes include 13th century Moor or 18th century Lascar? I'm pretty sure Cliff Richard, if he cares about these things, would consider himself ethnically English.
Generally people's ethnicity is what the dominant strains of traceable descent are. I don't know Cliff Richard's background that well, but my limited knowledge would have classed him as Anglo-Indian. Think of Australians that are ethnically Greek or Americans that are ethnically English. That goes generations back.
Trump and Murdoch used to be Scottish but they aren't anymore. Things change.
I'm pretty sure I've heard Donald Trump mention both his Scottish and German heritage. No idea about Murdoch. But I agree that they're not Scottish any more. They just have (some) Scottish ethnicity. To actually be Scottish would mean nationality.
I think that based on this week's news Trump is going to suddenly discover his Irish ancestry
Labour's recession was almost as great an impact on GDP as Scottish separation would be - we survived one, we'll certainly survive another.
PB Tory says 'Labour recession' wasn't a disaster. You heard it here first folks.
The Labour recession was chiefly due the Scottish banking disaster. The fact that it didn't become a national disaster was due to the benevolence and generosity of the Union.
The lexicography of Unionism: UK riots, Irish Troubles, Scottish banks and now, apparently, the English pound.
You forget
Britain's Andy Murray wins and Scotland's Andy Murray loses.
Though if Andy Robinson was still Scotland coach I'd have no problems with Scottish Rugby fans describing their team as Englishman led Scottish Rugby team.
Fckn hell, now you've made me nostalgic for Andy Robinson, a deeply disturbing sensation.
Blimey, I didn't realise it was that bad.
No England fan has ever pined for the return of Andy Robinson.
England isn't in danger of being relegated from the Six Nations.
Labour's recession was almost as great an impact on GDP as Scottish separation would be - we survived one, we'll certainly survive another.
PB Tory says 'Labour recession' wasn't a disaster. You heard it here first folks.
The Labour recession was chiefly due the Scottish banking disaster. The fact that it didn't become a national disaster was due to the benevolence and generosity of the Union.
The lexicography of Unionism: UK riots, Irish Troubles, Scottish banks and now, apparently, the English pound.
It was the English pound. It existed before 1707, which is one reason why the UK's central bank is called the Bank of England. Scotland had its own currency.
You'd better let the world know about the hideous hoodwinking practiced (no doubt by some perfidious Jock) upon them.
'The pound sterling (symbol: £; ISO code: GBP), commonly known simply as the pound, is the official currency of the United Kingdom, Jersey, Guernsey, the Isle of Man, South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands,[6] the British Antarctic Territory[7] and Tristan da Cunha.[8] It is subdivided into 100 pence (singular: penny). A number of nations that do not use sterling also have currencies called the pound... The full, official name, pound sterling, (plural: pounds sterling) is used mainly in formal contexts and also when it is necessary to distinguish the United Kingdom currency from other currencies with the same name. Otherwise the term pound is normally used. The currency name is sometimes abbreviated to just sterling, particularly in the wholesale financial markets, but not when referring to specific amounts; for example, "Payment is accepted in sterling" but never "These cost five sterling". The abbreviations "ster." or "stg." are sometimes used. The term British pound is commonly used in less formal contexts, although it is not an official name of the currency.'
Comments
"It was a pledge made with the best of intentions – but we should not have made a promise we were not absolutely sure we could deliver. I shouldn't have committed to a policy that was so expensive when there was no money around. Not least when the most likely way we would end up in government was in coalition with Labour or the Conservatives who were both committed to put fees up."
That seems to sum it up quite well for me. He was shooting off his mouth because he became over-excited. Then the cold, harsh reality of government revealed itself to him.
A genuine question. People often say stuff like that, but are remarkably coy about what exactly they would do differently.
I'm very concerned that the possibility of Scotsmen being on the UK side of the negotiating table. If it comes to that, we'd have a morally indefensible situation that could be permanently detrimental to the UK.
Happily, it is at the outer edge of realistic possibilities (requires a Yes win, then Labour to win an outright majority without any provision to prevent the aforementioned crazy situation). If Yes win I suspect the Conservatives will do much better south of the border.
Secondly, I really think that it is unthinkable that Scottish electors will send MPs to Westminster at the 2015GE if the vote is YES for independence. Scottish electors will have chosen in the referendum to be represented by their MSPs at Holyrood, and there would be no further need for them to send MPs to Westminster.
I would expect that legislation would be passed before the GE in 2015 excluding MPs that represent Scottish constituencies from the Commons. Anything else would be absurd.
The table they have attached:
http://cdn.yougov.com/cumulus_uploads/document/e1p6fkzyrs/YG-Archive-140211 - Size Matters.pdf
Asks the question:
"When it comes to sex, to what extent, if at all, do you agree with the statement ‘A man's penis size matters’
Net agree:
Con: +3
Lab: -8
LibD: -33
UKIP: -22
I shall never to be able to read about Lib Dem shortcomings in quite the same way again....
Londoners (-3) most persuaded, Scots (-37), not. Chilly up north!
Job done. Save the big swings for the marginals.
(Actually, an even better result for the I Can Only Be Arsed If You Stick A Postal Vote Under My Nose - Then Come And Collect It From Me Party.)
Utterly dire for the LibDems. Without the Eastleigh result to cling onto, their Parliamentary fortunes would be peering into the box marked "apocalyptic". Clegg has to go. Somebody new has to come out fighting with a clear message that people are prepared to at least listen to; they have turned deaf on Clegg.
But there is no great groundswell of excitement about a Labour victory either. You have to think that with the right leader, the LibDems could start appealing to the Sensible Left. Continually claiming they have been date-raped by the Tories isn't a message that people are listening to; they need to go for Labour's jugular.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-26184819
Just shows the dangers of making it a crime to offend religious sensibilities. Religion is a belief system and deserves to be held up to the same debate and scrutiny as any other.
Even France managed to grow 0.3% in Q4 meaning that they did not have a technical recession. Italy managed its first growth since 2011 all 0.1% of it. Greece, however, continues to nose dive and its economy is now as small as it was a decade ago.
Overall a return to growth in the EZ is good news for our exporters and should help exports make a positive contribution (if only by being less bad) in the early part of this year. I am still fairly stunned by the BoE forecast of 3.4% for this year though.
Share of vote up 500%, actual votes up 300%, 5th to 2nd in a seat they could not win. Ashcroft only under estimated by 2%! Personally háppy with that, the papers are all saying its a great result for ukip, I fear it's only LibDem and Labour a spinners that are trying to paint another picture
I suspect most south of the border will shrug their shoulders and think "oh well, if that's what they feel..." Then it will be time to get on with the divorce -with little sentiment or sympathy for those who brought it about.
Labour's recession was almost as great an impact on GDP as Scottish separation would be - we survived one, we'll certainly survive another.
As I have pointed out before, we shouldn't be starting from here, but that's not Cameron's fault.
Matthew Goodwin (@GoodwinMJ)
14/02/2014 08:32
Also worth noting what Farage told me on #Ukip result pre by-election: anything around 10% he'd worry, over 15% happy, over 20% delighted.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2010/nov/12/lib-dems-tuition-fees-clegg
This is why the LibDems have had such a battering. Clegg is a liar. His party protest loudly against various things they morally object to then loyally trot through the government lobby. Whereas Tory MPs protest and vote against the government in large numbers on repeated occasions. The MPs most loyal to Tory policies smashing the disabled, the poor, students etc are LibDems. Disagree we me as you like, this is what their former voters say when asked why they will never again vote for them.
It's not perfect, but its better than the current system, surely.
Reality is a tough task-master.
IIRC the authorities also wrote a report about the losing of the marked register, which concluded that they should be more careful in future, and try to avoid leaving important electoral documents in a basement in a bag that looked similar to some rubbish that they were throwing out.
Britain's Andy Murray wins and Scotland's Andy Murray loses.
Though if Andy Robinson was still Scotland coach I'd have no problems with Scottish Rugby fans describing their team as Englishman led Scottish Rugby team.
Look, a protest party has to start somewhere. We know the LDs pre-election had a bunch of off the spectrum bonkers lefty whackjob policies.
Fine.
They allowed the NOTAs to put a tick there and feel good about their saving planet tendencies.
But government is a different kettle of chickienobs. And the LDs are finding out just how different and that's fine also. They will emerge a more mature party with more mature policies and a more mature attitude to power. And as a result, possibly, a greater chance of achieving that power (within a coalition context).
But you are half right. They are getting punished by their ostrich-like supporters. It is a shame as there is a real chance to move politics forward. But it seems even reformers and LD-ers are determined to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
twitter.com/RebeccaKeating/status/434269042832973824
Is that candidates? Membership? Executive positions within UKIP?
I thought their MEP woman on QT last night was pretty dreadful.
The Daily Mail made flesh.
That would compare with last years quarterly growth rates of 0.5%, 0.8%, 0.8% and 0.7%. So looked at in this way it would only require a modest acceleration from last year's quarterly growth rates.
However, if the floods put a dent into the first quarter's growth figures that will have a disproportionate impact on the growth figure for the year as a whole. If we reverse the quarterly growth figures I posit for 2014, to be 0.7%, 0.8%, 0.9% and 1.0% for Q4, then although the 2014Q4 GDP figures will be identical in both cases, the different shape of growth through the year means that the 2014 growth figure would be +3.1% in the second case.
This is part 37 in an occasional series of posts on why you should not pay too much attention to the GDP figures.
twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/434279862237675521
No England fan has ever pined for the return of Andy Robinson.
Having experienced him with Wales, I could have told you SJ is not a good choice as a head coach. He's a good lieutenant, but not a good head man.
That said, Scotland haven't had a good back division for a very, very long time. Other teams know it and reckon that if they can contain the forward endeavour, they've cracked it.
Also, the rule changes militate against the Scots. They were a great rucking team, and the ruck is completely depowered these days. It's a shame.
In the same way people preface a statement/question with "With the greatest respect" when in fact their true sentiment is
"Are you effing joking, I couldn't have less respect for you even if you said Jade Dernbach is a world class bowler"
I've yet to see a post that starting with the phrase 'A bogus question: '
Leave Jade alone, internet bullying is not clever!
99% to be followed by a question that the smart arse posing it thinks wins him the argument
Swingback (W&SE): 2% Labour lead
L&N (IPSOS Feb 2014): 6% Con lead
If he was the Jade Dernbach of politics I'd vote for him
http://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/i-am-a/journalist/electoral-commission-media-centre/news-releases-reviews-and-research/glenrothes-election-report-published
Doesn't say anything about recreating the marked register. It links to the link below to find the report, but searching for "Glenrothes" doesn't bring it up:
http://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/our-work/publications/election-and-referendum-reports?query=glenrothes&sort=relevancy&daat=on
http://www.buzzfeed.com/lukelewis/what-british-people-say-versus-what-they-mean
@TSE - yes it was an SNP council but it appears to have been the court service that was most to blame for it going missing.
http://www.heraldscotland.com/glenrothes-documents-lost-due-to-failures-in-handling-1.849426
I've also searched for Edmund's recreated marked register, and can't find any evidence for it. There's one document that says they are going to do it, but nothing saying they did it.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukipwatch/100259661/wythenshawe-and-sale-east-neither-a-setback-nor-a-success-but-a-solid-advance/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
Obviously that is just one example but it seems to be a fault that permeates all his inner circle's dealings with the public. Defence is another area where the say one thing/do another syndrome is all too prevalent. Local Government as well. In fact almost all areas of governance to a greater or lesser extent with the possible exception of education and perhaps (just to annoy the left on here) the economy where realism and the willingness to upset people by being honest about the mess we are in have been obvious and welcome.
This dishonesty is not, of course, limited to the present government. But after all the claims that they would change the way we do politics I am afraid the Cameroons have fallen far short of what was required.
The fact is, these are all trade-offs. What you call 'dishonesty' is the tough job of actually governing, which of course means balancing conflicting aims and making difficult choices in what is currently an extremely difficult financial position.
(I've already dealt with your first point in my reply to Socrates).
Edit: Also, the idea that Cameron wants to be 'all things to all men' is absolutely absurd. He has taken very strong stands on gay marriage, on the EU (not to your taste, but he has taken a consistent position right from the start), on the deficit, on Libya, on Syria, on supporting Gove and IDS in education and welfare reforms, etc.
As holders of the wooden spoon if anyone has to go it should be France.
You'd better let the world know about the hideous hoodwinking practiced (no doubt by some perfidious Jock) upon them.
'The pound sterling (symbol: £; ISO code: GBP), commonly known simply as the pound, is the official currency of the United Kingdom, Jersey, Guernsey, the Isle of Man, South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands,[6] the British Antarctic Territory[7] and Tristan da Cunha.[8] It is subdivided into 100 pence (singular: penny). A number of nations that do not use sterling also have currencies called the pound...
The full, official name, pound sterling, (plural: pounds sterling) is used mainly in formal contexts and also when it is necessary to distinguish the United Kingdom currency from other currencies with the same name. Otherwise the term pound is normally used. The currency name is sometimes abbreviated to just sterling, particularly in the wholesale financial markets, but not when referring to specific amounts; for example, "Payment is accepted in sterling" but never "These cost five sterling". The abbreviations "ster." or "stg." are sometimes used. The term British pound is commonly used in less formal contexts, although it is not an official name of the currency.'