Alex Salmond has been accused of the “very worst type of tokenism” after attempting to win more female voters’ support for Scottish independence by promoting two women to his Cabinet.
Ruth Davidson, the Scottish Tory leader, said the announcement was a “particularly cynical stunt” and questioned why neither of the female ministers had been given this status over the past seven years of SNP rule at Holyrood.
Patrick O'Flynn (@oflynndirector) 14/04/2014 09:48 I'm hearing speculation from normally reliable sources that Ed Davey is plotting a Lib Dem leadership bid - can that really be true?
He'll lack Clegg's toxicity, but he's also the Energy and Climate Change Archpriest. It could harm the Lib Dems to have the turmoil of a leadership election and probably the most pro-green man in government as leader.
The question is whether turmoil and another man called Ed would be worse than Clegg. Probably not.
But how easy/hard would it be to axe Clegg?
Presumably the rumblings are beginning now so that there's a head of steam if, as expected, the yellows get a thrashing in the European elections.
Mike, we will see but what you are describing is a continuation and accentuation of the trends in 2010 and 2005 where Labour's vote was reduced overall by their supporters being willing to vote tactically for the Lib Dems in Con/Lib Dem seats and Lib Dems were willing to vote tactically for Labour in Con/Lab seats.
I think the first of these will be greatly diminished which is one of the reasons the Lib Dems are polling so badly. Many of the 2010 Lib dem voters in these seats were never really Lib Dem voters, they were Labour voters in the first place. They will vote for the party they genuinely want, even if they recognise that will not help them locally.
DavidL: it's worth remembering the LibDems did disproportionately well in 2010 in seats where it didn't matter to them (i.e. Lab/Con marginals). If these Libs return to their historic home (i.e. Labour) then that will be very bad for the Conservatives.
It's also worth remembering that the Ashcroft polling showed the Libs holding on very well in Lib/Con marginals. And while I'd expect that to have diminished somewhat in the last few weeks, it does suggest that anti-Tory tactical voting still exists.
Finally: I think in a few areas (like South West London), the Libs might find it easier to pick up 'soft Tory' voters than before, as they can position themselves as a break on 'more extreme' Tories, rather than merely as 'Labour Lite'.
Why would Lab=>LD switchers return to Lab? Answer that and you have your GE result.
They fled, understandably, in 2010 because their disgust at Lab under first Blair then Brown meant that even holding their nose wouldn't have been effective enough to be able to vote Lab. But their loathing of the Cons, as Nick P points out, meant they couldn't vote for the Tories so they fled to a (luckily) left-wing protest/alternative party.
Since then that left-wing/protest party has only gone and cosied up to the arch capitalists and betrayed those homeless left-wingers.
So back to Lab would seem logical.
But is it?
What has changed in Lab since 2010. Some (but not all) of the personalities, there have been no policy changes as there have been no policies, and the general incompetence and inability to choose the "correct" political direction (ie moving far, far to the left) remains.
So why go back?
The LDs, meanwhile a) are in power; and b) have forged a decent enough, though far from perfect, place for themselves as the restraining factor in an otherwise evil Tory govt.
Put them both together and that is quite a compelling reason for the Lab=>LD switchers=>Lab (from the polls) to re-switch => LDs.
The 2010 Conservatives are not what Conservatives were in the 1980s. The 1980s Conservatives are not what Conservatives were in the 1950s. The 1950s Conservatives are not what Conservatives were in the 1920s.
Mr. Pulpstar, would it be any madder than Ed "I'm an atheist but I have faith, but I don't believe in God, but I'd be the first Jewish Prime Minister [except Disraeli]" Miliband?
Patrick O'Flynn (@oflynndirector) 14/04/2014 09:48 I'm hearing speculation from normally reliable sources that Ed Davey is plotting a Lib Dem leadership bid - can that really be true?
Seems a bit early for that - you'd think they'd hold on until after the Euros. Unless Clegg is getting a Commission job after all...
The LDs, meanwhile a) are in power; and b) have forged a decent enough, though far from perfect, place for themselves as the restraining factor in an otherwise evil Tory govt.
Put them both together and that is quite a compelling reason for the Lab=>LD switchers=>Lab (from the polls) to re-switch => LDs.
OGH suggests they are indeed staying LDs where the Lib Dems are 'next best' to challenge the conservatives. Where the Lib Dems can't win - the vote has utterly collapsed.
@oflynndirector: I'm hearing speculation from normally reliable sources that Ed Davey is plotting a Lib Dem leadership bid - can that really be true?
Ed Davey - looooooool
I know they aren't polling very well at the moment but Ed Davey - seriously ?!
Carmichael won't be happy about this.
More likely that any leadership 'hopeful' will be preparing for the backlash if things go very pear shaped in May by sounding out those those lib dem MPs who might be sympathetic to them. Which always runs the danger of getting out if some of those MPs are still loyal to Clegg and want to try and preemptively rubbish their chances. If the whisper campaign against Clegg starts it will be obvious and it won't be reliant on the status of any of his challengers.
He'll lack Clegg's toxicity, but he's also the Energy and Climate Change Archpriest. It could harm the Lib Dems to have the turmoil of a leadership election and probably the most pro-green man in government as leader.
That's definitely not an electoral liability. Greenery is generally popular with the voters, even Tory ones. (Although taxes to pay for it aren't.)
The 2010 Conservatives are not what Conservatives were in the 1980s. The 1980s Conservatives are not what Conservatives were in the 1950s. The 1950s Conservatives are not what Conservatives were in the 1920s.
Society moves on, as does politics.
Indeed, but what about us OAP voters? We may well prefer not to.
The state has the theoretical potential to be a force for good.
Indeed, but there are two problems. The first is that generally speaking, most things the state does, it does badly.
If you drew one of those charts where on the x axis you've got "does badly / does well" from left to right, and on the y axis you've got "does cheaply / does expensively" from the bottom to the top, then pretty well everything the state does is going to be in the top left quadrant - meaning "does badly + does expensively".
There are exceptions. Defence and universities would be bottom right - the state does them cheaply, but quite well (for what is spent). Broadcasting would probably also be there, although it looks cheap only because everyone is forced to fund it. The licence fee would be about 4 to 5 times higher if it were only paid by BBC viewers.
Everything else the state does - education, healthcare, child care / protection / orphanages, tax collection, law enforcement, parking enforcement, pension provision, unemployment protection and transport - it does both badly and at excessive cost. A million heads were added to the public payroll between 1997 and 2010 during which time everything either stayed the same or got worse.
An exception would be financial regulation. This is done badly by the state, but costs nil via direct tax because the regulated pay for the regulator. The fees, along with the costs of compliance, ultimately find their way into retail product prices, of course, but there's no actual FCA tax.
Before I get accused of being subjective and partisan about what the state does badly, the measure I am using is broadly whether there is any paid-for private alternative to what the state does, that people who can afford to use prefer to use. Clearly, there are things like defence that individuals can't privately fund or arrange. But they can arrange private education, healthcare, policing and transport; and anyone who has dealt with HMRC will be aware that they are cretinous, aggressive monkeys.
The second issue about the state is that it has an inbuilt propensity towards low standards (all we are ever told about our children at school is that they are "above average", with an air of bafflement that this isn't good enough), towards the concealment of abuses (Mid Staffs, anything run by Margaret Hodge), towards the corrupt creation of futile jobs and hence it has an inexhaustible appetite for ever more money.
To say that the state has potential to be a force for good is like saying that cars are a force for good - the statement is so in need of qualification that it ends up meaning nothing.
Patrick O'Flynn (@oflynndirector) 14/04/2014 09:48 I'm hearing speculation from normally reliable sources that Ed Davey is plotting a Lib Dem leadership bid - can that really be true?
Seems a bit early for that - you'd think they'd hold on until after the Euros. Unless Clegg is getting a Commission job after all...
I would have thought it quite likely the LibDems replaced their leader in early 2015. They may do this without said person taking over as DPM (so as not to be too contaminated with the coalition).
The question is:
* Farron (to win back lefty Labour switchers) or * An Orange booker
@oflynndirector: I'm hearing speculation from normally reliable sources that Ed Davey is plotting a Lib Dem leadership bid - can that really be true?
Ed Davey - looooooool
I know they aren't polling very well at the moment but Ed Davey - seriously ?!
Carmichael won't be happy about this.
More likely that any leadership 'hopeful' will be preparing for the backlash if things go very pear shaped in May by sounding out those those lib dem MPs who might be sympathetic to them. Which always runs the danger of getting out if some of those MPs are still loyal to Clegg and want to try and preemptively rubbish their chances. If the whisper campaign against Clegg starts it will be obvious and it won't be reliant on the status of any of his challengers.
Do you think the orange-bookers have a chance? Personally I'd see a sharp left turn as inevitable for the Lib Dems as a knee-jerk to the damage done by association with the Tories.
Or course a coalition with Labour would also have caused them grievous harm. Whoever their partner, the status of 'protest party' and their ability to shape their image on a constituency basis has been lost for a decade.
"Aberdeen has seen the largest increase in disposable income in the UK since the credit crunch, according to a study of economic figures.
The analysis suggests households in the city are now better off by 19%, £2,285, compared with before the recession.
Brighton, Belfast and Blackpool also ranked well, with London seventh."
Yes its the burden of that volatile resource that would beggar Scotland but is great as all the money flows to London. Pity we did not control it and then perhaps more than Aberdeen in Scotland would be recovering.
To be fair, SO, Scandinavian social democracy is funded on oil, which was the State's to begin with. Our right-wing adversaries, if they are to get beyond public-school debating points, need to show why it would have been better for the embedded oil to have privately owned ab initio.
My original point was that the "most successful" economies are those where the state does not confiscate wealth. The counter examples of countries doing OK are Nordic, but the answer to your question is which countries are members of the G8? The OK Nordics, or the full on capitalists?
So Denmark , Sweden have oil, think someone is kind of mixed up.
OGH suggests they are indeed staying LDs where the Lib Dems are 'next best' to challenge the conservatives. Where the Lib Dems can't win - the vote has utterly collapsed.
That would be very convenient for the LDs, but their loss of support since 2010 can't be satisfied by perfectly distributed numbers.
UK Polling Report described this as a "floor effect":
"As a caveat to this Lib Dem optimism though, look at the Scottish Parliament election in 2011. In that case Lib Dem incumbents didn’t seem to do any better, if anything the Liberal Democrats lost more support in areas where they had the most support to begin with, the very opposite pattern.
The cause of this is probably a floor effect (the Lib Dems lost 8% of the vote in the election, but started off with less than 8% in many seats, so by definition more of their lost support had to come in their stronger seats).
If the Lib Dems do really badly we may see the same effect at Westminster, if the Lib Dems lose enough support it’s impossible for it all to come from seats where they have hardly any support to begin with! "
Mr. Tokyo, Davey will be asked about green levies. The Conservatives are rowing back from them as much as they can. Davey will support them.
Meanwhile, Eggborough power station is closing because it's coal-fired and coal is the dung of Satan, and has been denied the funding Drax got to shift to wood-pellets/biofuel. We're also at serious risk of not having enough energy.
It's fair to say that sort of greenist zealotry will probably go down well with Lib Dems, though.
Alex Salmond has been accused of the “very worst type of tokenism” after attempting to win more female voters’ support for Scottish independence by promoting two women to his Cabinet.
Ruth Davidson, the Scottish Tory leader, said the announcement was a “particularly cynical stunt” and questioned why neither of the female ministers had been given this status over the past seven years of SNP rule at Holyrood.
To be fair, SO, Scandinavian social democracy is funded on oil, which was the State's to begin with. Our right-wing adversaries, if they are to get beyond public-school debating points, need to show why it would have been better for the embedded oil to have privately owned ab initio.
My original point was that the "most successful" economies are those where the state does not confiscate wealth. The counter examples of countries doing OK are Nordic, but the answer to your question is which countries are members of the G8? The OK Nordics, or the full on capitalists?
The G8 economies are not the most successful, they are the biggest. There is a huge difference.
He'll lack Clegg's toxicity, but he's also the Energy and Climate Change Archpriest. It could harm the Lib Dems to have the turmoil of a leadership election and probably the most pro-green man in government as leader.
That's definitely not an electoral liability. Greenery is generally popular with the voters, even Tory ones. (Although taxes to pay for it aren't.)
Wouldn't say that's strictly true. Scepticism has got stronger across most political strains in the last few years, though I would exclude the libdems from that. The socks and sandals brigade are staunchly in the windfarm fanclub. This is anecdotal but even in the most staunchly pro-labour areas such as mine (The Peoples Republic of The Rhondda) people really could not give a monkeys about climate change and are secure in the knowledge that even if sea levels rose we'd still be several hundred feet above sea level and Cardiff and London would be underwater (Result!). Plus those turbines on top of the mountain look ugly.
"Aberdeen has seen the largest increase in disposable income in the UK since the credit crunch, according to a study of economic figures.
The analysis suggests households in the city are now better off by 19%, £2,285, compared with before the recession.
Brighton, Belfast and Blackpool also ranked well, with London seventh."
Yes its the burden of that volatile resource that would beggar Scotland but is great as all the money flows to London. Pity we did not control it and then perhaps more than Aberdeen in Scotland would be recovering.
I'd be wary about making any judgement based on Aberdeen. It's an anomalous (and lovely) place with a very different social and economic makeup to the rest of Scotland, or to the rest of the UK, for that matter. An example: the Heathrow-Aberdeen route is BA's most profitable route in Europe, on a per passenger basis.
Patrick O'Flynn (@oflynndirector) 14/04/2014 09:48 I'm hearing speculation from normally reliable sources that Ed Davey is plotting a Lib Dem leadership bid - can that really be true?
Seems a bit early for that - you'd think they'd hold on until after the Euros. Unless Clegg is getting a Commission job after all...
I would have thought it quite likely the LibDems replaced their leader in early 2015. They may do this without said person taking over as DPM (so as not to be too contaminated with the coalition).
The question is:
* Farron (to win back lefty Labour switchers) or * An Orange booker
Right, that would be the logical timing if they were doing it in a planned way. But if you're an ambitious MP planning a hostile takeover you want to move a bit sooner, because people will be reluctant to back a coup too close to the election in case it fails to come off cleanly and ends up just making them look like a mess. The obvious thing to do would be to keep your mouth shut until the day after the Euros so you can't get blamed for contributing to the defeat, then make your move as soon as the results are announced.
Why would I, the director of a company and a top rate tax payer, not vote Tory? It's a tricky one to put into words, but I think it boils down to the fact that the basic Tory philosophy seems to be that if the wealthiest are looked after OK everything else will work itself out. I just don't buy into that. Neither do I buy into the idea that the state should just get out of the way and leave as much as possible to the private sector. And I also believe that Anglo-Saxon style capitalism needs fundamental reform; something which I don't think the Tories believe in.
I believe passionately in redistribution, in the potential of the state to be a powerful force for good, as well as in a different kind of capitalism that is not obsessed with quarterly dividends, disproportionately high managerial wages and enables much greater long term thinking and investment. So I put myself to the left of centre. But, sadly, I don't see anything meaningful from Ed's Labour that appeals to me. Like OKC, I suspect, I am waiting for something to turn up. It's frustrating and worrying.
So are you happy that on your retirement/death that all the assets you have developed during your lifetime are taken over by the state and not left to any member of your family or anyone/thing else?
The 2010 Conservatives are not what Conservatives were in the 1980s. The 1980s Conservatives are not what Conservatives were in the 1950s. The 1950s Conservatives are not what Conservatives were in the 1920s.
Society moves on, as does politics.
Short back and sides was a popular haircut in the forties and fifties, naff in the seventies, and is popular again now
Bit of an open goal but Conservatives 2010-2020 don't look like being Consevatives 1979-1997 either
He'll lack Clegg's toxicity, but he's also the Energy and Climate Change Archpriest. It could harm the Lib Dems to have the turmoil of a leadership election and probably the most pro-green man in government as leader.
That's definitely not an electoral liability. Greenery is generally popular with the voters, even Tory ones. (Although taxes to pay for it aren't.)
Wouldn't say that's strictly true. Scepticism has got stronger across most political strains in the last few years, though I would exclude the libdems from that. The socks and sandals brigade are staunchly in the windfarm fanclub. This is anecdotal but even in the most staunchly pro-labour areas such as mine (The Peoples Republic of The Rhondda) people really could not give a monkeys about climate change and are secure in the knowledge that even if sea levels rose we'd still be several hundred feet above sea level and Cardiff and London would be underwater (Result!). Plus those turbines on top of the mountain look ugly.
It's been pretty thoroughly polled. The voters like renewables. Note that this doesn't necessarily include specific projects close to them, where regular NIMBY rules apply.
"Aberdeen has seen the largest increase in disposable income in the UK since the credit crunch, according to a study of economic figures.
The analysis suggests households in the city are now better off by 19%, £2,285, compared with before the recession.
Brighton, Belfast and Blackpool also ranked well, with London seventh."
Yes its the burden of that volatile resource that would beggar Scotland but is great as all the money flows to London. Pity we did not control it and then perhaps more than Aberdeen in Scotland would be recovering.
I'd be wary about making any judgement based on Aberdeen. It's an anomalous (and lovely) place with a very different social and economic makeup to the rest of Scotland, or to the rest of the UK, for that matter. An example: the Heathrow-Aberdeen route is BA's most profitable route in Europe, on a per passenger basis.
Anorak, I was replying with irony to the thick Tory who believes that because Aberdeen is booming that all is well. The usual Tory , F*** you Jack I am doing well attitude you expect from these morons. Secondly the fact that we are constantly told the oil is running out yet thick Tories then boast about how well Aberdeen is doing out of oil. How do they manage to dress themselves in the morning.
The state has the theoretical potential to be a force for good.
Indeed, but there are two problems. The first is that generally speaking, most things the state does, it does badly.
If you drew one of those charts where on the x axis you've got "does badly / does well" from left to right, and on the y axis you've got "does cheaply / does expensively" from the bottom to the top, then pretty well everything the state does is going to be in the top left quadrant - meaning "does badly + does expensively".
There are exceptions. Defence and universities would be bottom right - the state does them cheaply, but quite well (for what is spent). Broadcasting would probably also be there, although it looks cheap only because everyone is forced to fund it. The licence fee would be about 4 to 5 times higher if it were only paid by BBC viewers.
Everything else the state does - education, healthcare, child care / protection / orphanages, tax collection, law enforcement, parking enforcement, pension provision, unemployment protection and transport - it does both badly and at excessive cost. A million heads were added to the public payroll between 1997 and 2010 during which time everything either stayed the same or got worse.
An exception would be financial regulation. This is done badly by the state, but costs nil via direct tax because the regulated pay for the regulator. The fees, along with the costs of compliance, ultimately find their way into retail product prices, of course, but there's no actual FCA tax.
Before I get accused of being subjective and partisan about what the state does badly, the measure I am using is broadly whether there is any paid-for private alternative to what the state does, that people who can afford to use prefer to use. Clearly, there are things like defence that individuals can't privately fund or arrange. But they can arrange private education, healthcare, policing and transport; and anyone who has dealt with HMRC will be aware that they are cretinous, aggressive monkeys.
The second issue about the state is that it has an inbuilt propensity towards low standards (all we are ever told about our children at school is that they are "above average", with an air of bafflement that this isn't good enough), towards the concealment of abuses (Mid Staffs, anything run by Margaret Hodge), towards the corrupt creation of futile jobs and hence it has an inexhaustible appetite for ever more money.
To say that the state has potential to be a force for good is like saying that cars are a force for good - the statement is so in need of qualification that it ends up meaning nothing.
It was a response to SO's claim that the state is a force for good. I'm just more succinct than you.
Norway's oil money is put in a fund, it is not spent on funding redistributive policies.
My understanding is that the income from the fund is spent that way - but I might well be wrong, it may be infrastructure only (they have very pretty electric trains).
F1: the hearing to decide whether to reinstate Ricciardo/Red Bull's 2nd place in Australia after they were disqualified over a fuel-flow rate disagreement with the FIA is today (started about an hour ago).
They absolutely deserve to lose. There *are* issues with accurately measuring the fuel-flow, but all teams agreed to go along with the FIA, for the sake of the sport. Red Bull then decided to go their own way to try and take advantage of a tricky situation (in both technical and legal terms).
I suspect they'll lose, simply because if they win then what incentive does any team ever have to listen to a directive given to them during a race, if they know they ignore it, go on their merry way and win an appeal later?
"Aberdeen has seen the largest increase in disposable income in the UK since the credit crunch, according to a study of economic figures.
The analysis suggests households in the city are now better off by 19%, £2,285, compared with before the recession.
Brighton, Belfast and Blackpool also ranked well, with London seventh."
Yes its the burden of that volatile resource that would beggar Scotland but is great as all the money flows to London. Pity we did not control it and then perhaps more than Aberdeen in Scotland would be recovering.
I'd be wary about making any judgement based on Aberdeen. It's an anomalous (and lovely) place with a very different social and economic makeup to the rest of Scotland, or to the rest of the UK, for that matter. An example: the Heathrow-Aberdeen route is BA's most profitable route in Europe, on a per passenger basis.
How do they manage to dress themselves in the morning.
Tories have valets to find and attach clothes, malcolm.
A bit like Scots have ghillies to find and catch game.
Norway's oil money is put in a fund, it is not spent on funding redistributive policies.
My understanding is that the income from the fund is spent that way - but I might well be wrong, it may be infrastructure only (they have very pretty electric trains).
I think income from the fund contributes about 10% to the Norwegian budget.
@oflynndirector: I'm hearing speculation from normally reliable sources that Ed Davey is plotting a Lib Dem leadership bid - can that really be true?
Ed Davey - looooooool
I know they aren't polling very well at the moment but Ed Davey - seriously ?!
Carmichael won't be happy about this.
More likely that any leadership 'hopeful' will be preparing for the backlash if things go very pear shaped in May by sounding out those those lib dem MPs who might be sympathetic to them. Which always runs the danger of getting out if some of those MPs are still loyal to Clegg and want to try and preemptively rubbish their chances. If the whisper campaign against Clegg starts it will be obvious and it won't be reliant on the status of any of his challengers.
Do you think the orange-bookers have a chance? Personally I'd see a sharp left turn as inevitable for the Lib Dems as a knee-jerk to the damage done by association with the Tories.
Or course a coalition with Labour would also have caused them grievous harm. Whoever their partner, the status of 'protest party' and their ability to shape their image on a constituency basis has been lost for a decade.
If you take Jeremy Browne as the standard bearer for the orange-bookers then it's extraordinarily unlikely. Thing is, Browne doesn't really have much support at all and is a bit of a lone voice who would seem far happier in the tory party. Somewhat akin to the most extreme tory BOOer MPs who always look like they'd be far happier in UKIP. Clegg put Laws in charge of the 2015 manifesto which speaks volumes and indicates that he certainly wants things to keep going as they are. The continuity Clegg candidates would be the likes of Alexander, Laws perhaps even Davey and Lamb.
As you say though it's a bit much to expect the lib dem grass roots and MPs to be too happy with that and the chances are they would indeed look for a change of direction.
Any coalition always runs the danger of revealing where the lib dems and their leadership's priorities actually lie and cuts through all previous rhetoric. It's still worth noting though that the lib dems were in coalition with labour in scotland for two terms and they certainly didn't experience meltdown.
It all depends on how the voter perceives the lib dem leadership's actions compared to the campaign posturing with any dissonance and hypocrisy punished mercilessly if it's blatant.
If anyone can confirm the links work (as Fluffy kindly did yesterday), I'd be much obliged. I'm a technoidiot and the chances that I've failed are high.
"Aberdeen has seen the largest increase in disposable income in the UK since the credit crunch, according to a study of economic figures.
The analysis suggests households in the city are now better off by 19%, £2,285, compared with before the recession.
Brighton, Belfast and Blackpool also ranked well, with London seventh."
Yes its the burden of that volatile resource that would beggar Scotland but is great as all the money flows to London. Pity we did not control it and then perhaps more than Aberdeen in Scotland would be recovering.
I'd be wary about making any judgement based on Aberdeen. It's an anomalous (and lovely) place with a very different social and economic makeup to the rest of Scotland, or to the rest of the UK, for that matter. An example: the Heathrow-Aberdeen route is BA's most profitable route in Europe, on a per passenger basis.
How do they manage to dress themselves in the morning.
Tories have valets to find and attach clothes, malcolm.
A bit like Scots have ghillies to find and catch game.
Knuckle dragger malcolm has a nurse to adjust the velcro straps on his tartan suit jacket.
Patrick O'Flynn (@oflynndirector) 14/04/2014 09:48 I'm hearing speculation from normally reliable sources that Ed Davey is plotting a Lib Dem leadership bid - can that really be true?
Seems a bit early for that - you'd think they'd hold on until after the Euros. Unless Clegg is getting a Commission job after all...
Can't think why UKIP's head of media operations would want to spread such a rumour ...
the independence campaign has a women problem. The latest polling showed just 27 per cent of female Scots plan to vote Yes in September, compared to 46 per cent of men. Despite everything the Nationalists have done – put free childcare at the centre of their pitch; pick Nicola Sturgeon to front their media campaign – they've failed to make inroads with women.
If anyone can confirm the links work (as Fluffy kindly did yesterday), I'd be much obliged. I'm a technoidiot and the chances that I've failed are high.
Patrick O'Flynn (@oflynndirector) 14/04/2014 09:48 I'm hearing speculation from normally reliable sources that Ed Davey is plotting a Lib Dem leadership bid - can that really be true?
Seems a bit early for that - you'd think they'd hold on until after the Euros. Unless Clegg is getting a Commission job after all...
I would have thought it quite likely the LibDems replaced their leader in early 2015. They may do this without said person taking over as DPM (so as not to be too contaminated with the coalition).
The question is:
* Farron (to win back lefty Labour switchers) or * An Orange booker
There's still the middle option of putting in a caretaker just to get them through the election and then let the fun and games truly start afterwards. Which is where dear old Vince would offer his services. No doubt with a great deal of sadness and reluctance on his part but I've a feeling he would heroically manage to overcome that for 'the good of the party'.
I think the main election tactic the Tories will use is to frighten pensioners by saying that Labour will make them poorer, by increasing their taxes, changing their pensions/benefit entitlements and applying tax measures to take money away from them, that they would want to give to their children.
The Tories need a much bigger lead amongst the 60+ age group, to make up for current poor polling in the below 60 age groups. Older people tend to vote much more, so this will be a crucial age group for them. By attacking Labour, the Tories may also change the mind of some older people thinking of voting UKIP. Also some Lib Dems thinking of voting Labour may switch back.
If Labour want to avoid this, they need to be clear about the main policy areas that affect pensioners and they need to get this information out way before the election. They then need to keep repeating it, all the way to election day. There have been some comments from Labour people that a Labour government would need to look at changes to pensioner entitlements and what tax they contribute to ensure fairness. Some people believe that those aged 60+ have had an easier life with affordable homes and better economic conditions that their children/grandchildren will have. There is therefore a question of what can be done about this and one option is to look at taking more tax or benefits away from older people.
I'm working my way up to the Labour/Tory battle, and when I have time I'll have a look at UKIP's chances too.
Best of luck with the new blog antifrank. Looks good.
It's not intended as anything other than a place to store useful things where I can find them! If others find them useful, that's a bonus. There will be more posts along the same vein, but I'm not committing to post with any regularity.
Mr. 67, haven't Labour pledged to cut pension tax relief to help fund... er.. I think it's guaranteed 6 month long jobs for people under 25 who have been unemployed for a year or more?
@Bond_James_Bond - According to PISA, the best education systems in the world are state run. Even in the UK once you factor in social background state schools outperform the private sector. As to your other areas. I see very little evidence anywhere that, say, private policing is better than publicly-controlled policing; or that private healthcare for all but a select few is better than public healthcare. And so on.
He'll lack Clegg's toxicity, but he's also the Energy and Climate Change Archpriest. It could harm the Lib Dems to have the turmoil of a leadership election and probably the most pro-green man in government as leader.
That's definitely not an electoral liability. Greenery is generally popular with the voters, even Tory ones. (Although taxes to pay for it aren't.)
Wouldn't say that's strictly true. Scepticism has got stronger across most political strains in the last few years, though I would exclude the libdems from that. The socks and sandals brigade are staunchly in the windfarm fanclub. This is anecdotal but even in the most staunchly pro-labour areas such as mine (The Peoples Republic of The Rhondda) people really could not give a monkeys about climate change and are secure in the knowledge that even if sea levels rose we'd still be several hundred feet above sea level and Cardiff and London would be underwater (Result!). Plus those turbines on top of the mountain look ugly.
Climate chage is definitely one of those areas where it is poncey metro sexuals on one side with bumpkins on the other. Sides of Motorways and A-Roads are ideal for wind turbines, the countryside is already 'spoilt'. Mam Tor or Snowdonia national park ? No thanks.
@Bond_James_Bond - According to PISA, the best education systems in the world are state run. Even in the UK once you factor in social background state schools outperform the private sector. As to your other areas. I see very little evidence anywhere that, say, private policing is better than publicly-controlled policing; or that private healthcare for all but a select few is better than public healthcare. And so on.
Hi SO
Why do you think it is that the percentage of Oxford and Cambridge students from state schools rose from a pitifully low level in the 40s/50s to almost half in the early 70s and has dwindled ever since?
I think the main election tactic the Tories will use is to frighten pensioners by saying that Labour will make them poorer, by increasing their taxes, changing their pensions/benefit entitlements and applying tax measures to take money away from them, that they would want to give to their children.
The Tories need a much bigger lead amongst the 60+ age group, to make up for current poor polling in the below 60 age groups. Older people tend to vote much more, so this will be a crucial age group for them. By attacking Labour, the Tories may also change the mind of some older people thinking of voting UKIP. Also some Lib Dems thinking of voting Labour may switch back.
If Labour want to avoid this, they need to be clear about the main policy areas that affect pensioners and they need to get this information out way before the election. They then need to keep repeating it, all the way to election day. There have been some comments from Labour people that a Labour government would need to look at changes to pensioner entitlements and what tax they contribute to ensure fairness. Some people believe that those aged 60+ have had an easier life with affordable homes and better economic conditions that their children/grandchildren will have. There is therefore a question of what can be done about this and one option is to look at taking more tax or benefits away from older people.
Hucks, I am expecting my standard of living to fall after the election, and I am tempted to vote for whichever party is most honest about this. However, I doubt that more than 1 pensioner in 6 thinks as I do on this matter, so I expect to be able to resist temptation quite easily!
MM doesn't deny that Tories govern in the interests of the fortunate. Indeed, I read his post as an assertion that government can either be in the interests of the fortunate or else it is utterly irresponsible - there's no third way! To paraphrase: the pursuit of fairness is morally vicious.
MM doesn't deny that the world economy is run by the lizard people or that the moon is made of cheese.
Neither does he deny your super-human powers of extrapolation.
Unlike most here, I was brought up in what would pass today for very real poverty. I don't need to take lessons on what it means to be "the unfortunate poor". But I can give out lessons on how making the most of opportunity allowed me to rise above those circumstances. And how very good that feels. The more that can share my experience, the happier I will be. What I will say is that Government can take very little credit.
And what I will say is that 98%+ of those who drag themselves up from "very real poverty" do so by trampling on other peoples' heads. I'm happy to allow that you're in the tiny minority, though.
"Competition" means just that: a ritualised fight between individuals. "Perfect competition" is a fantasy which entrepreneurs (98% of whom are just crooks, of course) invoke to justify their behaviour. And yes, I do prefer my children to other people's, but I don't delude myself into thinking that that is anything other than extremely sinful behaviour.
Why do you think it's wrong to favour your own children over peoples'? You brought them into the world, and you certainly ought to favour them.
The size of the swings required by the SNP reflect their substantial under performance (compared to the Scottish elections and the local elections) of the SNP in 2010. I suspect that if the vote is "no" then there will be a lot of disappointed yes supporters who might be willing to give them a go. labour over performed in 2010 in Scotland and I do not think they will match that performance there even if Ed were to win a small majority. Taking all these factors into account I am expecting the SNP to gain seats in the event of a no vote despite what happened after the first devolution referendum was "lost".
The collapse of the Lib Dems in Scotland make their seats the obvious targets, even where the SNP were not second. So far as Labour is concerned I think Dundee West and Falkirk will be close and I think the SNP may well take South Ochil.
UK wages have returned to pre-recession levels, data is expected to show this week.
The figures, which are due out on Wednesday, are anticipated to reveal a 1.8% jump for the three months ended February 28th, according to a poll of economists carried out by Reuters.
If the data reveals that number, it would mean earnings have risen above the 1.7% climb in the February reading of the consumer price index, and the 1.6% figure expected for March and due to be announced on Tuesday.
Whether 32% or so of Lib Dem voters from 2010 remain with Labour depends on whether you think the Lib Dems will recover in any way from their current vote share of 10% or so. I would still expect Lib Dem support to recover to 14-15% or so.
I'd expect the Conservatives to come out ahead of Labour on about 36-34% at the next election. Baxter puts Labour ahead on those figures, but double incumbency may just give the edge to the Conservatives.
F1: a rumour is circulating Stefano Domenicali is either about to step down as team principal of Ferrari, or has already done so.
Slightly odd timing. After four seasons of near (and far) misses to go 3 races into 2014 would be a bit odd. That said, he may be the scapegoat for the engines being pretty bad. If he goes, of course. It's only a rumour right now.
@Bond_James_Bond - According to PISA, the best education systems in the world are state run. Even in the UK once you factor in social background state schools outperform the private sector. As to your other areas. I see very little evidence anywhere that, say, private policing is better than publicly-controlled policing; or that private healthcare for all but a select few is better than public healthcare. And so on.
Hi SO
Why do you think it is that the percentage of Oxford and Cambridge students from state schools rose from a pitifully low level in the 40s/50s to almost half in the early 70s and has dwindled ever since?
Grammar schools. That's one of the reasons why I support them in principle. I went to a grammar school and was the first person from my family to attend a university. It changed my life.
MM doesn't deny that Tories govern in the interests of the fortunate. Indeed, I read his post as an assertion that government can either be in the interests of the fortunate or else it is utterly irresponsible - there's no third way! To paraphrase: the pursuit of fairness is morally vicious.
MM doesn't deny that the world economy is run by the lizard people or that the moon is made of cheese.
Neither does he deny your super-human powers of extrapolation.
Unlike most here, I was brought up in what would pass today for very real poverty. I don't need to take lessons on what it means to be "the unfortunate poor". But I can give out lessons on how making the most of opportunity allowed me to rise above those circumstances. And how very good that feels. The more that can share my experience, the happier I will be. What I will say is that Government can take very little credit.
And what I will say is that 98%+ of those who drag themselves up from "very real poverty" do so by trampling on other peoples' heads. I'm happy to allow that you're in the tiny minority, though.
"Competition" means just that: a ritualised fight between individuals. "Perfect competition" is a fantasy which entrepreneurs (98% of whom are just crooks, of course) invoke to justify their behaviour. And yes, I do prefer my children to other people's, but I don't delude myself into thinking that that is anything other than extremely sinful behaviour.
Why do you think it's wrong to favour your own children over peoples'? You brought them into the world, and you certainly ought to favour them.
It's a thought. In practice of course I do but I don't delude myself that in so doing I am acting morally. Indeed, Sean, that may be a complete description of our political differences.
FWIW that's where I agree with Christianity; "property is theft" is where I agree with anarchism and "politics is determinant in the last instance" is where I agree with Marx.
Someone here recently posted a link to how schools are almost all dishonestly managed - no change there then from the 1980s or 1960s - it was, I think, the "say one thing do another" attitude of parents and teachers that moved me to the left politically. (For the record I left the Labour Party in 1990 and have no desire to re-join. For the same reason.)
F1: a rumour is circulating Stefano Domenicali is either about to step down as team principal of Ferrari, or has already done so.
Slightly odd timing. After four seasons of near (and far) misses to go 3 races into 2014 would be a bit odd. That said, he may be the scapegoat for the engines being pretty bad. If he goes, of course. It's only a rumour right now.
Alex Salmond has been accused of the “very worst type of tokenism” after attempting to win more female voters’ support for Scottish independence by promoting two women to his Cabinet.
Ruth Davidson, the Scottish Tory leader, said the announcement was a “particularly cynical stunt” and questioned why neither of the female ministers had been given this status over the past seven years of SNP rule at Holyrood.
OT for users of British bookmakers' websites, some of which I've heard are a bit rubbish: If anybody could hook me up with a screenshot showing an obvious WTF - something where you can tell at a glance that they're Doing It Wrong, or something that just looks hilariously bad - I'd much appreciate it. I'm working on some presentation slides.
Go to the Ladbrokes website and play around for 60 seconds, you should find something to your satisfaction. If that doesn't work, I seem to recall that the constituency betting markets have every constituency up there twice for some reason.
OK, I'll try that. I don't have logins for the UK bookmakers because you have to promise you live in the UK to open an account, so I'm limited to WTFs that I can see from the outside.
@Bond_James_Bond - According to PISA, the best education systems in the world are state run. Even in the UK once you factor in social background state schools outperform the private sector. As to your other areas. I see very little evidence anywhere that, say, private policing is better than publicly-controlled policing; or that private healthcare for all but a select few is better than public healthcare. And so on.
Hi SO
Why do you think it is that the percentage of Oxford and Cambridge students from state schools rose from a pitifully low level in the 40s/50s to almost half in the early 70s and has dwindled ever since?
Grammar schools. That's one of the reasons why I support them in principle. I went to a grammar school and was the first person from my family to attend a university. It changed my life.
Alex Salmond has been accused of the “very worst type of tokenism” after attempting to win more female voters’ support for Scottish independence by promoting two women to his Cabinet.
Ruth Davidson, the Scottish Tory leader, said the announcement was a “particularly cynical stunt” and questioned why neither of the female ministers had been given this status over the past seven years of SNP rule at Holyrood.
Note that the sample today had a heavily pro Conservative bias with a roughly 18% lead over Labour in the 2010 GE and even after the weighting adjustments a roughly 12% lead .
MM doesn't deny that Tories govern in the interests of the fortunate. Indeed, I read his post as an assertion that government can either be in the interests of the fortunate or else it is utterly irresponsible - there's no third way! To paraphrase: the pursuit of fairness is morally vicious.
MM doesn't deny that the world economy is run by the lizard people or that the moon is made of cheese.
Neither does he deny your super-human powers of extrapolation.
Unlike most here, I was brought up in what would pass today for very real poverty. I don't need to take lessons on what it means to be "the unfortunate poor". But I can give out lessons on how making the most of opportunity allowed me to rise above those circumstances. And how very good that feels. The more that can share my experience, the happier I will be. What I will say is that Government can take very little credit.
And what I will say is that 98%+ of those who drag themselves up from "very real poverty" do so by trampling on other peoples' heads. I'm happy to allow that you're in the tiny minority, though.
"Competition" means just that: a ritualised fight between individuals. "Perfect competition" is a fantasy which entrepreneurs (98% of whom are just crooks, of course) invoke to justify their behaviour. And yes, I do prefer my children to other people's, but I don't delude myself into thinking that that is anything other than extremely sinful behaviour.
Why do you think it's wrong to favour your own children over peoples'? You brought them into the world, and you certainly ought to favour them.
It's a thought. In practice of course I do but I don't delude myself that in so doing I am acting morally. Indeed, Sean, that may be a complete description of our political differences.
FWIW that's where I agree with Christianity; "property is theft" is where I agree with anarchism and "politics is determinant in the last instance" is where I agree with Marx.
Someone here recently posted a link to how schools are almost all dishonestly managed - no change there then from the 1980s or 1960s - it was, I think, the "say one thing do another" attitude of parents and teachers that moved me to the left politically. (For the record I left the Labour Party in 1990 and have no desire to re-join. For the same reason.)
But, I think you are acting morally in favouring your own children. You're being too hard on yourself.
I was asked today to fill out a survey on what I thought of the Ladbrokes website. It's always nice to be asked about things where I have strong opinions.
@Bond_James_Bond - According to PISA, the best education systems in the world are state run. Even in the UK once you factor in social background state schools outperform the private sector. As to your other areas. I see very little evidence anywhere that, say, private policing is better than publicly-controlled policing; or that private healthcare for all but a select few is better than public healthcare. And so on.
Hi SO
Why do you think it is that the percentage of Oxford and Cambridge students from state schools rose from a pitifully low level in the 40s/50s to almost half in the early 70s and has dwindled ever since?
Grammar schools. That's one of the reasons why I support them in principle. I went to a grammar school and was the first person from my family to attend a university. It changed my life.
@Bond_James_Bond - According to PISA, the best education systems in the world are state run. Even in the UK once you factor in social background state schools outperform the private sector. As to your other areas. I see very little evidence anywhere that, say, private policing is better than publicly-controlled policing; or that private healthcare for all but a select few is better than public healthcare. And so on.
Hi SO
Why do you think it is that the percentage of Oxford and Cambridge students from state schools rose from a pitifully low level in the 40s/50s to almost half in the early 70s and has dwindled ever since?
Errr: I think that state school pupils are still about half of Oxbridge intake, pretty much the same level as in 1970. IIRC, private is 35%, state is 50% and 15% is overseas.
Not only that, but (at Cambridge at least) those colleges with the highest proportion of state school pupils (Trinity, Kings) did significantly better academically than those with lowest proportions (Magdalen, Peterhouse).
Ed Davey is 7/1 to be next Lib Dem leader (with bet 365)
Ed Davey is a deluded and dangerous individual. If/when the lights go out people will be looking at him. With torches
While I agree that Greenery increases electricity prices, the Germans must be feeling very relieved that there focus on wind and solar has allowed them to cut gas usage 25% in the last three years.
I rather like Domenicali. Worked his way up from being a car park attendant to team principal of Ferrari, a real testament to F1's no-nonsense approach to competence being rewarded. Arguably, a bad strategy call in 2010 and two pieces of bad luck in 2012 cost him leading Ferrari to one or two drivers' titles.
Rumours swirling already that the odious Briatore or Ross Brawn could replace Domenicali.
MIss DiCanio (again), I can confirm I'd be willing to be a token Englishman in the Scottish Cabinet for a six figure salary.
I was asked today to fill out a survey on what I thought of the Ladbrokes website. It's always nice to be asked about things where I have strong opinions.
I'm particularly irked with the bet 365 website as well.
I had Liverpool to win 3-2 yesterday at 20/1.
As I hovered over the cash in button, it only takes one touch to cash in.
So instead of trousering £105 I got £17.50 instead.
@Bond_James_Bond - According to PISA, the best education systems in the world are state run. Even in the UK once you factor in social background state schools outperform the private sector. As to your other areas. I see very little evidence anywhere that, say, private policing is better than publicly-controlled policing; or that private healthcare for all but a select few is better than public healthcare. And so on.
Hi SO
Why do you think it is that the percentage of Oxford and Cambridge students from state schools rose from a pitifully low level in the 40s/50s to almost half in the early 70s and has dwindled ever since?
Errr: I think that state school pupils are still about half of Oxbridge intake, pretty much the same level as in 1970. IIRC, private is 35%, state is 50% and 15% is overseas.
Not only that, but (at Cambridge at least) those colleges with the highest proportion of state school pupils (Trinity, Kings) did significantly better academically than those with lowest proportions (Magdalen, Peterhouse).
Oxford too, from memory. Not surprising really; private school kids receive shed-loads of coaching and exam practice which gives them the edge over state school applicants at interview/selection. The advantage vanished when term starts, though, and the "true" capabilities of the students shows through.
The three cleverest people I've met were state-school-educated Oxford graduates.
MM doesn't deny that Tories govern in the interests of the fortunate. Indeed, I read his post as an assertion that government can either be in the interests of the fortunate or else it is utterly irresponsible - there's no third way! To paraphrase: the pursuit of fairness is morally vicious.
MM doesn't deny that the world economy is run by the lizard people or that the moon is made of cheese.
Neither does he deny your super-human powers of extrapolation.
very good that feels. The more that can share my experience, the happier I will be. What I will say is that Government can take very little credit.
Why do you think it's wrong to favour your own children over peoples'? You brought them into the world, and you certainly ought to favour them.
It's a thought. In practice of course I do but I don't delude myself that in so doing I am acting morally. Indeed, Sean, that may be a complete description of our political differences.
FWIW that's where I agree with Christianity; "property is theft" is where I agree with anarchism and "politics is determinant in the last instance" is where I agree with Marx.
Someone here recently posted a link to how schools are almost all dishonestly managed - no change there then from the 1980s or 1960s - it was, I think, the "say one thing do another" attitude of parents and teachers that moved me to the left politically. (For the record I left the Labour Party in 1990 and have no desire to re-join. For the same reason.)
But, I think you are acting morally in favouring your own children. You're being too hard on yourself.
It's a shame she's no longer with us, or I'd get my mother to explain to you why you've got that last sentence completely round your neck! On second thoughts, maybe "shame" isn't the word I want...
Apart from Schumacher (when I was younger), I've never really supported any one driver. When I decided to post regularly on F1 I decided to deliberately avoid being a supporter of anyone (I try not to be against anyone either, but Maldonado doesn't make that easy...). I think it's worked, for me, but your own football success suggests it's not essential to not be emotionally involved.
@Bond_James_Bond - According to PISA, the best education systems in the world are state run. Even in the UK once you factor in social background state schools outperform the private sector. As to your other areas. I see very little evidence anywhere that, say, private policing is better than publicly-controlled policing; or that private healthcare for all but a select few is better than public healthcare. And so on.
Hi SO
Why do you think it is that the percentage of Oxford and Cambridge students from state schools rose from a pitifully low level in the 40s/50s to almost half in the early 70s and has dwindled ever since?
Grammar schools. That's one of the reasons why I support them in principle. I went to a grammar school and was the first person from my family to attend a university. It changed my life.
Absolutely spot on.
Grammar schools were excellent for those of us lucky enough to go to them. The problem was the quality of education offered to those they excluded.
Apart from Schumacher (when I was younger), I've never really supported any one driver. When I decided to post regularly on F1 I decided to deliberately avoid being a supporter of anyone (I try not to be against anyone either, but Maldonado doesn't make that easy...). I think it's worked, for me, but your own football success suggests it's not essential to not be emotionally involved.
Yes but the state schools that supply that 50% are only available to people who live in the, usually very rich, catchment area of the existing grammar schools or 'state schools' that are 'non selective' on ability, but only select from a wealthy catchment area (the school that educates Michael Goves daughter is an example)
Comments
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/letters/10763812/Voters-turn-to-Ukip-because-the-Tories-are-no-longer-conservative.html
14/04/2014 09:48
I'm hearing speculation from normally reliable sources that Ed Davey is plotting a Lib Dem leadership bid - can that really be true?
LOL
I know they aren't polling very well at the moment but Ed Davey - seriously ?!
He'll lack Clegg's toxicity, but he's also the Energy and Climate Change Archpriest. It could harm the Lib Dems to have the turmoil of a leadership election and probably the most pro-green man in government as leader.
The question is whether turmoil and another man called Ed would be worse than Clegg. Probably not.
But how easy/hard would it be to axe Clegg?
Presumably the rumblings are beginning now so that there's a head of steam if, as expected, the yellows get a thrashing in the European elections.
They fled, understandably, in 2010 because their disgust at Lab under first Blair then Brown meant that even holding their nose wouldn't have been effective enough to be able to vote Lab. But their loathing of the Cons, as Nick P points out, meant they couldn't vote for the Tories so they fled to a (luckily) left-wing protest/alternative party.
Since then that left-wing/protest party has only gone and cosied up to the arch capitalists and betrayed those homeless left-wingers.
So back to Lab would seem logical.
But is it?
What has changed in Lab since 2010. Some (but not all) of the personalities, there have been no policy changes as there have been no policies, and the general incompetence and inability to choose the "correct" political direction (ie moving far, far to the left) remains.
So why go back?
The LDs, meanwhile a) are in power; and b) have forged a decent enough, though far from perfect, place for themselves as the restraining factor in an otherwise evil Tory govt.
Put them both together and that is quite a compelling reason for the Lab=>LD switchers=>Lab (from the polls) to re-switch => LDs.
The 1980s Conservatives are not what Conservatives were in the 1950s.
The 1950s Conservatives are not what Conservatives were in the 1920s.
Society moves on, as does politics.
More likely that any leadership 'hopeful' will be preparing for the backlash if things go very pear shaped in May by sounding out those those lib dem MPs who might be sympathetic to them. Which always runs the danger of getting out if some of those MPs are still loyal to Clegg and want to try and preemptively rubbish their chances. If the whisper campaign against Clegg starts it will be obvious and it won't be reliant on the status of any of his challengers.
If you drew one of those charts where on the x axis you've got "does badly / does well" from left to right, and on the y axis you've got "does cheaply / does expensively" from the bottom to the top, then pretty well everything the state does is going to be in the top left quadrant - meaning "does badly + does expensively".
There are exceptions. Defence and universities would be bottom right - the state does them cheaply, but quite well (for what is spent). Broadcasting would probably also be there, although it looks cheap only because everyone is forced to fund it. The licence fee would be about 4 to 5 times higher if it were only paid by BBC viewers.
Everything else the state does - education, healthcare, child care / protection / orphanages, tax collection, law enforcement, parking enforcement, pension provision, unemployment protection and transport - it does both badly and at excessive cost. A million heads were added to the public payroll between 1997 and 2010 during which time everything either stayed the same or got worse.
An exception would be financial regulation. This is done badly by the state, but costs nil via direct tax because the regulated pay for the regulator. The fees, along with the costs of compliance, ultimately find their way into retail product prices, of course, but there's no actual FCA tax.
Before I get accused of being subjective and partisan about what the state does badly, the measure I am using is broadly whether there is any paid-for private alternative to what the state does, that people who can afford to use prefer to use. Clearly, there are things like defence that individuals can't privately fund or arrange. But they can arrange private education, healthcare, policing and transport; and anyone who has dealt with HMRC will be aware that they are cretinous, aggressive monkeys.
The second issue about the state is that it has an inbuilt propensity towards low standards (all we are ever told about our children at school is that they are "above average", with an air of bafflement that this isn't good enough), towards the concealment of abuses (Mid Staffs, anything run by Margaret Hodge), towards the corrupt creation of futile jobs and hence it has an inexhaustible appetite for ever more money.
To say that the state has potential to be a force for good is like saying that cars are a force for good - the statement is so in need of qualification that it ends up meaning nothing.
The question is:
* Farron (to win back lefty Labour switchers)
or
* An Orange booker
Or course a coalition with Labour would also have caused them grievous harm. Whoever their partner, the status of 'protest party' and their ability to shape their image on a constituency basis has been lost for a decade.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/10763598/Bad-behaviour-in-students-is-glossed-over-to-maintain-schools-reputation-says-study.html
UK Polling Report described this as a "floor effect":
"As a caveat to this Lib Dem optimism though, look at the Scottish Parliament election in 2011. In that case Lib Dem incumbents didn’t seem to do any better, if anything the Liberal Democrats lost more support in areas where they had the most support to begin with, the very opposite pattern.
The cause of this is probably a floor effect (the Lib Dems lost 8% of the vote in the election, but started off with less than 8% in many seats, so by definition more of their lost support had to come in their stronger seats).
If the Lib Dems do really badly we may see the same effect at Westminster, if the Lib Dems lose enough support it’s impossible for it all to come from seats where they have hardly any support to begin with! "
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/7687
Meanwhile, Eggborough power station is closing because it's coal-fired and coal is the dung of Satan, and has been denied the funding Drax got to shift to wood-pellets/biofuel. We're also at serious risk of not having enough energy.
It's fair to say that sort of greenist zealotry will probably go down well with Lib Dems, though.
What a big jessie you are
Bit of an open goal but Conservatives 2010-2020 don't look like being Consevatives 1979-1997 either
Secondly the fact that we are constantly told the oil is running out yet thick Tories then boast about how well Aberdeen is doing out of oil. How do they manage to dress themselves in the morning.
They absolutely deserve to lose. There *are* issues with accurately measuring the fuel-flow, but all teams agreed to go along with the FIA, for the sake of the sport. Red Bull then decided to go their own way to try and take advantage of a tricky situation (in both technical and legal terms).
I suspect they'll lose, simply because if they win then what incentive does any team ever have to listen to a directive given to them during a race, if they know they ignore it, go on their merry way and win an appeal later?
And I doubt our politicians would have the discipline to do this.
A bit like Scots have ghillies to find and catch game.
As you say though it's a bit much to expect the lib dem grass roots and MPs to be too happy with that and the chances are they would indeed look for a change of direction.
Any coalition always runs the danger of revealing where the lib dems and their leadership's priorities actually lie and cuts through all previous rhetoric. It's still worth noting though that the lib dems were in coalition with labour in scotland for two terms and they certainly didn't experience meltdown.
It all depends on how the voter perceives the lib dem leadership's actions compared to the campaign posturing with any dissonance and hypocrisy punished mercilessly if it's blatant.
http://newstonoone.blogspot.co.uk/2014/04/the-snps-chances-in-2015-early.html
I'm working my way up to the Labour/Tory battle, and when I have time I'll have a look at UKIP's chances too.
The Tories need a much bigger lead amongst the 60+ age group, to make up for current poor polling in the below 60 age groups. Older people tend to vote much more, so this will be a crucial age group for them. By attacking Labour, the Tories may also change the mind of some older people thinking of voting UKIP. Also some Lib Dems thinking of voting Labour may switch back.
If Labour want to avoid this, they need to be clear about the main policy areas that affect pensioners and they need to get this information out way before the election. They then need to keep repeating it, all the way to election day. There have been some comments from Labour people that a Labour government would need to look at changes to pensioner entitlements and what tax they contribute to ensure fairness. Some people believe that those aged 60+ have had an easier life with affordable homes and better economic conditions that their children/grandchildren will have. There is therefore a question of what can be done about this and one option is to look at taking more tax or benefits away from older people.
Mr. Antifrank, best of luck with the new blog.
Why do you think it is that the percentage of Oxford and Cambridge students from state schools rose from a pitifully low level in the 40s/50s to almost half in the early 70s and has dwindled ever since?
The collapse of the Lib Dems in Scotland make their seats the obvious targets, even where the SNP were not second. So far as Labour is concerned I think Dundee West and Falkirk will be close and I think the SNP may well take South Ochil.
UK wages have returned to pre-recession levels, data is expected to show this week.
The figures, which are due out on Wednesday, are anticipated to reveal a 1.8% jump for the three months ended February 28th, according to a poll of economists carried out by Reuters.
If the data reveals that number, it would mean earnings have risen above the 1.7% climb in the February reading of the consumer price index, and the 1.6% figure expected for March and due to be announced on Tuesday.
All eyes on the Bingo card this week.
I'd expect the Conservatives to come out ahead of Labour on about 36-34% at the next election. Baxter puts Labour ahead on those figures, but double incumbency may just give the edge to the Conservatives.
Slightly odd timing. After four seasons of near (and far) misses to go 3 races into 2014 would be a bit odd. That said, he may be the scapegoat for the engines being pretty bad. If he goes, of course. It's only a rumour right now.
http://www.oecd.org/pisa/pisaproducts/pisainfocus/48482894.pdf
See chart on page 2.
Just looked - Tory score much higher in the days before the Spiral of Shame Shy Tory adjustment was pioneered. As I say, go figure.
Phil Hollman @ProcessorHalt 3m
.@Number10gov David Cameron: Stop MPs policing their own expenses http://www.change.org/en-GB/petitions/number10gov-david-cameron-stop-mps-policing-their-own-expenses … via @UKChange
No doubt yet another 'triumph' for Cammie after Maria Miller's expenses car-crash.
LOL
FWIW that's where I agree with Christianity; "property is theft" is where I agree with anarchism and "politics is determinant in the last instance" is where I agree with Marx.
Someone here recently posted a link to how schools are almost all dishonestly managed - no change there then from the 1980s or 1960s - it was, I think, the "say one thing do another" attitude of parents and teachers that moved me to the left politically. (For the record I left the Labour Party in 1990 and have no desire to re-join. For the same reason.)
http://www.gazzetta.it/Formula-1/14-04-2014/ferrari-domenicali-dimissioni-f1-80447411753.shtml
Is the SNP team "horribly white" ?
Six-figure salaries for the two tokens. Eck's generosity with other people's money is boundless.
Not only that, but (at Cambridge at least) those colleges with the highest proportion of state school pupils (Trinity, Kings) did significantly better academically than those with lowest proportions (Magdalen, Peterhouse).
undercovergovernor @undercovergov
A mouth and mind like a sewer!! Lynton Crosby still plans to ignore f***ing Muslims during election http://politicalscrapbook.net/2014/02/lynton-crosby-still-plans-to-ignore-fing-muslims-during-election/ … RT @psbook
I rather like Domenicali. Worked his way up from being a car park attendant to team principal of Ferrari, a real testament to F1's no-nonsense approach to competence being rewarded. Arguably, a bad strategy call in 2010 and two pieces of bad luck in 2012 cost him leading Ferrari to one or two drivers' titles.
Rumours swirling already that the odious Briatore or Ross Brawn could replace Domenicali.
MIss DiCanio (again), I can confirm I'd be willing to be a token Englishman in the Scottish Cabinet for a six figure salary.
I had Liverpool to win 3-2 yesterday at 20/1.
As I hovered over the cash in button, it only takes one touch to cash in.
So instead of trousering £105 I got £17.50 instead.
MPs' expenses pay for Conservative party conference gay orgy This from the people who tell us how to run our lives! http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/470168/MPs-expenses-pay-for-Conservative-party-conference-gay-orgy …
Equality Justice @Avitusparta 21h
David Cameron: 'Jesus invented the Big Society – I'm just continuing God's work' http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/david-cameron-claims-jesus-invented-the-big-society--he-is-just-continuing-gods-work-9250449.html … pic.twitter.com/GuDemQfe8j
The three cleverest people I've met were state-school-educated Oxford graduates.
I nearly made myself sick.
And I've got another month of this.
I just know Chelsea and or Norwich will ruin it for us.
Apart from Schumacher (when I was younger), I've never really supported any one driver. When I decided to post regularly on F1 I decided to deliberately avoid being a supporter of anyone (I try not to be against anyone either, but Maldonado doesn't make that easy...). I think it's worked, for me, but your own football success suggests it's not essential to not be emotionally involved.
And now I must go. The Bridge table calls...
Yes but the state schools that supply that 50% are only available to people who live in the, usually very rich, catchment area of the existing grammar schools or 'state schools' that are 'non selective' on ability, but only select from a wealthy catchment area (the school that educates Michael Goves daughter is an example)
Council estate kids dont make up much of that 50%