Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » With 17 months to go the Scottish #IndyRef YES appears to h

SystemSystem Posts: 8,489
edited May 2013 in General

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » With 17 months to go the Scottish #IndyRef YES appears to have a mountain to climb

Latest Scottish poll from Ipsos-MORI has NO in #indyref extending lead to 28% twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/st…

Read the full story here


«134

Comments

  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    Why's Sturgeon more popular than Salmond?
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 46,243
    FPT:

    From UKIP's website:

    "UKIP holds all three of the 'governing' parties of the past 20 years responsible for the catastrophic state of the UK's energy strategy, which will see sever energy shortages, soaring prices, brownouts and energy rationing from 2015 onwards. Here, our Energy and Industry spokesman Roger Helmer MEP describes what has gone so wrong ­– and how to put it right."

    I will offer evens that that there will be neither rationing nor brownouts in UK electricity in 2015 or 2016. Any size.

    I will also bet that - as global gas prices ease thanks to the US and Canada being able to export cheap shale gas (plus the giant Australian LNG fields of Gorgon and the like come on-stream) - that inflation-adjusted retail electricity prices in 2016 will be below current levels.

    Come on energy lovers - take me on :-)
  • GrandioseGrandiose Posts: 2,323
    Quite clearly, the "Yes" campaign is yet to 'break out' of its core areas. If I were leading an independence campaign, I'd want enthusiasm - because the costs will mount up post-independence and continuity of government vital - and that seems entirely lacking at the moment.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    Socrates said:

    Why's Sturgeon more popular than Salmond?

    Eck has a women problem. Expect 1000 posts on the subject.

  • MonikerDiCanioMonikerDiCanio Posts: 5,792
    The most curious finding is that 17 % of SNP supporters don't think Scotland should be an independent country.
  • QuincelQuincel Posts: 3,910
    That's some pretty heavy opposition from LD and Con voters. Now if only there were a few more of them in Scotland this might be even more over before it starts than it already is.
  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 9,124
    You will rue the day Mr Smithson!!!
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    Interesting article suggesting Eck may yet find an excuse for delaying the Neverendum

    http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2013/05/will-an-eu-referendum-kill-the-scottish-independence-referendum/
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    rcs1000 said:

    FPT:

    From UKIP's website:

    "UKIP holds all three of the 'governing' parties of the past 20 years responsible for the catastrophic state of the UK's energy strategy, which will see sever energy shortages, soaring prices, brownouts and energy rationing from 2015 onwards. Here, our Energy and Industry spokesman Roger Helmer MEP describes what has gone so wrong ­– and how to put it right."

    I will offer evens that that there will be neither rationing nor brownouts in UK electricity in 2015 or 2016. Any size.

    I will also bet that - as global gas prices ease thanks to the US and Canada being able to export cheap shale gas (plus the giant Australian LNG fields of Gorgon and the like come on-stream) - that inflation-adjusted retail electricity prices in 2016 will be below current levels.

    Come on energy lovers - take me on :-)

    What source would you use for electricity prices? What odds? Is CPI the measure for inflation?
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Scott_P said:

    Socrates said:

    Why's Sturgeon more popular than Salmond?

    Eck has a women problem. Expect 1000 posts on the subject.

    You can't talk about Eck and women - personal and family attacks are only allowed by the left.

    Otherwise I would have whipped out the Wayne Rooney / £40 gag.

  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    It's only one poll, but it seems like we may be approaching the Natterdämmerung.
  • JonathanDJonathanD Posts: 2,397
    antifrank said:

    It's only one poll, but it seems like we may be approaching the Natterdämmerung.


    The only thing that can save the SNPs indy ref is the prospect of Cameron winning power in 2015.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 71,143
    For fear of worse, Scots clung to nurse.
  • corporealcorporeal Posts: 2,549
    Scott_P said:
    MORI always do good graphics, head and shoulders above any other company in that regard.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 46,243
    edited May 2013
    @Socrates

    Evens on both.

    https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/171915/qep_mar_2013.pdf shows average UK electricity bills in 2012 were £479. Shall we use that as baseline (although we should technically use price per kwh)?

    CPI or RPI, either is fine.

    By the way, I think we are going to be completely flat on our Japan vs Italy bet. We were 50% GDP per capita, USD and 50% GDP per capita, local currency inflation adjusted. I think I will win handsomely in the USD-denominated one, and you will win by a smaller (but still significant) margin in local currency.
  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362
    edited May 2013
    On bbc 2 tonight,bradford: city dreams,it's documentary examining life in the west Yorkshire city,just to say,one of my local shop is on the programme ;-)

    http://www.radiotimes.com/episode/wkggt/bradford-city-of-dreams--series-1---episode-1
  • JonathanDJonathanD Posts: 2,397
    Pulpstar said:

    For fear of worse, Scots clung to nurse.


    Not at all. The Scots were a major part of building the Empire. We just realise that being part of the Union allows us to be appreciated on an even larger stage. Better together or some such.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 16,152
    edited May 2013
    JonathanD said:

    The only thing that can save the SNPs indy ref is the prospect of Cameron winning power in 2015.

    They should campaign on independence in Europe being the sensible, non-disruptive, status-quo option while the rest of the UK threatens to leave the EU. The Con vs UKIP who-hates-Europe-the-most bunfight in the early part of the same year should tee things up nicely.
  • hucks67hucks67 Posts: 758
    If I were resident in Scotland I would want a lot more information before I decided which way to vote. At the moment they don't know what currency they will be using, as the UK Treasury has issues with Scotland continuing with Sterling. If they can't have Sterling then they will need to have their own currency and central bank. Scotland would not need to apply to join the EU, if they want to do so and it may be a requirement to have the Euro. So currency would be one issue, which would also affect their interest rates. Because an independent Scotland would inherit a share of UK current debt, obviously the amount of interest that would be payable on this debt, would be an important issue, as it affects what budget they have for spending requirements.

    Not sure it a good idea to go through such a messy process, when the world economy is going through a difficult period.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 16,152
    hucks67 said:

    Not sure it a good idea to go through such a messy process, when the world economy is going through a difficult period.

    Agreed, if I was Scottish I'd want a "Dunno, ask me again in 10 years" option.
  • samsam Posts: 727
    edited May 2013
    FPT @antifrank

    @rcs1000 While I agree with your general point, I find it hard to summon up even the slightest respect for UKIP supporters while they can't agree among themselves on their flagship policy. Do they want to be in the EEA (and thus have to accept the current rules on immigration) or do they want to be outside the EEA (and thus be outside the common market)? Or do they want something that's not currently on offer but that they're 100% sure that they'd be able to get by some hocus pocus?

    While their main policy boils down to having their cake and eating it, it's not surprising they're condescended to.






    To be honest, as a UKIP supporter, (and member!) if being in the the EEA is almost identical to being in the EU and UKIP want to stay in it, I would regard them as fraudulent as the LDs, Cons and Labour and have to excercise my right not to vote.

    Would be interested to know from political experts what the difference between being in the EU and being out of it but in the EEA are. If there is no difference regarding movement of people to settle in the UK what is the point of UKIP?
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 59,117
    Surprised Sturgeon's more popular than Salmond. Where does Deep Fried Mars Bar rank?

    Mr. Tokyo, 10 years is too close. You can't ask people nation-defining questions every decade. Once they answer then that's got to be it for at least a generation.
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621
    edited May 2013
    corporeal said:

    Scott_P said:
    MORI always do good graphics, head and shoulders above any other company in that regard.
    The 'crowd' graphic at the top seriously short-changes the Nats. The 31% 'yes' crowd is the same size as the 10% 'undecided' crowd!

    Funny, yes, but not very fair.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 46,243
    sam said:

    FPT @antifrank

    @rcs1000 While I agree with your general point, I find it hard to summon up even the slightest respect for UKIP supporters while they can't agree among themselves on their flagship policy. Do they want to be in the EEA (and thus have to accept the current rules on immigration) or do they want to be outside the EEA (and thus be outside the common market)? Or do they want something that's not currently on offer but that they're 100% sure that they'd be able to get by some hocus pocus?

    While their main policy boils down to having their cake and eating it, it's not surprising they're condescended to.

    To be honest, as a UKIP supporter, (and member!) if being in the the EEA is almost identical to being in the EU and UKIP want to stay in it, I would regard them as fraudulent as the LDs, Cons and Labour and have to excercise my right not to vote.

    Would be interested to know from political experts what the difference between being in the EU and being out of it but in the EEA are. If there is no difference regarding movement of people to settle in the UK what is the point of UKIP?

    @Sam,

    It's a difficult one. I was in San Francisco with a friend of mine at the weekend and we were chatting about UKIP. He is a historic UKIP voter, and believes Britain would be best off out - as it would be (a) cheaper; and (b) it would allow us to loosen a number of burdensome regulations.

    But he looks on leaving the EEA and significantly reducing skilled immigration with absolute horror. His girlfriend runs an international charity in London, and she's Portugese. He genuinely thinks that free movement of labour through the EU is probably the only positive thing the EU has brought us.

    As goes your specific point: the EEA includes the provision for free movement of labour. However, it doesn't make it bureaucracy free. So, you can impose a requirement on immigrants to - for example - turn up at the police station to get their card stamped every month. In other words, there are lots of soft measures you can implement that would make immigration somewhat less attractive.
  • FinancierFinancier Posts: 3,916
    OT

    BT is to offer free Premier League football coverage to its broadband customers, the telecoms company has announced.

    After winning a three-year deal to show 38 Premier League games a season, BT has signalled its intent to challenge BSkyB's dominance of sports pay-TV.

    BSkyB's shares fell nearly 6% as BT unveiled its plans, which includes a £10-a-month broadband package.

    BT has 6.3 million broadband customers, but just 750,000 pay-TV customers.

    The aggressive move is an attempt to establish itself as a major multi-platform provider, offering TV, internet and telephone in one package.

    BT Sport's channels will also show 69 live Aviva Premiership rugby matches per season, plus live football from leagues in Germany, France, Italy and Brazil.

    BSkyB dominates the pay-TV market with around 10 million customers, but lags behind BT with 4.3 million broadband customers.

    BT Sport is also taking on BSkyB in pubs and clubs with a 12-months-for-nine subscription and free installation special offer lasting until 1 July.

    Around half the premises taking up the offer will end up paying £135 a month, BT said, while packages for hotels and betting shops could undercut Sky by 75%.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-22462525
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    edited May 2013
    @bbcnickrobinson: Eurosceptics Tory MPs are plotting a Commons vote on an EU referendum next week. They're tabling an amendment to the Queens Speech

    This is great news for Ed who's only articulated Europe policy is to never hold a referendum ever.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 46,243
    FPT @anotherDave

    Then put your money where your mouth is :-)

    Between 2005 and 2010, energy companies in the US and Canada spent tens of billions of dollars building LNG import terminals for the gas shortage that never came.

    Over the next eight years, the amount of LNG available for import will increase between 100 and 200%. There is more LNG in-planning or under-construction in Australia alone than the entire world market.

    As I said, I'm happy to take bets in any size. (Although for sizes over £500 or so, I think we should both put money in escrow, as I'm not happy with the credit risk.)
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 26,352
    sam said:

    FPT @antifrank

    @rcs1000 While I agree with your general point, I find it hard to summon up even the slightest respect for UKIP supporters while they can't agree among themselves on their flagship policy. Do they want to be in the EEA (and thus have to accept the current rules on immigration) or do they want to be outside the EEA (and thus be outside the common market)? Or do they want something that's not currently on offer but that they're 100% sure that they'd be able to get by some hocus pocus?

    While their main policy boils down to having their cake and eating it, it's not surprising they're condescended to.






    To be honest, as a UKIP supporter, (and member!) if being in the the EEA is almost identical to being in the EU and UKIP want to stay in it, I would regard them as fraudulent as the LDs, Cons and Labour and have to excercise my right not to vote.

    Would be interested to know from political experts what the difference between being in the EU and being out of it but in the EEA are. If there is no difference regarding movement of people to settle in the UK what is the point of UKIP?

    It is not necessary to be a member of the EEA to maintain free trade. In fact UKIP could get their migrant controls but still have the free trade by having us rejoin EFTA. Even so as Robert points out, remaining in the EEA also allows far greater controls on migrants. A case in point is Norway where, for example, you cannot settle permanently without taking 300 hours of compulsory language and culture schooling.
  • I find this all very interesting, one of the very few unknowns in current politics. The most significant figure is the 17% of SNP voters who do not want independence - to me that is NOT a surprise.

    In the last Scottish parliament elections the parliamentary aspect of the vote was a delusion, just as much as, or even more than it is in Westminster elections. It might not have been the question which was being asked but the question which the electorate answered was "Who will do the best job at sticking up for Scotland ?" There was only one answer and as a card carrying Tory for nearly forty years, if I had been up in Scotland I would have been struggling not to say Wee Eck.

    My fellow Tories look at me as if I have been hit on the head when I say this, but really. Even from just over the border, and fairly obsessed with politics I have barely a clue who any of the other people you mention are.

    The appeal to independence might not be rational but it pulls on the heart. Nobody who puts head before heart will vote for independence. However, I would not suppose from that that the independence campaign has lost in Scotland, or England.
  • samsam Posts: 727
    rcs1000 said:

    sam said:

    FPT @antifrank

    @rcs1000 While I agree with your general point, I find it hard to summon up even the slightest respect for UKIP supporters while they can't agree among themselves on their flagship policy. Do they want to be in the EEA (and thus have to accept the current rules on immigration) or do they want to be outside the EEA (and thus be outside the common market)? Or do they want something that's not currently on offer but that they're 100% sure that they'd be able to get by some hocus pocus?

    While their main policy boils down to having their cake and eating it, it's not surprising they're condescended to.

    To be honest, as a UKIP supporter, (and member!) if being in the the EEA is almost identical to being in the EU and UKIP want to stay in it, I would regard them as fraudulent as the LDs, Cons and Labour and have to excercise my right not to vote.

    Would be interested to know from political experts what the difference between being in the EU and being out of it but in the EEA are. If there is no difference regarding movement of people to settle in the UK what is the point of UKIP?

    @Sam,

    It's a difficult one. I was in San Francisco with a friend of mine at the weekend and we were chatting about UKIP. He is a historic UKIP voter, and believes Britain would be best off out - as it would be (a) cheaper; and (b) it would allow us to loosen a number of burdensome regulations.

    But he looks on leaving the EEA and significantly reducing skilled immigration with absolute horror. His girlfriend runs an international charity in London, and she's Portugese. He genuinely thinks that free movement of labour through the EU is probably the only positive thing the EU has brought us.

    As goes your specific point: the EEA includes the provision for free movement of labour. However, it doesn't make it bureaucracy free. So, you can impose a requirement on immigrants to - for example - turn up at the police station to get their card stamped every month. In other words, there are lots of soft measures you can implement that would make immigration somewhat less attractive.
    Thank you

  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 22,663
    Do any of PB's finest based in other European countries have a view on how other countries are viewing all the politicians here (OK - all 3 of them) saying that GB should leave.

    Or don't they know / care etc...?
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 30,774
    I asked twice this morning about the Yes Declaration.

    As you may recall, this was launched on May 25 last year. Alex Salmond claimed that, if one million signatures were obtained, then independence would happen. This somewhat dubious claim therefore makes the declaration more important than would otherwise be the case.

    The last figures I can see is that 143,000 people signed up, still a long way short of the one million mark promoted at launch. (1)

    There are 496 days left to reach one million.

    Does anyone have more recent figures?

    (1): http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-20539259
  • SandraMSandraM Posts: 206
    tim said:

    What a surprise, Gove's bonkers "Mr Men and Hitler" nonsense wasn't quite what he thought it was.
    Or he was deliberately misrepresenting it.


    Of course it's a task set for Year Elevens to teach the subject to primary school pupils

    http://www.activehistory.co.uk/Miscellaneous/menus/GCSE/mr_men.php

    Seems to have sucked in some very stupid tweeters

    I still find the idea of teaching the history of the Nazis by comparing the tragic events to Mr. Men cartoons quite distasteful.

  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 46,243
    No-one wants to take me on on energy prices :-(
  • samsam Posts: 727
    edited May 2013

    sam said:

    FPT @antifrank

    @rcs1000 While I agree with your general point, I find it hard to summon up even the slightest respect for UKIP supporters while they can't agree among themselves on their flagship policy. Do they want to be in the EEA (and thus have to accept the current rules on immigration) or do they want to be outside the EEA (and thus be outside the common market)? Or do they want something that's not currently on offer but that they're 100% sure that they'd be able to get by some hocus pocus?

    While their main policy boils down to having their cake and eating it, it's not surprising they're condescended to.






    To be honest, as a UKIP supporter, (and member!) if being in the the EEA is almost identical to being in the EU and UKIP want to stay in it, I would regard them as fraudulent as the LDs, Cons and Labour and have to excercise my right not to vote.

    Would be interested to know from political experts what the difference between being in the EU and being out of it but in the EEA are. If there is no difference regarding movement of people to settle in the UK what is the point of UKIP?

    It is not necessary to be a member of the EEA to maintain free trade. In fact UKIP could get their migrant controls but still have the free trade by having us rejoin EFTA. Even so as Robert points out, remaining in the EEA also allows far greater controls on migrants. A case in point is Norway where, for example, you cannot settle permanently without taking 300 hours of compulsory language and culture schooling.
    Thank you

    Well the EEA sounds much better than the EU, and I guess the £53million* (not billion) a day is saved?!

    Im going to a UKIP meeting in Hornchurch on July 11th, will be interesting to see the kind of people in attendance

    Fruitcakes, Loonies & Closet racists I expect!


  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 41,675
    Interesting that 81% of Scots Labour fans and 94% of LibDems are against.
  • taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    Financier.

    More evidence that the premiership rights are nothing short of a goldmine. Where would BSkyB's 10 million subscribers be without premiership football? its the key to the universe.

    Others with deep pockets may also be circling Sky's premier asset. You mentioned BT, but Virgin Media is now owned by the giant Liberty global. ITV is making a fortune under Adam Crozier. Then there's ESPN, Eurosport, Al Jazeera....

    Sky will fight tooth and nail to keep its content. Those UK premiership rights contracts are only ever going one way.
  • MarkSeniorMarkSenior Posts: 4,699
    O/T The Green Party administration of Brighton/Hove Council is close to collapse and the Party itself is unlikely to emerge intact from the current crisis which is over pay cuts and compensation package for council staff . See http://blog.scrapperduncan.com for background to the story .
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 46,243
    sam said:

    sam said:

    FPT @antifrank

    @rcs1000 While I agree with your general point, I find it hard to summon up even the slightest respect for UKIP supporters while they can't agree among themselves on their flagship policy. Do they want to be in the EEA (and thus have to accept the current rules on immigration) or do they want to be outside the EEA (and thus be outside the common market)? Or do they want something that's not currently on offer but that they're 100% sure that they'd be able to get by some hocus pocus?

    While their main policy boils down to having their cake and eating it, it's not surprising they're condescended to.






    To be honest, as a UKIP supporter, (and member!) if being in the the EEA is almost identical to being in the EU and UKIP want to stay in it, I would regard them as fraudulent as the LDs, Cons and Labour and have to excercise my right not to vote.

    Would be interested to know from political experts what the difference between being in the EU and being out of it but in the EEA are. If there is no difference regarding movement of people to settle in the UK what is the point of UKIP?

    It is not necessary to be a member of the EEA to maintain free trade. In fact UKIP could get their migrant controls but still have the free trade by having us rejoin EFTA. Even so as Robert points out, remaining in the EEA also allows far greater controls on migrants. A case in point is Norway where, for example, you cannot settle permanently without taking 300 hours of compulsory language and culture schooling.
    Thank you

    Well the EEA sounds much better than the EU, and I guess the £53bn a day is saved?!

    Im going to a UKIP meeting in Hornchurch on July 11th, will be interesting to see the kind of people in attendance

    Fruitcakes, Loonies & Closet racists I expect!


    I think you may have an order-of-magnitude error in there... £53bn a day would be around £20 trillion a year. Which is 7x the size of UK GDP.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 10,503
    Afternoon all :)

    One or two responses and some heavy doses of wishful thinking on the previous thread. I agree the Conservative/Labour combined share is in long-term decline from 97% in 1951 to 65% in 2010 which is pretty good going. One could argue that on the basis of the lowest figures for the two parties it could get down to 60% but no lower.

    The problem is the concentration of those votes means the duopoly in terms of seats is much stronger - in 1951 the combined total was 616 seats, in 2010 it was still 564. UKIP has opened up some new fronts in areas which had seen little competition (and that shouldn't surprise) but couldn't break into areas which were already competitive.

    For any third or fourth party to break the vote/seat stranglehold of the Conservative and Labour parties is a massive undertaking. Even if you got the Conservative and Labour parties down to 29% each they'd still have around 375 seats betwen them by my reckoning. Realistically, the insurgent party needs to be looking at 35-40% of the vote to make "the breakthrough" and drive the other two parties down to historic low numbers in terms of votes.

    The only other option is a schism in either of the two parties - Labour suffered one in 1981 which arguably put them in Opposition for a decade or more. The Conservatives suffered the same in the 19th Century. Both parties know that hanging together is infinitely preferrable to hanging separately. Some thought or hoped Labour would split apart after 2010 - they haven't. The Conservatives held together in Opposition for an unprecedented thirteen years.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 41,675
    rcs1000 said:

    sam said:

    sam said:

    FPT @antifrank

    @rcs1000 While I agree with your general point, I find it hard to summon up even the slightest respect for UKIP supporters while they can't agree among themselves on their flagship policy. Do they want to be in the EEA (and thus have to accept the current rules on immigration) or do they want to be outside the EEA (and thus be outside the common market)? Or do they want something that's not currently on offer but that they're 100% sure that they'd be able to get by some hocus pocus?

    While their main policy boils down to having their cake and eating it, it's not surprising they're condescended to.






    To be honest, as a UKIP supporter, (and member!) if being in the the EEA is almost identical to being in the EU and UKIP want to stay in it, I would regard them as fraudulent as the LDs, Cons and Labour and have to excercise my right not to vote.

    Would be interested to know from political experts what the difference between being in the EU and being out of it but in the EEA are. If there is no difference regarding movement of people to settle in the UK what is the point of UKIP?

    It is not necessary to be a member of the EEA to maintain free trade. In fact UKIP could get their migrant controls but still have the free trade by having us rejoin EFTA. Even so as Robert points out, remaining in the EEA also allows far greater controls on migrants. A case in point is Norway where, for example, you cannot settle permanently without taking 300 hours of compulsory language and culture schooling.
    Thank you

    Well the EEA sounds much better than the EU, and I guess the £53bn a day is saved?!

    Im going to a UKIP meeting in Hornchurch on July 11th, will be interesting to see the kind of people in attendance

    Fruitcakes, Loonies & Closet racists I expect!


    I think you may have an order-of-magnitude error in there... £53bn a day would be around £20 trillion a year. Which is 7x the size of UK GDP.
    18 billion a year / 365.25 = 49 million a day.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 46,243

    rcs1000 said:

    sam said:

    sam said:

    FPT @antifrank

    @rcs1000 While I agree with your general point, I find it hard to summon up even the slightest respect for UKIP supporters while they can't agree among themselves on their flagship policy. Do they want to be in the EEA (and thus have to accept the current rules on immigration) or do they want to be outside the EEA (and thus be outside the common market)? Or do they want something that's not currently on offer but that they're 100% sure that they'd be able to get by some hocus pocus?

    While their main policy boils down to having their cake and eating it, it's not surprising they're condescended to.






    To be honest, as a UKIP supporter, (and member!) if being in the the EEA is almost identical to being in the EU and UKIP want to stay in it, I would regard them as fraudulent as the LDs, Cons and Labour and have to excercise my right not to vote.

    Would be interested to know from political experts what the difference between being in the EU and being out of it but in the EEA are. If there is no difference regarding movement of people to settle in the UK what is the point of UKIP?

    It is not necessary to be a member of the EEA to maintain free trade. In fact UKIP could get their migrant controls but still have the free trade by having us rejoin EFTA. Even so as Robert points out, remaining in the EEA also allows far greater controls on migrants. A case in point is Norway where, for example, you cannot settle permanently without taking 300 hours of compulsory language and culture schooling.
    Thank you

    Well the EEA sounds much better than the EU, and I guess the £53bn a day is saved?!

    Im going to a UKIP meeting in Hornchurch on July 11th, will be interesting to see the kind of people in attendance

    Fruitcakes, Loonies & Closet racists I expect!


    I think you may have an order-of-magnitude error in there... £53bn a day would be around £20 trillion a year. Which is 7x the size of UK GDP.
    18 billion a year / 365.25 = 49 million a day.
    Sam wrote £53bn a day. So, yes, an order-of-magnitude error.
  • RichardNabaviRichardNabavi Posts: 3,413
    edited May 2013

    It is not necessary to be a member of the EEA to maintain free trade. In fact UKIP could get their migrant controls but still have the free trade by having us rejoin EFTA.

    Fine, but that's not UKIP's policy, as far as one can tell. If Farage thinks we should leave the EEA, he should say so. Instead, he is totally dishonest by mentioning Norway as a model, and explicitly saying we'd stay in the EEA, whilst simultaneously pretending we'd have complete sovereignty on immigration. It's only a matter of time before the press finally wake up to this and start challenging him on it. This is one reason why I'm not too concerned about UKIP - the fallacy of their position is so ludicrous that it won't last a whole two years

    As regards EFTA, as Alex Salmond keeps forgetting, it takes two to tango. We can only rejoin EFTA if the current members agree, and in practice on terms negotiated with the EU.

    None of this is insurmountable, of course (except the immigration point, which I suspect is). However, you have to be honest: if we leave the EU, we will have to carry out much the same negotiation about terms of access to the Single Market as we would if we stay in and negotiate opt-outs. Nothing is automatic; it's a question of haggling and trade-offs.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Perhaps teenagers should be set the task of explaining the plot of Bleak House through the medium of interpretative dance.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    antifrank said:

    Perhaps teenagers should be set the task of explaining the plot of Bleak House through the medium of interpretative dance.

    Can you not get an Arts Council grant for that?

  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    edited May 2013
    @GuidoFawkes: UPDATE: Ed's policy chief Jon Cruddas has reportedly signed the Tory backbench EU amendment http://bit.ly/13jS3Yn

    What is Ed's policy now then?

    @BBCNormanS: Labour deny that John Cruddas among signatories to Tory EU referendum motion
  • RichardNabaviRichardNabavi Posts: 3,413
    Apologies for talking about Scotland on the last thread and the EU on this thread, but I do think people are underestimating our bargaining power in negotiating repatriation of powers. Our key partners will be desperate to keep us from leaving. Germany would be absolutely horrified at being left the only large non-ClubMed economy and the only large pro-business country in the EU. France, Italy and the smaller countries will be worried about an EU completely dominated by Germany. The nomenklatura will be horrified at the very idea of anyone leaving their sacred construction.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 26,352

    It is not necessary to be a member of the EEA to maintain free trade. In fact UKIP could get their migrant controls but still have the free trade by having us rejoin EFTA.

    Fine, but that's not UKIP's policy, as far as one can tell. If Farage thinks we should leave the EEA, he should say so. Instead, he is totally dishonest by mentioning Norway as a model, and explicitly saying we'd stay in the EEA, whilst simultaneously pretending we'd have complete sovereignty on immigration. It's only a matter of time before the press finally wake up to this and start challenging him on it. This is one reason why I'm not too concerned about UKIP - the fallacy of their position is so ludicrous that it won't last a whole two years

    As regards EFTA, as Alex Salmond keeps forgetting, it takes two to tango. We can only rejoin EFTA if the current members agree, and in practice on terms negotiated with the EU.

    None of this is insurmountable, of course (except the immigration point, which I suspect is). However, you have to be honest: if we leave the EU, we will have to carry out much the same negotiation about terms of access to the Single Market as we would if we stay in and negotiate opt-outs. Nothing is automatic; it's a question of haggling and trade-offs.
    But as I pointed out even remaining in the EEA gives us far more control over migrants and what they can do when they are here compared to the current situation as a member of the EU.

    The only real fallacy is the Tory one (and I presume yours) which pretends we can remain inside the EU and change it to suit our needs against the wishes of the rest of the bloc. As evidenced by the last few days more and more people are seeing the idiocy and dishonesty of this claim and are coming to the only logical conclusion which is that we must leave.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @pppolitics: The price on a nationwide referendum on leaving the EU before the next election has been cut to 8/1
  • MillsyMillsy Posts: 900
    How much difference does the new group of 16/17 year old voters make? I'm assuming they're broadly in favour as Salmond went after them, but are they polled?
  • perdixperdix Posts: 1,806

    It is not necessary to be a member of the EEA to maintain free trade. In fact UKIP could get their migrant controls but still have the free trade by having us rejoin EFTA.

    Fine, but that's not UKIP's policy, as far as one can tell. If Farage thinks we should leave the EEA, he should say so. Instead, he is totally dishonest by mentioning Norway as a model, and explicitly saying we'd stay in the EEA, whilst simultaneously pretending we'd have complete sovereignty on immigration. It's only a matter of time before the press finally wake up to this and start challenging him on it. This is one reason why I'm not too concerned about UKIP - the fallacy of their position is so ludicrous that it won't last a whole two years

    As regards EFTA, as Alex Salmond keeps forgetting, it takes two to tango. We can only rejoin EFTA if the current members agree, and in practice on terms negotiated with the EU.

    None of this is insurmountable, of course (except the immigration point, which I suspect is). However, you have to be honest: if we leave the EU, we will have to carry out much the same negotiation about terms of access to the Single Market as we would if we stay in and negotiate opt-outs. Nothing is automatic; it's a question of haggling and trade-offs.
    Someone speaks the truth at last about ukip's incoherent policies.

  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 26,352
    tim said:

    Sams going to do a 360 degree turn on his £53bn a day figure.

    It shows the paucity of your arguments Tim that you are reduced to having to scorn someone based on a typo.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    Millsy said:

    I'm assuming they're broadly in favour as Salmond went after them

    Salmond has made a series of assumptions that have not turned out entirely to his advantage

  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    rcs1000 said:

    @Socrates

    Evens on both.

    https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/171915/qep_mar_2013.pdf shows average UK electricity bills in 2012 were £479. Shall we use that as baseline (although we should technically use price per kwh)?

    CPI or RPI, either is fine.

    By the way, I think we are going to be completely flat on our Japan vs Italy bet. We were 50% GDP per capita, USD and 50% GDP per capita, local currency inflation adjusted. I think I will win handsomely in the USD-denominated one, and you will win by a smaller (but still significant) margin in local currency.

    I knew at the time the USD number would screw me! All funny exchange rate movements rather than actual growth.

    Does that £479 include VAT?
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 41,675
    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    sam said:

    sam said:

    FPT @antifrank

    @rcs1000 While I agree with your general point, I find it hard to summon up even the slightest respect for UKIP supporters while they can't agree among themselves on their flagship policy. Do they want to be in the EEA (and thus have to accept the current rules on immigration) or do they want to be outside the EEA (and thus be outside the common market)? Or do they want something that's not currently on offer but that they're 100% sure that they'd be able to get by some hocus pocus?

    While their main policy boils down to having their cake and eating it, it's not surprising they're condescended to.






    To be honest, as a UKIP supporter, (and member!) if being in the the EEA is almost identical to being in the EU and UKIP want to stay in it, I would regard them as fraudulent as the LDs, Cons and Labour and have to excercise my right not to vote.

    Would be interested to know from political experts what the difference between being in the EU and being out of it but in the EEA are. If there is no difference regarding movement of people to settle in the UK what is the point of UKIP?

    It is not necessary to be a member of the EEA to maintain free trade. In fact UKIP could get their migrant controls but still have the free trade by having us rejoin EFTA. Even so as Robert points out, remaining in the EEA also allows far greater controls on migrants. A case in point is Norway where, for example, you cannot settle permanently without taking 300 hours of compulsory language and culture schooling.
    Thank you

    Well the EEA sounds much better than the EU, and I guess the £53bn a day is saved?!

    Im going to a UKIP meeting in Hornchurch on July 11th, will be interesting to see the kind of people in attendance

    Fruitcakes, Loonies & Closet racists I expect!


    I think you may have an order-of-magnitude error in there... £53bn a day would be around £20 trillion a year. Which is 7x the size of UK GDP.
    18 billion a year / 365.25 = 49 million a day.
    Sam wrote £53bn a day. So, yes, an order-of-magnitude error.
    Aid to India is only 300 million a year, aid to the EU 18 billion (or 10 billion if you prefer the net amount).

  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    edited May 2013
    Fruitcakes are very resilient, Richard.

    You soak them in brandy; wrap them in tin foil; store them in a dark cupboard; and they will come out in a decade as solid as the day they were made.


    This is one reason why I'm not too concerned about UKIP - the fallacy of their position is so ludicrous that it won't last a whole two years.



  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    Due to the unique way they are funded...

    @GuidoFawkes: Guido understands that the BBC have confused Jon Cruddas with John Cryer. Jon Cruddas has not signed.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 26,352
    perdix said:



    Someone speaks the truth at last about ukip's incoherent policies.

    Be nice if someone could speak the truth about the utterly dishonest Tory policies.
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    @RichardNabavi The way Farage should square the circle is the position I have argued. We should leave the EU and stay in the EEA immediately, while we negotiate a bunch of trading agreements, and then make use of the controls we could have. When we have a wider trading network, we can then negotiate a bilateral agreement with the EU from a position of strength, before leaving the EEA.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 26,352
    tim said:

    Can UKIP and the Tories explain their European Policies by using Mr Men cartoons please.

    Using the following characters.

    Mr Impossible
    Mr Topsy Turvy
    Mr Daydream
    Mr Muddle

    Or Labour using Mr LaLa.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    Lucky for Ed nobody has ever compared him to a cartoon character...

    Oh.
  • RichardNabaviRichardNabavi Posts: 3,413

    But as I pointed out even remaining in the EEA gives us far more control over migrants and what they can do when they are here compared to the current situation as a member of the EU.

    Not really. Farage goes on at great length about 'work permits' to keep out Eastern Europeans who want to work here. Yet he also says we should stay in the EEA, or at least, he sometimes says that, and he often cites Norway.

    That's just dishonest, isn't it?
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 41,675
    Surely tim is Mr Troll?

    :)
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    @RichardNabavi

    How exactly is the supposed pro-business bloc in the ascendancy right now? They can't even form a blocking position to demanding we pay for billions in EU overspending.
  • taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    Our key partners will be desperate to keep us from leaving.

    After what Dave said today about 'pessimists' I wonder if the powers that be in the EU have already quietly intimated to Dave he will be thrown a bone on this issue....

  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 16,152
    OT, I don't suppose any British politicians will dare to do anything about it, but a good piece on the damage done to economies by home ownership:
    The bottom line? A state's homeownership rate may be a powerful precursor to "eventual sharp rises in unemployment in that state." The authors find that a doubling of a state's rate of homeownership "is followed in the long-run by more than a doubling of the later unemployment rate."

    Higher rates of homeownership lead to higher rates of unemployment, according to the authors, in three key ways: by restricting labor mobility, generating longer commutes, and by lowering rates of new business formation.
    http://www.theatlanticcities.com/jobs-and-economy/2013/05/link-betweeen-high-levels-homeownership-and-unemployment/5520/
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 46,243
    Socrates said:

    rcs1000 said:

    @Socrates

    Evens on both.

    https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/171915/qep_mar_2013.pdf shows average UK electricity bills in 2012 were £479. Shall we use that as baseline (although we should technically use price per kwh)?

    CPI or RPI, either is fine.

    By the way, I think we are going to be completely flat on our Japan vs Italy bet. We were 50% GDP per capita, USD and 50% GDP per capita, local currency inflation adjusted. I think I will win handsomely in the USD-denominated one, and you will win by a smaller (but still significant) margin in local currency.

    I knew at the time the USD number would screw me! All funny exchange rate movements rather than actual growth.

    Does that £479 include VAT?
    While I was fairly sure the Yen would be weak, and was less sure about GDP per head :-)

    Re VAT, I have no idea. Shall we just use the UK average electricity bill as quoted in www.gov.uk. It's probably not a perfect metric (and benefits you as - presumably - there is growth in the number of kwh used per household thanks to rising penetration of electrical devices), but it is at least a consistent number we can use.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 46,243
    rcs1000 said:

    Socrates said:

    rcs1000 said:

    @Socrates

    Evens on both.

    https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/171915/qep_mar_2013.pdf shows average UK electricity bills in 2012 were £479. Shall we use that as baseline (although we should technically use price per kwh)?

    CPI or RPI, either is fine.

    By the way, I think we are going to be completely flat on our Japan vs Italy bet. We were 50% GDP per capita, USD and 50% GDP per capita, local currency inflation adjusted. I think I will win handsomely in the USD-denominated one, and you will win by a smaller (but still significant) margin in local currency.

    I knew at the time the USD number would screw me! All funny exchange rate movements rather than actual growth.

    Does that £479 include VAT?
    While I was fairly sure the Yen would be weak, and was less sure about GDP per head :-)

    Re VAT, I have no idea. Shall we just use the UK average electricity bill as quoted in www.gov.uk. It's probably not a perfect metric (and benefits you as - presumably - there is growth in the number of kwh used per household thanks to rising penetration of electrical devices), but it is at least a consistent number we can use.
    Oh yes, and shall, say that if CPI and RPI give different results, we'll call the bet a wash.

    (Which means that based on our history of betting, probably means it'll lag the CPI and beat the RPI...)
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621
    edited May 2013
    @RichardNabavi
    That's just dishonest politics, isn't it?
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 21,645
    @Avery

    " the fallacy of their position is so ludicrous that it won't last a whole two years."

    good to see Cameron and UKIP have found some common ground.
  • JonathanDJonathanD Posts: 2,397
    NIESR GDP estimate out. I hope George is having fun with the IMF's visitation.


    "Our monthly estimates of GDP suggest that output grew by 0.8 per cent in the three
    months ending in April after growth of 0.3 per cent in the three months ending in March
    2013"

    http://www.niesr.ac.uk/sites/default/files/gdp0513.pdf
  • RichardNabaviRichardNabavi Posts: 3,413
    Socrates said:

    @RichardNabavi The way Farage should square the circle is the position I have argued. We should leave the EU and stay in the EEA immediately, while we negotiate a bunch of trading agreements, and then make use of the controls we could have. When we have a wider trading network, we can then negotiate a bilateral agreement with the EU from a position of strength, before leaving the EEA.

    He could say that, but he doesn't. That is the point.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 35,338
    The question is can A Salmond stay at the helm after the inevitable "IN" vote to negotiate the extra concessions from Westminster?
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 21,645
    Socrates said:

    @RichardNabavi

    How exactly is the supposed pro-business bloc in the ascendancy right now? They can't even form a blocking position to demanding we pay for billions in EU overspending.

    Odd to see Ricahrd N arguing a FTT is pro-business; I thought this was one of his red lines.
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    rcs1000 said:

    Socrates said:

    rcs1000 said:

    @Socrates

    Evens on both.

    https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/171915/qep_mar_2013.pdf shows average UK electricity bills in 2012 were £479. Shall we use that as baseline (although we should technically use price per kwh)?

    CPI or RPI, either is fine.

    By the way, I think we are going to be completely flat on our Japan vs Italy bet. We were 50% GDP per capita, USD and 50% GDP per capita, local currency inflation adjusted. I think I will win handsomely in the USD-denominated one, and you will win by a smaller (but still significant) margin in local currency.

    I knew at the time the USD number would screw me! All funny exchange rate movements rather than actual growth.

    Does that £479 include VAT?
    While I was fairly sure the Yen would be weak, and was less sure about GDP per head :-)

    Re VAT, I have no idea. Shall we just use the UK average electricity bill as quoted in www.gov.uk. It's probably not a perfect metric (and benefits you as - presumably - there is growth in the number of kwh used per household thanks to rising penetration of electrical devices), but it is at least a consistent number we can use.
    If we restrict it to just CPI, I'll bet £40.
  • Financier said:

    OT

    BT is to offer free Premier League football coverage to its broadband customers, the telecoms company has announced.

    After winning a three-year deal to show 38 Premier League games a season, BT has signalled. its intent to challenge BSkyB's dominance of sports pay-TV.


    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-22462525

    This sounds like great news - next stop Cricket test matches, Golf majors and F1.

    It's high time someone took on Sky in winning back some of the highly-prized sporting events which the BBC wantonly let go in order to keep their overpaid executives in the manner to which they had grown accustomed.

  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143
    stodge said:

    Afternoon all :)

    One or two responses and some heavy doses of wishful thinking on the previous thread. I agree the Conservative/Labour combined share is in long-term decline from 97% in 1951 to 65% in 2010 which is pretty good going. One could argue that on the basis of the lowest figures for the two parties it could get down to 60% but no lower.

    The problem is the concentration of those votes means the duopoly in terms of seats is much stronger - in 1951 the combined total was 616 seats, in 2010 it was still 564. UKIP has opened up some new fronts in areas which had seen little competition (and that shouldn't surprise) but couldn't break into areas which were already competitive.

    For any third or fourth party to break the vote/seat stranglehold of the Conservative and Labour parties is a massive undertaking. Even if you got the Conservative and Labour parties down to 29% each they'd still have around 375 seats betwen them by my reckoning. Realistically, the insurgent party needs to be looking at 35-40% of the vote to make "the breakthrough" and drive the other two parties down to historic low numbers in terms of votes.

    The only other option is a schism in either of the two parties - Labour suffered one in 1981 which arguably put them in Opposition for a decade or more. The Conservatives suffered the same in the 19th Century. Both parties know that hanging together is infinitely preferrable to hanging separately. Some thought or hoped Labour would split apart after 2010 - they haven't. The Conservatives held together in Opposition for an unprecedented thirteen years.

    Stodge, my best guess would be that the combined share of Labour and Conservative will be in the range 60 - 65%, a bit down on 2010, but not in a new epoch kind of way.

    The thing is, if your starting point is the latest YouGov poll, this means you also have to look at where a few percent of support from Labour and the Conservatives is going to drift to, not just in terms of what UKIP voters are going to do when faced with a forced choice.

    Something like Labour 34%, Conservative 30%, UKIP 14%, Lib Dem 14%, Others 8% would be my rough guess now. That has a bit of swing-back from Labour and UKIP to Lib Dem and Conservative.

    The big two parties end up with more seats between them, even with a smaller share of the vote, according to electoral calculus. I don't dispute that as a likely outcome, but that's the joy of FPTP for you.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    TOPPING said:

    The question is can A Salmond stay at the helm after the inevitable "IN" vote to negotiate the extra concessions from Westminster?

    No, but of course Nicola is leading the referendum campaign. Eck is already donning the Teflon shirt

  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    edited May 2013
    @rcs1000

    ... thanks to rising penetration of electrical devices...

    Is this what Mr. Brooke would refer to as import substitution, Robert?

  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 46,243
    Socrates said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Socrates said:

    rcs1000 said:

    @Socrates

    Evens on both.

    https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/171915/qep_mar_2013.pdf shows average UK electricity bills in 2012 were £479. Shall we use that as baseline (although we should technically use price per kwh)?

    CPI or RPI, either is fine.

    By the way, I think we are going to be completely flat on our Japan vs Italy bet. We were 50% GDP per capita, USD and 50% GDP per capita, local currency inflation adjusted. I think I will win handsomely in the USD-denominated one, and you will win by a smaller (but still significant) margin in local currency.

    I knew at the time the USD number would screw me! All funny exchange rate movements rather than actual growth.

    Does that £479 include VAT?
    While I was fairly sure the Yen would be weak, and was less sure about GDP per head :-)

    Re VAT, I have no idea. Shall we just use the UK average electricity bill as quoted in www.gov.uk. It's probably not a perfect metric (and benefits you as - presumably - there is growth in the number of kwh used per household thanks to rising penetration of electrical devices), but it is at least a consistent number we can use.
    If we restrict it to just CPI, I'll bet £40.
    Done.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 21,645
    TOPPING said:

    The question is can A Salmond stay at the helm after the inevitable "IN" vote to negotiate the extra concessions from Westminster?

    can Cameron ?

  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621
    edited May 2013

    Financier said:

    OT

    BT is to offer free Premier League football coverage to its broadband customers, the telecoms company has announced.

    After winning a three-year deal to show 38 Premier League games a season, BT has signalled. its intent to challenge BSkyB's dominance of sports pay-TV.


    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-22462525

    This sounds like great news - next stop Cricket test matches, Golf majors and F1.

    It's high time someone took on Sky in winning back some of the highly-prized sporting events which the BBC wantonly let go in order to keep their overpaid executives in the manner to which they had grown accustomed.

    Is this not BT's pay TV offering though? So if you want all the sport, you now have to fork out for two TV providers...?

    I'm wrong. It appears free if you're a BT broadband customer. For now.
  • RichardNabaviRichardNabavi Posts: 3,413
    @Socrates, @Alanbrooke - Err, I didn't say the pro-business countries were in the ascendancy. Indeed, the fact that they are not is one factor which is making the Germans nervous, which was my point. They're hardly going to want the pro-business voice to be weakened further.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 46,243
    Anorak said:

    Financier said:

    OT

    BT is to offer free Premier League football coverage to its broadband customers, the telecoms company has announced.

    After winning a three-year deal to show 38 Premier League games a season, BT has signalled. its intent to challenge BSkyB's dominance of sports pay-TV.


    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-22462525

    This sounds like great news - next stop Cricket test matches, Golf majors and F1.

    It's high time someone took on Sky in winning back some of the highly-prized sporting events which the BBC wantonly let go in order to keep their overpaid executives in the manner to which they had grown accustomed.

    Is this not BT's pay TV offering though? So if you want all the sport, you now have to fork out for two TV providers...?
    You can get Sky Sports on BT Vision (albeit not in HD). You will - presumably - be able to recieve the BT Sports channel on Sky, although how you get it unlocked if you are a BT customer, I don't know.
  • samsam Posts: 727
    edited May 2013
    tim said:

    Sams going to do a 360 degree turn on his £53bn a day figure.

    Good job we arent politicians so dont have to cover up mistakes!

    "three brazillian soldiers have been killed"

    "My god how many million is that?!"

  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 21,645

    @Socrates, @Alanbrooke - Err, I didn't say the pro-business countries were in the ascendancy. Indeed, the fact that they are not is one factor which is making the Germans nervous, which was my point. They're hardly going to want the pro-business voice to be weakened further.

    personally I'd say the Germans can say what they want, they are already paying the bulk of the bills. I'd guess they support FTT since it means they foot less of a bill, make it a car supertax and you'll hear the screams from Berlin in London. It's less about pro-business and more about pro-which-business.
  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    edited May 2013
    Good afternoon, Mr Brooke.

    I have discovered the British Retail Consortium are as confused by the Visa Consumer Expenditure index as I was.

    There seems little doubt though that retail sales did fall in April.

    The question is why and what does it mean.

    Here is some "spinning" from the BRC:

    The value of UK retail sales was down by 2.2% on a like-for-like basis in April versus a year ago, when they declined by 3.3% on the preceding year, according to the British Retail Consortium (BRC).

    On a total basis, sales were down 0.6%, against a 1.0% decline in April 2012.

    Helen Dickinson, Director General, British Retail Consortium, said: "On the surface these are really poor figures but they're hiding another respectable month (…) this was actually a better month than March, especially for non-food sales.”

    Sales were negatively impacted by the timing of Easter, which fell in April last year but in March this year. The 3-month total growth average, which irons out the Easter distortions, was 2.6%, above the long-term 12-month average, which continued on an uptrend to reach 2.5%.

    Online sales were up 8.3% compared with April 2012, when they had risen by 9.0%.

    "There's a sense that people are more prepared to spend than they were but Chief Executives are telling me that's volatile. A convincing trend towards revival is hard to spot and competitive pricing is still critical to generating sales (…),” Dickinson added.


    My view is that the shopping malls were cleared to allow passage for Boy George's 'March of the Makers'. A bit like London and the State Opening of Parliament except in the provinces it becomes the Community Opening of Factories. The local mayor travels in a Nissan Qashqai rather than a state coach drawn by horses.

    @Avery

    " the fallacy of their position is so ludicrous that it won't last a whole two years."

    good to see Cameron and UKIP have found some common ground.

  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    rcs1000 said:

    Socrates said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Socrates said:

    rcs1000 said:

    @Socrates

    Evens on both.

    https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/171915/qep_mar_2013.pdf shows average UK electricity bills in 2012 were £479. Shall we use that as baseline (although we should technically use price per kwh)?

    CPI or RPI, either is fine.

    By the way, I think we are going to be completely flat on our Japan vs Italy bet. We were 50% GDP per capita, USD and 50% GDP per capita, local currency inflation adjusted. I think I will win handsomely in the USD-denominated one, and you will win by a smaller (but still significant) margin in local currency.

    I knew at the time the USD number would screw me! All funny exchange rate movements rather than actual growth.

    Does that £479 include VAT?
    While I was fairly sure the Yen would be weak, and was less sure about GDP per head :-)

    Re VAT, I have no idea. Shall we just use the UK average electricity bill as quoted in www.gov.uk. It's probably not a perfect metric (and benefits you as - presumably - there is growth in the number of kwh used per household thanks to rising penetration of electrical devices), but it is at least a consistent number we can use.
    If we restrict it to just CPI, I'll bet £40.
    Done.
    By the way, I don't think it's true that there is rising kwh per household. I believe it's fallen in recent years due to higher efficiency. Still I'm counting on the lobbying power of US business to hold back exports, and Germany's nuclear policies to put up prices here.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 35,338
    edited May 2013

    TOPPING said:

    The question is can A Salmond stay at the helm after the inevitable "IN" vote to negotiate the extra concessions from Westminster?

    can Cameron ?

    Cross-referendumising here, I think DC is sitting pretty on the EU referendum. His job is to provide an EU referendum which he has told us (face to camera) will occur if he's PM. He then says fine, I want to stay in (assuming he does, the "negotiations" go ok-ish which he will say they have). So he has paid the voters the compliment of consulting them and is entitled to his own point of view. Job done political superstardom.

    On Scotland - whilst understandably keen not to lose part of the country he was in charge of, if he is sensible, he will keep quiet and let the various discussions re. currencies, trade zones, etc play themselves out. Of course the result is foregone so his job is not to antagonise anyone in the meantime so he can look magnanimous when he then gives Scotland the right to set minimum banana curve parameters, or whatever.

    And yes, yes, I know - you think he should ditch Osborne....
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322

    @Socrates, @Alanbrooke - Err, I didn't say the pro-business countries were in the ascendancy. Indeed, the fact that they are not is one factor which is making the Germans nervous, which was my point. They're hardly going to want the pro-business voice to be weakened further.

    So the anti-business lot is in the majority. Why would they care about losing one on the other side, strengthening themselves further?

    To be fair, I suspect our division is one of what we consider major reform. If they reduced some of the social chapter, brought in some extra transitional controls on migration, and gave us a financial sector veto, I suspect you'd probably argue that was a huge transformation of the EU. I would not.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 19,384
    edited May 2013
    Socrates said:

    @RichardNabavi The way Farage should square the circle is the position I have argued. We should leave the EU and stay in the EEA immediately, while we negotiate a bunch of trading agreements, and then make use of the controls we could have. When we have a wider trading network, we can then negotiate a bilateral agreement with the EU from a position of strength, before leaving the EEA.

    It's a possible policy, but not UKIP's at the moment. Would you favour a second referendum on whether we should leave the EEA?
    Cyclefree said:

    Do any of PB's finest based in other European countries have a view on how other countries are viewing all the politicians here (OK - all 3 of them) saying that GB should leave.

    Or don't they know / care etc...?

    I intermittently read the German, French and Scandinavian press, can't speak for the others. They generally report the UK debate as a curious British phenomenon, in much the same way as Berlusconi or the FN in France is reported in the UK press: it's seen as "news about Britain" rather than something that affects anyone else. There aren't many editorials on the issue and the talk of a new treaty negotiation has almost completely died down. At present, they're not treating the possibility of the UK leaving as serious, so few feel the need to comment.

    If it became a serious prospect, I'd expect mixed feelings. The average view would probably be that it'd be a pity if the Brits pushed off, and if minor concessions would prevent it then they're worth making, on the lines of Harold Wilson's "renegotiation", which rearranged the furniture a bit without doing anything drastic. There is no appetite for a major rethink of the EU to suit Britain. The more senior politicians would take it more seriously, but are also more irritated by British tactics and keen to avoid a precedent that being awkward pays dividends, so again a major rethink is not on the cards.
  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    Is that Rach at work again, tim?
    tim said:

    AndrewSparrow ‏@AndrewSparrow 1m
    UK Statistics Authority says Iain Duncan Smith misused statistics re the benefits cap - full text of letter - http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/blog/2013/may/09/clegg-childcare-chris-grayling-rehabilitation-live#block-518baaa8e4b087a0919d6a23

    IDS is a serial liar, can't help himself.

  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 21,645
    @Avery

    we are on the road to recovery, though there will be some bumps and bends along the way. However realistically when we're still borrowing the GDP of New Zealand every year it would be a bit scary if we weren't. Still let the recovery continue, real good news never hurts.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633

    @Socrates, @Alanbrooke - Err, I didn't say the pro-business countries were in the ascendancy. Indeed, the fact that they are not is one factor which is making the Germans nervous, which was my point. They're hardly going to want the pro-business voice to be weakened further.

    personally I'd say the Germans can say what they want, they are already paying the bulk of the bills. I'd guess they support FTT since it means they foot less of a bill, make it a car supertax and you'll hear the screams from Berlin in London. It's less about pro-business and more about pro-which-business.
    Alan Brooke - the Germans are quickly realising that the FTT is about as welcome as Miliband as PM - a ghastly prospect which would be ruinous for the economy.

    http://openeuropeblog.blogspot.co.uk/2013/05/when-ideology-meets-economic-reality.html

    "First, there is a report from the Deutscher Aktieninstitute (DAI), an organisation representing German listed companies and investors, which warns that the FTT will cost German companies up to €1.5 billion per year. Blue-chip companies, including Siemens and Bayer, say they will face tens of millions of euros of additional cost from the tax due transactions they make to hedge currency and other risks.

    What makes this intervention to significant is that we're talking wholesome, exporting German businesses - in the German public mind the very opposite to ‘speculative’ finance. As DAI chief-executive Christine Bortenlaenger put it, the tax is “a direct strike against the export-oriented German economy”.

    This comes not long after the important intervention by Bundesbank President Jens Weidmann where he warned, as we did a few days before, that the FTT could impact monetary policy. With the German elections only a few months away, these concerns will be hard to dismiss. "
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 46,243
    Socrates said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Socrates said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Socrates said:

    rcs1000 said:

    @Socrates

    Evens on both.

    https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/171915/qep_mar_2013.pdf shows average UK electricity bills in 2012 were £479. Shall we use that as baseline (although we should technically use price per kwh)?

    CPI or RPI, either is fine.

    By the way, I think we are going to be completely flat on our Japan vs Italy bet. We were 50% GDP per capita, USD and 50% GDP per capita, local currency inflation adjusted. I think I will win handsomely in the USD-denominated one, and you will win by a smaller (but still significant) margin in local currency.

    I knew at the time the USD number would screw me! All funny exchange rate movements rather than actual growth.

    Does that £479 include VAT?
    While I was fairly sure the Yen would be weak, and was less sure about GDP per head :-)

    Re VAT, I have no idea. Shall we just use the UK average electricity bill as quoted in www.gov.uk. It's probably not a perfect metric (and benefits you as - presumably - there is growth in the number of kwh used per household thanks to rising penetration of electrical devices), but it is at least a consistent number we can use.
    If we restrict it to just CPI, I'll bet £40.
    Done.
    By the way, I don't think it's true that there is rising kwh per household. I believe it's fallen in recent years due to higher efficiency. Still I'm counting on the lobbying power of US business to hold back exports, and Germany's nuclear policies to put up prices here.
    You're right about the US business lobby. It's scary. However, in addition to Sabine Pass, Charles Lake and Cove Point, I think we see 'synthetic' exports through Canada. Kitimat will certainly happen and it could be huge. Shell has bought the old Molinex plant there as well, and it's hard to believe it'll be used for anything other than LNG. And I wouldn't be surprised at all if Exxon/Imperial oil did something very, very large in Prince Rupert Sound. Plus, Repsol will try and get Canaport (the world's least used LNG import terminal) turned around and used for exports.

    Plus, we've got massive LNG coming on-stream from Australia (Gorgon, etc.). Longer term there is Tanzania, Mozambique, etc.

    Oh yes, and let's not forget that Ireland is about to become a major gas producer when Corrib (finally) comes on-stream.
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322

    Socrates said:

    @RichardNabavi The way Farage should square the circle is the position I have argued. We should leave the EU and stay in the EEA immediately, while we negotiate a bunch of trading agreements, and then make use of the controls we could have. When we have a wider trading network, we can then negotiate a bilateral agreement with the EU from a position of strength, before leaving the EEA.

    It's a possible policy, but not UKIP's at the moment. Would you favour a second referendum on whether we should leave the EEA?
    Not really, as it's not a matter of sovereignty to anywhere near the degree that the EU is.I don't believe UKIP have decided their policy on the EEA, just like the Tories haven't decided their policy on what they want repatriated, and just like Labour and the Lib Dems haven't decided their policy on joining the Euro.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 26,352

    But as I pointed out even remaining in the EEA gives us far more control over migrants and what they can do when they are here compared to the current situation as a member of the EU.

    Not really. Farage goes on at great length about 'work permits' to keep out Eastern Europeans who want to work here. Yet he also says we should stay in the EEA, or at least, he sometimes says that, and he often cites Norway.

    That's just dishonest, isn't it?
    Um No. I worked for 15 years in Norway and had to renew a work permit on a regular basis every two years. It meant a half a day at the police station in Stavanger the walls of which were covered in the notices about compulsory language courses.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 21,645
    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    The question is can A Salmond stay at the helm after the inevitable "IN" vote to negotiate the extra concessions from Westminster?

    can Cameron ?

    Cross-referendumising here, I think DC is sitting pretty on the EU referendum. His job is to provide an EU referendum which he has told us (face to camera) will occur if he's PM. He then says fine, I want to stay in (assuming he does, the "negotiations" go ok-ish which he will say they have). So he has paid the voters the compliment of consulting them and is entitled to his own point of view. Job done political superstardom.

    On Scotland - whilst understandably keen not to lose part of the country he was in charge of, if he is sensible, he will keep quiet and let the various discussions re. currencies, trade zones, etc play themselves out. Of course the result is foregone so his job is not to antagonise anyone in the meantime so he can look magnanimous when he then gives Scotland the right to set minimum banana curve parameters, or whatever.

    And yes, yes, I know - you think he should ditch Osborne....
    "Cross-referendumising here" - no I was referring to Scotland.

    Post Sept 14 there will still need to be a renegotiation of powers amid the wider issue of proper devolution for England. By that stage all the main parties will be in GE mode so nothing much will move until we get new govt.

    Currently I see more Chance of Salmond being sat at the negotiating table than Cameron. So it will be another Labour mess\stitch up on England.





  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Well, it's good to see it confirmed that UKIP doesn't really have a coherent policy on its purported mainplank.

    It's central to understanding UKIP's current polling ratings that it is a state of mind rather than a political party.
This discussion has been closed.