Doncaster is one of the whitest and most working class constituencies in the UK. If UKIP is really serious about going after the Labour vote it should surely make a real effort there with a high profile candidate. Perhaps even the Nigemeister himself - after all, the locals must feel horribly betrayed by their sitting MP. We should expect a massive switch to UKIP next year, shouldn't we?
Good morning all and David that's a very cerebral topic for a miserable, overcast Saturday morning.
I think David Cameron is playing the long game. He knows he holds all the cards. By telling Adam Bolton that nothing will be decided until September he gets the IndyRef and party conference season out of the way. Many people including several of our leading media politicial commentators expect the Tories to be back in the lead in the polls by October.
Yesterday DC dismissed the fanciful notion shared by Sean T and some others that he would/should resign if, as I expect, we Scots will vote to say goodbye in September. In such circumstances after the initial excitement the politics would all be about Labour's implosion and the impending dissolution negotiations, a very different political landscape from the one we see now. Would UKIP be remotely relevant then, even if it does win the Euro elections a fortnight tomorrow when the counting is done?
Interesting thought.
As you are probably aware, there is talk about Salmond requesting that the SP election in 2016 being delayed while he is allowed to continue Independence talks with rUK.
Could Cameron be thinking to play a similar game plan with regards to the 2015 GE?
I have always thought that the election times for Westminster and Holyrood would not just be a fly in the ointment, more like an elephant.
Changes of administration, or rather the possibility of a change could hamstring any talk of Salmond's hope of Being Free in 2016.
Difficult to get through Westminster certainly, but with the SNP majority in Holyrood, a possibility.
Salmond and the SNP scheduled the vote for when they did. Why should the election be moved (still more, delayed), to accommodate a problem of their own making?
Or indeed the separation date? What Salmond fails to appreciate is that after the 18th of September, the views and wishes of the 92% become paramount.....
You keep wishing for that to be true
It's not my fault you can't work out which is the bigger number "8" or "92".....
sounds more like trepidation to me, but at least you now accept the result will be YES.
As an aside, I am seeing a Conservative Banner at the top of this site saying that they are the only party promising an in/out referendum.
As even the most rabid PB kipper and tory would agree, Cameron can't promise any such thing.
Can the banner be removed?
Oh dear, hitting a UKIP nerve is it? Why do you feel so threatened by the Conservative manifesto commitment to hold an In-Out referendum on EU membership (assuming they have sufficient MP's to pass the legislation)?
You don't think its because they've read the polls that show Cameron would win a post-negotiation referendum to stay in do you?
That then drives them to wish a 5 year Miliband government, ignoring the likely consequences of that.....monomania doesn't come close......
Two Tories or Tory supporters trying to console themselves. A bit pathetic really.
So what outcome do you predict at GE2015, and how will that help get you what you want?
If UKIP win the Euros and Labour keep sliding down the polls thanks to their voters turning to UKIP, what do you think Ed might offer in the manifesto to tempt them back?
That's the problem with UKIP "analysis" - there are only ever upsides for UKIP, no downsides for other parties.
Why do you think a Euro referendum promise might shore up Labour support, rather than piss off some of their current supporters?
How high does "Europe" rank among Labour voters as an issue?
If a large chunk of Labour supporters are pro EU, they can vote to stay in. Pro EU people aren't necessarily afraid of democracy are they?
Why promise them something they are not particularly interested in or don't want, when you could focus your message on things (energy price freeze, bankers bonus tax, rent controls) they are interested in and do want?
You know a Con maj government is the only path to a referendum - but fear it's outcome - UKIP people aren't afraid of democracy, are they?
Doncaster is one of the whitest and most working class constituencies in the UK. If UKIP is really serious about going after the Labour vote it should surely make a real effort there with a high profile candidate. Perhaps even the Nigemeister himself - after all, the locals must feel horribly betrayed by their sitting MP. We should expect a massive switch to UKIP next year, shouldn't we?
Good morning all and David that's a very cerebral topic for a miserable, overcast Saturday morning.
I think David Cameron is playing the long game. He knows he holds all the cards. By telling Adam Bolton that nothing will be decided until September he gets the IndyRef and party conference season out of the way. Many people including several of our leading media politicial commentators expect the Tories to be back in the lead in the polls by October.
Yesterday DC dismissed the fanciful notion shared by Sean T and some others that he would/should resign if, as I expect, we Scots will vote to say goodbye in September. In such circumstances after the initial excitement the politics would all be about Labour's implosion and the impending dissolution negotiations, a very different political landscape from the one we see now. Would UKIP be remotely relevant then, even if it does win the Euro elections a fortnight tomorrow when the counting is done?
Interesting thought.
As you are probably aware, there is talk about Salmond requesting that the SP election in 2016 being delayed while he is allowed to continue Independence talks with rUK.
Could Cameron be thinking to play a similar game plan with regards to the 2015 GE?
I have always thought that the election times for Westminster and Holyrood would not just be a fly in the ointment, more like an elephant.
Changes of administration, or rather the possibility of a change could hamstring any talk of Salmond's hope of Being Free in 2016.
Difficult to get through Westminster certainly, but with the SNP majority in Holyrood, a possibility.
Salmond and the SNP scheduled the vote for when they did. Why should the election be moved (still more, delayed), to accommodate a problem of their own making?
Or indeed the separation date? What Salmond fails to appreciate is that after the 18th of September, the views and wishes of the 92% become paramount.....
You keep wishing for that to be true
Do you honestly believe that the wishes of the English/Welsh/Irish have no bearing on how the UK may be dissolved? The legislation will have to pass the Westminster Parliament.
Yawn, Dave after 18th it will be a done deal with just the details to be sorted out. If you think you will get any say in it then you are deluded. The politicians will carve it up to best suit themselves. The rats will be too busy fighting their corners.
Good morning all and David that's a very cerebral topic for a miserable, overcast Saturday morning.
I think David Cameron is playing the long game. He knows he holds all the cards. By telling Adam Bolton that nothing will be decided until September he gets the IndyRef and party conference season out of the way. Many people including several of our leading media politicial commentators expect the Tories to be back in the lead in the polls by October.
Yesterday DC dismissed the fanciful notion shared by Sean T and some others that he would/should resign if, as I expect, we Scots will vote to say goodbye in September. In such circumstances after the initial excitement the politics would all be about Labour's implosion and the impending dissolution negotiations, a very different political landscape from the one we see now. Would UKIP be remotely relevant then, even if it does win the Euro elections a fortnight tomorrow when the counting is done?
Interesting thought.
As you are probably aware, there is talk about Salmond requesting that the SP election in 2016 being delayed while he is allowed to continue Independence talks with rUK.
Could Cameron be thinking to play a similar game plan with regards to the 2015 GE?
I have always thought that the election times for Westminster and Holyrood would not just be a fly in the ointment, more like an elephant.
Changes of administration, or rather the possibility of a change could hamstring any talk of Salmond's hope of Being Free in 2016.
Difficult to get through Westminster certainly, but with the SNP majority in Holyrood, a possibility.
Salmond and the SNP scheduled the vote for when they did. Why should the election be moved (still more, delayed), to accommodate a problem of their own making?
Or indeed the separation date? What Salmond fails to appreciate is that after the 18th of September, the views and wishes of the 92% become paramount.....
You keep wishing for that to be true
It's not my fault you can't work out which is the bigger number "8" or "92".....
sounds more like trepidation to me, but at least you now accept the result will be YES.
The result will be what the result will be - you are the one making confident assertions (despite your contingency plan to emigrate if the result is "No"....)
And on the 19th of September, what the 92% want they will get.....
Good morning all and David that's a very cerebral topic for a miserable, overcast Saturday morning.
I think David Cameron is playing the long game. He knows he holds all the cards. By telling Adam Bolton that nothing will be decided until September he gets the IndyRef and party conference season out of the way. Many people including several of our leading media politicial commentators expect the Tories to be back in the lead in the polls by October.
Yesterday DC dismissed the fanciful notion shared by Sean T and some others that he would/should resign if, as I expect, we Scots will vote to say goodbye in September. In such circumstances after the initial excitement the politics would all be about Labour's implosion and the impending dissolution negotiations, a very different political landscape from the one we see now. Would UKIP be remotely relevant then, even if it does win the Euro elections a fortnight tomorrow when the counting is done?
Interesting thought.
As you are probably aware, there is talk about Salmond requesting that the SP election in 2016 being delayed while he is allowed to continue Independence talks with rUK.
Could Cameron be thinking to play a similar game plan with regards to the 2015 GE?
I have always thought that the election times for Westminster and Holyrood would not just be a fly in the ointment, more like an elephant.
Changes of administration, or rather the possibility of a change could hamstring any talk of Salmond's hope of Being Free in 2016.
Difficult to get through Westminster certainly, but with the SNP majority in Holyrood, a possibility.
Salmond and the SNP scheduled the vote for when they did. Why should the election be moved (still more, delayed), to accommodate a problem of their own making?
The vote was scheduled with the agreement of Mr Cameron, and to allow plenty of time for discussion and debate.
The Unionists in Scotland had plenty of opportunity to hold a referendum at any time when they had a majority in the parliament, right up to 2011. Indeed, Wendy Alexander proposed just this but got sacked from her job as head of Labour's Scottish branch for her pains.
And when the SNP proposed 2014, all the Unionists in Holyrood and Westminster could do was whine about not having it on the anniversary of some mediaeval battle or other - which of course instantly invalidated their preferred option of 2013 as well, though it had to be pointed out to them I expect. I really do wonder what history they taught in schools in the 70s and 80s ...
On UKIP - a rather better report than in the Herald, from the point of view of making it clear who was doing the anti-Kipper demoing (though it is fairly clear from the Herald photo as well).
I emailed the London 2016 story to a friend who worked for London 2012.
He said it ain't going to happen.
The Olympic stadium is being renovated and handed over to West Ham in 2016 with less capacity.
So that's a no go.
The Village where the athletes stayed is now currently occupied by people who bought the properties or rent them.
Quite a few of other venues have been renovated and are no longer of Olympic standard.
Also 2012 was the culmination of seven years plus meticulous planning.
They can't replicate that in less than two years.
I strongly agree with the 'kick up the backside' assessment. However, the IOC is clearly getting very itchy about Rio. There was a stat the other day that at this stage (i.e. a little over 2 years out), London had completed 60% of preparations, Athens 40%, whereas Rio's at 10%. The second largest complex hasn't even begun being built yet.
But as you say, London is not in any position to deliver the kind of Games it did in 2012 now either, and in all probability, couldn't be in two years' time. Whether it could be in a better position than Rio is another matter.
Crucially, the clock is ticking not only on Rio but on Plan B (and Plan C and so on). The longer the delay in any decision to switch, the harder to stage a good Games, never mind a great one. But the sooner a decision is taken, the harder it is to justify: it's not an enviable call.
FWIW, I think if London were given two years, it could do it. It'd have to mean scaling back on certain aspects from usual standards (the main stadium would have to run in reduced form), and there'd be all sorts of legal questions. The athletes would probably have to be stationed in various locations rather than just one, making transport more difficult - but nonetheless, it could be done.
Over-riding all that though is the mighty embarrassment (and cost) the IOC would feel about withdrawing the Games from Rio - its first award to South America. I don't think they would do that unless it became absolutely clear that the Games going ahead there were either impossible or dangerous, by which time it might not be possible to shift them either.
Having said all that, the Rio experience, following on from Athens, where the IOC dodged a bullet, and synthetic Beijing, will have a real impact on the race for 2024. Paris ought to be a shoo-in.
I went to a talk by Eric Brown a few weeks ago. He stood for over two hours and talked, which seems amazing for a 95-year old. A fascinating man.
The most poignant bit was nothing to do with planes, but the liberation of Bergen-Belsen concentration camp, where he acted as interpreter. His descriptions of the scenes that greeted them in the camp were horrific, and I wonder how anyone could ever fully recover from seeing them, yet alone having been an inmate.
Good morning all and David that's a very cerebral topic for a miserable, overcast Saturday morning.
I think David Cameron is playing the long game. He knows he holds all the cards. By telling Adam Bolton that nothing will be decided until September he gets the IndyRef and party conference season out of the way. Many people including several of our leading media politicial commentators expect the Tories to be back in the lead in the polls by October.
Yesterday DC dismissed the fanciful notion shared by Sean T and some others that he would/should resign if, as I expect, we Scots will vote to say goodbye in September. In such circumstances after the initial excitement the politics would all be about Labour's implosion and the impending dissolution negotiations, a very different political landscape from the one we see now. Would UKIP be remotely relevant then, even if it does win the Euro elections a fortnight tomorrow when the counting is done?
Interesting thought.
As you are probably aware, there is talk about Salmond requesting that the SP election in 2016 being delayed while he is allowed to continue Independence talks with rUK.
Could Cameron be thinking to play a similar game plan with regards to the 2015 GE?
I have always thought that the election times for Westminster and Holyrood would not just be a fly in the ointment, more like an elephant.
Changes of administration, or rather the possibility of a change could hamstring any talk of Salmond's hope of Being Free in 2016.
Difficult to get through Westminster certainly, but with the SNP majority in Holyrood, a possibility.
Salmond and the SNP scheduled the vote for when they did. Why should the election be moved (still more, delayed), to accommodate a problem of their own making?
Or indeed the separation date? What Salmond fails to appreciate is that after the 18th of September, the views and wishes of the 92% become paramount.....
You keep wishing for that to be true
Do you honestly believe that the wishes of the English/Welsh/Irish have no bearing on how the UK may be dissolved? The legislation will have to pass the Westminster Parliament.
If you think you will get any say in it then you are deluded.
Just as well there isn't an rUK General Election campaign within 6 months then......oh.......
Good morning all and David that's a very cerebral topic for a miserable, overcast Saturday morning.
I think David Cameron is playing the long game. He knows he holds all the cards. By telling Adam Bolton that nothing will be decided until September he gets the IndyRef and party conference season out of the way. Many people including several of our leading media politicial commentators expect the Tories to be back in the lead in the polls by October.
Yesterday DC dismissed the fanciful notion shared by Sean T and some others that he would/should resign if, as I expect, we Scots will vote to say goodbye in September. In such circumstances after the initial excitement the politics would all be about Labour's implosion and the impending dissolution negotiations, a very different political landscape from the one we see now. Would UKIP be remotely relevant then, even if it does win the Euro elections a fortnight tomorrow when the counting is done?
Salmond and the SNP scheduled the vote for when they did. Why should the election be moved (still more, delayed), to accommodate a problem of their own making?
Or indeed the separation date? What Salmond fails to appreciate is that after the 18th of September, the views and wishes of the 92% become paramount.....
You keep wishing for that to be true
It's not my fault you can't work out which is the bigger number "8" or "92".....
sounds more like trepidation to me, but at least you now accept the result will be YES.
The result will be what the result will be - you are the one making confident assertions (despite your contingency plan to emigrate if the result is "No"....)
And on the 19th of September, what the 92% want they will get.....
dear Dear getting ever more desperate. I am making no plans as I will not need to. I merely pointed out I would not want to live in a place that voted to be a region of England rather than a Nation state. Many will share my view. I know you are a toom tabard but not all are like you.
What a difference a constituency makes. Last week at my Dingwall house in Charles Kennedy's constituency there was a LibDem leaflet recommending George Lyon for the Euro election. This morning in the post at my main residence I had a personally addressed letter and leaflet from my noble kinsman and MP John Thurso also recommending George Lyon to me. Sadly for George Lyon, who is a perfectly likeable chap, my vote is already spoken for as I assist Iain Duncan to replace Struan Stevenson who is retiring.
P3 underway. Don't anticipate a qualifying tip but I'll check the markets in case anything jumps out.
Edited extra bit: Simona de Silvestro in the Sauber garage. Some speculation she could end up with a race seat in the team next year. If she has the pace, that could be very good for the team.
Why stop at 5 - get all the parties in -12 way debate.
Farage was crap on QT this week - Mr Angry with nothing positive to say - given the Kipper bubble it prob won't even be an issue come 2015.
You must be kidding. Farage had well over half the audience laughing and clapping throughout the night. He made supposed heavyweights look like pygmies. UKIP will do well in Southampton if that audience represents anything.
Doncaster is one of the whitest and most working class constituencies in the UK. If UKIP is really serious about going after the Labour vote it should surely make a real effort there with a high profile candidate. Perhaps even the Nigemeister himself - after all, the locals must feel horribly betrayed by their sitting MP. We should expect a massive switch to UKIP next year, shouldn't we?
Cupcake by Belarus is a good Eurovision song, and worth a punt at 7:1 at Ladbrokes for a top ten finish at Ladbrokes, and as a possibility of a Russian 12 points 20:1 also seems good (any other country and also covers a few others). I also have some on the Ukraine each way, a good song and likely to get a lot of political voting. The prospect of next years Eurovision in Kyiv will give the organizers the willies!
I suspect that every tory out there has their breaking point with Cameron's conservatives The point at which they say f8ck it these people aren't conservatives really and I can't support them any more. This is mine.
I think you've hit the nail on the head here. I was enormously pro-Cameron when he came in and I really thought, yes, he is an old Etonian and might be out of touch, but he would have a deep grounding on liberal conservative thought and that might count for something. I defended him for a long time, even when I had to raise an eyebrow at certain things - like praising Nye Bevan and Polly Toynbee. I was even prepared to put our differences aside on the EU, given the fact he was committing to an EU referendum (although my positions have shifted to be more eurosceptic over the last few years).
But the thing I just have not been able to stomach was the sheer apathy towards civil liberties that any proper British conservative should deeply value. First it began with the complete lack of action on existing big brother laws Labour have brought in over the years. A terrorism act to search people that is clearly used predominantly for non-terrorism purposes. The sharing of personal data among hundreds of thousands at civil servants that don't have a right to do so. Hearsay evidence for anti-social behaviour. But then it got worse: the sharing of health data with private firms, and plans to do the same with tax data. The removal of legal aid necessary for poor people to have equal standing in matters of law. A European Arrest Warrant that can take people to corrupt Eastern Europe judicial systems without any of the usual English protections on liberty, like double jeopardy or hearsay evidence. And bringing in a new snooper's charter so that even more communication data can be stored.
And on top of all that, utterly unbelievable infringements from GCHQ on our most personal private communications. If a young girl has made a call to an abortion clinic, GCHQ can know about it. If a woman wants to do a strip tease for her husband on a webcam they can grab screenshots. And all this despite absolutely no connection to any individual case. And when people are outraged about this, how does Cameron react? He calls the criticism a "la-di-da, airy-fairy" view and says it's necessary to pull this shit because of fictional TV crime dramas.
Seriously, screw David Cameron. He's just a shallow, shallow PR man with no deeper understanding of British society and history.
As an aside, I am seeing a Conservative Banner at the top of this site saying that they are the only party promising an in/out referendum.
As even the most rabid PB kipper and tory would agree, Cameron can't promise any such thing.
Can the banner be removed?
Oh dear, hitting a UKIP nerve is it? Why do you feel so threatened by the Conservative manifesto commitment to hold an In-Out referendum on EU membership (assuming they have sufficient MP's to pass the legislation)?
You don't think its because they've read the polls that show Cameron would win a post-negotiation referendum to stay in do you?
That then drives them to wish a 5 year Miliband government, ignoring the likely consequences of that.....monomania doesn't come close......
Two Tories or Tory supporters trying to console themselves. A bit pathetic really.
So what outcome do you predict at GE2015, and how will that help get you what you want?
If UKIP win the Euros and Labour keep sliding down the polls thanks to their voters turning to UKIP, what do you think Ed might offer in the manifesto to tempt them back?
That's the problem with UKIP "analysis" - there are only ever upsides for UKIP, no downsides for other parties.
Why do you think a Euro referendum promise might shore up Labour support, rather than piss off some of their current supporters?
How high does "Europe" rank among Labour voters as an issue?
If a large chunk of Labour supporters are pro EU, they can vote to stay in. Pro EU people aren't necessarily afraid of democracy are they?
Why promise them something they are not particularly interested in or don't want, when you could focus your message on things (energy price freeze, bankers bonus tax, rent controls) they are interested in and do want?
You know a Con maj government is the only path to a referendum - but fear it's outcome - UKIP people aren't afraid of democracy, are they?
Are Labour supporters aggressively against a referendum on the EU to the point where they may vote elsewhere if it is offered then?
UKIP will offer a referendum, I agree with the outline of their beliefs and so I will vote for them. Other people can vote for who they like and we will see where we end up. That's democracy
David Herdson [9.38am] And I don't know of any evidence that the Greens even want to be included in TV debates, given their general attitude towards leadership (somewhere between distrust and paranoia...)
Good point. It would be political madness of them to turn down an invite but then the Greens have a very individual way of viewing politics and I could well see them doing it.
Why stop at 5 - get all the parties in -12 way debate.
Farage was crap on QT this week - Mr Angry with nothing positive to say - given the Kipper bubble it prob won't even be an issue come 2015.
You must be kidding. Farage had well over half the audience laughing and clapping throughout the night. He made supposed heavyweights look like pygmies. UKIP will do well in Southampton if that audience represents anything.
Didn't see it and you know I'm not as virulently anti-Farage as some, but anecdotally I talked to two people at a meeting last night who both said they'd been considering voting UKIP but were put off by Farage's "hectoring" manner on QT. They said there was a bloke who'd stood up to him and insisted that he wouldn't be talked down and they really liked that.
It's an anecdote, but maybe reflects the underlying fact that it's hard to predict how people come across to anyone else. Coming over very forcefully tends to motivate the core vote (which is perhaps his priority right now) while alienating waverers.
On UKIP - a rather better report than in the Herald, from the point of view of making it clear who was doing the anti-Kipper demoing (though it is fairly clear from the Herald photo as well).
We'll have to see if Mr Farage repeats his claims of anti-English racism this time.
''Ukip, which has purged unphotogenic Scottish activists such as the climate change denier Lord Monckton from its ranks, is confident of its chances on 22 May.'
Rather cruel to write that under the photo that heads the piece.
'Monckton and his five allies were "well meaning chaps who are ill-fashioned and quite frankly not up to the cut and thrust of modern politics," said David Coburn, Ukip's lead candidate in the 22 May election and former London regional chairman.'
That would be the Coburn that recently stated that the SNP planned to populate the Highlands with Pashtuns. Presumably he defines scaremongering about immigration as the cut and thrust of modern politics.
Why stop at 5 - get all the parties in -12 way debate.
Farage was crap on QT this week - Mr Angry with nothing positive to say - given the Kipper bubble it prob won't even be an issue come 2015.
You must be kidding. Farage had well over half the audience laughing and clapping throughout the night. He made supposed heavyweights look like pygmies. UKIP will do well in Southampton if that audience represents anything.
An incredible analysis from TGOHF... Farage slaughtered the rest of the panel, I am worried just how many UKIP plants their were in the audience, it was like a UKIP rally!
Southampton Itchen, John Denhams seat could be intersting. Denham, standing down, has already been warning that Labour arent doing enough there...
Don't understand the debate about inclusion. IMO it comes down to one question.
In purely technical terms, could this party command a majority in the HoC? Yes or No.
I.e. put up 320 candidates and your leader is in the debate.
That would open up the door to any multi-millionaire buying their way in, as Goldsmith would have done in 1997 or some representative from the Yogic Flyers in 1992.
To my mind, there has to be some assessment of a party's support as well as of the number of people who can vote for them.
Doncaster is one of the whitest and most working class constituencies in the UK. If UKIP is really serious about going after the Labour vote it should surely make a real effort there with a high profile candidate. Perhaps even the Nigemeister himself - after all, the locals must feel horribly betrayed by their sitting MP. We should expect a massive switch to UKIP next year, shouldn't we?
Not really the same, is it? Surely the local MP is there for the taking.
Well Labour have lost 22% of their vote since 1997 so the trend supports your theory.
Probably be UKIP by 2020, next year might be too soon. I'd expect UKIP to come second there
Ed could be in real trouble soon then.
But it's an interesting one: in a Labour seat in which the vast majority of the population is white and working class, and immigration has had very little impact - a town like Doncaster, in fact - what will the UKIP message be?
Why promise them something they are not particularly interested in or don't want, when you could focus your message on things (energy price freeze, bankers bonus tax, rent controls) they are interested in and do want?
You know a Con maj government is the only path to a referendum - but fear it's outcome - UKIP people aren't afraid of democracy, are they?
Actually, no I don't know that's the case. For a start, Cameron outright lies about the EU. In the leaflet he delivered through my door last night, the Tories said that they kept us out of the EU bailouts. They also said they stood for bringing back control over justice matters when they just voluntarily signed up for the European Arrest Warrant. Why on Earth should we trust him to suddenly be truthful on other matters?
Secondly, there isn't going to be a Conservative majority government. The Tories would have to increase about ten points in the polls in a year for that to happen. So the "path" you describe doesn't exist at all. Neither UKIP or the Tories can deliver on this, so I may as well help the party whose views I agree with to build pressure for the longer term.
Why stop at 5 - get all the parties in -12 way debate.
Farage was crap on QT this week - Mr Angry with nothing positive to say - given the Kipper bubble it prob won't even be an issue come 2015.
You must be kidding. Farage had well over half the audience laughing and clapping throughout the night. He made supposed heavyweights look like pygmies. UKIP will do well in Southampton if that audience represents anything.
but anecdotally I talked to two people at a meeting last night who both said they'd been considering voting UKIP but were put off by Farage's "hectoring" manner on QT. They said there was a bloke who'd stood up to him and insisted that he wouldn't be talked down and they really liked that.
Yeah alright Nick. Good anecdote. Funny how it's the same one that Alastair Campbell is retweeting right now. Good effort though.
Seriously, what did you think of Chuka Umunna trivialising the Astrazeneca situation? He's your shadow business secretary. Way out of league. Final question if you want to see it.
I suspect that every tory out there has their breaking point with Cameron's conservatives The point at which they say f8ck it these people aren't conservatives really and I can't support them any more. This is mine.
I think you've hit the nail on the head here. I was enormously pro-Cameron when he came in and I really thought, yes, he is an old Etonian and might be out of touch, but he would have a deep grounding on liberal conservative thought and that might count for something. I defended him for a long time, even when I had to raise an eyebrow at certain things - like praising Nye Bevan and Polly Toynbee. I was even prepared to put our differences aside on the EU, given the fact he was committing to an EU referendum (although my positions have shifted to be more eurosceptic over the last few years).
But the thing I just have not been able to stomach was the sheer apathy towards civil liberties that any proper British conservative should deeply value. First it began with the complete lack of action on existing big brother laws Labour have brought in over the years. A terrorism act to search people that is clearly used predominantly for non-terrorism purposes. The sharing of personal data among hundreds of thousands at civil servants that don't have a right to do so. Hearsay evidence for anti-social behaviour. But then it got worse: the sharing of health data with private firms, and plans to do the same with tax data. The removal of legal aid necessary for poor people to have equal standing in matters of law. A European Arrest Warrant that can take people to corrupt Eastern Europe judicial systems without any of the usual English protections on liberty, like double jeopardy or hearsay evidence. And bringing in a new snooper's charter so that even more communication data can be stored.
And on top of all that, utterly unbelievable infringements from GCHQ on our most personal private communications. If a young girl has made a call to an abortion clinic, GCHQ can know about it. If a woman wants to do a strip tease for her husband on a webcam they can grab screenshots. And all this despite absolutely no connection to any individual case. And when people are outraged about this, how does Cameron react? He calls the criticism a "la-di-da, airy-fairy" view and says it's necessary to pull this shit because of fictional TV crime dramas.
Seriously, screw David Cameron. He's just a shallow, shallow PR man with no deeper understanding of British society and history.
One could also add the obsession with policing speech and comments on social media.
I get irked when the counter-argument is that if you don't vote Conservative, you'll get Milliband. Yes, Milliband would be worse than Cameron, but I think politics ought to offer more than a choice between dismal and even worse.
Doncaster is one of the whitest and most working class constituencies in the UK. If UKIP is really serious about going after the Labour vote it should surely make a real effort there with a high profile candidate. Perhaps even the Nigemeister himself - after all, the locals must feel horribly betrayed by their sitting MP. We should expect a massive switch to UKIP next year, shouldn't we?
Not really the same, is it? Surely the local MP is there for the taking.
Well Labour have lost 22% of their vote since 1997 so the trend supports your theory.
Probably be UKIP by 2020, next year might be too soon. I'd expect UKIP to come second there
Ed could be in real trouble soon then.
But it's an interesting one: in a Labour seat in which the vast majority of the population is white and working class, and immigration has had very little impact - a town like Doncaster, in fact - what will the UKIP message be?
Maybe they could say Barking and Dagenham was predominantly white and working class 20 years ago, look what Labour have done to it.
Labour got almost 70% there in 1997 and have lost votes at each election since. Ed managed to get them below 50% for the first time in a generation in 2010, so people seem to be waking up
Why promise them something they are not particularly interested in or don't want, when you could focus your message on things (energy price freeze, bankers bonus tax, rent controls) they are interested in and do want?
You know a Con maj government is the only path to a referendum - but fear it's outcome - UKIP people aren't afraid of democracy, are they?
Actually, no I don't know that's the case. For a start, Cameron outright lies about the EU. In the leaflet he delivered through my door last night, the Tories said that they kept us out of the EU bailouts. They also said they stood for bringing back control over justice matters when they just voluntarily signed up for the European Arrest Warrant. Why on Earth should we trust him to suddenly be truthful on other matters?
Secondly, there isn't going to be a Conservative majority government. The Tories would have to increase about ten points in the polls in a year for that to happen. So the "path" you describe doesn't exist at all. Neither UKIP or the Tories can deliver on this, so I may as well help the party whose views I agree with to build pressure for the longer term.
I suspect you are a closet socialist wanting Millband for PM.
As an aside, I am seeing a Conservative Banner at the top of this site saying that they are the only party promising an in/out referendum.
As even the most rabid PB kipper and tory would agree, Cameron can't promise any such thing.
Can the banner be removed?
Oh dear, hitting a UKIP nerve is it? Why do you feel so threatened by the Conservative manifesto commitment to hold an In-Out referendum on EU membership (assuming they have sufficient MP's to pass the legislation)?
You don't think its because they've read the polls that show Cameron would win a post-negotiation referendum to stay in do you?
That then drives them to wish a 5 year Miliband government, ignoring the likely consequences of that.....monomania doesn't come close......
Two Tories or Tory supporters trying to console themselves. A bit pathetic really.
So what outcome do you predict at GE2015, and how will that help get you what you want?
If UKIP win the Euros and Labour keep sliding down the polls thanks to their voters turning to UKIP, what do you think Ed might offer in the manifesto to tempt them back?
That's the problem with UKIP "analysis" - there are only ever upsides for UKIP, no downsides for other parties.
Why do you think a Euro referendum promise might shore up Labour support, rather than piss off some of their current supporters?
How high does "Europe" rank among Labour voters as an issue?
If a large chunk of Labour supporters are pro EU, they can vote to stay in. Pro EU people aren't necessarily afraid of democracy are they?
Why promise them something they are not particularly interested in or don't want, when you could focus your message on things (energy price freeze, bankers bonus tax, rent controls) they are interested in and do want?
You know a Con maj government is the only path to a referendum - but fear it's outcome - UKIP people aren't afraid of democracy, are they?
Are Labour supporters aggressively against a referendum on the EU to the point where they may vote elsewhere if it is offered then?
UKIP will offer a referendum, I agree with the outline of their beliefs and so I will vote for them.
Yes, but unless they form the government, you won't get one. You do understand that part, don't you?
Why promise them something they are not particularly interested in or don't want, when you could focus your message on things (energy price freeze, bankers bonus tax, rent controls) they are interested in and do want?
You know a Con maj government is the only path to a referendum - but fear it's outcome - UKIP people aren't afraid of democracy, are they?
Actually, no I don't know that's the case. For a start, Cameron outright lies about the EU. In the leaflet he delivered through my door last night, the Tories said that they kept us out of the EU bailouts. They also said they stood for bringing back control over justice matters when they just voluntarily signed up for the European Arrest Warrant. Why on Earth should we trust him to suddenly be truthful on other matters?
Secondly, there isn't going to be a Conservative majority government. The Tories would have to increase about ten points in the polls in a year for that to happen. So the "path" you describe doesn't exist at all. Neither UKIP or the Tories can deliver on this, so I may as well help the party whose views I agree with to build pressure for the longer term.
I want more than a referendum on EU membership, with all the dice loaded against Out. I want to win such a referendum. And the way to win it is to maximise UKIP's electoral representation.
Why stop at 5 - get all the parties in -12 way debate.
Farage was crap on QT this week - Mr Angry with nothing positive to say - given the Kipper bubble it prob won't even be an issue come 2015.
You must be kidding. Farage had well over half the audience laughing and clapping throughout the night. He made supposed heavyweights look like pygmies. UKIP will do well in Southampton if that audience represents anything.
An incredible analysis from TGOHF... Farage slaughtered the rest of the panel, I am worried just how many UKIP plants their were in the audience, it was like a UKIP rally!
I agree. That half-Indian guy was class. He really opened up the them and us - those with a voice and those without - debate.
Why promise them something they are not particularly interested in or don't want, when you could focus your message on things (energy price freeze, bankers bonus tax, rent controls) they are interested in and do want?
You know a Con maj government is the only path to a referendum - but fear it's outcome - UKIP people aren't afraid of democracy, are they?
Neither UKIP or the Tories can deliver on this, so I may as well help the party whose views I agree with to build pressure for the longer term.
The politics of despair, you won't vote for the party who could give you a referendum, so instead will vote for one who can't, increasing the likelihood of the election of a party that won't.....That's the argument, isn't it?
Doncaster is one of the whitest and most working class constituencies in the UK. If UKIP is really serious about going after the Labour vote it should surely make a real effort there with a high profile candidate. Perhaps even the Nigemeister himself - after all, the locals must feel horribly betrayed by their sitting MP. We should expect a massive switch to UKIP next year, shouldn't we?
Not really the same, is it? Surely the local MP is there for the taking.
Well Labour have lost 22% of their vote since 1997 so the trend supports your theory.
Probably be UKIP by 2020, next year might be too soon. I'd expect UKIP to come second there
Ed could be in real trouble soon then.
But it's an interesting one: in a Labour seat in which the vast majority of the population is white and working class, and immigration has had very little impact - a town like Doncaster, in fact - what will the UKIP message be?
"We understand you; the others don't", I should think.
Why stop at 5 - get all the parties in -12 way debate.
Farage was crap on QT this week - Mr Angry with nothing positive to say - given the Kipper bubble it prob won't even be an issue come 2015.
You must be kidding. Farage had well over half the audience laughing and clapping throughout the night. He made supposed heavyweights look like pygmies. UKIP will do well in Southampton if that audience represents anything.
but anecdotally I talked to two people at a meeting last night who both said they'd been considering voting UKIP but were put off by Farage's "hectoring" manner on QT. They said there was a bloke who'd stood up to him and insisted that he wouldn't be talked down and they really liked that.
Yeah alright Nick. Good anecdote. Funny how it's the same one that Alastair Campbell is retweeting right now. Good effort though.
Seriously, what did you think of Chuka Umunna trivialising the Astrazeneca situation? He's your shadow business secretary. Way out of league. Final question if you want to see it.
Haha
That guy asked that Farage didnt interrupt him, which he didnt, then talked all over Farage's answer!
Mr. Blueberry (Miss? I do apologise if I got that wrong), what did Umunna say?
Umunna neglected to say that EU competition rules come into play and that therefore the decision does not rest with our gov't. I've not rewatched it, but that's my memory. Here's Farage giving his response to whether the UK gov't should step in.
Why promise them something they are not particularly interested in or don't want, when you could focus your message on things (energy price freeze, bankers bonus tax, rent controls) they are interested in and do want?
You know a Con maj government is the only path to a referendum - but fear it's outcome - UKIP people aren't afraid of democracy, are they?
Neither UKIP or the Tories can deliver on this, so I may as well help the party whose views I agree with to build pressure for the longer term.
The politics of despair, you won't vote for the party who could give you a referendum, so instead will vote for one who can't, increasing the likelihood of the election of a party that won't.....That's the argument, isn't it?
Did you not even bother to read what I said? The Tories aren't the party who could give me a referendum, because they won't have an absolute majority. That was the point of my post.
Why promise them something they are not particularly interested in or don't want, when you could focus your message on things (energy price freeze, bankers bonus tax, rent controls) they are interested in and do want?
You know a Con maj government is the only path to a referendum - but fear it's outcome - UKIP people aren't afraid of democracy, are they?
Actually, no I don't know that's the case. For a start, Cameron outright lies about the EU. In the leaflet he delivered through my door last night, the Tories said that they kept us out of the EU bailouts. They also said they stood for bringing back control over justice matters when they just voluntarily signed up for the European Arrest Warrant. Why on Earth should we trust him to suddenly be truthful on other matters?
Secondly, there isn't going to be a Conservative majority government. The Tories would have to increase about ten points in the polls in a year for that to happen. So the "path" you describe doesn't exist at all. Neither UKIP or the Tories can deliver on this, so I may as well help the party whose views I agree with to build pressure for the longer term.
I want more than a referendum on EU membership, with all the dice loaded against Out. I want to win such a referendum. And the way to win it is to maximise UKIP's electoral representation.
No it's not (or at least, not unless UKIP can win a substantial number of MPs).
The way to get an Out vote is:
1. For a Tory government with a small majority to be elected: no excuses for backsliding then and maximum pressure from the back-benches.
2. For those advocating Out to ramp up and sustain pressure on: a. demands for what counts as success in the negotiations, and b. the deadline. It will be extremely difficult, if not impossible, for Cameron to meet those expectations. He will then have to choose between admitting an impossible task and recommending Out, or half-heartedly advocating In, while most of his party goes the other way.
Those wanting Out need the Tories on their side. If they can get the leadership too, so much the better.
But first, they need a referendum to happen, which is something Labour will never offer.
As an aside, I am seeing a Conservative Banner at the top of this site saying that they are the only party promising an in/out referendum.
As even the most rabid PB kipper and tory would agree, Cameron can't promise any such thing.
Can the banner be removed?
Oh dear, hitting a UKIP nerve is it? Why do you feel so threatened by the Conservative manifesto commitment to hold an In-Out referendum on EU membership (assuming they have sufficient MP's to pass the legislation)?
You don't think its because they've read the polls that show Cameron would win a post-negotiation referendum to stay in do you?
That then drives them to wish a 5 year Miliband government, ignoring the likely consequences of that.....monomania doesn't come close......
Two Tories or Tory supporters trying to console themselves. A bit pathetic really.
So what outcome do you predict at GE2015, and how will that help get you what you want?
My Dear Carlotta, UKIP, contrary to what the Lab/Lib/Cons and the MSM say, are in it for the long haul. We see no difference between Cast Iron Dave and New Marxist Ed. UKIP hope to grow and form, or be part of a government by 2020, or 2025 at the latest.
I probably wont be around to see it, and if I'm not I'll cheer from on high.
As an aside, I am seeing a Conservative Banner at the top of this site saying that they are the only party promising an in/out referendum.
As even the most rabid PB kipper and tory would agree, Cameron can't promise any such thing.
Can the banner be removed?
Two Tories or Tory supporters trying to console themselves. A bit pathetic really.
So what outcome do you predict at GE2015, and how will that help get you what you want?
If UKIP win the Euros and Labour keep sliding down the polls thanks to their voters turning to UKIP, what do you think Ed might offer in the manifesto to tempt them back?
That's the problem with UKIP "analysis" - there are only ever upsides for UKIP, no downsides for other parties.
Why do you think a Euro referendum promise might shore up Labour support, rather than piss off some of their current supporters?
How high does "Europe" rank among Labour voters as an issue?
If a large chunk of Labour supporters are pro EU, they can vote to stay in. Pro EU people aren't necessarily afraid of democracy are they?
Why promise them something they are not particularly interested in or don't want, when you could focus your message on things (energy price freeze, bankers bonus tax, rent controls) they are interested in and do want?
You know a Con maj government is the only path to a referendum - but fear it's outcome - UKIP people aren't afraid of democracy, are they?
Are Labour supporters aggressively against a referendum on the EU to the point where they may vote elsewhere if it is offered then?
UKIP will offer a referendum, I agree with the outline of their beliefs and so I will vote for them.
Yes, but unless they form the government, you won't get one. You do understand that part, don't you?
Is there a need to be so patronising?
Call me naive, but I couldn't vote for something I don't believe in. I could argue that anyone that wants out of the EU and doesn't vote for UKIP is not interested in democracy etc, but I say let people vote for who they like and see where we end up
If it is any consolation to you, it doesnt matter who I vote for because I live in a very safe Conservative seat, Hornchurch and Upminster
''Seriously, screw David Cameron. He's just a shallow, shallow PR man with no deeper understanding of British society and history.''
I would have disagreed with you until I heard Cameron defend Osborne's proposal this morning. A conservative Prime Minister defending the arbitrary confiscation of assets without a court order by a giant and unaccountable state organ. Incredible really.
David Cameron cannot be a conservative. A true conservative would have rejected this proposal as it came out of the mouth of whatever communist proposed it. He'd have done more. he;d have fired the stupid f8cker. If it was me it would taken me all my self control not to be throwing punches.
Why promise them something they are not particularly interested in or don't want, when you could focus your message on things (energy price freeze, bankers bonus tax, rent controls) they are interested in and do want?
You know a Con maj government is the only path to a referendum - but fear it's outcome - UKIP people aren't afraid of democracy, are they?
Neither UKIP or the Tories can deliver on this, so I may as well help the party whose views I agree with to build pressure for the longer term.
The politics of despair, you won't vote for the party who could give you a referendum, so instead will vote for one who can't, increasing the likelihood of the election of a party that won't.....That's the argument, isn't it?
Did you not even bother to read what I said? The Tories aren't the party who could give me a referendum, because they won't have an absolute majority. That was the point of my post.
Cameron has said a referendum would be a red line in any coalition negotiations - I fear your mistrust and or hatred of him is blinding you to your only path to a referendum.
Mr. Blueberry (Miss? I do apologise if I got that wrong), what did Umunna say?
Umunna neglected to say that EU competition rules come into play and that therefore the decision does not rest with our gov't. I've not rewatched it, but that's my memory. Here's Farage giving his response to whether the UK gov't should step in.
No it's not (or at least, not unless UKIP can win a substantial number of MPs).
The way to get an Out vote is:
1. For a Tory government with a small majority to be elected: no excuses for backsliding then and maximum pressure from the back-benches.
2. For those advocating Out to ramp up and sustain pressure on: a. demands for what counts as success in the negotiations, and b. the deadline. It will be extremely difficult, if not impossible, for Cameron to meet those expectations. He will then have to choose between admitting an impossible task and recommending Out, or half-heartedly advocating In, while most of his party goes the other way.
Those wanting Out need the Tories on their side. If they can get the leadership too, so much the better.
But first, they need a referendum to happen, which is something Labour will never offer.
A Tory government with a small majority just isn't going to happen. Cameron knows this, Osborne knows this, even Richard Nabavi knows this. Cameron's game plan is to use his referendum offer to get as many UKIP votes as he can in the hope of getting a minority government. He'll then blame the dastardly Lib Dems and Labour for blocking a referendum, and punt the issue into the long grass for another five years.
Meanwhile, if lots of UKIP voters go back to the Tories and Ed Miliband has most seats, we'll have the worst of all worlds. A Labour government, no referendum, and a Tory elite that feels UKIP were a passing fad and blames Cameron's defeat on him pandering to eurosceptics too much. Whether they commit to a referendum post 2020 is then highly questionable.
The best realistic scenario is UKIP finish in double figures, the Tories feeling under existential threat, Cameron resigning, and a new leadership election with on overwhelming imperative of picking a eurosceptic and potentially merging with UKIP.
''Seriously, screw David Cameron. He's just a shallow, shallow PR man with no deeper understanding of British society and history.''
I would have disagreed with you until I heard Cameron defend Osborne's proposal this morning. A conservative Prime Minister defending the arbitrary confiscation of assets without a court order by a giant and unaccountable state organ. Incredible really.
David Cameron cannot be a conservative. A true conservative would have rejected this proposal as it came out of the mouth of whatever communist proposed it. He'd have done more. he;d have fired the stupid f8cker. If it was me it would taken me all my self control not to be throwing punches.
It isn;t just un tory, It's anti tory.
It's hard to disagree with LIAMT when he said that anyone who values personal freedom cannot, in good conscience, vote Conservative.
Why stop at 5 - get all the parties in -12 way debate.
Farage was crap on QT this week - Mr Angry with nothing positive to say - given the Kipper bubble it prob won't even be an issue come 2015.
You must be kidding. Farage had well over half the audience laughing and clapping throughout the night. He made supposed heavyweights look like pygmies. UKIP will do well in Southampton if that audience represents anything.
An incredible analysis from TGOHF... Farage slaughtered the rest of the panel, I am worried just how many UKIP plants their were in the audience, it was like a UKIP rally!
I agree. That half-Indian guy was class. He really opened up the them and us - those with a voice and those without - debate.
He was brilliant, I agree. UKIP should sign him up, if they havent already
Cameron has said a referendum would be a red line in any coalition negotiations - I fear your mistrust and or hatred of him is blinding you to your only path to a referendum.
Right. And Labour and the Lib Dems would never accept it from the other side. So we won't get a Tory-led coalition.
(This ignoring the fact that Cameron lies about Europe, as when he claims we weren't part of the Eurozone bailouts, as when he claims we'll bring back home affairs and justice issues, as when he claims they stand for keeping control of our borders.)
Mr. Blueberry, Umunna's a cretin and Dimbleby, as has long been the case, incompetent as chairman. Fair enough to disagree with Farage on things but continuously talking over him is just obnoxious.
Call me naive, but I couldn't vote for something I don't believe in. I could argue that anyone that wants out of the EU and doesn't vote for UKIP is not interested in democracy etc, but I say let people vote for who they like and see where we end up
If it is any consolation to you, it doesnt matter who I vote for because I live in a very safe Conservative seat, Hornchurch and Upminster
Regarding your vote as a "protest" against the major parties and their position on the EU is a perfectly respectable position. And a lot saner than some of the other convoluted arguments sometimes advanced.
Mr. Taffys, worse, it seems that money can be taken from joint accounts if only one of the account-holders owes money. That's reprehensible and indefensible.
Mr. Fear, I propose a Balls Exception - surely a man is wise to vote Conservative if that is the best hope for throwing Balls out of Parliament?
We see no difference between Cast Iron Dave and New Marxist Ed.
Until today I'd have violently disagreed with you. After Dave proposed to allow HMRC to steal my money with no let or hindrance, I no longer disagree.
The thing that's bizarre about this is that it's a gross infringement of personal liberty and protection under English law, for such a minute benefit. You would hope that someone that studied politics and philosophy at one of the best universities in the country would value the former greatly, but clearly it didn't even cross his mind. It's the same thing with throwing out long-standing protections in extradition. It's the same thing with spying on individual's private communications - both the metadata and the content - without a warrant, or even probable cause.
Apologies for this late response, but have just got to the office and had parking problems. (am in the office as there is a problem with an off-shore oil rig in Ghana).
Yes, former Saigon was always entreprenurial and for Hanoi it was easier to allow the status quo. Of course Cuba is a good example of lots of private enterprise under a supposed Communist regime.
What I was trying to get at, is the entreprenurial spirit and pursuit of excellence (across the poorest and the richest) of a lot of nations in Asia and even Africa where there is no or very little financial bottom line and they have a great get-up-and-go attitude to self improvement - something that the UK had nearly 100 years ago.
Mr Abroad, you have it wrong, I and my ilk are not wanting to reduce employment but increase it, but with globalisation and technology advance and the rise of the BRIC countries, it is a lot harder to be competitive and maintain Western wage levels and benefits. For example, a consultancy recently wrote to me from Mumbai offering their services at 25% of our rates. Fortunately, their technology was not as advanced as ours but their people are as well if not better educated and are extremely motivated with a great work ethic. Soon they will match our technology and could be able take our clients. So we have to establish more local companies or jvs - but that will not help UK employment unless we use the UK to improve our technology and for that we require a flexible attitude to work, educational standard and willingness to relocate globally, and a pursuit of excellence that has almost disappeared from parts of the UK.
However, in the UK and other nearby countries, the benefit levels have risen and risen to the stage where some people are not motivated to look for work beyond their locality, or work at all (genuine disabled and OAPs excepted). In our competing countries, such benefit levels would appear to be riches beyond belief. As a nation we have to rebalance and reward the economic prospects of the workers and non-workers - that is if we can find enough work for them.
As the world accelerates past us in terms of education standards and skill sets, how will we employ those who through state neglect and political pride have left these people in an uncompetitive employment state?
The differences between Labour and Conservatives are so minute as to be invisible. They just tweak parts of the same policy slightly
This week on PB we discussed Halal meat, and those against eating it relied on the technique of animal slaughter being less dignified than the traditional British way
Try selling that to the animal when a third choice is not to be slaughtered at all!
UKIP are vegetarians and the Conservatives are trying to gain our vote by saying they want to kill animals in a slightly nicer way than Labour would!
Mr. Taffys, worse, it seems that money can be taken from joint accounts if only one of the account-holders owes money. That's reprehensible and indefensible.
To please their masters in government, HMRC would undoubtedly try it on. They would invent byzantine ways in which they claimed you owed them money, and then simply take it, knowing that the average man in the street does not have the time, money or knowledge to claim it back. The big boys would be able to protect themselves, its the ordinary guy who would get hammered.
2 Labour selections today: Batley & Spen and Sheffield Heeley
SLAB reselected Frank McAveety for Holyrood's Glasgow Shettleston. They are either slow in understanding or they really don't have much talent to choose from.
Why stop at 5 - get all the parties in -12 way debate.
Farage was crap on QT this week - Mr Angry with nothing positive to say - given the Kipper bubble it prob won't even be an issue come 2015.
You must be kidding. Farage had well over half the audience laughing and clapping throughout the night. He made supposed heavyweights look like pygmies. UKIP will do well in Southampton if that audience represents anything.
Trouble is @Blueberry, @TGOHF only sees what he wants to see: blinkered to all but his own navel.
Rather than improve HMRC's ability to collect taxes within existing laws, Cameron proposes more regulations, more powers which those wretches Smith, Blunkett and Brown could only support.
The nothing to see, nothing to fear line gets trotted out. Exile Can't do Dave to Selfie on Nandos. Would have changed my postal vote, if I had the chance.
If @Tim was back, he would enjoy the discomfort of Cameron's cheer leaders.
Mr. Blueberry, Umunna's a cretin and Dimbleby, as has long been the case, incompetent as chairman. Fair enough to disagree with Farage on things but continuously talking over him is just obnoxious.
Dimbleby has political views that he allows to colour his chairmanship which is unforgiveable and he must go. Reminding a panelist to answer the question is his job, but to interpose with other ideas is the role of the other panelists and the audience.
''The thing that's bizarre about this is that it's a gross infringement of personal liberty and protection under English law, for such a minute benefit. ''
Shows you what David Cameron really thinks of us and our country. For me, the mask slipped today.
Cameron has said a referendum would be a red line in any coalition negotiations - I fear your mistrust and or hatred of him is blinding you to your only path to a referendum.
Right. And Labour and the Lib Dems would never accept it from the other side. So we won't get a Tory-led coalition.
(This ignoring the fact that Cameron lies about Europe, as when he claims we weren't part of the Eurozone bailouts, as when he claims we'll bring back home affairs and justice issues, as when he claims they stand for keeping control of our borders.)
The Lib Dems will accept it if the Quid Pro Quo is sufficiently attractive.
2 Labour selections today: Batley & Spen and Sheffield Heeley
SLAB reselected Frank McAveety for Holyrood's Glasgow Shettleston. They are either slow in understanding or they really don't have much talent to choose from.
Or a bit of both? Actually Macca is by no means the worst of the SLAB Holyrood fodder (or Westminster for that matter).
Cameron has said a referendum would be a red line in any coalition negotiations - I fear your mistrust and or hatred of him is blinding you to your only path to a referendum.
Right. And Labour and the Lib Dems would never accept it from the other side. So we won't get a Tory-led coalition.
(This ignoring the fact that Cameron lies about Europe, as when he claims we weren't part of the Eurozone bailouts, as when he claims we'll bring back home affairs and justice issues, as when he claims they stand for keeping control of our borders.)
The Lib Dems will accept it if the Quid Pro Quo is sufficiently attractive.
I can't think of anything the Lib Dems value as much as EU membership. You could have once said PR, but I don't even think that's true any more with their collapse in poll numbers and the rise of UKIP.
A Tory government with a small majority just isn't going to happen. Cameron knows this, Osborne knows this, even Richard Nabavi knows this. Cameron's game plan is to use his referendum offer to get as many UKIP votes as he can in the hope of getting a minority government. He'll then blame the dastardly Lib Dems and Labour for blocking a referendum, and punt the issue into the long grass for another five years.
Meanwhile, if lots of UKIP voters go back to the Tories and Ed Miliband has most seats, we'll have the worst of all worlds. A Labour government, no referendum, and a Tory elite that feels UKIP were a passing fad and blames Cameron's defeat on him pandering to eurosceptics too much. Whether they commit to a referendum post 2020 is then highly questionable.
The best realistic scenario is UKIP finish in double figures, the Tories feeling under existential threat, Cameron resigning, and a new leadership election with on overwhelming imperative of picking a eurosceptic and potentially merging with UKIP.
I think you - and Richard Tyndall - are absolutely right that to get an out vote in a referendum, you need to have a Conservative Party campaigning for an 'out' vote. A UKIP vote, in this circumstance, is an attempt to force the Conservative Party to move Eurosceptic post a 2015 loss.
However, it fails under a number of circumstances:
1. If there is a referendum in 2017, whether in alliance with the LibDems or not, then the chance for Brexit is lost for 20 years.
2. If the Conservative Party fails to pick a Eurosceptic as leader. Don't forget that the more Eurosceptics leave the Conservative Party, the more Europhiles are left. A number of Conservative MPs, who are outwardly seen as Eurosceptics, are nowhere near as sceptical as their public personas suggest.
3. If the Labour Party does a good job in office. Handed an improving economy by George Osbourne, the Labour Party ends up in power for at least two terms - and who knows where the British economy and the Brexit cause is by this point?
4. A merger/alliance post-2015 with UKIP leads the Conservative Party to hemorrhage votes in metropolitan areas to the LibDems, or a moderate Labour Party. Essentially it reinvigorates the anti-Conservative tactical voting that so hammered the right in 1997 and 2001.
These prospects would seem - in aggregate - to be much more likely than the 2015 Conservative defeated by weak Labour Party, elect genuinely Eurosceptic leader, pact with UKIP, triumphant majority in 2020, Brexit.
Cameron has said a referendum would be a red line in any coalition negotiations - I fear your mistrust and or hatred of him is blinding you to your only path to a referendum.
Right. And Labour and the Lib Dems would never accept it from the other side. So we won't get a Tory-led coalition.
(This ignoring the fact that Cameron lies about Europe, as when he claims we weren't part of the Eurozone bailouts, as when he claims we'll bring back home affairs and justice issues, as when he claims they stand for keeping control of our borders.)
The Lib Dems will accept it if the Quid Pro Quo is sufficiently attractive.
I can't think of anything the Lib Dems value as much as EU membership. You could have once said PR, but I don't even think that's true any more with their collapse in poll numbers and the rise of UKIP.
But as you've said, it's not withdrawal itself, it's the possibility - set against the certainty of - say - PR for the Commons. I think there are enough wedded to that policy on principle that it would still sell itself.
Cameron has said a referendum would be a red line in any coalition negotiations - I fear your mistrust and or hatred of him is blinding you to your only path to a referendum.
Right. And Labour and the Lib Dems would never accept it from the other side. So we won't get a Tory-led coalition.
(This ignoring the fact that Cameron lies about Europe, as when he claims we weren't part of the Eurozone bailouts, as when he claims we'll bring back home affairs and justice issues, as when he claims they stand for keeping control of our borders.)
I actually disagree with you on this one.
If the LibDems had the choice between an immediate second election, where they would face electoral oblivion for preventing a coalition solely on the basis of their not wanting a referendum. And the trappings of power, and the chance to keep their seats.
They'll choose the second. Not because they're not europhiles. But because the thought of immediately losing their seats will concentrate their minds.
What are the LDs saying about Cameron's tax policy? Do they also support this illiberal extension of state powers, or not?
Will it matter? Ed Miliband must be stunned and delighted and will probably support. How could he have dreamed that the tories would open up the way to socialism themselves?
Cameron has said a referendum would be a red line in any coalition negotiations - I fear your mistrust and or hatred of him is blinding you to your only path to a referendum.
Right. And Labour and the Lib Dems would never accept it from the other side. So we won't get a Tory-led coalition.
(This ignoring the fact that Cameron lies about Europe, as when he claims we weren't part of the Eurozone bailouts, as when he claims we'll bring back home affairs and justice issues, as when he claims they stand for keeping control of our borders.)
I actually disagree with you on this one.
If the LibDems had the choice between an immediate second election, where they would face electoral oblivion for preventing a coalition solely on the basis of their not wanting a referendum. And the trappings of power, and the chance to keep their seats.
They'll choose the second. Not because they're not europhiles. But because the thought of immediately losing their seats will concentrate their minds.
They can just express a preference for coalition with Labour. They then wouldn't be seen as sabotaging anything. And Labour would probably accept it to get in power.
Perhaps too tempting for the crowd to sing along with the rugby version which refers to why "we go around in pairs", no? Though very appropriate this year of equal marriage ...
I sincerely hope it doesn't happen, but if this summer's World Cup turns into a fiasco then the case for London Olympics 2016 would be much stronger....
Maybe if one of the bookies gave decent odds, then those fine upstanding members of the IOC might just be tempted to have a few bob on that outcome!
London Olympics Marquee 2 - I very much doubt it .... after all by then the Olympic Stadium will have been converted into a new home for West Ham. If by then however they are a struggling Championship side (not that unlikely) with attendances falling like a stone, perhaps they'd be grateful to be let off the hook. If the games were indeed to be taken off Brazil as a result of the infrastructure, etc not being ready, it's far more likely that they would be moved to perhaps a multi city location in the U.S.
Cameron has said a referendum would be a red line in any coalition negotiations - I fear your mistrust and or hatred of him is blinding you to your only path to a referendum.
Right. And Labour and the Lib Dems would never accept it from the other side. So we won't get a Tory-led coalition.
(This ignoring the fact that Cameron lies about Europe, as when he claims we weren't part of the Eurozone bailouts, as when he claims we'll bring back home affairs and justice issues, as when he claims they stand for keeping control of our borders.)
I actually disagree with you on this one.
If the LibDems had the choice between an immediate second election, where they would face electoral oblivion for preventing a coalition solely on the basis of their not wanting a referendum. And the trappings of power, and the chance to keep their seats.
They'll choose the second. Not because they're not europhiles. But because the thought of immediately losing their seats will concentrate their minds.
They can just express a preference for coalition with Labour. They then wouldn't be seen as sabotaging anything. And Labour would probably accept it to get in power.
David Cameron:
"I have been in discussion with Nick Clegg for the past 24 hours, and I offered a continuation of the coalition that so well governed Britain for the past 5 years. The only condition that I put upon the continuation, despite the Liberal Democrats collapse in votes and seats, was that we must put our continued membership of the EU to the British people. That was not a condition Mr Clegg was willing to accept. The Liberal Democrat Party would rather subject us all to an unneccesary second election that accept the British people should have a say on the relationship of this country and the EU."
The LibDem vote in 2015 will be largely those who supported the coalition. To express a preference for 'The Labour Party' would be electoral suicide, especially in the event that the Conservatives were ahead on votes and seats.
This is what I don't get about the EU utopians, talking about a brotherhood of nations and how we may as well have a country at the EU level. For all the issues with UK politicians, it's clearly not the complete joke that half of Europe has. Can pro-EU people not see just how corrupt or authoritarian politics is in countries like Italy, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Greece etc? Why on Earth would we want to integrate with these places? It's insanity.
The UK is the most authoritarian country in the EU. Nobody has a surveillance apparatus like GHCQ, and the UK is the only country where you can be imprisoned for possessing random numbers and being unable to prove they're not encrypted documents. Who knows what it'll be like if the UK ever leaves the ECHR.
2. If the Conservative Party fails to pick a Eurosceptic as leader. Don't forget that the more Eurosceptics leave the Conservative Party, the more Europhiles are left. A number of Conservative MPs, who are outwardly seen as Eurosceptics, are nowhere near as sceptical as their public personas suggest.
But as you say, the loss of seats concentrates minds. Politicians first and foremost care about the survival of them and their party. UKIP thriving means that necessity will force the issue. Plus, more and more conservatives are coming round to euroscepticism - see Lawson, Portillo etc - and will continue to do so as the EU encroaches ever further. By all accounts the 2010 intake was notably more conservative than in previous years, and this generational trend will continue.
3. If the Labour Party does a good job in office. Handed an improving economy by George Osbourne, the Labour Party ends up in power for at least two terms - and who knows where the British economy and the Brexit cause is by this point?
Even with an economy improving, I can't see Labour doing a good job in office. Governments lose support over time, and a Miliband-Balls leadership will lose support faster than most.
4. A merger/alliance post-2015 with UKIP leads the Conservative Party to hemorrhage votes in metropolitan areas to the LibDems, or a moderate Labour Party. Essentially it reinvigorates the anti-Conservative tactical voting that so hammered the right in 1997 and 2001.
They will lose some votes on their total sure. But the Tories-UKP currently get 48% of the vote between them. They would need to follow the Reform model in Canada. Be genuinely conservative, connect with the working class, but slightly move away from the aggressive populism, and emanate professionalism and be a bit more careful with language.
The man was a true hero (and contributor to 'Air International'). [Sorry Dr Sunil - sad, repeated jokes - Prasenanth!]
t would have been interesting to have seen the 'Shark' Me-262 against a DeHaviland Vampire. [OK; most fun seems to have been in a[n] Hawker Tempest: Auntie 'Hilda' Merkel will not allow Wee-Fr'Eck that space come EU lebensraum...!]
"I have been in discussion with Nick Clegg for the past 24 hours, and I offered a continuation of the coalition that so well governed Britain for the past 5 years. The only condition that I put upon the continuation, despite the Liberal Democrats collapse in votes and seats, was that we must put our continued membership of the EU to the British people. That was not a condition Mr Clegg was willing to accept. The Liberal Democrat Party would rather subject us all to an unneccesary second election that accept the British people should have a say on the relationship of this country and the EU."
The LibDem vote in 2015 will be largely those who supported the coalition. To express a preference for 'The Labour Party' would be electoral suicide, especially in the event that the Conservatives were ahead on votes and seats.
But why would there be a second election when Ed Miliband and Nick Clegg can agree on a deal? Both of them get what they want: no EU referendum, no conservatives in power, and centre-left government for five years. The Lib Dems don't even need to make any demands really. They can agree a coalition agreement that's 85% joint demands and 15% Labour stuff.
The man was a true hero (and contributor to 'Air International'. [Sorry Dr Sunil - sad, repeated jokes - Prasenanth!]
t would have been interesting to have seen the 'Shark' Me-262 against a DeHaviland Vampire. [OK; most fun seems to have been in a[n] Hawker Tempest: Auntie 'Hilda' Merkel will not allow Wee-Fr'Eck that space come EU lebensraum...!]
Entirely agree (except the obligatory Mr Salmond joke, but never mind). Many PBers will not know that he flew very many different types as a Farnborough test pilot, notably captured Axis aircraft in '45 on. My favourite Winkle Brown story is his account of landing a Vampire jet on a bouncy rubber mattress (a bright idea, or at least it seemed like it at the time, for solving the problem of landing planes on ships).
This is what I don't get about the EU utopians, talking about a brotherhood of nations and how we may as well have a country at the EU level. For all the issues with UK politicians, it's clearly not the complete joke that half of Europe has. Can pro-EU people not see just how corrupt or authoritarian politics is in countries like Italy, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Greece etc? Why on Earth would we want to integrate with these places? It's insanity.
The UK is the most authoritarian country in the EU. Nobody has a surveillance apparatus like GHCQ, and the UK is the only country where you can be imprisoned for possessing random numbers and being unable to prove they're not encrypted documents. Who knows what it'll be like if the UK ever leaves the ECHR.
The idea that the UK - for all its faults including those you mention - operating under Common Law systems (including habeas corpus) is more authoritarian than the rest of the EU operating under the Civil Law system is just risible.
There is much I would see changed about the way that our system has been abused - most particularly over the last 30 years or so - but it is still miles better and fairer than the systems operating in Europe.
The UK is the most authoritarian country in the EU. Nobody has a surveillance apparatus like GHCQ, and the UK is the only country where you can be imprisoned for possessing random numbers and being unable to prove they're not encrypted documents. Who knows what it'll be like if the UK ever leaves the ECHR.
So I agree with you on much of that. But we don't have parties like Jobbik or Golden Dawn or the Freedom Party getting major support here.
Cameron has said a referendum would be a red line in any coalition negotiations - I fear your mistrust and or hatred of him is blinding you to your only path to a referendum.
Right. And Labour and the Lib Dems would never accept it from the other side. So we won't get a Tory-led coalition.
(This ignoring the fact that Cameron lies about Europe, as when he claims we weren't part of the Eurozone bailouts, as when he claims we'll bring back home affairs and justice issues, as when he claims they stand for keeping control of our borders.)
I actually disagree with you on this one.
If the LibDems had the choice between an immediate second election, where they would face electoral oblivion for preventing a coalition solely on the basis of their not wanting a referendum. And the trappings of power, and the chance to keep their seats.
They'll choose the second. Not because they're not europhiles. But because the thought of immediately losing their seats will concentrate their minds.
They can just express a preference for coalition with Labour. They then wouldn't be seen as sabotaging anything. And Labour would probably accept it to get in power.
David Cameron:
"I have been in discussion with Nick Clegg for the past 24 hours, and I offered a continuation of the coalition that so well governed Britain for the past 5 years. The only condition that I put upon the continuation, despite the Liberal Democrats collapse in votes and seats, was that we must put our continued membership of the EU to the British people. That was not a condition Mr Clegg was willing to accept. The Liberal Democrat Party would rather subject us all to an unneccesary second election that accept the British people should have a say on the relationship of this country and the EU."
The LibDem vote in 2015 will be largely those who supported the coalition. To express a preference for 'The Labour Party' would be electoral suicide, especially in the event that the Conservatives were ahead on votes and seats.
Clegg: As I told David Cameron repeatedly I am willing to agree to a referendum on the EU, and my offer for a continued coalition agreement, encompassing the repeal of tuition fees, a rolling back of restrictions on civil liberties enacted by previous Labour and Conservative governments and a referendum on Proportional Representation is still open to him.
"I have been in discussion with Nick Clegg for the past 24 hours, and I offered a continuation of the coalition that so well governed Britain for the past 5 years. The only condition that I put upon the continuation, despite the Liberal Democrats collapse in votes and seats, was that we must put our continued membership of the EU to the British people. That was not a condition Mr Clegg was willing to accept. The Liberal Democrat Party would rather subject us all to an unneccesary second election that accept the British people should have a say on the relationship of this country and the EU."
The LibDem vote in 2015 will be largely those who supported the coalition. To express a preference for 'The Labour Party' would be electoral suicide, especially in the event that the Conservatives were ahead on votes and seats.
But why would there be a second election when Ed Miliband and Nick Clegg can agree on a deal? Both of them get what they want: no EU referendum, no conservatives in power, and centre-left government for five years. The Lib Dems don't even need to make any demands really. They can agree a coalition agreement that's 85% joint demands and 15% Labour stuff.
Thank you for your comments today. Most interesting.
This is what I don't get about the EU utopians, talking about a brotherhood of nations and how we may as well have a country at the EU level. For all the issues with UK politicians, it's clearly not the complete joke that half of Europe has. Can pro-EU people not see just how corrupt or authoritarian politics is in countries like Italy, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Greece etc? Why on Earth would we want to integrate with these places? It's insanity.
The UK is the most authoritarian country in the EU. Nobody has a surveillance apparatus like GHCQ, and the UK is the only country where you can be imprisoned for possessing random numbers and being unable to prove they're not encrypted documents. Who knows what it'll be like if the UK ever leaves the ECHR.
The idea that the UK - for all its faults including those you mention - operating under Common Law systems (including habeas corpus) is more authoritarian than the rest of the EU operating under the Civil Law system is just risible.
There is much I would see changed about the way that our system has been abused - most particularly over the last 30 years or so - but it is still miles better and fairer than the systems operating in Europe.
We don't have ID cards. We have juries that can make up their own minds.
However, we also have the highest concentration of CCTV cameras, and the most active 'intelligence' service, with some of the most far reaching powers to detain and interrogate people.
Has anyone seen the fabulous 2005 BBC documentary The Power of Nightmares?
The UK is the most authoritarian country in the EU. Nobody has a surveillance apparatus like GHCQ, and the UK is the only country where you can be imprisoned for possessing random numbers and being unable to prove they're not encrypted documents. Who knows what it'll be like if the UK ever leaves the ECHR.
Derh!!!
Gaigin: Cornwall to New-England is the back-bone of the Internet package system! Tapping copper-wires is not a profession that only East-Europeans know.
[Add-in: INMARSAT, SKYNET, ECHELON, FIVE-EYES, &c. and you wonder why "Essex-bouy" is still breathing...!]
Doncaster is one of the whitest and most working class constituencies in the UK. If UKIP is really serious about going after the Labour vote it should surely make a real effort there with a high profile candidate. Perhaps even the Nigemeister himself - after all, the locals must feel horribly betrayed by their sitting MP. We should expect a massive switch to UKIP next year, shouldn't we?
Not really the same, is it? Surely the local MP is there for the taking.
Well Labour have lost 22% of their vote since 1997 so the trend supports your theory.
Probably be UKIP by 2020, next year might be too soon. I'd expect UKIP to come second there
Ed could be in real trouble soon then.
But it's an interesting one: in a Labour seat in which the vast majority of the population is white and working class, and immigration has had very little impact - a town like Doncaster, in fact - what will the UKIP message be?
Maybe they could say Barking and Dagenham was predominantly white and working class 20 years ago, look what Labour have done to it.
Labour got almost 70% there in 1997 and have lost votes at each election since. Ed managed to get them below 50% for the first time in a generation in 2010, so people seem to be waking up
This is what I don't get about the EU utopians, talking about a brotherhood of nations and how we may as well have a country at the EU level. For all the issues with UK politicians, it's clearly not the complete joke that half of Europe has. Can pro-EU people not see just how corrupt or authoritarian politics is in countries like Italy, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Greece etc? Why on Earth would we want to integrate with these places? It's insanity.
The UK is the most authoritarian country in the EU. Nobody has a surveillance apparatus like GHCQ, and the UK is the only country where you can be imprisoned for possessing random numbers and being unable to prove they're not encrypted documents. Who knows what it'll be like if the UK ever leaves the ECHR.
The idea that the UK - for all its faults including those you mention - operating under Common Law systems (including habeas corpus) is more authoritarian than the rest of the EU operating under the Civil Law system is just risible.
There is much I would see changed about the way that our system has been abused - most particularly over the last 30 years or so - but it is still miles better and fairer than the systems operating in Europe.
We don't have ID cards. We have juries that can make up their own minds.
However, we also have the highest concentration of CCTV cameras, and the most active 'intelligence' service, with some of the most far reaching powers to detain and interrogate people.
Has anyone seen the fabulous 2005 BBC documentary The Power of Nightmares?
It's a classic in the 'fast cut images, calm authoritative voice' genre designed to lull the viewer in to simply agreeing with whatever is put forward, no?
This is what I don't get about the EU utopians, talking about a brotherhood of nations and how we may as well have a country at the EU level. For all the issues with UK politicians, it's clearly not the complete joke that half of Europe has. Can pro-EU people not see just how corrupt or authoritarian politics is in countries like Italy, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Greece etc? Why on Earth would we want to integrate with these places? It's insanity.
The UK is the most authoritarian country in the EU. Nobody has a surveillance apparatus like GHCQ, and the UK is the only country where you can be imprisoned for possessing random numbers and being unable to prove they're not encrypted documents. Who knows what it'll be like if the UK ever leaves the ECHR.
The idea that the UK - for all its faults including those you mention - operating under Common Law systems (including habeas corpus) is more authoritarian than the rest of the EU operating under the Civil Law system is just risible.
There is much I would see changed about the way that our system has been abused - most particularly over the last 30 years or so - but it is still miles better and fairer than the systems operating in Europe.
We don't have ID cards. We have juries that can make up their own minds.
However, we also have the highest concentration of CCTV cameras, and the most active 'intelligence' service, with some of the most far reaching powers to detain and interrogate people.
Has anyone seen the fabulous 2005 BBC documentary The Power of Nightmares?
The problem with the current system, is that we have Conservative and Labour governments making the stuff the security services stuff worse, and EU integration making the legal system stuff worse.
Comments
Farage was crap on QT this week - Mr Angry with nothing positive to say - given the Kipper bubble it prob won't even be an issue come 2015.
You know a Con maj government is the only path to a referendum - but fear it's outcome - UKIP people aren't afraid of democracy, are they?
And on the 19th of September, what the 92% want they will get.....
The Unionists in Scotland had plenty of opportunity to hold a referendum at any time when they had a majority in the parliament, right up to 2011. Indeed, Wendy Alexander proposed just this but got sacked from her job as head of Labour's Scottish branch for her pains.
And when the SNP proposed 2014, all the Unionists in Holyrood and Westminster could do was whine about not having it on the anniversary of some mediaeval battle or other - which of course instantly invalidated their preferred option of 2013 as well, though it had to be pointed out to them I expect. I really do wonder what history they taught in schools in the 70s and 80s ...
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/may/09/nigel-farage-confident-ukip-will-win-seat-in-scotland
We'll have to see if Mr Farage repeats his claims of anti-English racism this time.
But as you say, London is not in any position to deliver the kind of Games it did in 2012 now either, and in all probability, couldn't be in two years' time. Whether it could be in a better position than Rio is another matter.
Crucially, the clock is ticking not only on Rio but on Plan B (and Plan C and so on). The longer the delay in any decision to switch, the harder to stage a good Games, never mind a great one. But the sooner a decision is taken, the harder it is to justify: it's not an enviable call.
FWIW, I think if London were given two years, it could do it. It'd have to mean scaling back on certain aspects from usual standards (the main stadium would have to run in reduced form), and there'd be all sorts of legal questions. The athletes would probably have to be stationed in various locations rather than just one, making transport more difficult - but nonetheless, it could be done.
Over-riding all that though is the mighty embarrassment (and cost) the IOC would feel about withdrawing the Games from Rio - its first award to South America. I don't think they would do that unless it became absolutely clear that the Games going ahead there were either impossible or dangerous, by which time it might not be possible to shift them either.
Having said all that, the Rio experience, following on from Athens, where the IOC dodged a bullet, and synthetic Beijing, will have a real impact on the race for 2024. Paris ought to be a shoo-in.
The most poignant bit was nothing to do with planes, but the liberation of Bergen-Belsen concentration camp, where he acted as interpreter. His descriptions of the scenes that greeted them in the camp were horrific, and I wonder how anyone could ever fully recover from seeing them, yet alone having been an inmate.
Edited extra bit: Simona de Silvestro in the Sauber garage. Some speculation she could end up with a race seat in the team next year. If she has the pace, that could be very good for the team.
Probably be UKIP by 2020, next year might be too soon. I'd expect UKIP to come second there
And on the subject of scantily clad Europeans:
Cupcake by Belarus is a good Eurovision song, and worth a punt at 7:1 at Ladbrokes for a top ten finish at Ladbrokes, and as a possibility of a Russian 12 points 20:1 also seems good (any other country and also covers a few others). I also have some on the Ukraine each way, a good song and likely to get a lot of political voting. The prospect of next years Eurovision in Kyiv will give the organizers the willies!
This LD loves Europe!
But the thing I just have not been able to stomach was the sheer apathy towards civil liberties that any proper British conservative should deeply value. First it began with the complete lack of action on existing big brother laws Labour have brought in over the years. A terrorism act to search people that is clearly used predominantly for non-terrorism purposes. The sharing of personal data among hundreds of thousands at civil servants that don't have a right to do so. Hearsay evidence for anti-social behaviour. But then it got worse: the sharing of health data with private firms, and plans to do the same with tax data. The removal of legal aid necessary for poor people to have equal standing in matters of law. A European Arrest Warrant that can take people to corrupt Eastern Europe judicial systems without any of the usual English protections on liberty, like double jeopardy or hearsay evidence. And bringing in a new snooper's charter so that even more communication data can be stored.
And on top of all that, utterly unbelievable infringements from GCHQ on our most personal private communications. If a young girl has made a call to an abortion clinic, GCHQ can know about it. If a woman wants to do a strip tease for her husband on a webcam they can grab screenshots. And all this despite absolutely no connection to any individual case. And when people are outraged about this, how does Cameron react? He calls the criticism a "la-di-da, airy-fairy" view and says it's necessary to pull this shit because of fictional TV crime dramas.
Seriously, screw David Cameron. He's just a shallow, shallow PR man with no deeper understanding of British society and history.
UKIP will offer a referendum, I agree with the outline of their beliefs and so I will vote for them. Other people can vote for who they like and we will see where we end up. That's democracy
It's an anecdote, but maybe reflects the underlying fact that it's hard to predict how people come across to anyone else. Coming over very forcefully tends to motivate the core vote (which is perhaps his priority right now) while alienating waverers.
Rather cruel to write that under the photo that heads the piece.
'Monckton and his five allies were "well meaning chaps who are ill-fashioned and quite frankly not up to the cut and thrust of modern politics," said David Coburn, Ukip's lead candidate in the 22 May election and former London regional chairman.'
That would be the Coburn that recently stated that the SNP planned to populate the Highlands with Pashtuns. Presumably he defines scaremongering about immigration as the cut and thrust of modern politics.
Southampton Itchen, John Denhams seat could be intersting. Denham, standing down, has already been warning that Labour arent doing enough there...
http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/news/11190530._Don_t_call_UKIP_racist__says_city_MP/?action=complain&cid=12725786
To my mind, there has to be some assessment of a party's support as well as of the number of people who can vote for them.
But it's an interesting one: in a Labour seat in which the vast majority of the population is white and working class, and immigration has had very little impact - a town like Doncaster, in fact - what will the UKIP message be?
Secondly, there isn't going to be a Conservative majority government. The Tories would have to increase about ten points in the polls in a year for that to happen. So the "path" you describe doesn't exist at all. Neither UKIP or the Tories can deliver on this, so I may as well help the party whose views I agree with to build pressure for the longer term.
And thanks to whoever posted the link to http://www.whatthehellhavethelibdemsdone.com
Reminded me why I voted LibDem last time.
Edited extra bit: also, consider the impact a Faragophile or Faragophobe would have on the worm during a debate.
Seriously, what did you think of Chuka Umunna trivialising the Astrazeneca situation? He's your shadow business secretary. Way out of league. Final question if you want to see it.
I get irked when the counter-argument is that if you don't vote Conservative, you'll get Milliband. Yes, Milliband would be worse than Cameron, but I think politics ought to offer more than a choice between dismal and even worse.
Labour got almost 70% there in 1997 and have lost votes at each election since. Ed managed to get them below 50% for the first time in a generation in 2010, so people seem to be waking up
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doncaster_North_(UK_Parliament_constituency)
That guy asked that Farage didnt interrupt him, which he didnt, then talked all over Farage's answer!
They can show that as much as they like
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SCSfSjM-moA
BTW, Mr is correct (and suitably polite). TY!
The way to get an Out vote is:
1. For a Tory government with a small majority to be elected: no excuses for backsliding then and maximum pressure from the back-benches.
2. For those advocating Out to ramp up and sustain pressure on:
a. demands for what counts as success in the negotiations, and
b. the deadline.
It will be extremely difficult, if not impossible, for Cameron to meet those expectations. He will then have to choose between admitting an impossible task and recommending Out, or half-heartedly advocating In, while most of his party goes the other way.
Those wanting Out need the Tories on their side. If they can get the leadership too, so much the better.
But first, they need a referendum to happen, which is something Labour will never offer.
I probably wont be around to see it, and if I'm not I'll cheer from on high.
Call me naive, but I couldn't vote for something I don't believe in. I could argue that anyone that wants out of the EU and doesn't vote for UKIP is not interested in democracy etc, but I say let people vote for who they like and see where we end up
If it is any consolation to you, it doesnt matter who I vote for because I live in a very safe Conservative seat, Hornchurch and Upminster
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hornchurch_and_Upminster_(UK_Parliament_constituency)#Election_results
I would have disagreed with you until I heard Cameron defend Osborne's proposal this morning. A conservative Prime Minister defending the arbitrary confiscation of assets without a court order by a giant and unaccountable state organ. Incredible really.
David Cameron cannot be a conservative. A true conservative would have rejected this proposal as it came out of the mouth of whatever communist proposed it. He'd have done more. he;d have fired the stupid f8cker. If it was me it would taken me all my self control not to be throwing punches.
It isn;t just un tory, It's anti tory.
Meanwhile, if lots of UKIP voters go back to the Tories and Ed Miliband has most seats, we'll have the worst of all worlds. A Labour government, no referendum, and a Tory elite that feels UKIP were a passing fad and blames Cameron's defeat on him pandering to eurosceptics too much. Whether they commit to a referendum post 2020 is then highly questionable.
The best realistic scenario is UKIP finish in double figures, the Tories feeling under existential threat, Cameron resigning, and a new leadership election with on overwhelming imperative of picking a eurosceptic and potentially merging with UKIP.
Until today I'd have violently disagreed with you. After Dave proposed to allow HMRC to steal my money with no let or hindrance, I no longer disagree.
(This ignoring the fact that Cameron lies about Europe, as when he claims we weren't part of the Eurozone bailouts, as when he claims we'll bring back home affairs and justice issues, as when he claims they stand for keeping control of our borders.)
Call me naive, but I couldn't vote for something I don't believe in. I could argue that anyone that wants out of the EU and doesn't vote for UKIP is not interested in democracy etc, but I say let people vote for who they like and see where we end up
If it is any consolation to you, it doesnt matter who I vote for because I live in a very safe Conservative seat, Hornchurch and Upminster
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hornchurch_and_Upminster_(UK_Parliament_constituency)#Election_results
Regarding your vote as a "protest" against the major parties and their position on the EU is a perfectly respectable position. And a lot saner than some of the other convoluted arguments sometimes advanced.
Mr. Fear, I propose a Balls Exception - surely a man is wise to vote Conservative if that is the best hope for throwing Balls out of Parliament?
Apologies for this late response, but have just got to the office and had parking problems. (am in the office as there is a problem with an off-shore oil rig in Ghana).
Yes, former Saigon was always entreprenurial and for Hanoi it was easier to allow the status quo. Of course Cuba is a good example of lots of private enterprise under a supposed Communist regime.
What I was trying to get at, is the entreprenurial spirit and pursuit of excellence (across the poorest and the richest) of a lot of nations in Asia and even Africa where there is no or very little financial bottom line and they have a great get-up-and-go attitude to self improvement - something that the UK had nearly 100 years ago.
Mr Abroad, you have it wrong, I and my ilk are not wanting to reduce employment but increase it, but with globalisation and technology advance and the rise of the BRIC countries, it is a lot harder to be competitive and maintain Western wage levels and benefits. For example, a consultancy recently wrote to me from Mumbai offering their services at 25% of our rates. Fortunately, their technology was not as advanced as ours but their people are as well if not better educated and are extremely motivated with a great work ethic. Soon they will match our technology and could be able take our clients. So we have to establish more local companies or jvs - but that will not help UK employment unless we use the UK to improve our technology and for that we require a flexible attitude to work, educational standard and willingness to relocate globally, and a pursuit of excellence that has almost disappeared from parts of the UK.
However, in the UK and other nearby countries, the benefit levels have risen and risen to the stage where some people are not motivated to look for work beyond their locality, or work at all (genuine disabled and OAPs excepted). In our competing countries, such benefit levels would appear to be riches beyond belief. As a nation we have to rebalance and reward the economic prospects of the workers and non-workers - that is if we can find enough work for them.
As the world accelerates past us in terms of education standards and skill sets, how will we employ those who through state neglect and political pride have left these people in an uncompetitive employment state?
The differences between Labour and Conservatives are so minute as to be invisible. They just tweak parts of the same policy slightly
This week on PB we discussed Halal meat, and those against eating it relied on the technique of animal slaughter being less dignified than the traditional British way
Try selling that to the animal when a third choice is not to be slaughtered at all!
UKIP are vegetarians and the Conservatives are trying to gain our vote by saying they want to kill animals in a slightly nicer way than Labour would!
To please their masters in government, HMRC would undoubtedly try it on. They would invent byzantine ways in which they claimed you owed them money, and then simply take it, knowing that the average man in the street does not have the time, money or knowledge to claim it back. The big boys would be able to protect themselves, its the ordinary guy who would get hammered.
This policy is pure evil.
SLAB reselected Frank McAveety for Holyrood's Glasgow Shettleston. They are either slow in understanding or they really don't have much talent to choose from.
The nothing to see, nothing to fear line gets trotted out. Exile Can't do Dave to Selfie on Nandos. Would have changed my postal vote, if I had the chance.
If @Tim was back, he would enjoy the discomfort of Cameron's cheer leaders.
Shows you what David Cameron really thinks of us and our country. For me, the mask slipped today.
However, it fails under a number of circumstances:
1. If there is a referendum in 2017, whether in alliance with the LibDems or not, then the chance for Brexit is lost for 20 years.
2. If the Conservative Party fails to pick a Eurosceptic as leader. Don't forget that the more Eurosceptics leave the Conservative Party, the more Europhiles are left. A number of Conservative MPs, who are outwardly seen as Eurosceptics, are nowhere near as sceptical as their public personas suggest.
3. If the Labour Party does a good job in office. Handed an improving economy by George Osbourne, the Labour Party ends up in power for at least two terms - and who knows where the British economy and the Brexit cause is by this point?
4. A merger/alliance post-2015 with UKIP leads the Conservative Party to hemorrhage votes in metropolitan areas to the LibDems, or a moderate Labour Party. Essentially it reinvigorates the anti-Conservative tactical voting that so hammered the right in 1997 and 2001.
These prospects would seem - in aggregate - to be much more likely than the 2015 Conservative defeated by weak Labour Party, elect genuinely Eurosceptic leader, pact with UKIP, triumphant majority in 2020, Brexit.
If the LibDems had the choice between an immediate second election, where they would face electoral oblivion for preventing a coalition solely on the basis of their not wanting a referendum. And the trappings of power, and the chance to keep their seats.
They'll choose the second. Not because they're not europhiles. But because the thought of immediately losing their seats will concentrate their minds.
Will it matter? Ed Miliband must be stunned and delighted and will probably support. How could he have dreamed that the tories would open up the way to socialism themselves?
With the Glasgae (Galwegians; not Galway-greens) Games coming upon us; why do we not anticipate Sept 18th with a new English anthem...?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=leU1kbtIZUI
:one-expects-loyalty-and-service-is-beyond-most-folks:
Betting PostF1: tipped Rosberg for pole at 3.8. I think it's going to be very close, so the odds are too long:
http://enormo-haddock.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/spain-pre-qualifying.html
If by then however they are a struggling Championship side (not that unlikely) with attendances falling like a stone, perhaps they'd be grateful to be let off the hook.
If the games were indeed to be taken off Brazil as a result of the infrastructure, etc not being ready, it's far more likely that they would be moved to perhaps a multi city location in the U.S.
"I have been in discussion with Nick Clegg for the past 24 hours, and I offered a continuation of the coalition that so well governed Britain for the past 5 years. The only condition that I put upon the continuation, despite the Liberal Democrats collapse in votes and seats, was that we must put our continued membership of the EU to the British people. That was not a condition Mr Clegg was willing to accept. The Liberal Democrat Party would rather subject us all to an unneccesary second election that accept the British people should have a say on the relationship of this country and the EU."
The LibDem vote in 2015 will be largely those who supported the coalition. To express a preference for 'The Labour Party' would be electoral suicide, especially in the event that the Conservatives were ahead on votes and seats.
t would have been interesting to have seen the 'Shark' Me-262 against a DeHaviland Vampire. [OK; most fun seems to have been in a[n] Hawker Tempest: Auntie 'Hilda' Merkel will not allow Wee-Fr'Eck that space come EU lebensraum...!]
Edit: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f7Lu6LEQ0zo
There is much I would see changed about the way that our system has been abused - most particularly over the last 30 years or so - but it is still miles better and fairer than the systems operating in Europe.
We have juries that can make up their own minds.
However, we also have the highest concentration of CCTV cameras, and the most active 'intelligence' service, with some of the most far reaching powers to detain and interrogate people.
Has anyone seen the fabulous 2005 BBC documentary The Power of Nightmares?
Gaigin: Cornwall to New-England is the back-bone of the Internet package system! Tapping copper-wires is not a profession that only East-Europeans know.
[Add-in: INMARSAT, SKYNET, ECHELON, FIVE-EYES, &c. and you wonder why "Essex-bouy" is still breathing...!]
Record Scoop 6 today,likely pot £7.5 million.