Seems increasing that the only people which live in London are the extremely wealthy, or the ones which can have the benefit of council/ housing benefit accommodation.
It's the middle which are squeezed out, and are in the commuter belt.
Mr Eagles, that's the thing about locals. So many results any party can point to something and say it's good news.
I remember many Labour folk telling me, even when Boris won, that London was a Labour city, so Labour are only doing well, where they are already strong.
I don't think it's been said yet, but for me one of the things the London results confirm is that Boris will not attempt to seek re-election as mayor and will head back to Westminster.
I was thinking that too, and wondering if it means he can stand as a London MP in 2015 without any problems further down the line.
He only won last time because Labour had a dire candidate in Ken. If Khan runs, he wins, IMO.
I certainly think you're right...
That may depend on whether his opponents make anything of his friendship with Babar Ahmed, the terrorist suspect extradited to the US on terror charges. London has suffered its fair share of terror attacks.
I don't suppose you want to be drawn on this, but, depending on the way the other parties happen to be aligned: Majority government at 38%, OK? Majority government at 32%, OK? Majority government at 24%, OK? Majority government at 16%, OK? Isn't there a point somewhere where you'd draw a line write "WTF" next to it?
Well, what I would say is that the current system encourages parties to try to appeal to a wide spectrum, and voters to concentrate on the real choice. So, hopefully, your scenario would be self-correcting after an election or two (as it was in the 1990s, when Labour finally got round to accomodating what the voters wanted, rather than what Labour activists wanted, with spectacularly successful results for them).
In any case, yes, sure, I acknowledge the issue you raise, it's the solution which I'm scratching my head at. Italy, for example, has a more proportional system than ours (and used to have a very pure proportional system), but that just led to unworkability.
Looks more and more as if No 10 will be decided by a relatively small number of UKIP returners. But who returns? The blue rinsers or the WWC? If UKIP poll (say) 14% and the returners split 3/1 either way, that's a 1% swing. Re London, well done Labour. But let's look at the maths. A nightmare night for the Tories might see all 7 2010 gains reversed, but where are the rest of Labours gains coming from? They are going backwards in most of the rest of England (momentum wise), they can't gain in Scotland, they might take a couple back in Wales. And whither the Tories? Forget London gains, it's all about defence. they will need to hold, hold, hold, gain from the Lib Dems, and maybe take advantage in places like Birmingham Northfield and Edgbaston, Southampton and the Midland towns. I can't see either party getting a majority unless the Labour backward momentum gathers pace or they lose the WWC to UKIP and the Tories take back the blue rinse brigade
If the Ukip/Con split unwinds in the worst possible way for them i.e. total shift to Ukip in the north and total shift to Con in the south then they could lose almost everywhere at once.
Derby City Council results complete Lab 8 Con 5 LD 2 ( plus 1 in a double vacancy ) UKIP 2
Lab gained 1 from Con and 1 from LD Con gained 1 from LD UKIP gained 2 from Lab
UKIP into wwc vote the Labour heartlands of Chaddesden, great news for the Tories put your money on a Tory gain here next for Derby North. DCFC great value for the play-off game tomorrow.
Looks more and more as if No 10 will be decided by a relatively small number of UKIP returners. But who returns? The blue rinsers or the WWC? If UKIP poll (say) 14% and the returners split 3/1 either way, that's a 1% swing. Re London, well done Labour. But let's look at the maths. A nightmare night for the Tories might see all 7 2010 gains reversed, but where are the rest of Labours gains coming from? They are going backwards in most of the rest of England (momentum wise), they can't gain in Scotland, they might take a couple back in Wales. And whither the Tories? Forget London gains, it's all about defence. they will need to hold, hold, hold, gain from the Lib Dems, and maybe take advantage in places like Birmingham Northfield and Edgbaston, Southampton and the Midland towns. I can't see either party getting a majority unless the Labour backward momentum gathers pace or they lose the WWC to UKIP and the Tories take back the blue rinse brigade
If the Ukip/Con split unwinds in the worst possible way for them i.e. total shift to Ukip in the north and total shift to Con in the south then they could lose almost everywhere at once.
Looks more and more as if No 10 will be decided by a relatively small number of UKIP returners. But who returns? The blue rinsers or the WWC? If UKIP poll (say) 14% and the returners split 3/1 either way, that's a 1% swing. Re London, well done Labour. But let's look at the maths. A nightmare night for the Tories might see all 7 2010 gains reversed, but where are the rest of Labours gains coming from? They are going backwards in most of the rest of England (momentum wise), they can't gain in Scotland, they might take a couple back in Wales. And whither the Tories? Forget London gains, it's all about defence. they will need to hold, hold, hold, gain from the Lib Dems, and maybe take advantage in places like Birmingham Northfield and Edgbaston, Southampton and the Midland towns. I can't see either party getting a majority unless the Labour backward momentum gathers pace or they lose the WWC to UKIP and the Tories take back the blue rinse brigade
If the Ukip/Con split unwinds in the worst possible way for them i.e. total shift to Ukip in the north and total shift to Con in the south then they could lose almost everywhere at once.
I'd laugh myself silly at UKIP, as Miliband cements the UK firmly into Europe. They'll put a portrait of Farage on the €50 note.
"I think that by Sunday night it will be even clearer that the discredited old parties of British politics are in serious trouble. They are paying for nearly 50 years of treachery and lies.
They lied about the real nature of the Common Market and its successor, the European Union.
They lied about immigration. They lied about the economy, they lied about schools, they lied about crime and justice. They lied about unemployment and they lied about global warming. They are still lying about all of them, aided by great battalions of professional liars, hired by them but paid for by you and me.
These parties, their spokesmen and the supposedly independent commentators who have been in their pockets and at their lunch tables for so long have no idea what has hit them. How funny that the Republic of London, which is barely part of Britain any more, was the only major part of England where UKIP’s surge was weak. But London is where all these people live, who do not understand their own country because they never visit it, except for swift and insulated photo-opportunities."
Just a note on turnout in the Labour Heartlands without locals - my girlfriend voted ~ 9 pm last night, and she said there was barely a name crossed through the list.
"I think that by Sunday night it will be even clearer that the discredited old parties of British politics are in serious trouble. They are paying for nearly 50 years of treachery and lies.
They lied about the real nature of the Common Market and its successor, the European Union.
They lied about immigration. They lied about the economy, they lied about schools, they lied about crime and justice. They lied about unemployment and they lied about global warming. They are still lying about all of them, aided by great battalions of professional liars, hired by them but paid for by you and me.
These parties, their spokesmen and the supposedly independent commentators who have been in their pockets and at their lunch tables for so long have no idea what has hit them. How funny that the Republic of London, which is barely part of Britain any more, was the only major part of England where UKIP’s surge was weak. But London is where all these people live, who do not understand their own country because they never visit it, except for swift and insulated photo-opportunities."
"I think that by Sunday night it will be even clearer that the discredited old parties of British politics are in serious trouble. They are paying for nearly 50 years of treachery and lies.
They lied about the real nature of the Common Market and its successor, the European Union.
They lied about immigration. They lied about the economy, they lied about schools, they lied about crime and justice. They lied about unemployment and they lied about global warming. They are still lying about all of them, aided by great battalions of professional liars, hired by them but paid for by you and me.
These parties, their spokesmen and the supposedly independent commentators who have been in their pockets and at their lunch tables for so long have no idea what has hit them. How funny that the Republic of London, which is barely part of Britain any more, was the only major part of England where UKIP’s surge was weak. But London is where all these people live, who do not understand their own country because they never visit it, except for swift and insulated photo-opportunities."
Saint Reatham is still not on the A list, but give it time.
The interesting thing is that gentrification is not turning these areas blue. Quite the opposite, it seems.
It's gentrification to a younger more liberal 20s and 30s. By the time they get older (and more tory), they then move out of the city...
No, the issue is that the gentrification is by generation rent. If they were owner occupiers then they would be more inclined to vote Con. Generation rent does not vote Con, because they see the party as standing up for older home owners who have locked young people out of the market with buy-to-let. It's not untrue either.
If Labour are only doing well in those parts of the country where they already have MPs e.g. H&F doesn't that mean that they're doing what the Tories are usually accused of i.e. piling up excess votes in safe seats?
Maybe that's the reason for the wailing and gnashing of teeth identified by Antifrank. They're not making advances where they need to and they're not doing nearly well enough overall nor do they have any real momentum. They may well be on course for a small majority or largest party now but that makes them vulnerable to events in the next year.
Saint Reatham is still not on the A list, but give it time.
The interesting thing is that gentrification is not turning these areas blue. Quite the opposite, it seems.
It's gentrification to a younger more liberal 20s and 30s. By the time they get older (and more tory), they then move out of the city...
No, the issue is that the gentrification is by generation rent. If they were owner occupiers then they would be more inclined to vote Con. Generation rent does not vote Con, because they see the party as standing up for older home owners who have locked young people out of the market with buy-to-let. It's not untrue either.
And Generation Rent will find Labour's focus on renting and agents' fees attractive.....
Matthew Goodwin @GoodwinMJ 1m Dan Hodges: "Farage is effectively finished". 1 week ago. "Ukip is not even going to scratch mould.. Lab's north base is solid" 3 months ago
Just a note on turnout in the Labour Heartlands without locals - my girlfriend voted ~ 9 pm last night, and she said there was barely a name crossed through the list.
When we voted at around 6:00, the election official said that it had been quiet, and was getting quieter! We went from the deserted polling station to Asda, which was busy - obvious answer to boosting turnout.
So much stuff has been written about why Ukip are gaining, what it all means, what should be done and so forth. All I'll say is that a combination of economic struggles, public spending austerity and high levels of immigration are toxic.
Looks more and more as if No 10 will be decided by a relatively small number of UKIP returners. But who returns? The blue rinsers or the WWC? If UKIP poll (say) 14% and the returners split 3/1 either way, that's a 1% swing. Re London, well done Labour. But let's look at the maths. A nightmare night for the Tories might see all 7 2010 gains reversed, but where are the rest of Labours gains coming from? They are going backwards in most of the rest of England (momentum wise), they can't gain in Scotland, they might take a couple back in Wales. And whither the Tories? Forget London gains, it's all about defence. they will need to hold, hold, hold, gain from the Lib Dems, and maybe take advantage in places like Birmingham Northfield and Edgbaston, Southampton and the Midland towns. I can't see either party getting a majority unless the Labour backward momentum gathers pace or they lose the WWC to UKIP and the Tories take back the blue rinse brigade
If the Ukip/Con split unwinds in the worst possible way for them i.e. total shift to Ukip in the north and total shift to Con in the south then they could lose almost everywhere at once.
I'd laugh myself silly at UKIP, as Miliband cements the UK firmly into Europe. They'll put a portrait of Farage on the €50 note.
Are you laughing as Cameron cements us ever more firmly into the EU? Maybe they can put his face on the €5 note. It's about all he is worth.
Generation rent does not vote Con, because they see the party as standing up for older home owners who have locked young people out of the market with buy-to-let. It's not untrue either.
The crux of the matter. The London housing market is clearly hitting the tories hard.
"I think that by Sunday night it will be even clearer that the discredited old parties of British politics are in serious trouble. They are paying for nearly 50 years of treachery and lies.
They lied about the real nature of the Common Market and its successor, the European Union.
They lied about immigration. They lied about the economy, they lied about schools, they lied about crime and justice. They lied about unemployment and they lied about global warming. They are still lying about all of them, aided by great battalions of professional liars, hired by them but paid for by you and me.
These parties, their spokesmen and the supposedly independent commentators who have been in their pockets and at their lunch tables for so long have no idea what has hit them. How funny that the Republic of London, which is barely part of Britain any more, was the only major part of England where UKIP’s surge was weak. But London is where all these people live, who do not understand their own country because they never visit it, except for swift and insulated photo-opportunities."
You Gov on fracking.Support gradually sliding away to 42% for and 33% against and these figures do not account of new developments soon to take place in the Tory heartlands of the South-East. Any odds on cross-over?
Saint Reatham is still not on the A list, but give it time.
The interesting thing is that gentrification is not turning these areas blue. Quite the opposite, it seems.
It's gentrification to a younger more liberal 20s and 30s. By the time they get older (and more tory), they then move out of the city...
No, the issue is that the gentrification is by generation rent. If they were owner occupiers then they would be more inclined to vote Con. Generation rent does not vote Con, because they see the party as standing up for older home owners who have locked young people out of the market with buy-to-let. It's not untrue either.
And Generation Rent will find Labour's focus on renting and agents' fees attractive.....
Indeed. I think that policy has definitely helped Labour in London. Not much of an impact elsewhere, but in London it has definitely helped them. The Tories need to get back in the game or they will lose their last remaining outposts in Greater London.
Matthew Goodwin @GoodwinMJ 1m Dan Hodges: "Farage is effectively finished". 1 week ago. "Ukip is not even going to scratch mould.. Lab's north base is solid" 3 months ago
LOL.
Hodges' rubbish predicative powers continue.
I give you:
David Miliband Andy Murray Nigel Farage
I guess that everyone now hopes that Hodges predicts disaster for them – it seems to be a very good omen!
You Gov on fracking.Support gradually sliding away to 42% for and 33% against and these figures do not account of new developments soon to take place in the Tory heartlands of the South-East. Any odds on cross-over?
Fracking is a big unexploded electoral bomb, as I've been saying for a while. Luckily for the Tories, UKIP are currently very pro-fracking, but, as they are an opportunistic protest party which doesn't have to worry about the serious choices in government, I expect that will change. That could be very dangerous for the Tories in rural SE England.
Alistair Heath made the point this morning that opposition to fracking boils down to locals feeling they are not being properly compensated for disruption.
He suggests a proper and generous compensation scheme. Surely its only common sense.
Derby City Council results complete Lab 8 Con 5 LD 2 ( plus 1 in a double vacancy ) UKIP 2
Lab gained 1 from Con and 1 from LD Con gained 1 from LD UKIP gained 2 from Lab
UKIP into wwc vote the Labour heartlands of Chaddesden, great news for the Tories put your money on a Tory gain here next for Derby North. DCFC great value for the play-off game tomorrow.
Hardly , Labour won Chaddesden with Conservatives 3rd
Seems increasing that the only people which live in London are the extremely wealthy, or the ones which can have the benefit of council/ housing benefit accommodation.
It's the middle which are squeezed out, and are in the commuter belt.
What do you class as extremely wealthy? I earn well into the HR band and live in the suburbs (albeit those within London itself)
Just a note on turnout in the Labour Heartlands without locals - my girlfriend voted ~ 9 pm last night, and she said there was barely a name crossed through the list.
When we voted at around 6:00, the election official said that it had been quiet, and was getting quieter! We went from the deserted polling station to Asda, which was busy - obvious answer to boosting turnout.
Of course it may be that in the Labour heartlands the postal vote is already sewn up - possibly using your ASDA analogy, on a BOGOF basis
Looks like Conservatives doing worse than the 220 losses expected (because of UKIP) Lib-Dems maybe not doing quite as bad? And a minor disaster for Labour had they fall 200+ seats short of the 500 gains expected (Thanks to the protest vote going to UKIP rather than Labour)?
You seem confused. The committee including cross party MSP's wrote the report and published it , that is democracy. It was not an SNP report. You are trying to conflate sour grapes with democracy and not painting a pretty picture.
I know 'facts' aren't your strong suit.....
Nationalist MSPs on a Holyrood committee examining the issue softened criticisms of the Scottish Government's stance in a major report to be published today, against the will of opposition members.
Alistair Heath made the point this morning that opposition to fracking boils down to locals feeling they are not being properly compensated for disruption.
Nope, that is wrong. The opposition is visceral, very deep-rooted, and won't be swayed by argument or promises of compensation. Small, local, anti-fracking groups are very well organised, are very passionate, and are winning the argument hands-down before the other side even starts to put its case.
Mr. F, must admit, I hadn't heard the boiling alive story. That is quite horrid.
Mr. Fett, given you seem outraged that an individual might not travel to London simply to admire its delights I'm not sure your view of London being hated is necessarily correct.
You claim it as an English city, its capital, and can't even take a two-hour train journey to check it out. Not even once in your life, even though you are in your thirties. If you did visit, you might actually think better of us rather than moaning about us all the time.
The reason UKIP dont do well in London is that relatively few people who live there were born there, and very few people have elderly relatives there. UKIP voters are generally people who dont like what is happening to the place they knew as home growing up, but still live nearby
If your parents or Grandparents are stuck in a place they used to love but now dont recognize, surrounded by a load of people talking a different language/all the old shops have changed, UKIP voters empathise with them and vote accordingly.
My own area is full of people who went to school here and whose families have roots here.. .no one really moves out, hence UKIP will do well
But inner London is full of newcomers (British and foreign) with no roots there who celebrate the fast pace of change, and cant get their heads round why anyone wouldnt feel the same... so they call them names!!
LOL – our favourite subject ;-)
To you, I am classed as a newcomer even though I have lived here longer than I have lived anywhere else and have started a family here. At least you'll consider my little son to be a Londoner – he was born in Shepherd's Bush!
If UKIP are doing better than expected, and the Conservatives worse, does that suggest we might see UKIP/Lab/Con as the order in the Euros, with the Lib Dems perhaps a more comfortable fourth than might have been expected?
In times of economic stress, right wing populists tend to do well, particularly when they blame others for the problems of the world. Right wing populists will do well in other parts of Europe this weekend, though Wilders seems to have faded a bit in the Netherlands.
One approach is to deny Europe, but to me UKIP shows how european we are. I see UKIP as more like the Danish peoples party or True Finns than the more suspect Golden Dawn or Jobbik, but the phenomenon is a pan european one. While these populists have a lot in common, their inward looking nature keeps them from forming the alliances that potentially could create a more flexible and less centralised EU.
So much stuff has been written about why Ukip are gaining, what it all means, what should be done and so forth. All I'll say is that a combination of economic struggles, public spending austerity and high levels of immigration are toxic.
Mr. F, must admit, I hadn't heard the boiling alive story. That is quite horrid.
Mr. Fett, given you seem outraged that an individual might not travel to London simply to admire its delights I'm not sure your view of London being hated is necessarily correct.
You claim it as an English city, its capital, and can't even take a two-hour train journey to check it out. Not even once in your life, even though you are in your thirties. If you did visit, you might actually think better of us rather than moaning about us all the time.
The reason UKIP dont do well in London is that relatively few people who live there were born there, and very few people have elderly relatives there. UKIP voters are generally people who dont like what is happening to the place they knew as home growing up, but still live nearby
If your parents or Grandparents are stuck in a place they used to love but now dont recognize, surrounded by a load of people talking a different language/all the old shops have changed, UKIP voters empathise with them and vote accordingly.
My own area is full of people who went to school here and whose families have roots here.. .no one really moves out, hence UKIP will do well
But inner London is full of newcomers (British and foreign) with no roots there who celebrate the fast pace of change, and cant get their heads round why anyone wouldnt feel the same... so they call them names!!
LOL – our favourite subject ;-)
To you, I am classed as a newcomer even though I have lived here longer than I have lived anywhere else and have started a family here. At least you'll consider my little son to be a Londoner – he was born in Shepherd's Bush!
The gf's Dad lives in Guiseley, he's still a Mackem though.
Just a note on turnout in the Labour Heartlands without locals - my girlfriend voted ~ 9 pm last night, and she said there was barely a name crossed through the list.
When we voted at around 6:00, the election official said that it had been quiet, and was getting quieter! We went from the deserted polling station to Asda, which was busy - obvious answer to boosting turnout.
Of course it may be that in the Labour heartlands the postal vote is already sewn up - possibly using your ASDA analogy, on a BOGOF basis
No postal votes in my Labour heartland (How widespread is the postal system anyway ?)
The opposition is visceral, very deep-rooted, and won't be swayed by argument or promises of compensation.
Heath reckons the compensation is far too low and too vague and a much better and more transparent scheme is needed.
It's hard not to agree.
Cameron's natural instinct is to fight for big business....and not to side with the local to make the exploiter pay through the nose to get his profits.
If UKIP are doing better than expected, and the Conservatives worse, does that suggest we might see UKIP/Lab/Con as the order in the Euros, with the Lib Dems perhaps a more comfortable fourth than might have been expected?
If UKIP are doing better than expected, and the Conservatives worse, does that suggest we might see UKIP/Lab/Con as the order in the Euros, with the Lib Dems perhaps a more comfortable fourth than might have been expected?
Conservatives aren't doing worse than expected in terms of losses alone, although the rise of UKIP will complicate their campaign strategy. UKIP are doing better, although it seems that early results were particularly good. Labour have recovered from an early poor start. I would struggle to draw an European inference from that.
Tories and Kippers: Anti-wind and pro-fracking. The wrong side of the argument, and the wrong side of public opinion.
The Tories are pro-wind.
And the dividing line is subsidies, and retail price, not method of generation.
UKIP are on the side of low retail prices, no taxpayer subsidies. The other three parties are on the side of higher retail prices, and subsidies to politically favoured companies.
Alistair Heath made the point this morning that opposition to fracking boils down to locals feeling they are not being properly compensated for disruption.
Nope, that is wrong. The opposition is visceral, very deep-rooted, and won't be swayed by argument or promises of compensation. Small, local, anti-fracking groups are very well organised, are very passionate, and are winning the argument hands-down before the other side even starts to put its case.
I agree with you Richard. Whilst I am in favour of fracking in principle and would have no problem with it in my area per se, the likely disruption to people's lives as well as the potential risks from ground water contamination (which are rather more likely than the government or oil companies chose to admit) mean that people see this as an issue where no amount of money can compensate.
I am fortunate that I am not in an area that has fracking potential. If I were I would probably be opposing based on my current knowledge and the current protections in place. I would however be open to persuasion if there were an improvement in regulation and serious work done on mitigation of disruption.
As it is I have a great deal of sympathy for those opposing fracking in the area.
Looks more and more as if No 10 will be decided by a relatively small number of UKIP returners. But who returns? The blue rinsers or the WWC? If UKIP poll (say) 14% and the returners split 3/1 either way, that's a 1% swing. Re London, well done Labour. But let's look at the maths. A nightmare night for the Tories might see all 7 2010 gains reversed, but where are the rest of Labours gains coming from? They are going backwards in most of the rest of England (momentum wise), they can't gain in Scotland, they might take a couple back in Wales. And whither the Tories? Forget London gains, it's all about defence. they will need to hold, hold, hold, gain from the Lib Dems, and maybe take advantage in places like Birmingham Northfield and Edgbaston, Southampton and the Midland towns. I can't see either party getting a majority unless the Labour backward momentum gathers pace or they lose the WWC to UKIP and the Tories take back the blue rinse brigade
If the Ukip/Con split unwinds in the worst possible way for them i.e. total shift to Ukip in the north and total shift to Con in the south then they could lose almost everywhere at once.
I'd laugh myself silly at UKIP, as Miliband cements the UK firmly into Europe. They'll put a portrait of Farage on the €50 note.
Are you laughing as Cameron cements us ever more firmly into the EU? Maybe they can put his face on the €5 note. It's about all he is worth.
In times of economic stress, right wing populists tend to do well, particularly when they blame others for the problems of the world. Right wing populists will do well in other parts of Europe this weekend, though Wilders seems to have faded a bit in the Netherlands.
One approach is to deny Europe, but to me UKIP shows how european we are. I see UKIP as more like the Danish peoples party or True Finns than the more suspect Golden Dawn or Jobbik, but the phenomenon is a pan european one. While these populists have a lot in common, their inward looking nature keeps them from forming the alliances that potentially could create a more flexible and less centralised EU.
So much stuff has been written about why Ukip are gaining, what it all means, what should be done and so forth. All I'll say is that a combination of economic struggles, public spending austerity and high levels of immigration are toxic.
Leaving the EU, and joining a different club is a better option.
Cameron's natural instinct is to fight for big business....and not to side with the local to make the exploiter pay through the nose to get his profits.
Same with property development.
No, it's not about money, it's not about compensation.
This is what it's about (and note how professional the video is):
Tories and Kippers: Anti-wind and pro-fracking. The wrong side of the argument, and the wrong side of public opinion.
The Tories are pro-wind.
And the dividing line is subsidies, and retail price, not method. UKIP are on the side of low retail prices, no taxpayer subsidies. The other three parties are on the side of higher retail prices, and subsidies to politically favoured companies.
The Tories are out to block as many onshore wind farm applications as they can. Onshore wind is the lowest cost option for low-carbon power. They are happy to back off-shore wind which costs several times more and requires a much bigger subsidy, but can't be seen from their grouse moors.
If UKIP are doing better than expected, and the Conservatives worse, does that suggest we might see UKIP/Lab/Con as the order in the Euros, with the Lib Dems perhaps a more comfortable fourth than might have been expected?
I think there's a bit of a disconnect between percentage loss (better) and council losses (worse) because of the Ukip effect so I'm not sue you can read too much into the euro vote.
Looks more and more as if No 10 will be decided by a relatively small number of UKIP returners. But who returns? The blue rinsers or the WWC? If UKIP poll (say) 14% and the returners split 3/1 either way, that's a 1% swing. Re London, well done Labour. But let's look at the maths. A nightmare night for the Tories might see all 7 2010 gains reversed, but where are the rest of Labours gains coming from? They are going backwards in most of the rest of England (momentum wise), they can't gain in Scotland, they might take a couple back in Wales. And whither the Tories? Forget London gains, it's all about defence. they will need to hold, hold, hold, gain from the Lib Dems, and maybe take advantage in places like Birmingham Northfield and Edgbaston, Southampton and the Midland towns. I can't see either party getting a majority unless the Labour backward momentum gathers pace or they lose the WWC to UKIP and the Tories take back the blue rinse brigade
If the Ukip/Con split unwinds in the worst possible way for them i.e. total shift to Ukip in the north and total shift to Con in the south then they could lose almost everywhere at once.
I'd laugh myself silly at UKIP, as Miliband cements the UK firmly into Europe. They'll put a portrait of Farage on the €50 note.
Are you laughing as Cameron cements us ever more firmly into the EU? Maybe they can put his face on the €5 note. It's about all he is worth.
I'm having a good chuckle at you.
Not sure why. My chosen party of the moment is doing better than expected. The arguments I believe in are clearly being won with the public and the blocks to leaving the EU - primarily Cameroons and the Lib Dems - are getting the mauling they deserve.
I see your point xxx, but the issue is that it takes practical issues and adds even more ideology to them, which effectively short circuits most humans ability to rationally evaluate information and change opinion. Frankly I would rather support individuals to carry out projects, the idea of electing some thrown together group of humans on the basis of symbolism loosely based on some half hearted, generic principles that are not obviously instantiated when the y are in power. The idea of electing them as a 'leading class' stretches absurdity to it's limits at times.
Mr. Rentool, I'm sure I saw (on here) pricing which put wind as more expensive than other forms.
Geothermal will probably be best, but unfortunately that's not available in most places.
Mr. Jones, cheers for that explanation.
OK, so I should have said lowest cost option suitable for application across the UK. If we were Iceland, Geothermal is a better option (but actually not CO2-free, as some CO2 comes out of solution from the produced water).
Saint Reatham is still not on the A list, but give it time.
The interesting thing is that gentrification is not turning these areas blue. Quite the opposite, it seems.
It's gentrification to a younger more liberal 20s and 30s. By the time they get older (and more tory), they then move out of the city...
20s and 30s? I suspect you can add a decade. Remember those in their 40s and early 50s will have grown up under Mrs Thatcher when she was toxifying the party (if that's a word).
The opposition is visceral, very deep-rooted, and won't be swayed by argument or promises of compensation.
Heath reckons the compensation is far too low and too vague and a much better and more transparent scheme is needed.
It's hard not to agree.
Cameron's natural instinct is to fight for big business....and not to side with the local to make the exploiter pay through the nose to get his profits.
Same with property development.
I am not sure I agree re Cameron- I suspect that it is Osborne who is the bogeyman in this case.
What baffles me about this is why the derisory compensation to locals offered is always framed as a payment to the local council. The amount is not enough but in any case if I was living next door to a fracking zone I couldn't care two hoots if my local council gets some extra money to fritter on the councilors' vanity projects. What would be far more effective at bringing round the opposition would be direct cash payments into the hands of the property owners most affected (those within a certain radius of the fracking site). I believe that this is what the French in effect do with respect to Nuclear power stations- by offering free electricity to those within a certain distance the result is that local opposition is minimal.
As you say the same applies to housing developments- if I Iive next door I do not care if the council gets some money to build new schools (my example householder probably does not have children in any case- most people don't except for a very brief period of their lives). What would bring me round is getting a share of the enormous profits enjoyed by the developer myself to spend as I please.
Looks more and more as if No 10 will be decided by a relatively small number of UKIP returners. But who returns? The blue rinsers or the WWC? If UKIP poll (say) 14% and the returners split 3/1 either way, that's a 1% swing. Re London, well done Labour. But let's look at the maths. A nightmare night for the Tories might see all 7 2010 gains reversed, but where are the rest of Labours gains coming from? They are going backwards in most of the rest of England (momentum wise), they can't gain in Scotland, they might take a couple back in Wales. And whither the Tories? Forget London gains, it's all about defence. they will need to hold, hold, hold, gain from the Lib Dems, and maybe take advantage in places like Birmingham Northfield and Edgbaston, Southampton and the Midland towns. I can't see either party getting a majority unless the Labour backward momentum gathers pace or they lose the WWC to UKIP and the Tories take back the blue rinse brigade
If the Ukip/Con split unwinds in the worst possible way for them i.e. total shift to Ukip in the north and total shift to Con in the south then they could lose almost everywhere at once.
I'd laugh myself silly at UKIP, as Miliband cements the UK firmly into Europe. They'll put a portrait of Farage on the €50 note.
Are you laughing as Cameron cements us ever more firmly into the EU? Maybe they can put his face on the €5 note. It's about all he is worth.
I'm having a good chuckle at you.
Not sure why. My chosen party of the moment is doing better than expected. The arguments I believe in are clearly being won with the public and the blocks to leaving the EU - primarily Cameroons and the Lib Dems - are getting the mauling they deserve.
Politically, life is going rather well.
At the quaint belief that we can rewind the clock back to a 1950's Britain, and that your actions will actually end up having the opposite effect to what is being wished for.
All those MEP's who want urgent and drastic reform of the EU, but can't be bothered to turn up and represent their constituents make me smile too.
Takes him to the end of 2016 with the team. Probably not a difficult decision for either party. Mercedes have been very fair with both their drivers this season, and he's probably going to be a title contender next year as well.
Incidentally, read a snippet on the BBC livefeed of one practice session that Hamilton, Rosberg and Mercedes bigwigs had a meeting on a boat off Monaco to talk about the title race. Apparently it was accepted that there was likely to be a collision between the two drivers at some point.
This is what it's about (and note how professional the video is):
Fair enough, but I still think people know how vulnerable Cameron and co. are to lobbyists from the companies who are set to make fortunes out of this. All he is really interested in the bottom line for them, the tax revenues for George and how it looks on the GDP number.
If the locals felt it was being properly managed by a government that had their interests at heart, I reckon enough would come around to make it a goer.
Same with property development. The exploiter must have everything - the locals nothing.
In any case, yes, sure, I acknowledge the issue you raise, it's the solution which I'm scratching my head at. Italy, for example, has a more proportional system than ours (and used to have a very pure proportional system), but that just led to unworkability.
The Germany/Scandi-systems work out fairly well IMO - PR (sometimes with open lists so you can pick your preferred candidate from your party), thresholds to exclude joke parties and broad alliances so you still know which government you're voting for even though you have a choice of nuances. So you could vote for a centre-right government but be keen on the enivronment or sceptical about immigration, or a centre-left government and have doubts about green policies. Nothing's perfect but it arguably gives a better expression of public opinion than our system.
At the quaint belief that we can rewind the clock back to a 1950's Britain, and that your actions will actually end up having the opposite effect to what is being wished for.
All those MEP's who want urgent and drastic reform of the EU, but can't be bothered to turn up and represent their constituents make me smile too.
Except of course none of us want to wind the clock back to the 1950s. That is just a myth perpetuated by the terminally bewildered, out of touch dinosaurs like yourself. We are looking forward and out to the rest of the world whilst you are still lost in the mire of the European backwater.
Nor do UKIP MEPs want "urgent and drastic reform of the EU". They know it is pointless. What they want is for us to leave entirely.
I know this has been a hard night for the dinosaurs of the old parties but you might as well get used to it. Either evolve or become extinct.
Mr. Rentool, ha. I'd be willing to emit the CO2 for geothermal energy.
Actually, we do have little spots here and there where we can use it, it's just unfortunate they aren't more common.
We should also burn rubbish. That wouldn't generate huge quantities of power, but it would reliably generate some as well as disposing of rubbish.
Weardale is a bit of a warm spot for geothermal - there was a pilot project, but that got stopped when the coalition killed off One North East.
Waste to energy is growing. Especially on Teesside. Most of the MSW from Merseyside is going to be transported to Teesside to supply a new power plant. However, only a fraction of the waste can be considered as 'green', since a lot of it (e.g. plastic) is derived from fossil fuels.
''The amount is not enough but in any case if I was living next door to a fracking zone I couldn't care two hoots if my local council gets some extra money to fritter on the councilors' vanity projects.
Absolutely agree 100%.''
Yet again, Cameroons siding with big government over the little guy. Like there are people out there who do anything other than loathe their local council, of whatever political stripe.
And the tory leadership wonder why, Kingston apart, its turning into an absolutely rank result for Cameroonism.
Derby City Council results complete Lab 8 Con 5 LD 2 ( plus 1 in a double vacancy ) UKIP 2
Lab gained 1 from Con and 1 from LD Con gained 1 from LD UKIP gained 2 from Lab
UKIP into wwc vote the Labour heartlands of Chaddesden, great news for the Tories put your money on a Tory gain here next for Derby North. DCFC great value for the play-off game tomorrow.
Hardly , Labour won Chaddesden with Conservatives 3rd
Derwent ward is part of the Chaddesden estate and UKIP took it. Derwent as a place doesn't exist.
The Germany/Scandi-systems work out fairly well IMO - PR (sometimes with open lists so you can pick your preferred candidate from your party), thresholds to exclude joke parties and broad alliances so you still know which government you're voting for even though you have a choice of nuances. So you could vote for a centre-right government but be keen on the enivronment or sceptical about immigration, or a centre-left government and have doubts about green policies. Nothing's perfect but it arguably gives a better expression of public opinion than our system.
Point taken, and I think you are right that the broad alliances before the election are an important aspect. But is it obvious that importing the voting system would import the broad consensus as well? Maybe it works better in Northern Europe because there is already more consensus and a more homogenous society. There are big historic and cultural differences - the UK has always had an adversarial approach which is deeply embedded right down into our legal system.
The opposition is visceral, very deep-rooted, and won't be swayed by argument or promises of compensation.
Heath reckons the compensation is far too low and too vague and a much better and more transparent scheme is needed.
It's hard not to agree.
Cameron's natural instinct is to fight for big business....and not to side with the local to make the exploiter pay through the nose to get his profits.
Same with property development.
I am not sure I agree re Cameron- I suspect that it is Osborne who is the bogeyman in this case.
What baffles me about this is why the derisory compensation to locals offered is always framed as a payment to the local council. The amount is not enough but in any case if I was living next door to a fracking zone I couldn't care two hoots if my local council gets some extra money to fritter on the councilors' vanity projects. What would be far more effective at bringing round the opposition would be direct cash payments into the hands of the property owners most affected (those within a certain radius of the fracking site). I believe that this is what the French in effect do with respect to Nuclear power stations- by offering free electricity to those within a certain distance the result is that local opposition is minimal.
As you say the same applies to housing developments- if I Iive next door I do not care if the council gets some money to build new schools (my example householder probably does not have children in any case- most people don't except for a very brief period of their lives). What would bring me round is getting a share of the enormous profits enjoyed by the developer myself to spend as I please.
MaxU, Agreed, the property owners in the vicinity should have a revenue sharing deal with the operators. Bunging a few quid to the council is the worst way to go about it
At the quaint belief that we can rewind the clock back to a 1950's Britain, and that your actions will actually end up having the opposite effect to what is being wished for.
If there's anything that's the epitome of 1950s thinking it's the concept of a brave new world of European integration with protectionist barriers and self-sufficiency in agriculture. Europe was the future once. But not any more. Now the future belongs to the Brazils, Indias and Chinas of the world. Ditching the EU is the only way we'll get the trade deals we need with them.
Comments
It's the middle which are squeezed out, and are in the commuter belt.
In any case, yes, sure, I acknowledge the issue you raise, it's the solution which I'm scratching my head at. Italy, for example, has a more proportional system than ours (and used to have a very pure proportional system), but that just led to unworkability.
Lutfur Rahman
WINNING HERE
They lied about the real nature of the Common Market and its successor, the European Union.
They lied about immigration. They lied about the economy, they lied about schools, they lied about crime and justice. They lied about unemployment and they lied about global warming. They are still lying about all of them, aided by great battalions of professional liars, hired by them but paid for by you and me.
These parties, their spokesmen and the supposedly independent commentators who have been in their pockets and at their lunch tables for so long have no idea what has hit them. How funny that the Republic of London, which is barely part of Britain any more, was the only major part of England where UKIP’s surge was weak. But London is where all these people live, who do not understand their own country because they never visit it, except for swift and insulated photo-opportunities."
http://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2014/05/rejoice-but-not-too-much-a-first-response-to-the-elections.html
Maybe that's the reason for the wailing and gnashing of teeth identified by Antifrank. They're not making advances where they need to and they're not doing nearly well enough overall nor do they have any real momentum. They may well be on course for a small majority or largest party now but that makes them vulnerable to events in the next year.
Dan Hodges: "Farage is effectively finished". 1 week ago. "Ukip is not even going to scratch mould.. Lab's north base is solid" 3 months ago
Labour by Blair/Iraq/the 70s/Unions dinosaurs
Tories by Thatcher/the 80s/Section 28 etc
Liberals by tuition fees etc.
They're now finding it increasingly difficult to move on from them.
The crux of the matter. The London housing market is clearly hitting the tories hard.
http://www.ukip.org/local_election_results
Any odds on cross-over?
Is Rochdale up for grabs this time? didn't hear it mentioned.
Hodges' rubbish predicative powers continue.
I give you:
David Miliband
Andy Murray
Nigel Farage
I guess that everyone now hopes that Hodges predicts disaster for them – it seems to be a very good omen!
Alistair Heath made the point this morning that opposition to fracking boils down to locals feeling they are not being properly compensated for disruption.
He suggests a proper and generous compensation scheme. Surely its only common sense.
It's not suprising when people feel they are being royally shafted for people outside the area to make money.
Same with property development. Compensate locals properly, and the opposition disappears.
As usual, the tories are far too much on the side of the big guy against the little guy.
http://www1.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2014/04/29/the-2014-rallings-and-thrasher-local-elections-forecasts/#vanilla-comments
Looks like Conservatives doing worse than the 220 losses expected (because of UKIP) Lib-Dems maybe not doing quite as bad? And a minor disaster for Labour had they fall 200+ seats short of the 500 gains expected (Thanks to the protest vote going to UKIP rather than Labour)?
Nationalist MSPs on a Holyrood committee examining the issue softened criticisms of the Scottish Government's stance in a major report to be published today, against the will of opposition members.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scotland/scottish-politics/10850525/SNP-uses-majority-to-stifle-criticism-of-Alex-Salmonds-EU-membership-stance.html
To you, I am classed as a newcomer even though I have lived here longer than I have lived anywhere else and have started a family here. At least you'll consider my little son to be a Londoner – he was born in Shepherd's Bush!
One approach is to deny Europe, but to me UKIP shows how european we are. I see UKIP as more like the Danish peoples party or True Finns than the more suspect Golden Dawn or Jobbik, but the phenomenon is a pan european one. While these populists have a lot in common, their inward looking nature keeps them from forming the alliances that potentially could create a more flexible and less centralised EU.
Heath reckons the compensation is far too low and too vague and a much better and more transparent scheme is needed.
It's hard not to agree.
Cameron's natural instinct is to fight for big business....and not to side with the local to make the exploiter pay through the nose to get his profits.
Same with property development.
And the dividing line is subsidies, and retail price, not method of generation.
UKIP are on the side of low retail prices, no taxpayer subsidies. The other three parties are on the side of higher retail prices, and subsidies to politically favoured companies.
I am fortunate that I am not in an area that has fracking potential. If I were I would probably be opposing based on my current knowledge and the current protections in place. I would however be open to persuasion if there were an improvement in regulation and serious work done on mitigation of disruption.
As it is I have a great deal of sympathy for those opposing fracking in the area.
Electoral Reform Soc @electoralreform 29m
Fortress Eastleigh?
Lab gets 10.3% of vote and no seats. UKIP 25.8% and no seats, Lib Dems 42.7% and 86.7% of seats pic.twitter.com/m7GuiZR2If
http://www.iea.org.uk/publications/research/the-iea-brexit-prize-a-blueprint-for-britain-openness-not-isolation
This is what it's about (and note how professional the video is):
http://tinyurl.com/pp67qva
IDS has had his flagship sunk.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/may/23/universal-credit-reset-iain-duncan-smith
Politically, life is going rather well.
Geothermal will probably be best, but unfortunately that's not available in most places.
Mr. Jones, cheers for that explanation.
Do you have the numbers or a link to the Watford mayoralty vote ?
I see your point xxx, but the issue is that it takes practical issues and adds even more ideology to them, which effectively short circuits most humans ability to rationally evaluate information and change opinion. Frankly I would rather support individuals to carry out projects, the idea of electing some thrown together group of humans on the basis of symbolism loosely based on some half hearted, generic principles that are not obviously instantiated when the y are in power. The idea of electing them as a 'leading class' stretches absurdity to it's limits at times.
What baffles me about this is why the derisory compensation to locals offered is always framed as a payment to the local council. The amount is not enough but in any case if I was living next door to a fracking zone I couldn't care two hoots if my local council gets some extra money to fritter on the councilors' vanity projects. What would be far more effective at bringing round the opposition would be direct cash payments into the hands of the property owners most affected (those within a certain radius of the fracking site). I believe that this is what the French in effect do with respect to Nuclear power stations- by offering free electricity to those within a certain distance the result is that local opposition is minimal.
As you say the same applies to housing developments- if I Iive next door I do not care if the council gets some money to build new schools (my example householder probably does not have children in any case- most people don't except for a very brief period of their lives). What would bring me round is getting a share of the enormous profits enjoyed by the developer myself to spend as I please.
All those MEP's who want urgent and drastic reform of the EU, but can't be bothered to turn up and represent their constituents make me smile too.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/27523534
Takes him to the end of 2016 with the team. Probably not a difficult decision for either party. Mercedes have been very fair with both their drivers this season, and he's probably going to be a title contender next year as well.
Incidentally, read a snippet on the BBC livefeed of one practice session that Hamilton, Rosberg and Mercedes bigwigs had a meeting on a boat off Monaco to talk about the title race. Apparently it was accepted that there was likely to be a collision between the two drivers at some point.
Actually, we do have little spots here and there where we can use it, it's just unfortunate they aren't more common.
We should also burn rubbish. That wouldn't generate huge quantities of power, but it would reliably generate some as well as disposing of rubbish.
Fair enough, but I still think people know how vulnerable Cameron and co. are to lobbyists from the companies who are set to make fortunes out of this. All he is really interested in the bottom line for them, the tax revenues for George and how it looks on the GDP number.
If the locals felt it was being properly managed by a government that had their interests at heart, I reckon enough would come around to make it a goer.
Same with property development. The exploiter must have everything - the locals nothing.
Nor do UKIP MEPs want "urgent and drastic reform of the EU". They know it is pointless. What they want is for us to leave entirely.
I know this has been a hard night for the dinosaurs of the old parties but you might as well get used to it. Either evolve or become extinct.
Waste to energy is growing. Especially on Teesside. Most of the MSW from Merseyside is going to be transported to Teesside to supply a new power plant. However, only a fraction of the waste can be considered as 'green', since a lot of it (e.g. plastic) is derived from fossil fuels.
Absolutely agree 100%.''
Yet again, Cameroons siding with big government over the little guy. Like there are people out there who do anything other than loathe their local council, of whatever political stripe.
And the tory leadership wonder why, Kingston apart, its turning into an absolutely rank result for Cameroonism.
https://twitter.com/johnbhess
What a disaster!
That would give me as much extra money each month as Osborne's latest increase to the personal tax allowance.
Agreed, the property owners in the vicinity should have a revenue sharing deal with the operators. Bunging a few quid to the council is the worst way to go about it
Con 23.9%, Lab 35.8%, LD 12.9%, UKIP 17.7%
(table 14, p.17)
http://survation.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/May-voting-poll-Mirror-tables.pdf
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0At91c3wX1Wu5dGZMVENacEVqMUI0bWZaQk13c041S3c&usp=drive_web#gid=0
-----------
Their EU Parliament prediction was:
Con 23%, Lab 27%, LD 9%, UKIP 32%
That would give me as much extra money each month as Osborne's latest increase to the personal tax allowance.
Does it work or is there still local resistance and what sort of radius to they draw. I am not sure that 20% off would be enough to persuade me.
http://www.watford.gov.uk/ccm/content/legal-and-democratic/elections/election-results---mayoral-22-may-2014.en
Labour gain 3 from LD and 1 from Con
Comm Action gain 1 from Con
Almost a LD clean sweep in the Southport Parliamentary wards