Patrick Wintour @patrickwintour RT @PeoplesPledgeEU: We've logged 20 pro-ref Lab MPs, new @Lab4aRef group lists others, plus 8 DUP, 1 Lib, 1 Green. Could be close!
Have to subtract Ken Clarke from that equation - perhaps 1-2 others on the Blue side.
What about the SNP ? They love a referendum.
I think we'd all be dead before we get to vote.
Hee hee - any polling on whether prisoners and 16-18 yo's are BOO ers ?
"In short, recent empirical research on the labour market effects of immigration to the UK finds little evidence of overall adverse effects of immigration on wages and employment for people born in the UK.
Nevertheless, there may be some downward pressure in the low wage labour market where (despite their higher relative education levels) many new immigrants tend to find work. There may also be a positive effect on wages in the high wage labour markets where it may take more time for the skills that immigrants bring to transfer."
@TheScreamingEagles You've missed out referenda on NHS privatisation, tax-raising powers for London, capital punishment, corporal punishment and compulsory euthanasia on the earliest of reaching age 80 or voting for UKIP.
'I think we have to realise that the entry of migrants to the labour market is hard for people who are finding it very difficult to get jobs, or to keep jobs' is plain and simple language and very damaging. It confirms fears in a single sentence.
Have to say I am struggling to see how that is very different to anything that Ed Miliband or other members of the Labour front bench have said.
I think you'll find the issue's the timing, they weren't saying that 7 or 8 years ago and were questioning the motives of anyone who raised the question.
Yes, I agree. As I have said many times before on here I think Labour got it very wrong on immigration. What I do not buy into is that it was all some kind of conspiracy. It was much more that an urban elite which had little idea of the real world and an ideological sympathy with internaitonalism was so isolated from reality it did not foresee the trouble that loosening restrictions on people coming into the country would create. Now Labour has to prove that it does get it.
@TheScreamingEagles You've missed out referenda on NHS privatisation, tax-raising powers for London, capital punishment, corporal punishment and compulsory euthanasia on the earliest of reaching age 80 or voting for UKIP.
NHS privatisation has happened already under New Labour.
Your last topic, as a great philosopher once wrote, "Naughty naughty very naughty"
'I think we have to realise that the entry of migrants to the labour market is hard for people who are finding it very difficult to get jobs, or to keep jobs' is plain and simple language and very damaging. It confirms fears in a single sentence.
Have to say I am struggling to see how that is very different to anything that Ed Miliband or other members of the Labour front bench have said.
I think you'll find the issue's the timing, they weren't saying that 7 or 8 years ago and were questioning the motives of anyone who raised the question.
Yes, I agree. As I have said many times before on here I think Labour got it very wrong on immigration. What I do not buy into is that it was all some kind of conspiracy. It was much more that an urban elite which had little idea of the real world and an ideological sympathy with internaitonalism was so isolated from reality it did not foresee the trouble that loosening restrictions on people coming into the country would create. Now Labour has to prove that it does get it.
Blimey! I more or less agree!
Well there you go. I am much more anti-Tory than pro-Labour. And as UKIP is the Tory Party with nobs on, I guess I am anti-UKIP as well. I swill vote for the party in my constituency best placed to keep the Tories (and UKIP) out.
Labour is facing a new financial crisis after it emerged that the party depends on a massive overdraft from the troubled Co-operative Bank.
The party relies on a £3.9 million lifeline from the ailing lender, which could be cut as part of the overhaul or sale of the bank.
The party has been kept afloat by a series of overdrafts on unusually generous terms from the bank, which has strong links to the party dating back to 1927.
Some of the financing used today relies on loan facilities agreed in 1999, which are so advantageous to the party that they would not be available elsewhere. The overdraft facilities have routinely been expanded in the run-up to an election.
These deals struck between the Co-operative Group and the Labour Government at the height of Tony Blair’s premiership are likely now to come under particular scrutiny and could be ended in the event that Co-op bank is sold or changes its lending criteria.
Labour is facing a new financial crisis after it emerged that the party depends on a massive overdraft from the troubled Co-operative Bank.
The party relies on a £3.9 million lifeline from the ailing lender, which could be cut as part of the overhaul or sale of the bank.
The party has been kept afloat by a series of overdrafts on unusually generous terms from the bank, which has strong links to the party dating back to 1927.
Some of the financing used today relies on loan facilities agreed in 1999, which are so advantageous to the party that they would not be available elsewhere. The overdraft facilities have routinely been expanded in the run-up to an election.
These deals struck between the Co-operative Group and the Labour Government at the height of Tony Blair’s premiership are likely now to come under particular scrutiny and could be ended in the event that Co-op bank is sold or changes its lending criteria.
Friends of the right sort of bankers eh ?
The Co-op is done, finished , kaput in present form - will certainly look different by March 2015 when Labour wants its cash.
Pity the poor union members - they will have to stump up for big posters of rEd saying "no wefewendum"
"First-time buyer numbers surged by a fifth last month as rising house prices and the end of the mortgage famine prompted more people to escape generation rent.
The Council of Mortgage Lenders (CML) reports that 19,100 loans, worth a total of £2.4 bn, were advanced to first-time buyers in March, while total homeloans increased by 15pc to £6.4bn."
"First-time buyer numbers surged by a fifth last month as rising house prices and the end of the mortgage famine prompted more people to escape generation rent.
The Council of Mortgage Lenders (CML) reports that 19,100 loans, worth a total of £2.4 bn, were advanced to first-time buyers in March, while total homeloans increased by 15pc to £6.4bn."
Labour is facing a new financial crisis after it emerged that the party depends on a massive overdraft from the troubled Co-operative Bank.
I do wish journlists wouldn't write so badly. This information hasn't 'emerged' at all, it's been very well known to everyone with even a passing interest in politics for yonks.
It's equally annoying to see 'The BBC has learned..' which usually means 'Someone sent the BBC a press release'.
'I think we have to realise that the entry of migrants to the labour market is hard for people who are finding it very difficult to get jobs, or to keep jobs' is plain and simple language and very damaging. It confirms fears in a single sentence.
Have to say I am struggling to see how that is very different to anything that Ed Miliband or other members of the Labour front bench have said.
I think you'll find the issue's the timing, they weren't saying that 7 or 8 years ago and were questioning the motives of anyone who raised the question.
Yes, I agree. As I have said many times before on here I think Labour got it very wrong on immigration. What I do not buy into is that it was all some kind of conspiracy. It was much more that an urban elite which had little idea of the real world and an ideological sympathy with internaitonalism was so isolated from reality it did not foresee the trouble that loosening restrictions on people coming into the country would create. Now Labour has to prove that it does get it.
Blimey! I more or less agree!
Well there you go. I am much more anti-Tory than pro-Labour. And as UKIP is the Tory Party with nobs on, I guess I am anti-UKIP as well. I swill vote for the party in my constituency best placed to keep the Tories (and UKIP) out.
Jesus tribalism gone mad. I'll buy you a bowler hat the next time we meet - shocked Ulsterman discovers he's openminded liberal !
Labour is facing a new financial crisis after it emerged that the party depends on a massive overdraft from the troubled Co-operative Bank.
The party relies on a £3.9 million lifeline from the ailing lender, which could be cut as part of the overhaul or sale of the bank.
The party has been kept afloat by a series of overdrafts on unusually generous terms from the bank, which has strong links to the party dating back to 1927.
Some of the financing used today relies on loan facilities agreed in 1999, which are so advantageous to the party that they would not be available elsewhere. The overdraft facilities have routinely been expanded in the run-up to an election.
These deals struck between the Co-operative Group and the Labour Government at the height of Tony Blair’s premiership are likely now to come under particular scrutiny and could be ended in the event that Co-op bank is sold or changes its lending criteria.
Friends of the right sort of bankers eh ?
The Co-op is done, finished , kaput in present form - will certainly look different by March 2015 when Labour wants its cash.
Pity the poor union members - they will have to stump up for big posters of rEd saying "no wefewendum"
This is the bit from the piece that really stuck out
One Labour source said: “We knew the deals in the late 1990s were not normal. The party and the bank were extremely close in the late 1990s, and there appeared to be an understanding that the Co-op would underwrite the 2001 election at almost whatever it cost.”
Labour is facing a new financial crisis after it emerged that the party depends on a massive overdraft from the troubled Co-operative Bank.
The party relies on a £3.9 million lifeline from the ailing lender, which could be cut as part of the overhaul or sale of the bank.
The party has been kept afloat by a series of overdrafts on unusually generous terms from the bank, which has strong links to the party dating back to 1927.
Some of the financing used today relies on loan facilities agreed in 1999, which are so advantageous to the party that they would not be available elsewhere. The overdraft facilities have routinely been expanded in the run-up to an election.
These deals struck between the Co-operative Group and the Labour Government at the height of Tony Blair’s premiership are likely now to come under particular scrutiny and could be ended in the event that Co-op bank is sold or changes its lending criteria.
Friends of the right sort of bankers eh ?
The Co-op is done, finished , kaput in present form - will certainly look different by March 2015 when Labour wants its cash.
Pity the poor union members - they will have to stump up for big posters of rEd saying "no wefewendum"
Still, at least Peston hasn't started another bank run.
While current house prices look stretched on traditional valuations, such as income multiples, these benchmarks may have become outmoded while interest rates remain at historic lows – and because few buyers now do so on a single income.
Ah yes, outmoded benchmarks.
Yes - terrible dreadful consumer demand - it should be the govt buying and building houses.
Heaven forbid people buying houses might encourage a builder to build one or two.
You should invent a time machine and move to East Germany in 1975.
Isn't subletting council houses illegal? Why should those lucky enough to receive subsidised housing be allowed to generate a tax-free income out of it?
GuidoFawkes Data shows that Guido is more in touch with Labour voters than union lobbyist @OwenJones84 >> guyfawk.es/16wA2sW
OwenJones84 @GuidoFawkes Always been realistic about attitudes. Argument will be won by telling truths. Hence you were so humiliated when we were on TV
GuidoFawkes @OwenJones84 Was I? Pretty sure I wasn't the one who left in a huff.
OwenJones84 @GuidoFawkes You're more delusional than I thought!
GuidoFawkes @OwenJones84 Only one of us has the delusion that he can "mobilise the millions".
While current house prices look stretched on traditional valuations, such as income multiples, these benchmarks may have become outmoded while interest rates remain at historic lows – and because few buyers now do so on a single income.
Ah yes, outmoded benchmarks.
Yes - terrible dreadful consumer demand - it should be the govt buying and building houses.
Heaven forbid people buying houses might encourage a builder to build one or two.
You should invent a time machine and move to East Germany in 1975.
terrible dreadful consumer demand
I realise you're in favour of taxpayer subsidised sub prime to get you to the election.
tim - we've been through this - you don't understand what sub prime means -stick to squirrels.
From the article:
"Mark Harris, chief executive of mortgage broker SPF Private Clients, pointed out: “First-time buyers are still putting down an average deposit of 20pc"
Just watching the innocent until proven guilty Bill Roache (Ken Barlow) walking into court,half smile on face, avoiding questions....
Can anyone remember a recent case of a person accused of an offence breaking down and crying and saying "I admit it, I am an awful person, I am so sorry, I deserve what I get...."
Just watching the innocent until proven guilty Bill Roache (Ken Barlow) walking into court,half smile on face, avoiding questions....
Can anyone remember a recent case of a person accused of an offence breaking down and crying and saying "I admit it, I am an awful person, I am so sorry, I deserve what I get...."
??
or words to that effect!
Cherie Blair, housing fiasco. Give that woman a BAFTA.
Isn't subletting council houses illegal? Why should those lucky enough to receive subsidised housing be allowed to generate a tax-free income out of it?
IDS has some questions to answer.
The govt were going to make it illegal last year, then they decided to encourage it and make it tax free this year in response to the bedroom tax proposals which took them by surprise
Surely they can only sub let to people waiting for a council property so the council pay/reduce their rent? They cant make it an earner?!!
Isn't subletting council houses illegal? Why should those lucky enough to receive subsidised housing be allowed to generate a tax-free income out of it?
IDS has some questions to answer.
The govt were going to make it illegal last year, then they decided to encourage it and make it tax free this year in response to the bedroom tax proposals which took them by surprise
Surely they can only sub let to people waiting for a council property so the council pay/reduce their rent? They cant make it an earner?!!
They are paying extra to the council due to the bedroom tax, so I doubt they are making much money out of the process.
Why I am betting that the Conservatives have a better than 9pc chance of winning most votes at the 2014 Euros
I can't buy it. It's clear 'Cameron's Follies' are taking their toll. When the likes of Paul Goodman are accusing Cameron of a 'failure of leadership' (whilst its been pretty obvious for some time) and likening him to John Major then the outlook for the Tories looks bleak. I can't see them repairing the damage that 'Cameron's Follies' have done in time.
A failure of leadership that leaves Cameron as a latter-day John Major
"We have just had one of the UK’s leading pollsters, Andrew Hawkins from ComRes, in for a briefing on what the polls are showing us for 2015.
What came across was how stark it is that Labour, with a bit of tweaking, have a better chance than ever of being the largest party in a coalition in 2015, if not getting an outright majority.
The ComRes rationale for this is:
1) The current distribution of votes in terms of boundaries favours Labour.
2) A 2% swing from Conservative to Labour will bring Ed Miliband into Downing Street, and a 5% swing would mean Labour have a majority.
3) A 5% swing from the Lib Dems to Labour sees Labour as the largest party.
4) (This is the stunning statistic in light of the local elections) – even if there is no swing to Labour if UKIP get 8% then Labour get into government.
It is interesting to see this in the context of the current debate in the party on whether Ed Miliband should drop Ed Balls. Without Balls, it is said, Labour looks much stronger on the economy, which remains the key issue for voters (who remain sceptical that the coalition is making a difference to the economy and our national debt).
So one of the main tweaks Miliband could (and some in the party say should) make is to reshuffle Ed Balls out of the brief. With a Labour frontbench reshuffle due this summer, watch this space.
Next race is Monaco, and Canada's right after that. I hope this doesn't prove a decisive advantage for Red Bull, but we'll have to wait and see how things go.
The consequence of Labour's Co-op loans either being called in or tightened, is that Labour will become even more reliant upon the Unions for its funding. >80% reliance to become >90% reliance? Unfortunately the funding of parties remains under Clegg and he has achieved nothing on this in 3 years. If Clegg actually did reform party funding, he might save a few more Lib Dem MPs but time is running out.
"This Westcountry otter is likely to be the fattest in the whole of the UK, even though he has been on a weight-loss regime. Staff at Escot Estate near Ottery St Mary were forced to put the "couch-potato otter", named Daze, on a diet after he got all the grub at feeding time.
But their efforts have now left the Asian short-clawed otter with "male otter boobs" and "bingo wings".
"If he doesn't have to move, he won't due to his laziness," said his keeper Kerry James. "After a meal the others play around and chase each other up and down, but Daze just goes back to bed."
They noticed his addiction to food when he was always first out of his family of six to pounce on raw meat burgers at feeding time, stopping the rest of them from having their fill.
Daze then began getting a lot of unwanted public attention after ballooning to a size larger than his father.
Ms James said: "Daze always took the easiest route and went back to bed before any of the others, so now they are all on a low-fat diet and Daze is made to stretch for his food."
Isn't subletting council houses illegal? Why should those lucky enough to receive subsidised housing be allowed to generate a tax-free income out of it?
IDS has some questions to answer.
The govt were going to make it illegal last year, then they decided to encourage it and make it tax free this year in response to the bedroom tax proposals which took them by surprise
Surely they can only sub let to people waiting for a council property so the council pay/reduce their rent? They cant make it an earner?!!
They are paying extra to the council due to the bedroom tax, so I doubt they are making much money out of the process.
Dont want an argument here, Im just trying to understand this
If they are renting out the other rooms, would they be subject to the spare room subsidy/ bedroom "tax" or does the fact they are not empty negate it?
In the case of the woman who threw herself in front of a lorry rather than pay the £20 a week extra for two empty rooms, she could have rented these rooms at £250 a month each and earned herself £420 a month! Five grand a year tax free and a bit of company in the evenings!
The consequence of Labour's Co-op loans either being called in or tightened, is that Labour will become even more reliant upon the Unions for its funding. >80% reliance to become >90% reliance? Unfortunately the funding of parties remains under Clegg and he has achieved nothing on this in 3 years. If Clegg actually did reform party funding, he might save a few more Lib Dem MPs but time is running out.
He'd need the votes in parliament.
Neither Labour or the Conservatives are willing to touch the system (or at least touch the bits that benefit them). It's been a running stalemate for years.
It's nominally under Clegg, but you still need people to go through the lobbies.
Isn't subletting council houses illegal? Why should those lucky enough to receive subsidised housing be allowed to generate a tax-free income out of it?
IDS has some questions to answer.
The govt were going to make it illegal last year, then they decided to encourage it and make it tax free this year in response to the bedroom tax proposals which took them by surprise
Surely they can only sub let to people waiting for a council property so the council pay/reduce their rent? They cant make it an earner?!!
A tax free earner according to the reports last month.
They haven't really got a clue what they are doing though
Ministers at the DCLG had been looking at a plan to criminalise council tenant subletting as late as July 2012 – months after the ‘bedroom tax’ was passed into law with the Welfare Reform Act.
In January 2012, then DCLG Housing minister Grant Shapps, now Conservative party Chairman, told the BBC that sub-letting in council properties was a “scandal” which caused people to “languish on waiting lists”.
But official guidance from Department for Work and Pensions encourages tenants to sub-let their extra rooms to avoid a reduction in housing benefit that came into force this month, branded the ‘bedroom tax’ by campaigners.
I await Richard Nabavi's attempt to spin this as a brilliant example of joined-up policymaking.
@TheScreamingEagles You've missed out referenda on NHS privatisation, tax-raising powers for London, capital punishment, corporal punishment and compulsory euthanasia on the earliest of reaching age 80 or voting for UKIP.
"We have just had one of the UK’s leading pollsters, Andrew Hawkins from ComRes, in for a briefing on what the polls are showing us for 2015.
What came across was how stark it is that Labour, with a bit of tweaking, have a better chance than ever of being the largest party in a coalition in 2015, if not getting an outright majority.
The ComRes rationale for this is:
1) The current distribution of votes in terms of boundaries favours Labour.
2) A 2% swing from Conservative to Labour will bring Ed Miliband into Downing Street, and a 5% swing would mean Labour have a majority.
3) A 5% swing from the Lib Dems to Labour sees Labour as the largest party.
4) (This is the stunning statistic in light of the local elections) – even if there is no swing to Labour if UKIP get 8% then Labour get into government.
It is interesting to see this in the context of the current debate in the party on whether Ed Miliband should drop Ed Balls. Without Balls, it is said, Labour looks much stronger on the economy, which remains the key issue for voters (who remain sceptical that the coalition is making a difference to the economy and our national debt).
So one of the main tweaks Miliband could (and some in the party say should) make is to reshuffle Ed Balls out of the brief. With a Labour frontbench reshuffle due this summer, watch this space.
both main parties are fronted by obnoxious eejits as CoE. It's a standoff as to which party has the courage to move first and gain some points with the voters.
I'm tempted to think some PBers and MPs suffer from this condition ;^ O
What The F*** Facts @WhatTheFFacts Negaholics are people who become addicted to negativity and self-doubt -- They find fault in most things and never seem to be satisfied.
@sam - I think they would pay the Council for the fact that they don't need the room themselves, but be able to cover this cost from the rent (and maybe make a small profit).
Seems fair enough to me. I really can't see what the problem is; it increases utilisation of under-used social housing and reduces the cost to the taxpayer. As the article says, for some (but not all) people affected by the withdrawal of the spare-room subsidy it could be a good option.
Sorry if this has been covered below, I've been doing some DIY (search doesn't work properly within a PB thread, at least on Chrome).
The number of suicides amongst Falklands veterans has been massively overstated in the past. The study appears to be fairly conclusive if it was properly carried out: they looked at the death certificate of every Falklands Veteran who had died since the conflict.
The results are, on the face of it, surprising: *) Fewer men had died as a percentage than amongst men of a similar age and background in the general population. *) The number of suicides is actually less than amongst men of similar age and background.
Supposedly, as military men are selected and very fit, that fitness remains until later in life and leads to a reduced risk of dying from many diseases.
Good results that, if properly carried out, should lay some myths to rest.
for which the taxpayer picks up the tab so our taxes go up unless you have a heavily regulated housing market. So far the private sector has been pretty poor at responding to the rise in population. The response has not been to build decent housing but to make more units out of the existing stock. Even the housing trusts have been no great shakes.
The consequence of Labour's Co-op loans either being called in or tightened, is that Labour will become even more reliant upon the Unions for its funding. >80% reliance to become >90% reliance? Unfortunately the funding of parties remains under Clegg and he has achieved nothing on this in 3 years. If Clegg actually did reform party funding, he might save a few more Lib Dem MPs but time is running out.
He'd need the votes in parliament.
Neither Labour or the Conservatives are willing to touch the system (or at least touch the bits that benefit them). It's been a running stalemate for years.
It's nominally under Clegg, but you still need people to go through the lobbies.
The current party funding problems and lack of House of Lords reform can be lain squarely at the feet of the Liberal Democrats predecessors, the Liberals.
Honestly if that Lloyd George hadn't been selling peerages and Knighthoods for donations, we wouldn't be in this mess.
@sam - I think they would pay the Council for the fact that they don't need the room themselves, but be able to cover this cost from the rent (and maybe make a small profit).
Seems fair enough to me. I really can't see what the problem is; it increases utilisation of under-used social housing and reduces the cost to the taxpayer. As the article says, for some (but not all) people affected by the withdrawal of the spare-room subsidy it could be a good option.
Maybe all people affected by the spare room subsidy should be offered the chance to be a tenant or "Landlord", it might help the policy, as well as providing company for old people affected who dont want to live in an old peoples home. The social benefit of it would accompany the economic.
Im not an OAP or a council resident but recently rented my spare room out to a friend and it is so much nicer than living on my own, although I was reluctant to do it at first.
Mr. Corporeal, isn't there agreement on a £50k limit but Labour want an exception for the unions? What's the bit the Conservatives disagree with?
No Mr Dancer.
The £50k limit is the Conservative proposal, who also want an opt-in for Union political levies and Union donations to count as single large donations rather than lots of small ones.
Labour want a much lower limit (about £10k), but for the Union donations to be counted as lots of small donations by each contributing member and to keep the opt out system.
This is essentially dictated by their finances. Labour funded by the hundreds of thousands of Union £££ (whether you see them as individual member donations or not). Conservatives tend to get funding in chunks of tens of thousands (so a £50k cap wouldn't affect them that much, while a £10k one would) while a £50k cap and counting Union donations as single large ones would hit them very hard.
So each party's plan coincidentally harms the other while leaving themselves unaffected, and there's little drive for compromise because it also gives both of them a large advantage over the smaller parties and they don't want to give that up.
As a side note, the Coalition's ruled out any increase in state funding for parties (essentially on grounds of PR suicide to propose it).
That's the stalemate as it has been for years, the Lib Dems want the reform because among other reasons (I'm keeping my cynical hat on here) it'd bring the other two closer to them in funding terms. But there's no real impetus for change amongst the big two, so while it's included in Clegg's territory there aren't the votes to get anything through.
The response has not been to build decent housing but to make more units out of the existing stock.
Private landlords buy up the council stock, rent it back to the occupants. The housing market would adjust naturally and at a manageable rate if you phased in the change carefully.
I'd buy up a street as an investment. A whole new generation in homeowners - the ultimate housing revolution.
@tnewtondunn: Dougie Alexander attacks Cameron EU dithering with the line: "We don’t support committing now to an in/out referendum in 2017". Go figure.
Pay the same way they are now if they are on low incomes - from, that cat's cradle of housing benefits and other payments. You could combine them all. Call it Universal Credit, perhaps? Sounds catchy.
The response has not been to build decent housing but to make more units out of the existing stock.
Private landlords buy up the council stock, rent it back to the occupants. The housing market would adjust naturally and at a manageable rate if you phased in the change carefully.
I'd buy up a street as an investment. A whole new generation in homeowners - the ultimate housing revolution.
I can't see it personally. Private landlords are more interested in capital appreciation when selling houses. They aren't building new homes for rental income in any great numbers. If the taxpayer is to stop subsidising asset inflation we need more houses and if the private sector won't build then someone else must.
"Pensioners are exempt from the bedroom tax, they vote Tory, or did before they started voting UKIP. The bedroom tax is therefore higher on the disabled than it would be otherwise if pensioners were not exempt.
Up until a few months ago the govt were planning to criminalise subletting, they should've sold it as part of their Big Society policy. I believe Dave has two taxpayer funded kitchens, one of which would suit a Bulgarian family nicely."
Bah bloody details!
Well I think it would be nice if OAPs with a spare room in their house and a deceased partner shared a house anyway!
****ANECDOTE****
When my Nan died my previously well kempt Grandad, (a butler who wore a shirt and tie for breakfast!) lost the plot/died from a combination of grief and loneliness, it was horrific. Was treated extremely poorly in a "home", his final years would have been so much nicer with company in his own (council) house in.... you guessed it, Dagenham!
The US is going to turn from being the world's largest importer to a net exporter of oil in only 6 years. If this does not give the western world a huge boost I really don't know what will. 2015, unlike 2010, may be a very good election to win. Not sure what effect it is going to have on north sea oil profits though.
By the way, how is this for a sentence: "US production is set to grow by 3.9m barrels of oil per day from 2012 to 2018, accounting for some two thirds of the predicted growth in traditional non-Opec production, according to the IEA."
That would be 3.9m per day every day for 6 years would it? The quality of English on the BBC is getting worse. Thank goodness for Mr Gove!
Pay the same way they are now if they are on low incomes - from, that cat's cradle of housing benefits and other payments. You could combine them all. Call it Universal Credit, perhaps? Sounds catchy.
And when rent levels exceed the total value of universal credit due to ongoing housing shortage, what happens?
To be fair, I have no idea whether it's all round cheaper for the state to own houses or pay private landlords to provide them - just a hunch that in a shortage situation as we currently have, it's likely that being an owner rather than a tenant is a cheaper place for the state to be. And I assume we all like the idea of keeping public spending down.
I guess it depends whether the ultimate aim is to ensure that there is a safety net such that all citizens are housed, or to replace that with a descent into homelessness/slum living whilst not having direct responsibility for it.
ensure that there is a safety net such that all citizens are housed
Agree. A safety net is exactly what the welfare state should be. And it is, when councils pay for families to go into bed and breakfast or when housing benefit etc is paid to those who need it.
I'm just suggesting that you cut out the bureaucracy and the middle man in the shape of the council, their outsourced maintenance dept costs etc etc.
It also fell 12 places in respect of unemployment.
The chart on p18 of the report in respect of public sector debt is equally depressing. At the end of the period we were still below the EU average but catching up very fast with all our previous advantage (largely the outcome of North Sea tax revenues) lost.
And more than 30% of our population want to trust the party responsible for this with our governance once again? Bah!
Comments
http://cep.lse.ac.uk/pubs/download/pa014.pdf
"In short, recent empirical research on the labour market effects of immigration to the UK finds little evidence of overall adverse effects of immigration on wages and employment for people born in the UK.
Nevertheless, there may be some downward pressure in the low wage labour market where (despite their higher relative education levels) many new immigrants tend to find work. There may also be a positive effect on wages in the high wage labour markets where it may take more time for the skills that immigrants bring to transfer."
Is there more up to date research?
Under Labour, in May 2010, there were 18,000 people who had been waiting more than a year for an NHS operation - it's now 665.
A) Gayers getting marriage
C) Withdrawal from the EU
D) Electoral reform.
Just think of the campaign and the PB threads.
Just imagine how totally insufferable SeanT would be were his 22/1 footy tip last October to actually deliver.
Blimey! I more or less agree!
Your last topic, as a great philosopher once wrote, "Naughty naughty very naughty"
Well there you go. I am much more anti-Tory than pro-Labour. And as UKIP is the Tory Party with nobs on, I guess I am anti-UKIP as well. I swill vote for the party in my constituency best placed to keep the Tories (and UKIP) out.
Labour is facing a new financial crisis after it emerged that the party depends on a massive overdraft from the troubled Co-operative Bank.
The party relies on a £3.9 million lifeline from the ailing lender, which could be cut as part of the overhaul or sale of the bank.
The party has been kept afloat by a series of overdrafts on unusually generous terms from the bank, which has strong links to the party dating back to 1927.
Some of the financing used today relies on loan facilities agreed in 1999, which are so advantageous to the party that they would not be available elsewhere. The overdraft facilities have routinely been expanded in the run-up to an election.
These deals struck between the Co-operative Group and the Labour Government at the height of Tony Blair’s premiership are likely now to come under particular scrutiny and could be ended in the event that Co-op bank is sold or changes its lending criteria.
http://ht.ly/l0Eq0
ComRes for @CAupdates finds even 2/3 of urban residents think politicians more interested in urban than rural people ht.ly/l0Eq0
The Co-op is done, finished , kaput in present form - will certainly look different by March 2015 when Labour wants its cash.
Pity the poor union members - they will have to stump up for big posters of rEd saying "no wefewendum"
http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-kingdom/urban-population-percent-of-total-wb-data.html
"The Urban population (% of total) in the United Kingdom was last reported at 90.10 in 2010, according to a World Bank report published in 2012."
What politician isn't going to be more interested in 90% of the population than the other 10%?
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/finance/ianmcowie/100024542/house-prices-first-time-buyers-surge-by-20pc-despite-predictions-of-doom/
"First-time buyer numbers surged by a fifth last month as rising house prices and the end of the mortgage famine prompted more people to escape generation rent.
The Council of Mortgage Lenders (CML) reports that 19,100 loans, worth a total of £2.4 bn, were advanced to first-time buyers in March, while total homeloans increased by 15pc to £6.4bn."
It's equally annoying to see 'The BBC has learned..' which usually means 'Someone sent the BBC a press release'.
Jesus tribalism gone mad. I'll buy you a bowler hat the next time we meet - shocked Ulsterman discovers he's openminded liberal !
Globalisation is as much to blame. If wages rise too quickly in a given country, that country's firms have to pass the higher costs on.
One Labour source said: “We knew the deals in the late 1990s were not normal. The party and the bank were extremely close in the late 1990s, and there appeared to be an understanding that the Co-op would underwrite the 2001 election at almost whatever it cost.”
Heaven forbid people buying houses might encourage a builder to build one or two.
You should invent a time machine and move to East Germany in 1975.
Thank you
http://www.thisisstaffordshire.co.uk/lodger-avoid-bedroom-tax-says-Stoke-Trent-City/story-18979834-detail/story.html#axzz2TGZUSDeo
Isn't subletting council houses illegal? Why should those lucky enough to receive subsidised housing be allowed to generate a tax-free income out of it?
IDS has some questions to answer.
OwenJones84 @GuidoFawkes Always been realistic about attitudes. Argument will be won by telling truths. Hence you were so humiliated when we were on TV
GuidoFawkes @OwenJones84 Was I? Pretty sure I wasn't the one who left in a huff.
OwenJones84 @GuidoFawkes You're more delusional than I thought!
GuidoFawkes @OwenJones84 Only one of us has the delusion that he can "mobilise the millions".
These two should really get a room lol
From the article:
"Mark Harris, chief executive of mortgage broker SPF Private Clients, pointed out: “First-time buyers are still putting down an average deposit of 20pc"
Hardly Detroit NINJA loans is it ?
Can anyone remember a recent case of a person accused of an offence breaking down and crying and saying "I admit it, I am an awful person, I am so sorry, I deserve what I get...."
??
or words to that effect!
They are paying extra to the council due to the bedroom tax, so I doubt they are making much money out of the process.
I can't buy it. It's clear 'Cameron's Follies' are taking their toll. When the likes of Paul Goodman are accusing Cameron of a 'failure of leadership' (whilst its been pretty obvious for some time) and likening him to John Major then the outlook for the Tories looks bleak. I can't see them repairing the damage that 'Cameron's Follies' have done in time.
A failure of leadership that leaves Cameron as a latter-day John Major
http://conservativehome.blogs.com/thetorydiary/2013/05/by-paul-goodmanfollow-paul-on-twitter-david-cameron-has-promised-an-in-out-referendum-on-the-eu-in-the-next-parliament-why.html
As unlikely and unadvisable as it may seem I'm starting to wonder whether Cameron will actually survive until 2015?
What came across was how stark it is that Labour, with a bit of tweaking, have a better chance than ever of being the largest party in a coalition in 2015, if not getting an outright majority.
The ComRes rationale for this is:
1) The current distribution of votes in terms of boundaries favours Labour.
2) A 2% swing from Conservative to Labour will bring Ed Miliband into Downing Street, and a 5% swing would mean Labour have a majority.
3) A 5% swing from the Lib Dems to Labour sees Labour as the largest party.
4) (This is the stunning statistic in light of the local elections) – even if there is no swing to Labour if UKIP get 8% then Labour get into government.
It is interesting to see this in the context of the current debate in the party on whether Ed Miliband should drop Ed Balls. Without Balls, it is said, Labour looks much stronger on the economy, which remains the key issue for voters (who remain sceptical that the coalition is making a difference to the economy and our national debt).
So one of the main tweaks Miliband could (and some in the party say should) make is to reshuffle Ed Balls out of the brief. With a Labour frontbench reshuffle due this summer, watch this space.
http://www.westminsteradvisers.co.uk/blogs/article/254/public-affairs/2013/05/2015-labourinwithachanceevenmoresowithoutballs
http://www.espn.co.uk/f1/motorsport/story/108038.html
Next race is Monaco, and Canada's right after that. I hope this doesn't prove a decisive advantage for Red Bull, but we'll have to wait and see how things go.
The consequence of Labour's Co-op loans either being called in or tightened, is that Labour will become even more reliant upon the Unions for its funding. >80% reliance to become >90% reliance? Unfortunately the funding of parties remains under Clegg and he has achieved nothing on this in 3 years. If Clegg actually did reform party funding, he might save a few more Lib Dem MPs but time is running out.
"This Westcountry otter is likely to be the fattest in the whole of the UK, even though he has been on a weight-loss regime. Staff at Escot Estate near Ottery St Mary were forced to put the "couch-potato otter", named Daze, on a diet after he got all the grub at feeding time.
But their efforts have now left the Asian short-clawed otter with "male otter boobs" and "bingo wings".
"If he doesn't have to move, he won't due to his laziness," said his keeper Kerry James. "After a meal the others play around and chase each other up and down, but Daze just goes back to bed."
They noticed his addiction to food when he was always first out of his family of six to pounce on raw meat burgers at feeding time, stopping the rest of them from having their fill.
Daze then began getting a lot of unwanted public attention after ballooning to a size larger than his father.
Ms James said: "Daze always took the easiest route and went back to bed before any of the others, so now they are all on a low-fat diet and Daze is made to stretch for his food."
Read more: http://www.thisiscornwall.co.uk/sure-lotta-otter/story-18979636-detail/story.html#ixzz2TGo2xuUy
Maybe we should split the difference and say 6%!
If they are renting out the other rooms, would they be subject to the spare room subsidy/ bedroom "tax" or does the fact they are not empty negate it?
In the case of the woman who threw herself in front of a lorry rather than pay the £20 a week extra for two empty rooms, she could have rented these rooms at £250 a month each and earned herself £420 a month! Five grand a year tax free and a bit of company in the evenings!
Bizarre
Neither Labour or the Conservatives are willing to touch the system (or at least touch the bits that benefit them). It's been a running stalemate for years.
It's nominally under Clegg, but you still need people to go through the lobbies.
Tim's 'Hard Man'?
That would be fun to watch.
Go Richard!
What The F*** Facts @WhatTheFFacts
Negaholics are people who become addicted to negativity and self-doubt -- They find fault in most things and never seem to be satisfied.
Seems fair enough to me. I really can't see what the problem is; it increases utilisation of under-used social housing and reduces the cost to the taxpayer. As the article says, for some (but not all) people affected by the withdrawal of the spare-room subsidy it could be a good option.
The number of suicides amongst Falklands veterans has been massively overstated in the past. The study appears to be fairly conclusive if it was properly carried out: they looked at the death certificate of every Falklands Veteran who had died since the conflict.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22523317
The results are, on the face of it, surprising:
*) Fewer men had died as a percentage than amongst men of a similar age and background in the general population.
*) The number of suicides is actually less than amongst men of similar age and background.
Supposedly, as military men are selected and very fit, that fitness remains until later in life and leads to a reduced risk of dying from many diseases.
Good results that, if properly carried out, should lay some myths to rest.
Honestly if that Lloyd George hadn't been selling peerages and Knighthoods for donations, we wouldn't be in this mess.
*Innocent face*
Im not an OAP or a council resident but recently rented my spare room out to a friend and it is so much nicer than living on my own, although I was reluctant to do it at first.
The £50k limit is the Conservative proposal, who also want an opt-in for Union political levies and Union donations to count as single large donations rather than lots of small ones.
Labour want a much lower limit (about £10k), but for the Union donations to be counted as lots of small donations by each contributing member and to keep the opt out system.
This is essentially dictated by their finances. Labour funded by the hundreds of thousands of Union £££ (whether you see them as individual member donations or not). Conservatives tend to get funding in chunks of tens of thousands (so a £50k cap wouldn't affect them that much, while a £10k one would) while a £50k cap and counting Union donations as single large ones would hit them very hard.
So each party's plan coincidentally harms the other while leaving themselves unaffected, and there's little drive for compromise because it also gives both of them a large advantage over the smaller parties and they don't want to give that up.
As a side note, the Coalition's ruled out any increase in state funding for parties (essentially on grounds of PR suicide to propose it).
That's the stalemate as it has been for years, the Lib Dems want the reform because among other reasons (I'm keeping my cynical hat on here) it'd bring the other two closer to them in funding terms. But there's no real impetus for change amongst the big two, so while it's included in Clegg's territory there aren't the votes to get anything through.
I'd buy up a street as an investment. A whole new generation in homeowners - the ultimate housing revolution.
@tim
"Pensioners are exempt from the bedroom tax, they vote Tory, or did before they started voting UKIP.
The bedroom tax is therefore higher on the disabled than it would be otherwise if pensioners were not exempt.
Up until a few months ago the govt were planning to criminalise subletting, they should've sold it as part of their Big Society policy.
I believe Dave has two taxpayer funded kitchens, one of which would suit a Bulgarian family nicely."
Bah bloody details!
Well I think it would be nice if OAPs with a spare room in their house and a deceased partner shared a house anyway!
****ANECDOTE****
When my Nan died my previously well kempt Grandad, (a butler who wore a shirt and tie for breakfast!) lost the plot/died from a combination of grief and loneliness, it was horrific. Was treated extremely poorly in a "home", his final years would have been so much nicer with company in his own (council) house in.... you guessed it, Dagenham!
The US is going to turn from being the world's largest importer to a net exporter of oil in only 6 years. If this does not give the western world a huge boost I really don't know what will. 2015, unlike 2010, may be a very good election to win. Not sure what effect it is going to have on north sea oil profits though.
By the way, how is this for a sentence:
"US production is set to grow by 3.9m barrels of oil per day from 2012 to 2018, accounting for some two thirds of the predicted growth in traditional non-Opec production, according to the IEA."
That would be 3.9m per day every day for 6 years would it? The quality of English on the BBC is getting worse. Thank goodness for Mr Gove!
To be fair, I have no idea whether it's all round cheaper for the state to own houses or pay private landlords to provide them - just a hunch that in a shortage situation as we currently have, it's likely that being an owner rather than a tenant is a cheaper place for the state to be. And I assume we all like the idea of keeping public spending down.
I guess it depends whether the ultimate aim is to ensure that there is a safety net such that all citizens are housed, or to replace that with a descent into homelessness/slum living whilst not having direct responsibility for it.
I'm just suggesting that you cut out the bureaucracy and the middle man in the shape of the council, their outsourced maintenance dept costs etc etc.
It also fell 12 places in respect of unemployment.
The chart on p18 of the report in respect of public sector debt is equally depressing. At the end of the period we were still below the EU average but catching up very fast with all our previous advantage (largely the outcome of North Sea tax revenues) lost.
And more than 30% of our population want to trust the party responsible for this with our governance once again? Bah!