Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The worry for Nick Clegg is if moves like this in Nottingha
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The worry for Nick Clegg is if moves like this in Nottingham gather momentum
So far according to Lib Dem blogger, Stephen Tall, just five of the party’s branches have had formal meetings to discuss the leadership and only two, Nottingham and Ribble Valley, have voted in favour of a contest.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
http://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/eu-regierungschefs-fordern-rasche-abstimmung-ueber-juncker-a-975334.html
If the current 'success' rate is two out of five, wouldn't we need around 188 (75/0.4) local party general meetings to get to the "magic 75"?
OK, maybe I should go back to lurking...
As regards Phil Neville's dubious commentary skills, it would seem that Jan Moir in today's Daily Mail agrees with my earlier comments:
"‘Yeah, he’s got to fire in them low crosses,’ he would say. Indeed, throughout his match commentary, Evil K-Neville would frequently use ‘them’ when he actually meant ‘those’ – a howling and irritating grammatical error.
At the very dawn of his career as a pundit, couldn’t a producer have had a quiet word in his ear and pointed out the mistake?
This has nothing to do with his regional accent, but everything to do with basic good grammar. It is pretty inexcusable.
After all, Neville is no longer a footballer. He is – for the moment at least – a highly paid voice for the national broadcaster, a man whose every word is being beamed to 15million bemused viewers back home."
Well before the 2010 election when the Yellows were then averaging around 14% in the polls, I was foolish enough to have an even money bet with OGH that their UK level of support in the GE would not exceed 17%. Of course they were to exceed this figure by a handsome margin and I lost the bet. The only saving grace from my perspective was that recognising the way things were heading, I offered to close the bet at a discount ahead of the event and Mike was generous enough to accommodate me. As a result I was able to mitigate my losses.
They had better get their story straight before next May because the campaign will home in on it for sure.
(a) because it's wrong;
(b) because the NHS can manage on its present, Tory, level of funding;
(c) because the NHS is wrong;
(d) all of the above;
(e) none of the above.
I think we can be sure that both the Tories and the Labour Party will be gentle in their treatment of Clegg and chums. Or maybe not...
There might be some leeway on taxes for all parties if you can get past the lobbyists and media.
"British public wrongly believe rich face highest tax burden, new research shows"
http://www.theguardian.com/money/2014/jun/16/british-public-wrong-rich-poor-tax-research
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/consumertips/tax/10900579/Middle-class-families-braced-for-inheritance-tax-time-bomb.html
Con 33% (+1)
Labour 31% (-6)
LD 13% (+1)
UKIP 15% (+4)
Oth 9% (+1)
I wouldn't be surprised if Labour bounce back a lot, particularly if the Lib Dems dive, so we might be looking at a 4% or 5% lead.
http://newstonoone.blogspot.co.uk/2014/06/the-latest-election-round-what-have-we_16.html
The Lib Dems need to either axe Clegg or get behind him. This sort of thing just damages the party without getting rid of him.
I do agree that council tax is regressive. In Monmouthshire, the difference between band F and D is around forty quid a month (we're using 2005 house valuations. Band F properties are nominally worth the thick end of twice that of band D).
Did The Sun break the law?
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/06/12/the-sun-world-cup-2014-_n_5488031.html
I haven't received a copy yet - when are they coming ?
With 10 and a bit months to go, Broxtowe LibDems (who predicted victory in 2010 and got 17% and lots of councillors) still haven't picked a candidate, though I think they will finally get round to it soon. Basically almost nobody wants to do it, as the immolation of the Broxtowe-based candidate in Newark (who lost 80% of his vote) suggests it won't be a fun experience.
Off topic.
I wonder if the present atrocities taking place in Iraq and the widespread coverage of Tony Blair’s ‘not my fault’ open letter will rekindle the animus, Labour voters had ‘come to terms’ since our withdrawal from the region?
BBC - Boris Johnson: Tony Blair's Iraq comments 'unhinged'
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-27864603
LD 1/3 (from 2/7)
SNP 9/2 (from 5/1)
Con 10/1 (from 16/1)
Lab 10/1 (n/c)
Note: Menzies Campbell MP is standing down at the next UK GE. The LD PPC is Cllr Tim Brett.
The people who carved up the middle east and Africa, using a straight edge rather than local knowledge may have had something to do with it as well.
The legacy of the European dreams of empire.
Lab 1/16 (from 1/20)
SNP 12/1 (from 16/1)
Con 25/1 (n/c)
LD 33/1 (n/c)
100 bar
Note: the SNP came in 4th place in this seat in 2010, with less than 12% of the vote, but won in this area the following year with 42% of the vote:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aberdeen_South_and_North_Kincardine_(Scottish_Parliament_constituency)
Those earning less that £10K a year now pay no IT. They will pay some NI at lower levels than that. Poorer families also spend more of their income on food and rent. The proportion of their spend subject to VAT will be smaller than the better paid albeit it will be more significant to their circumstances. Council tax is extremely regressive but how many of the very poor actually pay it? If they are getting housing benefit or other assistance with their liability it is very artificial to take the gross cost into account.
The poor will probably spend a significantly greater share of their income on duty for cigarettes and alcohol. The duty on alcohol in particular is regressive as it forms a much smaller proportion of a £20 bottle than a £5 one.
I don't doubt that the exemptions given to the more affluent in ISAs, pensions and other allowances along with the more generous exemptions on capital gains etc mean that the rates actually paid by the better off are well below the headline levels. I also don't doubt that there are very regressive elements in our tax system we should look at. But I am afraid without a lot more information I would not trust these assessments at all.
I suppose it comes down to which think tank or lobby group you trust?
It is the same with "benefit fraud", most people think it is circa 35%.
What do you think the actual figure is?
My wild guess would be a couple of hundred.
Local government should be about provision of and payment for services. While it is right that the tax system as a whole is progressive, this is a matter for national government, not councillors.
By "benefit fraud", I suspect you mean "known benefit fraud" as calculated by prosecution. That will be tiny.
In the real world, I know of quite a few minor cases going on. Not important in the grand scheme of things and at no great cost individually. But many people are aware of it.
Thus the insistence by the left, that these people are stupid because they don't believe the "official" figures is just self-defeating.
I think a dislike of the whole EU thing makes some on the right underestimate how interested and involved many Lab/Lib activists feel in it and its various features like the MEPs. Many Tories think it's complicated, obscure and not worth bothering with; many leftish activists find it pretty clear and generally positive, though in need of improvement. It's like football - people who are into it have strong views on particular keepers and strikers, whereas the uninvolved have never heard of any of them.
I pointed that out last night. Hindsight is terrific, the problem is where do we go from here?
You will struggle to find consensus even among those of your own political persuasion.
Nothing complicated or controversial, just the government estimate will do.
Round it up to the nearest percentage point if it makes it any easier.
A link to the article or research on which the Guardian article is a probably inaccurate and superficial summary would have been helpful.
" It is just a duff system unless your cirucmstances are completely predictable. "
Yes, IDS has found that is a problem with any system. How is the Universal Credit roll out coming along?
In terms of wealth distribution being a matter for local government, I don't see that your comment is germane; I simply offered a practical example in response to Smarmeron's post.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/mar/05/tony-blair-labour-party-donation
I feel a Rumsfield moment coming on. Estimates are based on what is told to them, and the cases I know of would not be known. So the "official" figure may well be 0.01% and meaningless.
Based on my own experience, I know say about 100 people well enough to estimate, and four of these indulge in minor benefits fraud. Those four would never admit that to anyone official, so I draw my own conclusions.
How about your mates?
DavidL, the report is here
http://www.equalitytrust.org.uk/sites/default/files/attachments/resources/Unfair and Unclear.pdf
And it is based on the tax take from 2011 so excludes most of the increase in PA. It also only covers tax on income rather than tax on capital, which I imagine would tend to underestimate the tax paid by the richest.
The full list of taxes they cover is
Income tax
• Tax on interest earned by savings/rental income/other income
• Capital gains tax
• Council tax
• Car/vehicle/road tax
• Inheritance tax
• Stamp duty
• Tax added to the cost of some goods, services, and transactions (i.e. VAT):
• National insurance
• Tax duty on fuel, beer, cider, wine, spirits, tobacco
• Betting & Gaming Duties
• Air Passenger Duty
• Insurance Premium Tax
• Landfill Tax
• Climate Change Levy
• Aggregates tax
I can understand the desire to have root and branch reform of the thickets of legislation, special circumstances and often unfair bureaucracy that has grown up as the welfare state spread its vines (getting a little carried away with this metaphor now) through society but it was and is frighteningly ambitious and brave in a Yes Minister way.
I would have thought that preliminary steps of clearing the undergrowth and simplification might have been a safer approach but we shall see. Having IDS in charge of it does not seem to be helping. He means well but has about the same level of credibility as a New Labour treasury minister in the last government in that he seems to say whatever might be thought to be helpful at the time.
My experience correlates with the government estimate, but I don't usually ask my friends about their finances, so who knows?
http://election-data.blogspot.co.uk/2014/06/self-employment-and-flight-to-ukip.html
I always told my tax partner when I was a solicitor that one of my aims in life was to pay CGT. I haven't managed it yet.
On that basis, I'd say 5%, but I have a relatively law-abiding group of friends and I suspect I don't know all their financial secrets.
Yes, they have a special test for that, worded in such a way that you stand a better chance of being found unfit for work if you are "at it" than you do if you are genuinely ill.
Ask the company who has baled out of the contract (or been removed if you prefer the departments version).
That said, I agree with your diagnosis, and IDS is perhaps more of a thinker than a manager (my view, not Graham's) - perhaps would be ideal as head of a right of centre think-tank.
It's an interesting argument to ask where we would be now IF the Conservatives had achieved an overall majority in 2010. I remember OGH suggesting the best result for the LDs would be a Conservative Government with a majority of less than 10.
One thing is for certain - the LDs would be polling much higher than now and the Conservatives and UKIP much lower. Indeed, there would have been polls with the Conservatives third as there were in the mid-80s.
As to what the LDs have achieved in Government - there's little doubt Osborne would have slashed the higher rate of tax to 40p in 2012 if he could and I also suspect basic rate tax might have been cut along with Corporation Tax. To balance this, I suspect public spending would have been cut deeper and faster after 2012.
Would there have been a referendum on EU membership ? I doubt it - there wouldn't be a strong UKIP to provide political pressure and in any case getting a majority for a referendum would be difficult in the Commons. We'd probably be where we are now.
You do of course know that UC does not have a "traffic light" rating these days?
It was such a mess that with the changes needed, they had to invent a new category, "reset"
Robert Kimbell @RedHotSquirrel 3m
#UKIP Membership:
2002 9,000
2008 14,600
2010 15,500
2012 19,500
2013 32,500
2014 39,143 as of now, and rising.
Not to say that he doesn't have a capable team now but surely the task is enormous and unprecedented.
Source:
http://www.libdems.org.uk/lib_dem_membership_surge_continues
Will UKIP have more members than the Lib Dems when the GE comes ?
I also fear that the DWP has not been the first choice for the ambitious and able in our Civil Service over a very long period. The level of administrative skills seems quite modest.
Universal credit feels like a classic second-system effect situation.
"For all UKIPs claims of an "earthquake" they remain the party with the least members... "
He has got the LDs into government for the first time in 100-odd years. The alternative in 2010 to a coalition with the Tories was to shore up Labour, who had caused social mayhem and economic disaster.
If there are LDs out there who seriously think coalition to keep that sordid regime in power would have been a/ what the country needed and b/ better for the LDs today, I'd like to hear why.
If they are simply so left wing that they are fundamentally viscerally opposed to coalition with the Tories on principle, then they should drop the pretence of being anything other than ersatz Labour, standing under a flag of convenience in seats where Labour could never win.
Collective selective memory, collective denial. I'm beginning to go off them.
Say 5 to 10 branches vote for a leadership election in a short space of time, then it has a feeling of inevitability about it.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-27863918
To put the membership figures into context, the average number of members per mainland British constituency [ie assuming no NI members] are:
Labour < 316
Conservative ~ 206
Lib Dem = 69
UKIP = 62
Green [E&W] ~ 30
Left Unity > 3
One of my friends who is 61, worked as an IT contractor for many years, and planned to retire at 65. He has now discovered that he hasn't got enough National Insurance credits to qualify for the basic state pension when he hits 65 (he had private pensions but they were split in a messy divorce). This means he will never be able to retire.
I think it will go down like a lead balloon once people discover the change and the government of the day will have to sort it out.
Kidding! My mistake, my bad grammar!!
Did he not pay NI when he was working? and claim it when unemployed?
Which means in betting terms Germany will now win.
Btw, didn't you tip Costa Rica at 14/1? Excellent tip, if so. I wish I'd backed it.
Ladbrokes have most of the F1 markets up, including one I wanted to see. Can't decide if I believe it's value or not. I shall ponder it.
Michael Schumacher management: Michael has left the CHU Grenoble to continue his long phase of rehabilitation. He is not in a coma anymore.
He's been semi-retired for a few years because IT work isn't exactly the most friendly field for older folks.
The Dutch have a rather interesting football prog.
It's called WK in Lingerie and you can find it on YouTube.
Jay Abdo, Syrian actor: how I changed my name from Jihad to Jay and (eventually) conquered Hollywood
The reluctant refugee talks about his journey from Syrian superstar to Los Angeles pizza delivery-man and now a new lease of life as co-star to Nicole Kidman and Tom Hanks
http://www.theguardian.com/film/2014/jun/15/jay-abdo-syria-film-refugee-actor?CMP=twt_gu