Many of the doubts being expressed about Ed Miliband today were being put forward re-Ted Heath back in 1969. Heath lagged further behind Wilson than Ed does in relation to Cameron.
"A worrying number of shy and book smart children are being labelled as 'mentally ill' by doctors who are under pressure from parents to give them a diagnosis according to a top psychiatrist
He told The Times: 'Certain behaviour carry stigma and there's less stigma if it's associated with a disorder. Often it's about the avoidance of guilt.
Around three to seven per cent of children, or 400,000, are believed to have ADHD in the UK, with many being prescribed drugs to try and improve their concentration at school.
According to recent figures, the use of ADHD drugs has tripled over the past decade and antidepressants usage has shot up too.
Professor Wessely said that it is becoming less common for children to be labelled as 'shy' but they are more likely to be branded as having a social phobia or a behavioural problem.
And even schools are benefitting from mislabelling pupils, says Professor Wessely, as the more special needs children in a school, the more funds they'll get.
However, some experts claim that many disorders have no merit at all, and are in fact, made up.
Paediatric neurologist Dr Richard Saul, based in Chicago, believes that ADHD simply ‘doesn’t exist’ and is being used as a mask for less serious problems. Dr Saul argues that children are being misdiagnosed.
‘ADHD makes a great excuse,’ Dr Saul said in his book, ‘ADHD does not exist: The truth about Attention Deficit and Hyperactivity Disorder.’ ‘The diagnosis can be an easy-to-reach-for crutch.
Mail online.
Some years ago, when analysing consultant psychiatrist’s prescribing, I was struck by the differences between people who were allegedly treating the same disorders.
You are right that the Lord Ashcroft polling was encouraging for the LibDems - and (assuming basically all seats where Labour are the main opposition are lost) would suggest 30-35 seats as a good baseline for the party.
However, I think you have recognise that while you'll almost certainly have that level of representation if you get 14% at the general, I suspect that between 14% and 9%, there'd be a precipitous drop in seats. And this is simply because parties can't go below zero votes in a seat; a vote lost at 11% in the polls in inevitably going to have to come from a strong LibDem seat, not a weak one.
Below 10 or 11% in the polls, there is a real danger of LibDempocalypse.
That being said, over the last 20 years, there has been a very strong correlation between local election success for the LibDems and national success. And - given that the bulk of LibDem council seat losses have been in places where they do not currently have MPs - this should make (ohhh... 30 to 35 of them) feel rather more comfortable about retaining their seats than the numbers bandied around by @Paul_Mid_Beds and @TCPoliticalBetting
Got a few bets in mind for the race. Rather annoyed at myself I didn't back Williams to top sore (30 prior to qualifying). Still, if we got to bet after we know how things turn out it'd be rather easier.
I also agree that PMB has a good point. UKIP voters are fairly evenly spread and in safe seats for either side may reduce majorities, but combined with the drop in LD voting paradoxically may mean that a four party system most benefits the two main parties.
One thing that perhaps deserves a bit more attention is that the precipitous fall in libdem vote since 2010 is causing unwinding of the "bias" that the electoral system gives Labour.
If you put C 36. Lab 33 LD 9 into Electoral calculus, that gives Conservatives 308 seats, one more than in 2010 and 18 short of majority.
in 2010 it was C37, Lab 29.5 and LD 23.5
So the collapse in Lib Dem votes means that despite the 2010 gap of 6.5% between Lab and Tory falling to 3%, Torys get more seats, labours gains being pretty well exclusively at Lib expense. Had Libdem vote stayed at 23.5 then labour would have "won" with 35 short of majority.
18 short of majority is really 16 short of majority because SF don't sit.
A result of C36, L31, LD9, a fall of 1% for torys on 2010 and a rise of 1.5% for labour on their 2010 performance (not an improbable scenario) would leave Tories 6 short of majority (4 short once SF not attendance not factored in. Therefore a coalition with the DUPs 8 MPs gives Conservative a majority of 6 (11 once SF factored in).
For illustration, if Torys and Labour get identical vote share to 2010 in 2015 and lib fall to 9%, this gives overall Tory majority of 24.
The rise of the Lib Dems is therefore a large factor in the "bias" towards Labour in the electoral system.
The lib dem collapse makes it far easier for the conservatives to win in 2015 than it was in 2010.
Additionally if the Tory vote is depressed without affecting seat numbers by UKIP piling up votes in safe Tory seats, will we be talking about the bias towards the Tory party in the electoral system after 2015?
Excellent post. Refreshing to see people finally discussing that a collapsed Lib Dem vote means the Tories need nothing like a 7% lead to retain largest seat share and probably can cobble a majority on a five point lead. Lib Dem incumbency is a thing of the past. And yep, the rise of UKIP in the urban North and safe Tory South might just reset the clock.
Given that neither the Conservatives or Labour appear to have impressed the voters as a good option, surely 'squeezing' smaller party supporters is likely to be unsuccessful, so UKIP may well be able to convert more of their local election wins into Westminster MPs than expected.
Given that all four parties will have support of significant proportions of the community, I suggest the model for 2015 will be 1983, when the SDP/Lib Alliance made very few gains.
It’s also pretty clear that even though the LD’s have sustained the Tories in government, there’s little or no sign of “grateful” Tories in such places as Burnley switching to them.
Many of the doubts being expressed about Ed Miliband today were being put forward re-Ted Heath back in 1969. Heath lagged further behind Wilson than Ed does in relation to Cameron.
And he went on to prove he was a woeful leader and PM. Hopefully the UK will not make the same mistake again
Only have the Ladbrokes markets up. Will wait a little while to see if they emerge, but I might well watch the BBC highlights and give a bit more time for them to get going.
If you backed Massa at 9 or 10, each way, (pre- and post-practice respectively) to be winner without Hamilton/Rosberg respectively then you may wish to consider laying him for a podium. That'd cover you, and it's also possible (if he's fourth) that both could come off.
Given that all four parties will have support of significant proportions of the community, I suggest the model for 2015 will be 1983, when the SDP/Lib Alliance made very few gains.
It’s also pretty clear that even though the LD’s have sustained the Tories in government, there’s little or no sign of “grateful” Tories in such places as Burnley switching to them.
As far as Burnley goes that is not in fact true . They only managed to field 5 candidates this year for the 15 seats and only got 5% of the vote .
Got a few bets in mind for the race. Rather annoyed at myself I didn't back Williams to top sore (30 prior to qualifying). Still, if we got to bet after we know how things turn out it'd be rather easier.
Sorry MD, I am going to have to aftertime that one...
21 Jun 14 / 11:55 Single 1 Austrian F1 Grand Prix - Winning Constructor - Race – Winning Constructor - Race Williams @ 20/1
Ah, another in the hilarious series of articles that included the 'Downfall of Rangers: why it's bad for the Yes campaign', and 'The White Paper: why it's bad for the Yes campaign'.
It's a pity this place is so utterly irrelevant to the referendum, there would be quite a few Yes votes in the bag if anyone in Scotland read PB at peak bollocks.
Was there really one on the effect on Rangers (which ones?)? Or is that a joke? No point in finding it again (there is no search function) but I'd be interested to know the underlying logic of the argument, please. But you might want to send that as a PM because we don't want to set off another fitba and politics row.
I'd prefer the top score bet, though. Winning has a premium, so (to me) that'd make more sense but your bet's still looking quite tasty and should be eminently layable (if you go for hedging).
I suspect Williams will lack the race pace, but I thought they'd lack qualifying pace too, so perhaps I'm wrong.
Got about six bets I'll consider once Ladbrokes puts them up and Betfair gets going.
Many of the doubts being expressed about Ed Miliband today were being put forward re-Ted Heath back in 1969. Heath lagged further behind Wilson than Ed does in relation to Cameron.
And he went on to prove he was a woeful leader and PM. Hopefully the UK will not make the same mistake again
He was a very unlucky leader, and, apparently, difficult to get along with. How can you be that and a successful yachtsman? It was the “sulk” which really turned people generally against him, but that was later.
My feeling at the moment is that Mercedes will retain dominance but Williams will be in a clear best of the rest position. Williams have tended to start well, so I'd guess Massa will retain the lead off the line. They could actually help Hamilton, if Rosberg has difficulty passing the Williams (a bit like Hulkenberg helped Ricciardo in Canada, but preventing Vettel from making progress).
Alonso's tricky to call. Could be anything from a podium to sliding down the order inexorably.
Edited extra bit: off for a bit. Will watch the highlights, let the markets warm up and see if anything leaps out this evening.
Ah, another in the hilarious series of articles that included the 'Downfall of Rangers: why it's bad for the Yes campaign', and 'The White Paper: why it's bad for the Yes campaign'.
It's a pity this place is so utterly irrelevant to the referendum, there would be quite a few Yes votes in the bag if anyone in Scotland read PB at peak bollocks.
Was there really one on the effect on Rangers (which ones?)? Or is that a joke? No point in finding it again (there is no search function) but I'd be interested to know the underlying logic of the argument, please. But you might want to send that as a PM because we don't want to set off another fitba and politics row.
I paraphrased the title, but it was certainly a joke, albeit of the unconscious variety.
'Has Rangers Football Club just made Alex Salmonds job harder?'
"A worrying number of shy and book smart children are being labelled as 'mentally ill' by doctors who are under pressure from parents to give them a diagnosis according to a top psychiatrist. [Snip]
‘ADHD makes a great excuse,’ Dr Saul said in his book, ‘ADHD does not exist: The truth about Attention Deficit and Hyperactivity Disorder.’ ‘The diagnosis can be an easy-to-reach-for crutch.
Mail online.
Child Tax Credits, Disabled Child Element, £3,015 per year (in addtion to child and family tax credit elements) - hmrc
"I have heard that I may be able to get a benefit because my child has ADHD and is taking X. Am I right and who would I contact to find out? Thanks ANSWER: Your child may be eligible for the Disability Living Allowance (DLA)...If your child receives DLA at the middle or higher rate you will then be able to claim a Carers Allowance." http://www.disability-grants.org/benefits-for-adhd.html
Ah, another in the hilarious series of articles that included the 'Downfall of Rangers: why it's bad for the Yes campaign', and 'The White Paper: why it's bad for the Yes campaign'.
It's a pity this place is so utterly irrelevant to the referendum, there would be quite a few Yes votes in the bag if anyone in Scotland read PB at peak bollocks.
Was there really one on the effect on Rangers (which ones?)? Or is that a joke? No point in finding it again (there is no search function) but I'd be interested to know the underlying logic of the argument, please. But you might want to send that as a PM because we don't want to set off another fitba and politics row.
I paraphrased the title, but it was certainly a joke, albeit of the unconscious variety.
'Has Rangers Football Club just made Alex Salmonds job harder?'
Ah! Thank you. An interesting notion, for which the underlying requirement of a move south of the border has not yet come to pass, but for which I can see some other factors applying. Which I won't go into here. (Partly because they may already have been aired, for Vanilla is not letting me see the comments yet, so I'll just have to try again another time.)
"A worrying number of shy and book smart children are being labelled as 'mentally ill' by doctors who are under pressure from parents to give them a diagnosis according to a top psychiatrist.
Professor Sir Simon Wessely, the new head of the Royal College of Psychiatrists says that there is a growing trend of medicating normal traits in children by the insistence of overbearing parents.
Pushy parents are getting GPs to prescribe drugs such as Ritalin and Prozac to treat serious disorders creating a huge rise in antidepressants and drug use among young children.
Along with mental health diagnosis, one of the most commonly medicated disorders is attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).
If a child is seen as being overactive, but does not necessarily have ADHD, he could be prescribed drugs, Professor Wessely said.
He told The Times: 'Certain behaviour carry stigma and there's less stigma if it's associated with a disorder. Often it's about the avoidance of guilt.
Around three to seven per cent of children, or 400,000, are believed to have ADHD in the UK, with many being prescribed drugs to try and improve their concentration at school.
According to recent figures, the use of ADHD drugs has tripled over the past decade and antidepressants usage has shot up too.
Professor Wessely said that it is becoming less common for children to be labelled as 'shy' but they are more likely to be branded as having a social phobia or a behavioural problem.
And even schools are benefitting from mislabelling pupils, says Professor Wessely, as the more special needs children in a school, the more funds they'll get.
However, some experts claim that many disorders have no merit at all, and are in fact, made up.
Paediatric neurologist Dr Richard Saul, based in Chicago, believes that ADHD simply ‘doesn’t exist’ and is being used as a mask for less serious problems. Dr Saul argues that children are being misdiagnosed.
‘ADHD makes a great excuse,’ Dr Saul said in his book, ‘ADHD does not exist: The truth about Attention Deficit and Hyperactivity Disorder.’ ‘The diagnosis can be an easy-to-reach-for crutch.
Mail online.
Mhhhh I have 2 ADHD children and the oldest one was a huge handful when he was younger.
We didn't go down the medication route but I know people that have and I can fully understand why some people do that.
@Mark_J_Harper: I got my owl! Meeting Monty, a European eagle owl, in a topical encounter at the Great Oaks Hospice fete in Coleford. http://t.co/n6F7br6tgl
I really can't get excited about a sporting event where the government has spent millions to fund it, yet the people who live there subsist in squalor and deprivation, with drugs on every street corner, alcoholism and prostitution are rife and the life expectancy is shockingly low.
But enough about the Commonwealth Games, Argentina v Iran has started.
I really can't get excited about a sporting event where the government has spent millions to fund it, yet the people who live there subsist in squalor and deprivation, with drugs on every street corner, alcoholism and prostitution are rife and the life expectancy is shockingly low.
But enough about the Commonwealth Games, Argentina v Iran has started.
"In an essay for Prospect, the president of YouGov, Peter Kellner, writes that there would be a "startling" improvement in Labour's fortunes if David Miliband were leader. The former foreign secretary scores 35% support as the best person for prime minister, 12 points ahead of his brother. A change of leader would see David Cameron's score crash from 33% to 23%.
One MP said: "I like Ed a lot. He is a really nice guy. But he has not managed to get a hearing from the British people. His ratings have been bad since day one and he has not managed to improve them. In fact, they are getting worse.""
"In an essay for Prospect, the president of YouGov, Peter Kellner, writes that there would be a "startling" improvement in Labour's fortunes if David Miliband were leader. The former foreign secretary scores 35% support as the best person for prime minister, 12 points ahead of his brother. A change of leader would see David Cameron's score crash from 33% to 23%.
One MP said: "I like Ed a lot. He is a really nice guy. But he has not managed to get a hearing from the British people. His ratings have been bad since day one and he has not managed to improve them. In fact, they are getting worse.""
Of course the Liberals might make a minor comeback in 2020 if their trouncing helps them to extricate the poison of SDP from the party. Michael Meadowcroft is clearly a continuity Liberal sleeper agent.
There are of course other opportunities over the summer for Scottish patriotism to fuse with nationalism in a rather more positive way
The 'launch' of HMS Queen Elizabeth on 4 July is a notable counter-example, as a symbol of things that won't happen in an independent Scotland. The emotional impact of anything to do with shipbuilding is not to be underestimated.
Comments
IIRC much more marked than, say, cardiologists
You are right that the Lord Ashcroft polling was encouraging for the LibDems - and (assuming basically all seats where Labour are the main opposition are lost) would suggest 30-35 seats as a good baseline for the party.
However, I think you have recognise that while you'll almost certainly have that level of representation if you get 14% at the general, I suspect that between 14% and 9%, there'd be a precipitous drop in seats. And this is simply because parties can't go below zero votes in a seat; a vote lost at 11% in the polls in inevitably going to have to come from a strong LibDem seat, not a weak one.
Below 10 or 11% in the polls, there is a real danger of LibDempocalypse.
That being said, over the last 20 years, there has been a very strong correlation between local election success for the LibDems and national success. And - given that the bulk of LibDem council seat losses have been in places where they do not currently have MPs - this should make (ohhh... 30 to 35 of them) feel rather more comfortable about retaining their seats than the numbers bandied around by @Paul_Mid_Beds and @TCPoliticalBetting
Got a few bets in mind for the race. Rather annoyed at myself I didn't back Williams to top sore (30 prior to qualifying). Still, if we got to bet after we know how things turn out it'd be rather easier.
http://survation.com/ukip-won-in-8-westminster-constituencies-last-thursday/
http://www.fabians.org.uk/election-2014-the-numbers/
It’s also pretty clear that even though the LD’s have sustained the Tories in government, there’s little or no sign of “grateful” Tories in such places as Burnley switching to them.
If you backed Massa at 9 or 10, each way, (pre- and post-practice respectively) to be winner without Hamilton/Rosberg respectively then you may wish to consider laying him for a podium. That'd cover you, and it's also possible (if he's fourth) that both could come off.
21 Jun 14 / 11:55 Single 1 Austrian F1 Grand Prix - Winning Constructor - Race – Winning Constructor - Race Williams @ 20/1
I'd prefer the top score bet, though. Winning has a premium, so (to me) that'd make more sense but your bet's still looking quite tasty and should be eminently layable (if you go for hedging).
I suspect Williams will lack the race pace, but I thought they'd lack qualifying pace too, so perhaps I'm wrong.
Got about six bets I'll consider once Ladbrokes puts them up and Betfair gets going.
My feeling at the moment is that Mercedes will retain dominance but Williams will be in a clear best of the rest position. Williams have tended to start well, so I'd guess Massa will retain the lead off the line. They could actually help Hamilton, if Rosberg has difficulty passing the Williams (a bit like Hulkenberg helped Ricciardo in Canada, but preventing Vettel from making progress).
Alonso's tricky to call. Could be anything from a podium to sliding down the order inexorably.
Edited extra bit: off for a bit. Will watch the highlights, let the markets warm up and see if anything leaps out this evening.
'Has Rangers Football Club just made Alex Salmonds job harder?'
http://tinyurl.com/ns7r8j2
Daily Mail "Parent of a child with ADHD? Have a free car under £1.5bn taxpayer-funded scheme" http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2046924/Parent-child-ADHD-Have-free-car-1-5bn-taxpayer-funded-scheme.html
BBC- "Unscrupulous parents seek ADHD diagnosis for benefits" http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-12359070
"I have heard that I may be able to get a benefit because my child has ADHD and is taking X.
Am I right and who would I contact to find out? Thanks
ANSWER:
Your child may be eligible for the Disability Living Allowance (DLA)...If your child receives DLA at the middle or higher rate you will then be able to claim a Carers Allowance."
http://www.disability-grants.org/benefits-for-adhd.html
FOLLOW THE MONEY.
We didn't go down the medication route but I know people that have and I can fully understand why some people do that.
So where's the rest of them...
But enough about the Commonwealth Games, Argentina v Iran has started.
Have a nice game!
The 'launch' of HMS Queen Elizabeth on 4 July is a notable counter-example, as a symbol of things that won't happen in an independent Scotland. The emotional impact of anything to do with shipbuilding is not to be underestimated.