Serial devaluation and inflation is not the route to prosperity as Britain demonstrated in the sixties and seventies. Structural reform and sound money are the foundations of growth. The return of Iberia to growth will happen, and this time it will be more sustainable.
Spain and Portugal are not due to recover to pre-crisis employment levels for another two decades. The growth you are talking about is a piddling fraction of what they've lost. This is entirely because they can't devalue and can't have expansive monetary policy.
The Euro-groups have now been finalised, for those that are interested:
• European People’s Party 221 MEPs (29.43%) • Socialist & Democrats (Lab in the UK) 191 MEPs (25.43%) • European Conservatives & Reformists (Con) 68 MEPs (9.05%) • Alliance of Liberals & Democrats (LD) 66 MEPs (8.79%) • GUE/NGL (Green Left) 52 MEPs (6.92%) • Greens/EFA (UK Greens) 50 MEPs (6.66%) • Europe of Freedom & Direct Democracy (UKIP) 48 MEPs (6.39%) • Non-aligned 54 MEPs (7.19%)
The non-aligned group includes the Front National and Wilders in the Netherlands, who failed to get another allies to form a formal group (which means they don't get group funding and research staff).
The Eamonn Bates consultancy (to whom I'm indebted for the above figures) add:
As for the jobs, it now seems clear that the European Council will accept the Parliament’s nominee for president of the European Commission when they decide this formally next week in Strasbourg. The EPP’s candidate Jean-Claude Juncker appears to have stitched up the support he needs to win the vote and is headed for an office in the Berlaymont.
In return, the outgoing president of the Parliament, the socialist Martin Schulz, and the leader of the liberals, Guy Verhofstadt will each get a two-and-a-half year term as president of the European Parliament. Both were, of course, their political group’s candidate for the Commission presidency.
@FalseFlag It's hard for me to "target" anyone. To do that properly, you need money, and the media to spin your line. The poor are more often spun against than spinning against. (to paraphrase) This is what politics is about, control of people while suggesting to them it is what they want, and blaming someone else when it all goes nipples up. As I have said before, we all have an equal voice, but money and power buys you a pretty good sound system to let your point be heard.
Interest rates will be around 2.5%, this is apparently because the old normal is not the same as the new normal. (and by extension Carney knows all about the new normal). On the plus side he is not overly worried about house prices till after 2017. I may be being slightly cynical here, but an awful lot has been put off till after the next election?
I heard Carney on R4 this morning just after 8. He is worth listening to. Getting him to be governor was one of the smartest things that Osborne has done.
What I understood from him was that going forward we are going to have a financial system that is much better capitalised. The cost of that extra capitalisation will be passed on to borrowers making borrowing relatively more expensive (the banks will require higher margins) with the result that the level of interest rates for a "normal" supply of credit will be lower than in the past. It does not mean that the mortgage rate will be significantly lower than it might have been with the old "normal" of 5%, it just means the composition of the ultimate cost has changed.
Carney was clear that we are going to have a slow and gradual increase in rates to this new normal over a period of years to 2017. The slowness recognised that the recovery has a long way to go and households in particular are still over borrowed and vulnerable to increases in rates.
Recovery from the collapse of 2008 and the chronic misjudgements that led to it is not a done deal, not by a long chalk. But we do seem to be on the right road.
Entirely agree with you about Carney, David.
The light hand on the tiller, careful manipulation of market expectations through regular public statements and open policy making; and, the deployment of the multi-tool box of regulatory measures given back to the bank by George is proving to a major contributor to our economic recovery.
Sad though that a dim Labour MP on the Treasury Committee can get his (albeit witty) news soundbite on TV to undermine the Guv's performance. If the MP hadn't been male he would certainly have described Carney as "hot, hot, hot".
He has to be given a concesion with other EU appointments - a win because he was never going to stop Junker anyway so was not conceding anything in return.
That was my initial take on it but he still seems to be planning on sending the only person he's sacked for incompetence during his entire term in office, who obviously can't be given an important job.
Maybe they're still planning on sending Hague or somebody and want to make it a surprise.
Interest rates will be around 2.5%, this is apparently because the old normal is not the same as the new normal. (and by extension Carney knows all about the new normal). On the plus side he is not overly worried about house prices till after 2017. I may be being slightly cynical here, but an awful lot has been put off till after the next election?
I heard Carney on R4 this morning just after 8. He is worth listening to. Getting him to be governor was one of the smartest things that Osborne has done.
What I understood from him was that going forward we are going to have a financial system that is much better capitalised. The cost of that extra capitalisation will be passed on to borrowers making borrowing relatively more expensive (the banks will require higher margins) with the result that the level of interest rates for a "normal" supply of credit will be lower than in the past. It does not mean that the mortgage rate will be significantly lower than it might have been with the old "normal" of 5%, it just means the composition of the ultimate cost has changed.
Carney was clear that we are going to have a slow and gradual increase in rates to this new normal over a period of years to 2017. The slowness recognised that the recovery has a long way to go and households in particular are still over borrowed and vulnerable to increases in rates.
Recovery from the collapse of 2008 and the chronic misjudgements that led to it is not a done deal, not by a long chalk. But we do seem to be on the right road.
Entirely agree with you about Carney, David.
The light hand on the tiller, careful manipulation of market expectations through regular public statements and open policy making; and, the deployment of the multi-tool box of regulatory measures given back to the bank by George is proving to a major contributor to our economic recovery.
Sad though that a dim Labour MP on the Treasury Committee can get his (albeit witty) news soundbite on TV to undermine his performance. If he hadn't been male he would certainly have described Carney as "hot, hot, hot".
In fairness the whole forward guidance thing has not been Carney's finest hour. Even this morning he was a bit all over the place on it but much, much better on the big picture stuff. As someone who has been forecasting the first, modest, rise in base rates in Q4 of this year for over a year now my main priority is to guard against smugness.
Juncker elected, Cameron goes on the warpath, brings forward referendum to May 2015 (somehow) to be held on GE day. UKIP become utterly irrelevant at the 2015 GE, Con Majority, We leave the EU.
On topic if Cameron stops Juncker, this would be the greatest British performance in Europe since the 2005 champions league final The Battle of Waterloo.
If Cameron fails it will be up there with the Charge of The Light Brigade which was more a statement of intent and morale than anything else.
No more boom and bust then Avery? It will be plain sailing all the way to the promised land? Excuse me while I pick up my guitar and play, just like yesterday, then I get on my knees and pray........I forget the next line.
@TheScreamingEagles Ahh the Charge of the Light Brigade, such history, such gallantry, I wonder what happened to those brave lower ranks after the war? Perhaps some research might be done?
''He has to be given a concession with other EU appointments - a win because he was never going to stop Junker anyway so was not conceding anything in return.''
Cameron would be foolish to criticise the European way of doing business and then be seen to play along with it.
Avery thinks Britain may refuse to underwrite any more Eurozone debt in response to being outvoted.
The Euro-groups have now been finalised, for those that are interested:
• Europe of Freedom & Direct Democracy (UKIP) 48 MEPs (6.39%)
That comprises UKIP (24 MEPs) + Beppo Grillo's Five Star movement (17), plus seven other MEPs (1 Czech, 1 ex-Front National from France, 1 Latvian, and 2 each from Lithuania and Sweden). One of the criteria for having a recognised group (and therefore being on the gravy train) is having MEPs from at least seven countries, which they have thus just fulfilled.
Question: What happens if one of the five micro-parties of just 1 or 2 MEPs withdraws so they no longer cover seven countries - does the grouping then collapse?
@TheScreamingEagles Ahh the Charge of the Light Brigade, such history, such gallantry, I wonder what happened to those brave lower ranks after the war? Perhaps some research might be done?
As an expert on the Charge of The Light Brigade, it was doomed because of too much wooly thinking.
I mean it was The 7th Earl of Cardigan at the Battle of Balaclava.
No more boom and bust then Avery? It will be plain sailing all the way to the promised land? Excuse me while I pick up my guitar and play, just like yesterday, then I get on my knees and pray........I forget the next line.
What ALP seems to be saying is that the nations growth is being held back by the household consumer - seems a far cry from claims the recovery was due to credit card spending and housing bubbles.
On topic if Cameron stops Juncker, this would be the greatest British performance in Europe since the 2005 champions league final The Battle of Waterloo.
If Cameron fails it will be up there with the Charge of The Light Brigade which was more a statement of intent and morale than anything else.
Didn't the Charge of The Light Brigade end up beneficial as it scared/impressed the Russians about British bravery?
On topic if Cameron stops Juncker, this would be the greatest British performance in Europe since the 2005 champions league final The Battle of Waterloo.
If Cameron fails it will be up there with the Charge of The Light Brigade which was more a statement of intent and morale than anything else.
Didn't the Charge of The Light Brigade end up beneficial as it scared/impressed the Russians about British bravery?
James Cook @BBCJamesCook 19m Ed Miliband: Juncker's appointment would represent a "total failure to deliver and an utter humiliation" for David Cameron.
Strange man to be defending.
Surely it would be better to just let the Tories bang on about Europe.
On topic if Cameron stops Juncker, this would be the greatest British performance in Europe since the 2005 champions league final The Battle of Waterloo.
If Cameron fails it will be up there with the Charge of The Light Brigade which was more a statement of intent and morale than anything else.
Didn't the Charge of The Light Brigade end up beneficial as it scared/impressed the Russians about British bravery?
Yup.
Not very bright, sometimes, the Russian aristocracy!
"Some 52 per cent of households, or 13.8 million families, received more in benefits and public services than they contributed in taxes last year, according to the Office for National Statistics.
In 1977, just 40 per cent of households took more than they contributed, rising to 44 per cent in 2000.
It peaked at 53.5 per cent in 2010, as a result of rising unemployment that turned thousands of workers into welfare recipients. Nevertheless, it has remained at above 50 per cent for every year of the Coalition, despite a drive by ministers to cut public spending and rein in the welfare bill.
The figures showed a marginal increase on last year’s."
This is why growth and surging employment is not bringing the deficit down. Far too many of the new jobs cost the state more than having people unemployed because in work benefits are so generous.
Unless we can get back to something like the figures in 2000 with 56% of us being net contributors to the pot we will not eliminate the deficit. The changes that are needed to achieve that are massive and will be hugely unpopular.
The cuts in the upper limits for WTC, the means testing of CB and the other trimming at the edges has not reduced the number of net recipients below 50% once in this Parliament. It needs to be done and it is going to hurt.
@TheScreamingEagles Ahh the Charge of the Light Brigade, such history, such gallantry, I wonder what happened to those brave lower ranks after the war? Perhaps some research might be done?
The same that has happened to soldiers after every war right up the present day.
James Cook @BBCJamesCook 19m Ed Miliband: Juncker's appointment would represent a "total failure to deliver and an utter humiliation" for David Cameron.
Strange man to be defending.
Surely it would be better to just let the Tories bang on about Europe.
Considering he agrees with Cameron that Juncker is a mistake, it would look utterly hypocritical if Miliband now has a go at Cameron over it. The parties are all united, so this is a defeat for Britain. It's particularly unpatriotic to turn that to turn that to partisan advantage.
@TheScreamingEagles Ahh the Charge of the Light Brigade, such history, such gallantry, I wonder what happened to those brave lower ranks after the war? Perhaps some research might be done?
As an expert on the Charge of The Light Brigade, it was doomed because of too much wooly thinking.
I mean it was The 7th Earl of Cardigan at the Battle of Balaclava.
Is TGOHF not our in-house expert? After all he was there wasn't he?
@TheScreamingEagles Ahh the Charge of the Light Brigade, such history, such gallantry, I wonder what happened to those brave lower ranks after the war? Perhaps some research might be done?
As an expert on the Charge of The Light Brigade, it was doomed because of too much wooly thinking.
I mean it was The 7th Earl of Cardigan at the Battle of Balaclava.
Is TGOHF not our in-house expert? After all he was there wasn't he?
Have actually been re-reading the Flashman novels back to back from the start in chronological order as kindle were offering the 12 pack for a silly price. Haven't got to "at the charge" yet -
Labour NEC elections- members sections. CLPs nominations
Ann Black (Centre-Left Grassroots Alliance, CLGA) 220 Johanna Baxter (Indy) 162 Ken Livington (CLGA) 131 Peter Willsman (CLGA) 116 Ellie Reeves (Labour First) 115 Christine Shawcroft (CLGA) 113 Kate Osamor (CLGA) 96 Luke Akehust (Labour First) 94 Peter Wheeler (Labour First) 92 Kevin Peel (Progress) 84 Darren Williams (CLGA) 76 Florence Nosegbe (Labour First) 49 Crispin Flintoff (Indy) 37
In the PLP/EPLP section, Margaret Beckett is re-elected unopposed for the female quota. John Healey is challenging incumbents Dennis Skinner and Steve Rotherham for the 2 other seats.
One nice thing about the latest Populus is that the sample seems to be fairly correctly stratified - so not much need for weighting (Always a good point in a poll)
Weightings from raw:
+8 Con +4 Lab
Superb - correction to within less than 1% on Lab and 2% on Con.
LD/UKIP... +21 LD - Fair enough not as good as Lab/Con though
-129 UKIP OH..
Spot the odd weighting out...
The thing about the UKIP POpulus weighting is that EVERY SINGLE Populus Poll has a huge downweighting for UKIP - I think it needs som, but I question the value of the UKIP projection from Populus as much as from TNS-BRMB's 23% (Which is reasonably close to Populus unweighted)
James Cook @BBCJamesCook 19m Ed Miliband: Juncker's appointment would represent a "total failure to deliver and an utter humiliation" for David Cameron.
Strange man to be defending.
Surely it would be better to just let the Tories bang on about Europe.
Considering he agrees with Cameron that Juncker is a mistake, it would look utterly hypocritical if Miliband now has a go at Cameron over it. The parties are all united, so this is a defeat for Britain. It's particularly unpatriotic to turn that to turn that to partisan advantage.
The Euro-groups have now been finalised, for those that are interested:
• Europe of Freedom & Direct Democracy (UKIP) 48 MEPs (6.39%)
That comprises UKIP (24 MEPs) + Beppo Grillo's Five Star movement (17), plus seven other MEPs (1 Czech, 1 ex-Front National from France, 1 Latvian, and 2 each from Lithuania and Sweden). One of the criteria for having a recognised group (and therefore being on the gravy train) is having MEPs from at least seven countries, which they have thus just fulfilled.
Question: What happens if one of the five micro-parties of just 1 or 2 MEPs withdraws so they no longer cover seven countries - does the grouping then collapse?
I think so, though I'd guess it's only reviewed once a year as each session starts rather than on a daily basis.
Belatedly answering your earlier post on polls - you were right and I was wrong about Merkel being doomed on the basis of midterm polls: she caught up very nicely. You'd I think accept that the UK polls at the moment can't really be called mid-term. We're so used to staring hypnotised at the daily polls that we tend to miss the point that polls don't usually move much unless a major event catches public attention.
I've listed the "coming major poll-moving events" from time to time, and the list is getting short. What's left is:
* Scottish referendum (even if it's a No, seems bound to do something drastic to vote shares in Scotland, though we don't know what)
* Party conferences (usually feature bounces but turn out a wash in the end)
* Manifestos and pre-election budget promises (electorate tends to be scpetical of all parties at that point)
* The campaign itself (rarely shifts much between the main parties), including the leader debates if they happen.
* UKIP (listed separately since I think they have a potential to rise or fall sharply depending on events)
And that's about it, isn't it? There's a potential for a substantial swing in there, but I wouldn't call it the most probable outcome, given the limited movement after lots of previous eye-catching events and economic changes.
We are of course using the term "won" in the sense that people are now talking about the Iraq war. The treaty of Paris left a lot to be desired, so eventually everything kicked off again. Still? War can be profitable if you have the right connections?
Cameron will look weak over Juncker but as a Ukipper I'm not sure this is good news for us. OK it confirms that reform and influence is out of the question but in way that might strengthen tory eurosceptics.
Yes, his disagreement with Lord Raglan over blame was only ever going to end one way. A common feature of British "adventures" of the period it would seem?
@TheScreamingEagles Ahh the Charge of the Light Brigade, such history, such gallantry, I wonder what happened to those brave lower ranks after the war? Perhaps some research might be done?
As an expert on the Charge of The Light Brigade, it was doomed because of too much wooly thinking.
I mean it was The 7th Earl of Cardigan at the Battle of Balaclava.
Is TGOHF not our in-house expert? After all he was there wasn't he?
Have actually been re-reading the Flashman novels back to back from the start in chronological order as kindle were offering the 12 pack for a silly price. Haven't got to "at the charge" yet -
The research that went into the early ones in particular was outstanding. My recollection is that he contrived to be involved in the charge of the heavy brigade, the thin red line and the charge of the light brigade, all of which occurred on 25th October 1854.
"Some 52 per cent of households, or 13.8 million families, received more in benefits and public services than they contributed in taxes last year, according to the Office for National Statistics.
In 1977, just 40 per cent of households took more than they contributed, rising to 44 per cent in 2000.
It peaked at 53.5 per cent in 2010, as a result of rising unemployment that turned thousands of workers into welfare recipients. Nevertheless, it has remained at above 50 per cent for every year of the Coalition, despite a drive by ministers to cut public spending and rein in the welfare bill.
The figures showed a marginal increase on last year’s."
This is why growth and surging employment is not bringing the deficit down. Far too many of the new jobs cost the state more than having people unemployed because in work benefits are so generous.
Unless we can get back to something like the figures in 2000 with 56% of us being net contributors to the pot we will not eliminate the deficit. The changes that are needed to achieve that are massive and will be hugely unpopular.
The cuts in the upper limits for WTC, the means testing of CB and the other trimming at the edges has not reduced the number of net recipients below 50% once in this Parliament. It needs to be done and it is going to hurt.
Well, I am glad someone else noticed what is probably the most significant story of the day, far more important than the row over some Eurocrat.
Another issue that will have to be picked up after the election. Tax rises for the "Squeezed middle" must be on the cards regardless of who gets in
Off topic but as Avery is around - what should we make of Ukraine now signing the arrangement with the EU, which is what Putin and his gang were so desperate to avoid?
OK, he's got Crimea and continues to stir up trouble in the East, but has Vlad emerged as the ultimate loser?
John
I don't think that Putin thought he could stop the Ukraine government from entering into an EU Trade deal and this will already have been discounted in Russian policy. There may have been a time when stopping the agreement was a policy goal but the intervening year has ended that.
One surprise on the upside is that Russia has been stating in public its support for the concept of a pan-European EU which stretches from Lisbon to Vladivostok. It was always thought that this would be Russia's preference but they have never expressed it officially before. Basically what Putin is doing is putting an alternative negotiating route to divide and rule on the diplomatic table.
As to short term responses to the EU Trade Deal, the Russian response is mostly in place No more energy supplies on credit and at below world prices. As far as Putin is concerned the EU can now pick up the tab. Already the first tranche of EU financial support has been earmarked to pay the current due payment of $1.95 bn on past supplies.
For the Kiev government to succeed it will need to control the whole territory of the Ukraine and this it doesn't do and won't do until there is a political settlement with the East and South. I don't see major military incursions by Russian forces (the situation would need to have deteriorated into open civil conflict before that might happen) and Moscow will continue to make "peace-brokering" statements in public while covertly destabilising Kiev's government in Russian leaning territories.
What is happening is massive emigration to Russia from the East of Ukraine (currently Russia is claiming over 54,000 "refugees". Business emigration will follow next as almost all of the East Ukraine's customer base for its heavy industries lies to the east of their border. Russia will accelerate import substitution measures and factory buyout and transfer measures.
So Putin's response, unless provoked by civil war or over-aggressive Western response, will simply be to make the Ukraine ungovernable, to undermine its industry and to strangle it with high energy prices, forcing the EU to pay the bills.
Whether such tactics take either Russia or the EU in the right strategic direction is probably not even questionable.
The ray of hope lies in Moscow's new 'commitment' to wider and deeper co-operation with the EU. Watch where the diplomats travel next is my 'Kremlinology' advice. If today's EU Trade Agreement is a stepping stone across the Dnieper all well and good. It the stone is being used as a missile to fire at Moscow all this will only end in tears.
The question here is how Cameron responds to this huge snub to not just him, but all four UK parties and the great British public. Will he just take the voting defeat lying down, or will he see the "consequences" he promised through. The obvious answer is to put a serious eurosceptic up for Commissioner. Liam Fox perhaps? Whoever it is, we need someone who is seriously willing to leave the EU if they continue to refuse to listen.
We can't impose our own President on the EU. The choice is always going to disappoint someone. We've lost out on this one. There's a critical mass behind Juncker ad as OGH said in much of the EU these parliamentary elections were about determining the next President. It's not completely undemocratic whether you like Juncker or not.
@TheScreamingEagles Ahh the Charge of the Light Brigade, such history, such gallantry, I wonder what happened to those brave lower ranks after the war? Perhaps some research might be done?
As an expert on the Charge of The Light Brigade, it was doomed because of too much wooly thinking.
I mean it was The 7th Earl of Cardigan at the Battle of Balaclava.
Is TGOHF not our in-house expert? After all he was there wasn't he?
Have actually been re-reading the Flashman novels back to back from the start in chronological order as kindle were offering the 12 pack for a silly price. Haven't got to "at the charge" yet -
The research that went into the early ones in particular was outstanding. My recollection is that he contrived to be involved in the charge of the heavy brigade, the thin red line and the charge of the light brigade, all of which occurred on 25th October 1854.
The language is deliciously un PC - a single chapter would knock 10 years off YAB or Harriet...
Lord Ashcroft @LordAshcroft 55s Please register at http://lordashcroftpolls.com to receive next week my research on the LibDem/Labour marginal seats battleground .
@TheScreamingEagles Ahh the Charge of the Light Brigade, such history, such gallantry, I wonder what happened to those brave lower ranks after the war? Perhaps some research might be done?
As an expert on the Charge of The Light Brigade, it was doomed because of too much wooly thinking.
I mean it was The 7th Earl of Cardigan at the Battle of Balaclava.
Is TGOHF not our in-house expert? After all he was there wasn't he?
Have actually been re-reading the Flashman novels back to back from the start in chronological order as kindle were offering the 12 pack for a silly price. Haven't got to "at the charge" yet -
The research that went into the early ones in particular was outstanding. My recollection is that he contrived to be involved in the charge of the heavy brigade, the thin red line and the charge of the light brigade, all of which occurred on 25th October 1854.
The language is deliciously un PC - a single chapter would knock 10 years off YAB or Harriet...
This is why growth and surging employment is not bringing the deficit down. Far too many of the new jobs cost the state more than having people unemployed because in work benefits are so generous.
Unless we can get back to something like the figures in 2000 with 56% of us being net contributors to the pot we will not eliminate the deficit. The changes that are needed to achieve that are massive and will be hugely unpopular.
The cuts in the upper limits for WTC, the means testing of CB and the other trimming at the edges has not reduced the number of net recipients below 50% once in this Parliament. It needs to be done and it is going to hurt.
Gordon Brown's gambit to get the middle classes addicted to benefits is still in effect. In work benefits should all be canned, Osborne had the opportunity back in 2010, he should have taken an axe to the working tax credit and child tax credit and transformed them into a higher tax free allowance (up to £10k overnight) and additional allowances for each child of £5000 (extra annual income of £1000 per year). People keeping more of their own money rather than it being taxed and given back to them through a series of complicated means tests and bureaucracy. Part of the reason the coalition have failed to fully benefit from the higher tax free allowance is because of working tax benefit withdrawal as people have higher take home pay. It's why the Tories didn't really want to bother with it in the first place as the political gain was calculated as not worth it.
Giving people who work tax credits makes absolutely no sense, it would be better to have a higher minimum wage and a higher tax free threshold. Any lost tax income or economic slowdown from a higher minimum wage would easily be made up for through the savings in canning the in work credits system.
As ever, neither Dave not George were bold enough to go through with such a plan. While the middle classes remain addicted to their Brownies the Tories will always find it tough. It's why Labour tend to better on personal income despite being way, way behind when it comes to the national outlook. That disconnect exists because people are used to higher taxes and then receiving benefits. The Tories have done nothing to reverse the addiction to benefits that exists in the working population (Housing, WTC and CTC). The Tories need to be the party of low tax. They should campaign on a significantly higher minimum wage and a £15k tax free allowance paid for by eliminating in work benefits. Our social security system is not a safety net any more and that needs to be addressed as a matter of urgency.
On topic if Cameron stops Juncker, this would be the greatest British performance in Europe since the 2005 champions league final The Battle of Waterloo.
If Cameron fails it will be up there with the Charge of The Light Brigade which was more a statement of intent and morale than anything else.
I am sure you should fitting in Napoleon Brandy for Breakfast in there somewhere.
I can make an educated guess where the cuts are going to hit the hardest, can you?
My expectation is that those who are earning above average earnings but receiving WTC and associated benefits such as HB will find their entitlements severely curtailed. I would not be too surprised if the cap is left where it is in real terms too gradually catching more and more people.
But I also expect taxes to rise. This is not an either or situation. We need to do both as soon as the economy is strong enough to handle it.
We'll see any Junker/Coulson effect in next week's polls - remember it always takes a little while for news to filter in, echo around and be absorbed by the general population.
@DavidL You would think that would be the way to go, especially with George's planned saving on social security. I think however he will load it where he loaded it before.
@DavidL You would think that would be the way to go, especially with George's planned saving on social security. I think however he will load it where he loaded it before.
The country spends upwards of £35bn per year on giving money to people who work in the form of tax credits, and then another £15bn in housing benefits. That is not sustainable. Social security is supposed to be a safety net, Gordon Brown cynically turned it into a way of life, even for the middle classes.
The people in receipt of these benefits and credits are usually on middle income. It is not necessary for them to have their lifestyle funded by the tax payer.
I don't think that Putin thought he could stop the Ukraine government from entering into an EU Trade deal and this will already have been discounted in Russian policy. There may have been a time when stopping the agreement was a policy goal but the intervening year has ended that.
One surprise on the upside is that Russia has been stating in public its support for the concept of a pan-European EU which stretches from Lisbon to Vladivostok. It was always thought that this would be Russia's preference but they have never expressed it officially before. Basically what Putin is doing is putting an alternative negotiating route to divide and rule on the diplomatic table.
As to short term responses to the EU Trade Deal, the Russian response is mostly in place No more energy supplies on credit and at below world prices. As far as Putin is concerned the EU can now pick up the tab. Already the first tranche of EU financial support has been earmarked to pay the current due payment of $1.95 bn on past supplies.
For the Kiev government to succeed it will need to control the whole territory of the Ukraine and this it doesn't do and won't do until there is a political settlement with the East and South. I don't see major military incursions by Russian forces (the situation would need to have deteriorated into open civil conflict before that might happen) and Moscow will continue to make "peace-brokering" statements in public while covertly destabilising Kiev's government in Russian leaning territories.
What is happening is massive emigration to Russia from the East of Ukraine (currently Russia is claiming over 54,000 "refugees". Business emigration will follow next as almost all of the East Ukraine's customer base for its heavy industries lies to the east of their border. Russia will accelerate import substitution measures and factory buyout and transfer measures.
So Putin's response, unless provoked by civil war or over-aggressive Western response, will simply be to make the Ukraine ungovernable, to undermine its industry and to strangle it with high energy prices, forcing the EU to pay the bills.
Whether such tactics take either Russia or the EU in the right strategic direction is probably not even questionable.
The ray of hope lies in Moscow's new 'commitment' to wider and deeper co-operation with the EU. Watch where the diplomats travel next is my 'Kremlinology' advice. If today's EU Trade Agreement is a stepping stone across the Dnieper all well and good. It the stone is being used as a missile to fire at Moscow all this will only end in tears.
Avery, Goodness that was one heck of a response and a most convincing one too (though you do have just a bit of a soft spot for Vlad, don't you). Many thanks.
I can make an educated guess where the cuts are going to hit the hardest, can you?
My expectation is that those who are earning above average earnings but receiving WTC and associated benefits such as HB will find their entitlements severely curtailed. I would not be too surprised if the cap is left where it is in real terms too gradually catching more and more people.
But I also expect taxes to rise. This is not an either or situation. We need to do both as soon as the economy is strong enough to handle it.
I think you are right, Mr. L.. It will be done by stealth and fiddling around the edges. What is actually needed is something far more radical on the lines suggested by Mr. PB up-thread but more so and accompanied by a good look at what the Government does as opposed what it needs to do. That should have happened in 2010 and been implemented from 2011 onwards but the coalition bottled it.
At some point an administration is going to be forced to take the necessary action, the can cannot be kicked further down the road for ever.
Lord Ashcroft @LordAshcroft 55s Please register at http://lordashcroftpolls.com to receive next week my research on the LibDem/Labour marginal seats battleground .
Hmm Hopefully not too many forgone conclusions (Sheffield Central Lab Hold etc) in there.
Brent & Manchester Withington will be in there and will show Labour gains..
Bermondsey, Leeds NW and Hallam should be in there - deep into yellow territory -
I was disappointed not to see Torbay in the Con/Lib Marginals. But I revised my view on it slightly in light of the polls (Good for Sanders I reckon). I suspect the 8-11 wouldn't be available if it was actually polled given the Lib Dems strength in urban SW.
@DavidL You would think that would be the way to go, especially with George's planned saving on social security. I think however he will load it where he loaded it before.
The country spends upwards of £35bn per year on giving money to people who work in the form of tax credits, and then another £15bn in housing benefits. That is not sustainable. Social security is supposed to be a safety net, Gordon Brown cynically turned it into a way of life, even for the middle classes.
The people in receipt of these benefits and credits are usually on middle income. It is not necessary for them to have their lifestyle funded by the tax payer.
Is the plan not to freeze/sub inflation rise them then hack away from the bottom by raising the tax allowance ?
@DavidL You would think that would be the way to go, especially with George's planned saving on social security. I think however he will load it where he loaded it before.
The country spends upwards of £35bn per year on giving money to people who work in the form of tax credits, and then another £15bn in housing benefits. That is not sustainable. Social security is supposed to be a safety net, Gordon Brown cynically turned it into a way of life, even for the middle classes.
The people in receipt of these benefits and credits are usually on middle income. It is not necessary for them to have their lifestyle funded by the tax payer.
Bang on. A chapo on the radio who earnt £50k down south came on yesterday and although he didn't have much sympathy from some other people on the radio he had a problem in that he had PLANNED for his Child Benefit financially speaking to continue. That is the big problem with middle-high earning benefit programs, people plan round it as part of their regular income, so they may be overcommitted on rental/mortgage when they are taken away.
@DavidL You would think that would be the way to go, especially with George's planned saving on social security. I think however he will load it where he loaded it before.
The country spends upwards of £35bn per year on giving money to people who work in the form of tax credits, and then another £15bn in housing benefits. That is not sustainable. Social security is supposed to be a safety net, Gordon Brown cynically turned it into a way of life, even for the middle classes.
The people in receipt of these benefits and credits are usually on middle income. It is not necessary for them to have their lifestyle funded by the tax payer.
Is the plan not to freeze/sub inflation rise them then hack away from the bottom by raising the tax allowance ?
Timidly erase rather than cut ?
The state has a national deficit of £100bn, we cannot afford to go down the softly, softly route. If the economic situation worsens at any point in the next five years the country will be absolutely defenceless against the markets. We have almost exhausted our monetary stimulus capacity and our indebtedness is approaching critical levels. The government must fix the roof while the sun is shining and that means they need to stop giving money to people who are in work, rather let them keep more of their own money with higher allowances. The savings would be immense as it removes swathes of expensive bureaucracy.
We can't afford the NHS, benefits, the army,social services etc, as the poor don't earn enough to keep the wealthy in the style they are accustomed to. The government should only fund the basic necessities. I would suggest extra police and riot control gear to keep your money and property safe.
We can't afford the NHS, benefits, the army,social services etc, as the poor don't earn enough to keep the wealthy in the style they are accustomed to. The government should only fund the basic necessities. I would suggest extra police and riot control gear to keep your money and property safe.
Classic lefty argument. Please explain to me why the government should give money to people who already work? Make businesses pay higher wages and have lower general taxation, the government should not be subsidising corporations in that manner, that is crony capitalism or corporatism at best or corporate welfare at worst. The working tax credit allows corporations to get away with paying employees less and showing higher profits, funded by the state. Explain to me, as someone who is left of centre, why this is good for the country?
We're not talking about people who are unemployed or unable to work for other reasons. These are people who have jobs and have their wages topped up by the government because the company they work for don't pay them enough to live on.
The question here is how Cameron responds to this huge snub to not just him, but all four UK parties and the great British public. Will he just take the voting defeat lying down, or will he see the "consequences" he promised through. The obvious answer is to put a serious eurosceptic up for Commissioner. Liam Fox perhaps? Whoever it is, we need someone who is seriously willing to leave the EU if they continue to refuse to listen.
We can't impose our own President on the EU. The choice is always going to disappoint someone. We've lost out on this one. There's a critical mass behind Juncker ad as OGH said in much of the EU these parliamentary elections were about determining the next President. It's not completely undemocratic whether you like Juncker or not.
They certainly weren't about this from the perspective of the votes. Virtually no-one even knew who Juncker was. You can't claim he's been chosen by the voters when the voters have never heard of him.
You're right that we can't impose our own president, but we can have a consensus president that is acceptable to all as long as everyone compromises a bit. But the Parliament is refusing to do that. It's saying "our way or the high way, and screw British concerns". You say "we've lost out on this one" as if we win on other ones. But that never happens. The UK just gets screwed time and time again. The only time we even get anything our way is if it happens to coincide with what Germany wants.
Well if the EU isn't going to compromise with us, we shouldn't be forced to compromise with them, against our interest. Let's put a proper eurosceptic in the Commission who can start saying our view at every meeting.
@TheScreamingEagles Ahh the Charge of the Light Brigade, such history, such gallantry, I wonder what happened to those brave lower ranks after the war? Perhaps some research might be done?
As an expert on the Charge of The Light Brigade, it was doomed because of too much wooly thinking.
I mean it was The 7th Earl of Cardigan at the Battle of Balaclava.
Is TGOHF not our in-house expert? After all he was there wasn't he?
Have actually been re-reading the Flashman novels back to back from the start in chronological order as kindle were offering the 12 pack for a silly price. Haven't got to "at the charge" yet -
The research that went into the early ones in particular was outstanding. My recollection is that he contrived to be involved in the charge of the heavy brigade, the thin red line and the charge of the light brigade, all of which occurred on 25th October 1854.
Flashman books range from very good to superb. At the Charge and the Great Game are two particular favourites. Not only did Flashy participate in all the events of Balaclava, he did so while recovering from dysentery (or was it cholera?), hence his bowels being in even more of an uproar than normal.
He gained even more phony lustre by being the only member of the Light Brigade to charge beyond the battery (completely by mistake, natch).
The portion of the book dealing with Yakub Beg and the Silk One opened my eyes to a whole new area of history - part of the reason I loved GMF so much.
@DavidL You would think that would be the way to go, especially with George's planned saving on social security. I think however he will load it where he loaded it before.
The country spends upwards of £35bn per year on giving money to people who work in the form of tax credits, and then another £15bn in housing benefits. That is not sustainable. Social security is supposed to be a safety net, Gordon Brown cynically turned it into a way of life, even for the middle classes.
The people in receipt of these benefits and credits are usually on middle income. It is not necessary for them to have their lifestyle funded by the tax payer.
Bang on. A chapo on the radio who earnt £50k down south came on yesterday and although he didn't have much sympathy from some other people on the radio he had a problem in that he had PLANNED for his Child Benefit financially speaking to continue. That is the big problem with middle-high earning benefit programs, people plan round it as part of their regular income, so they may be overcommitted on rental/mortgage when they are taken away.
The mere concept of rewarding people for having sex and producing offspring is ludicrous. Tax breaks for marriage are ludicrous. State funded lifestyle is ludicrous. Wealthy middle class people with two cars, a house and all the kit and caboodle of the modern world holding out the begging bowl to the State and drooling 'gimme more, for I have loins' is disgusting. Labours great trick was convincing well-fed, comfortable people that they are poor and need a crutch from the State. Teach them thrift, teach them industriousness, teach them to value the pound in their pocket.
@MaxPB I don't believe in it either, but despite Avery's "yellow boxes" Osbourne's economic "miracle" depends on it, along with rising asset prices. Welcome to Carney's new normal.
@DavidL You would think that would be the way to go, especially with George's planned saving on social security. I think however he will load it where he loaded it before.
The country spends upwards of £35bn per year on giving money to people who work in the form of tax credits, and then another £15bn in housing benefits. That is not sustainable. Social security is supposed to be a safety net, Gordon Brown cynically turned it into a way of life, even for the middle classes.
The people in receipt of these benefits and credits are usually on middle income. It is not necessary for them to have their lifestyle funded by the tax payer.
Bang on. A chapo on the radio who earnt £50k down south came on yesterday and although he didn't have much sympathy from some other people on the radio he had a problem in that he had PLANNED for his Child Benefit financially speaking to continue. That is the big problem with middle-high earning benefit programs, people plan round it as part of their regular income, so they may be overcommitted on rental/mortgage when they are taken away.
The mere concept of rewarding people for having sex and producing offspring is ludicrous. Tax breaks for marriage are ludicrous. State funded lifestyle is ludicrous. Wealthy middle class people with two cars, a house and all the kit and caboodle of the modern world holding out the begging bowl to the State and drooling 'gimme more, for I have loins' is disgusting. Labours great trick was convincing well-fed, comfortable people that they are poor and need a crutch from the State. Teach them thrift, teach them industriousness, teach them to value the pound in their pocket.
Oh I don't disagree. Just saying it was the fact the benefits were given out in the first place that was a huge mistake.
Avery, Goodness that was one heck of a response and a most convincing one too (though you do have just a bit of a soft spot for Vlad, don't you). Many thanks.
I am not sure about the "soft spot for Vlad", John.
It is a question I am always being asked by my former Russian counterparts and generally I avoid commitment.
The problem with the question is that it acts as a virility test (support for Putin confirms you are a real man, a "muzhik") or a test of one's feminine side (opposition confirms you are a sensitive fellow, or a dangerous intellectual and enemy of the state).
I started by supporting Putin when asked by Russian men and opposing him when asked by Russian girls. I have to report that my returns on this investment of guile did not vindicatte the strategy. Even reversing it yielded no better results.
I certainly believe that Putin has been a successful Russian leader, returning power from the oligarchs and corrupt intermediate government (e.g. Luzkhov in Moscow) to the centre and leading Russia to a strong (if 'all eggs in one basket' risky) economy. Putin also fulfills Russian need (or fantasy?) for a strong hand ("сильная рука") in control.
My reservations are that Russia is at its best when the "muzhik" is mixed with the music, the masculine with the feminine, the army and the arts. I guess I shall just have to wait for that nirvana or even moksha!
@DavidL You would think that would be the way to go, especially with George's planned saving on social security. I think however he will load it where he loaded it before.
The country spends upwards of £35bn per year on giving money to people who work in the form of tax credits, and then another £15bn in housing benefits. That is not sustainable. Social security is supposed to be a safety net, Gordon Brown cynically turned it into a way of life, even for the middle classes.
The people in receipt of these benefits and credits are usually on middle income. It is not necessary for them to have their lifestyle funded by the tax payer.
Bang on. A chapo on the radio who earnt £50k down south came on yesterday and although he didn't have much sympathy from some other people on the radio he had a problem in that he had PLANNED for his Child Benefit financially speaking to continue. That is the big problem with middle-high earning benefit programs, people plan round it as part of their regular income, so they may be overcommitted on rental/mortgage when they are taken away.
The mere concept of rewarding people for having sex and producing offspring is ludicrous. Tax breaks for marriage are ludicrous. State funded lifestyle is ludicrous. Wealthy middle class people with two cars, a house and all the kit and caboodle of the modern world holding out the begging bowl to the State and drooling 'gimme more, for I have loins' is disgusting. Labours great trick was convincing well-fed, comfortable people that they are poor and need a crutch from the State. Teach them thrift, teach them industriousness, teach them to value the pound in their pocket.
Oh I don't disagree. Just saying it was the fact the benefits were given out in the first place that was a huge mistake.
agreed. A cynical ploy to buy a few more hundred thousand votes, and keep them on the teat.
When we run a deficit then we are by definition spending more than we raise in taxation, hence the net tax take relative to spending is less. It is no surprise therefore that more families are net gainers, and that this will be in the marginal zone. It may well be that deficit spending is the cause as well as the result!
Nonetheless there is a need to gradually repair the benefits and tax system while unemployment and inflation are low. There can be no end of austerity in the next parliament.
@DavidL You would think that would be the way to go, especially with George's planned saving on social security. I think however he will load it where he loaded it before.
The country spends upwards of £35bn per year on giving money to people who work in the form of tax credits, and then another £15bn in housing benefits. That is not sustainable. Social security is supposed to be a safety net, Gordon Brown cynically turned it into a way of life, even for the middle classes.
The people in receipt of these benefits and credits are usually on middle income. It is not necessary for them to have their lifestyle funded by the tax payer.
Is the plan not to freeze/sub inflation rise them then hack away from the bottom by raising the tax allowance ?
Timidly erase rather than cut ?
The state has a national deficit of £100bn, we cannot afford to go down the softly, softly route. If the economic situation worsens at any point in the next five years the country will be absolutely defenceless against the markets. We have almost exhausted our monetary stimulus capacity and our indebtedness is approaching critical levels. The government must fix the roof while the sun is shining and that means they need to stop giving money to people who are in work, rather let them keep more of their own money with higher allowances. The savings would be immense as it removes swathes of expensive bureaucracy.
@DavidL You would think that would be the way to go, especially with George's planned saving on social security. I think however he will load it where he loaded it before.
The country spends upwards of £35bn per year on giving money to people who work in the form of tax credits, and then another £15bn in housing benefits. That is not sustainable. Social security is supposed to be a safety net, Gordon Brown cynically turned it into a way of life, even for the middle classes.
The people in receipt of these benefits and credits are usually on middle income. It is not necessary for them to have their lifestyle funded by the tax payer.
Bang on. A chapo on the radio who earnt £50k down south came on yesterday and although he didn't have much sympathy from some other people on the radio he had a problem in that he had PLANNED for his Child Benefit financially speaking to continue. That is the big problem with middle-high earning benefit programs, people plan round it as part of their regular income, so they may be overcommitted on rental/mortgage when they are taken away.
The mere concept of rewarding people for having sex and producing offspring is ludicrous. Tax breaks for marriage are ludicrous. State funded lifestyle is ludicrous. Wealthy middle class people with two cars, a house and all the kit and caboodle of the modern world holding out the begging bowl to the State and drooling 'gimme more, for I have loins' is disgusting. Labours great trick was convincing well-fed, comfortable people that they are poor and need a crutch from the State. Teach them thrift, teach them industriousness, teach them to value the pound in their pocket.
Oh I don't disagree. Just saying it was the fact the benefits were given out in the first place that was a huge mistake.
You are being naive, it wasn't a mistake but a pre-meditated attempt to get the middle classes hooked in welfare and push them away from the Tories who's instincts are anti-welfare. A very cynical and effective move by Brown to shift the national opinion towards more government instead of less.
BETTING POST: India 5 - 0 England @ 100-1 on the Betfair Sportsbook. Singles Odds Stake Test Series 100/1 £2,525.00 India 5 - 0 Series Correct Score Bet Ref: ------------------
Interesting - I would expect at least one draw given the state of the pitches and/or the English weather (if one doesn't cause a draw, the other one will...) but as part of a 3-0, 4-0, 5-0 combination that looks an attractive bet to me.
The Euro-groups have now been finalised, for those that are interested:
• Europe of Freedom & Direct Democracy (UKIP) 48 MEPs (6.39%)
That comprises UKIP (24 MEPs) + Beppo Grillo's Five Star movement (17), plus seven other MEPs (1 Czech, 1 ex-Front National from France, 1 Latvian, and 2 each from Lithuania and Sweden). One of the criteria for having a recognised group (and therefore being on the gravy train) is having MEPs from at least seven countries, which they have thus just fulfilled.
Question: What happens if one of the five micro-parties of just 1 or 2 MEPs withdraws so they no longer cover seven countries - does the grouping then collapse?
They increase the bribe (sorry, "allocated share of group research budget") until he changes his mind.
The average Populus polls for June (with one to go) show very little movement on the 2010 voters compared with the average over the 2014 polls. So far the only movement more than 1% is all the in 2010LD column. A reduction of 1% in LD to L and LD to UKIP switchers and an increase of 2% in LD to G switchers. Still around 22% don't knows for 2010LDs.
@foxinsoxuk "There can be no end of austerity in the next parliament"
Austerity is bearable if you are getting well above inflation pay rises, and/or your assets are rising at above the GDP rate. Thankfully, those inflation busting rises are countered by those at the bottom getting a real terms pay decrease. I am sure no one will notice though.
James Cook @BBCJamesCook 19m Ed Miliband: Juncker's appointment would represent a "total failure to deliver and an utter humiliation" for David Cameron.
The problem for Ed Milliband with this is that nobody would seriously expect an ardent europhile like him to do any better. At least Cameron is having a row over this - Milliband would just give the EU what it wants without a second thought.
And let's remember this is all happening because of the Lisbon Treaty, negotiated by Blair (who also gave away half of our rebate and got back nothing whatsoever) and signed (by the back door, like the coward he always was) by Brown.
@Socratese In Britain we vote in the main for our existing political parties rather than an EU grouping, the system might be usefully changed in that respect. As for percentage of votes? Under FPT only a limited number of vote make the real difference, for the rest of us the result is more or less a foregone conclusion.
I have criticisms of FPTP, but it's still better than the party stitch-up in a party list system. And it's a hell of a lot better than grouping leaders trying to claim democratic legitimacy from a system where most people had never heard of them or their groupings.
I agree that the party list system is an abomination, designed by and for the elite of the parties and resulting in no-one knowing or caring who their MEP is.
But it is a UK invention - subsidiarity and all that. It is not an EU imposition. In the Irish Republic (and Northern Ireland) they use STV to elect their MEPs. There is fierce competition for name recognition and first preferences between candidates from the same party. Don't blame the party list system on the EU. It is a UK stitch-up.
''But the Parliament is refusing to do that. It's saying "our way or the high way, and screw British concerns".
It's worse than that. The parliament is saying 'we share your concerns but we've been bribed to ignore them'.
Not to worry. History shows that the more isolated we are on Europe, the righter we tend to be in the long run.
Maybe that's what is causing some pause for thought.
I don't think I've ever seen the EU be so blatant in their disregard for us. The entire public vote and political class of this country opposed Juncker, and the EU has responded with "we won't even consider anyone else, so screw you."
James Cook @BBCJamesCook 19m Ed Miliband: Juncker's appointment would represent a "total failure to deliver and an utter humiliation" for David Cameron.
The problem for Ed Milliband with this is that nobody would seriously expect an ardent europhile like him to do any better. At least Cameron is having a row over this - Milliband would just give the EU what it wants without a second thought.
And let's remember this is all happening because of the Lisbon Treaty, negotiated by Blair (who also gave away half of our rebate and got back nothing whatsoever) and signed (by the back door, like the coward he always was) by Brown.
I cannot understand why, given the situation, Milliband expressed an opinion at all re Juncker. There was always a very good chance that Cameron would make a bog of it somehow.
Socrates - why should they agree to what we want? If there's a critical mass in the EU for Juncker then he'll get the post. You can't please everyone. Tough luck.
The question here is how Cameron responds to this huge snub to not just him, but all four UK parties and the great British public. Will he just take the voting defeat lying down, or will he see the "consequences" he promised through. The obvious answer is to put a serious eurosceptic up for Commissioner. Liam Fox perhaps? Whoever it is, we need someone who is seriously willing to leave the EU if they continue to refuse to listen.
We can't impose our own President on the EU. The choice is always going to disappoint someone. We've lost out on this one. There's a critical mass behind Juncker ad as OGH said in much of the EU these parliamentary elections were about determining the next President. It's not completely undemocratic whether you like Juncker or not.
They certainly weren't about this from the perspective of the votes. Virtually no-one even knew who Juncker was. You can't claim he's been chosen by the voters when the voters have never heard of him.
You're right that we can't impose our own president, but we can have a consensus president that is acceptable to all as long as everyone compromises a bit. But the Parliament is refusing to do that. It's saying "our way or the high way, and screw British concerns". You say "we've lost out on this one" as if we win on other ones. But that never happens. The UK just gets screwed time and time again. The only time we even get anything our way is if it happens to coincide with what Germany wants.
Well if the EU isn't going to compromise with us, we shouldn't be forced to compromise with them, against our interest. Let's put a proper eurosceptic in the Commission who can start saying our view at every meeting.
Bingo.. the only point of 'having influence' in the EU is whether we actually have influence or not.
As it stands, even if the UK play good little Europeans, as Blair and Gordon pretty much did, only 'influence' amounts to sweet fa. Did we ever that get that reform of the CAP? Nope..
What's the point of being in a club, when they're only interested in your wallet, and don't want to listen to anything else you want to do?
@TheScreamingEagles Ahh the Charge of the Light Brigade, such history, such gallantry, I wonder what happened to those brave lower ranks after the war? Perhaps some research might be done?
My great x 3 uncle was one of those chaps, came back home enjoyed the army and finished out his time in London.
If you want to know what next read Hell Riders by Terry Brighton.
''But the Parliament is refusing to do that. It's saying "our way or the high way, and screw British concerns".
It's worse than that. The parliament is saying 'we share your concerns but we've been bribed to ignore them'.
Not to worry. History shows that the more isolated we are on Europe, the righter we tend to be in the long run.
Maybe that's what is causing some pause for thought.
I don't think I've ever seen the EU be so blatant in their disregard for us. The entire public vote and political class of this country opposed Juncker, and the EU has responded with "we won't even consider anyone else, so screw you."
Not true, they delayed the whole thing for several weeks to see if there was another candidate who might be a runner. It wouldn't have been anything like the slam-dunk it was if Cameron hadn't out-maneuvered himself and made it impossible for even the people who agreed with him to agree with him.
Socrates - why should they agree to what we want? If there's a critical mass in the EU for Juncker then he'll get the post. You can't please everyone. Tough luck.
I think the point is that we never get what we want, because ultimately the aims and values and direction of travel for the EU is fundamentally at odds with where the UK wants to go, and what it wants to do.
The EU, in very simple terms, wants to be a single country, a United States of Europe, and the UK doesn't.
'The EPP, of course, was the grouping that the UK Conservative party used to belong to. That ended following Cameron becoming Tory leader. ' Cameron did the right thing then in taking the tories out of that group.
Comments
"When the going gets tough, you have to lie."
• European People’s Party 221 MEPs (29.43%)
• Socialist & Democrats (Lab in the UK) 191 MEPs (25.43%)
• European Conservatives & Reformists (Con) 68 MEPs (9.05%)
• Alliance of Liberals & Democrats (LD) 66 MEPs (8.79%)
• GUE/NGL (Green Left) 52 MEPs (6.92%)
• Greens/EFA (UK Greens) 50 MEPs (6.66%)
• Europe of Freedom & Direct Democracy (UKIP) 48 MEPs (6.39%)
• Non-aligned 54 MEPs (7.19%)
The non-aligned group includes the Front National and Wilders in the Netherlands, who failed to get another allies to form a formal group (which means they don't get group funding and research staff).
The Eamonn Bates consultancy (to whom I'm indebted for the above figures) add:
As for the jobs, it now seems clear that the European Council will accept the Parliament’s nominee for president of the European Commission when they decide this formally next week in Strasbourg. The EPP’s candidate Jean-Claude Juncker appears to have stitched up the support he needs to win the vote and is headed for an office in the Berlaymont.
In return, the outgoing president of the Parliament, the socialist Martin Schulz, and the leader of the liberals, Guy Verhofstadt will each get a two-and-a-half year term as president of the European Parliament. Both were, of course, their political group’s candidate for the Commission presidency.
October 2013 Forecast:
Con Maj 57
Hung 15
Lab Maj 28
Con Largest 88%
Lab Largest 12%
___________________
Con 337
Lab 265
LD 21
Current forecast:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Con Maj 29
Hung 49
Lab Maj 22
Con 302
Lab 292
LD 28
Con Largest 55%
Lab Largest 45%
It's hard for me to "target" anyone. To do that properly, you need money, and the media to spin your line.
The poor are more often spun against than spinning against. (to paraphrase)
This is what politics is about, control of people while suggesting to them it is what they want, and blaming someone else when it all goes nipples up.
As I have said before, we all have an equal voice, but money and power buys you a pretty good sound system to let your point be heard.
The light hand on the tiller, careful manipulation of market expectations through regular public statements and open policy making; and, the deployment of the multi-tool box of regulatory measures given back to the bank by George is proving to a major contributor to our economic recovery.
Sad though that a dim Labour MP on the Treasury Committee can get his (albeit witty) news soundbite on TV to undermine the Guv's performance. If the MP hadn't been male he would certainly have described Carney as "hot, hot, hot".
@PopulusPolls: New Populus VI: Lab 35 (-2); Cons 34 (+2); LD 8 (-1); UKIP 13 (=); Oth 10 (+2) Tables http://t.co/2mLWofkrns
So the Tories' group is now the main opposition?
Maybe they're still planning on sending Hague or somebody and want to make it a surprise.
So everyone gets a trough to snout in.
UKIP become utterly irrelevant at the 2015 GE, Con Majority, We leave the EU.
As Radiohead would say 'Nice Dream'
It took him almost a month since the crossover to show his face again on PB.
Now he is condemned to giving Basil mouth to mouth resuscitation. As Suarez might have said: "a hazelnut in every bite".
If Cameron fails it will be up there with the Charge of The Light Brigade which was more a statement of intent and morale than anything else.
No more boom and bust then Avery? It will be plain sailing all the way to the promised land?
Excuse me while I pick up my guitar and play, just like yesterday, then I get on my knees and pray........I forget the next line.
6 weeks of Ed on the telly every day next spring - it's going to be a giggle.
Ahh the Charge of the Light Brigade, such history, such gallantry, I wonder what happened to those brave lower ranks after the war?
Perhaps some research might be done?
Cameron would be foolish to criticise the European way of doing business and then be seen to play along with it.
Avery thinks Britain may refuse to underwrite any more Eurozone debt in response to being outvoted.
Question: What happens if one of the five micro-parties of just 1 or 2 MEPs withdraws so they no longer cover seven countries - does the grouping then collapse?
I mean it was The 7th Earl of Cardigan at the Battle of Balaclava.
Ed Miliband: Juncker's appointment would represent a "total failure to deliver and an utter humiliation" for David Cameron.
Strange man to be defending.
Surely it would be better to just let the Tories bang on about Europe.
Were any of the commanders punished for "wooly thinking"?
telegraph.co.uk/sport/tennis/wimbledon/10929321/Wimbledon-women-forced-to-go-bra-less-due-to-all-white-rule-clampdown.html
I am wondering if the discovery of islamic militancy (DaiSIS?') in Wales might alter the complexion of politics in the principality at all.
UKIP did reasonably well in Wales in the euros, if I remember rightly.
It says:
"Some 52 per cent of households, or 13.8 million families, received more in benefits and public services than they contributed in taxes last year, according to the Office for National Statistics.
In 1977, just 40 per cent of households took more than they contributed, rising to 44 per cent in 2000.
It peaked at 53.5 per cent in 2010, as a result of rising unemployment that turned thousands of workers into welfare recipients.
Nevertheless, it has remained at above 50 per cent for every year of the Coalition, despite a drive by ministers to cut public spending and rein in the welfare bill.
The figures showed a marginal increase on last year’s."
This is why growth and surging employment is not bringing the deficit down. Far too many of the new jobs cost the state more than having people unemployed because in work benefits are so generous.
Unless we can get back to something like the figures in 2000 with 56% of us being net contributors to the pot we will not eliminate the deficit. The changes that are needed to achieve that are massive and will be hugely unpopular.
The cuts in the upper limits for WTC, the means testing of CB and the other trimming at the edges has not reduced the number of net recipients below 50% once in this Parliament. It needs to be done and it is going to hurt.
http://www.populus.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Online_VI_27-06-2014_BPC.pdf
http://www.populus.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/130715-Online-Voting-Intention.pdf
I believe it would collapse yes. Though in all likelihood they would find some other independent to join - there's enough about.
Who "won" the war?
He did however make the rank of Field Marshall before his death, so it turned out ok for him personally?
Ann Black (Centre-Left Grassroots Alliance, CLGA) 220
Johanna Baxter (Indy) 162
Ken Livington (CLGA) 131
Peter Willsman (CLGA) 116
Ellie Reeves (Labour First) 115
Christine Shawcroft (CLGA) 113
Kate Osamor (CLGA) 96
Luke Akehust (Labour First) 94
Peter Wheeler (Labour First) 92
Kevin Peel (Progress) 84
Darren Williams (CLGA) 76
Florence Nosegbe (Labour First) 49
Crispin Flintoff (Indy) 37
In the PLP/EPLP section, Margaret Beckett is re-elected unopposed for the female quota. John Healey is challenging incumbents Dennis Skinner and Steve Rotherham for the 2 other seats.
He was pretty much condemned/ostracised in the period after The Charge and before his death.
Weightings from raw:
+8 Con
+4 Lab
Superb - correction to within less than 1% on Lab and 2% on Con.
LD/UKIP...
+21 LD - Fair enough not as good as Lab/Con though
-129 UKIP OH..
Spot the odd weighting out...
The thing about the UKIP POpulus weighting is that EVERY SINGLE Populus Poll has a huge downweighting for UKIP - I think it needs som, but I question the value of the UKIP projection from Populus as much as from TNS-BRMB's 23% (Which is reasonably close to Populus unweighted)
Phone polls much better for UKIP.
/cough syria cough/
Belatedly answering your earlier post on polls - you were right and I was wrong about Merkel being doomed on the basis of midterm polls: she caught up very nicely. You'd I think accept that the UK polls at the moment can't really be called mid-term. We're so used to staring hypnotised at the daily polls that we tend to miss the point that polls don't usually move much unless a major event catches public attention.
I've listed the "coming major poll-moving events" from time to time, and the list is getting short. What's left is:
* Scottish referendum (even if it's a No, seems bound to do something drastic to vote shares in Scotland, though we don't know what)
* Party conferences (usually feature bounces but turn out a wash in the end)
* Manifestos and pre-election budget promises (electorate tends to be scpetical of all parties at that point)
* The campaign itself (rarely shifts much between the main parties), including the leader debates if they happen.
* UKIP (listed separately since I think they have a potential to rise or fall sharply depending on events)
And that's about it, isn't it? There's a potential for a substantial swing in there, but I wouldn't call it the most probable outcome, given the limited movement after lots of previous eye-catching events and economic changes.
We are of course using the term "won" in the sense that people are now talking about the Iraq war. The treaty of Paris left a lot to be desired, so eventually everything kicked off again.
Still? War can be profitable if you have the right connections?
Yes, his disagreement with Lord Raglan over blame was only ever going to end one way.
A common feature of British "adventures" of the period it would seem?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/germany/10929864/David-Camerons-big-mistake-Trusting-Angela-Merkel-the-black-widow.html
Another issue that will have to be picked up after the election. Tax rises for the "Squeezed middle" must be on the cards regardless of who gets in
I don't think that Putin thought he could stop the Ukraine government from entering into an EU Trade deal and this will already have been discounted in Russian policy. There may have been a time when stopping the agreement was a policy goal but the intervening year has ended that.
One surprise on the upside is that Russia has been stating in public its support for the concept of a pan-European EU which stretches from Lisbon to Vladivostok. It was always thought that this would be Russia's preference but they have never expressed it officially before. Basically what Putin is doing is putting an alternative negotiating route to divide and rule on the diplomatic table.
As to short term responses to the EU Trade Deal, the Russian response is mostly in place No more energy supplies on credit and at below world prices. As far as Putin is concerned the EU can now pick up the tab. Already the first tranche of EU financial support has been earmarked to pay the current due payment of $1.95 bn on past supplies.
For the Kiev government to succeed it will need to control the whole territory of the Ukraine and this it doesn't do and won't do until there is a political settlement with the East and South. I don't see major military incursions by Russian forces (the situation would need to have deteriorated into open civil conflict before that might happen) and Moscow will continue to make "peace-brokering" statements in public while covertly destabilising Kiev's government in Russian leaning territories.
What is happening is massive emigration to Russia from the East of Ukraine (currently Russia is claiming over 54,000 "refugees". Business emigration will follow next as almost all of the East Ukraine's customer base for its heavy industries lies to the east of their border. Russia will accelerate import substitution measures and factory buyout and transfer measures.
So Putin's response, unless provoked by civil war or over-aggressive Western response, will simply be to make the Ukraine ungovernable, to undermine its industry and to strangle it with high energy prices, forcing the EU to pay the bills.
Whether such tactics take either Russia or the EU in the right strategic direction is probably not even questionable.
The ray of hope lies in Moscow's new 'commitment' to wider and deeper co-operation with the EU. Watch where the diplomats travel next is my 'Kremlinology' advice. If today's EU Trade Agreement is a stepping stone across the Dnieper all well and good. It the stone is being used as a missile to fire at Moscow all this will only end in tears.
I can make an educated guess where the cuts are going to hit the hardest, can you?
Please register at http://lordashcroftpolls.com to receive next week my research on the LibDem/Labour marginal seats battleground .
Giving people who work tax credits makes absolutely no sense, it would be better to have a higher minimum wage and a higher tax free threshold. Any lost tax income or economic slowdown from a higher minimum wage would easily be made up for through the savings in canning the in work credits system.
As ever, neither Dave not George were bold enough to go through with such a plan. While the middle classes remain addicted to their Brownies the Tories will always find it tough. It's why Labour tend to better on personal income despite being way, way behind when it comes to the national outlook. That disconnect exists because people are used to higher taxes and then receiving benefits. The Tories have done nothing to reverse the addiction to benefits that exists in the working population (Housing, WTC and CTC). The Tories need to be the party of low tax. They should campaign on a significantly higher minimum wage and a £15k tax free allowance paid for by eliminating in work benefits. Our social security system is not a safety net any more and that needs to be addressed as a matter of urgency.
Alot of door knocking in Broxtowe I for-see for you.
But I also expect taxes to rise. This is not an either or situation. We need to do both as soon as the economy is strong enough to handle it.
The Italian defender who shoved his shoulder into Suarez's mouth says the four month ban is excessive.
You would think that would be the way to go, especially with George's planned saving on social security. I think however he will load it where he loaded it before.
The people in receipt of these benefits and credits are usually on middle income. It is not necessary for them to have their lifestyle funded by the tax payer.
At some point an administration is going to be forced to take the necessary action, the can cannot be kicked further down the road for ever.
Brent & Manchester Withington will be in there and will show Labour gains..
Bermondsey, Leeds NW and Hallam should be in there - deep into yellow territory -
I was disappointed not to see Torbay in the Con/Lib Marginals. But I revised my view on it slightly in light of the polls (Good for Sanders I reckon). I suspect the 8-11 wouldn't be available if it was actually polled given the Lib Dems strength in urban SW.
Timidly erase rather than cut ?
That is the big problem with middle-high earning benefit programs, people plan round it as part of their regular income, so they may be overcommitted on rental/mortgage when they are taken away.
The government should only fund the basic necessities.
I would suggest extra police and riot control gear to keep your money and property safe.
We're not talking about people who are unemployed or unable to work for other reasons. These are people who have jobs and have their wages topped up by the government because the company they work for don't pay them enough to live on.
You're right that we can't impose our own president, but we can have a consensus president that is acceptable to all as long as everyone compromises a bit. But the Parliament is refusing to do that. It's saying "our way or the high way, and screw British concerns". You say "we've lost out on this one" as if we win on other ones. But that never happens. The UK just gets screwed time and time again. The only time we even get anything our way is if it happens to coincide with what Germany wants.
Well if the EU isn't going to compromise with us, we shouldn't be forced to compromise with them, against our interest. Let's put a proper eurosceptic in the Commission who can start saying our view at every meeting.
India 5 - 0 England @ 100-1 on the Betfair Sportsbook.
Singles Odds Stake
Test Series
100/1
£2,525.00
India 5 - 0
Series Correct Score
Bet Ref: ------------------
He gained even more phony lustre by being the only member of the Light Brigade to charge beyond the battery (completely by mistake, natch).
The portion of the book dealing with Yakub Beg and the Silk One opened my eyes to a whole new area of history - part of the reason I loved GMF so much.
Labours great trick was convincing well-fed, comfortable people that they are poor and need a crutch from the State.
Teach them thrift, teach them industriousness, teach them to value the pound in their pocket.
I don't believe in it either, but despite Avery's "yellow boxes" Osbourne's economic "miracle" depends on it, along with rising asset prices.
Welcome to Carney's new normal.
It is a question I am always being asked by my former Russian counterparts and generally I avoid commitment.
The problem with the question is that it acts as a virility test (support for Putin confirms you are a real man, a "muzhik") or a test of one's feminine side (opposition confirms you are a sensitive fellow, or a dangerous intellectual and enemy of the state).
I started by supporting Putin when asked by Russian men and opposing him when asked by Russian girls. I have to report that my returns on this investment of guile did not vindicatte the strategy. Even reversing it yielded no better results.
I certainly believe that Putin has been a successful Russian leader, returning power from the oligarchs and corrupt intermediate government (e.g. Luzkhov in Moscow) to the centre and leading Russia to a strong (if 'all eggs in one basket' risky) economy. Putin also fulfills Russian need (or fantasy?) for a strong hand ("сильная рука") in control.
My reservations are that Russia is at its best when the "muzhik" is mixed with the music, the masculine with the feminine, the army and the arts. I guess I shall just have to wait for that nirvana or even moksha!
It's worse than that. The parliament is saying 'we share your concerns but we've been bribed to ignore them'.
Not to worry. History shows that the more isolated we are on Europe, the righter we tend to be in the long run.
Maybe that's what is causing some pause for thought.
Nonetheless there is a need to gradually repair the benefits and tax system while unemployment and inflation are low. There can be no end of austerity in the next parliament.
Red and Purple Liberals becoming Green Liberals?
"There can be no end of austerity in the next parliament"
Austerity is bearable if you are getting well above inflation pay rises, and/or your assets are rising at above the GDP rate.
Thankfully, those inflation busting rises are countered by those at the bottom getting a real terms pay decrease.
I am sure no one will notice though.
And let's remember this is all happening because of the Lisbon Treaty, negotiated by Blair (who also gave away half of our rebate and got back nothing whatsoever) and signed (by the back door, like the coward he always was) by Brown.
But it is a UK invention - subsidiarity and all that. It is not an EU imposition. In the Irish Republic (and Northern Ireland) they use STV to elect their MEPs. There is fierce competition for name recognition and first preferences between candidates from the same party. Don't blame the party list system on the EU. It is a UK stitch-up.
As it stands, even if the UK play good little Europeans, as Blair and Gordon pretty much did, only 'influence' amounts to sweet fa. Did we ever that get that reform of the CAP? Nope..
What's the point of being in a club, when they're only interested in your wallet, and don't want to listen to anything else you want to do?
If you want to know what next read Hell Riders by Terry Brighton.
The EU, in very simple terms, wants to be a single country, a United States of Europe, and the UK doesn't.
Cameron did the right thing then in taking the tories out of that group.