However I can't see why you will vote UKIP in a search for a party with a coherent political dogma, as it is a party that claims to be libertarian while embracing palaeo-conservatives.
Because the other three parties are amoral liberal secluarists. As far as I am concerned this is a Christian country and we have a Monarch who is defender of the faith and I don't like the fact that since the dreaded Roy Jenkins became home secretary both Labour and Tories have undermined this as it presented an obstacle to the persuit of self gratification by the elite.
Yes UKIP had too many golf club tories, but they are broadening towards supporting the lower middle and skilled working class who have been abandoned by the other parties. The fact that Paul Nuttal, a practicing catholic and member of SPUC is their deputy leader speaks volumes.
And of course UKIP are unambigously in favour of leaving the EU - I wouldn't trust Cameron further than I can throw him on his 2017 referendum promise.
Oddly, if I had to vote for any of the other three I would actually vote Liberal because they are the only one of those parties that actually pay heed to the democratic wishes of their members. But if UKIP don't stand in my constituency I will probably write none of the above on the ballot paper - or join them and stand myself :-)
How can you accept someone who is placed there merely by accident of birth as defender of your faith?
Sadly, not actually strictly speaking defender of my faith because I am Catholic, but defender of the faith as in Christianity, and unquestionably a devout Christian.
Why. Because she has been anointed by the Archbishop of Canterbury as Monarch and therefore given that responsibility by God.
And because someone who is heriditary has an incentive to conserve not revolute. If your house was going to go to the treasury, rather than your offspring, when you die would you bother to maintain it in your old age?
And also someone born and trained for the role who is given it rather than wants it will probably do a better job than someone who gets it by cunning, deviousness, political chicanery, croynyism and populism which are the necessary quialifications for an executive president.
How the hell have we engineering a situation where the Conservatives are banging on about Europe again?
Extraordinary.
Because the European Parliament decided to have a huge power grab from national leaders? Do you think the UK should just not raise British concerns because it might help UKIP? Cameron took a moral and decent position here, while your Miliband was particularly craven, suggesting that he would have stopped Juncker through magic.
What do you mean a power grab? It was in the Lisbon treaty.
However I can't see why you will vote UKIP in a search for a party with a coherent political dogma, as it is a party that claims to be libertarian while embracing palaeo-conservatives.
Because the other three parties are amoral liberal secluarists. As far as I am concerned this is a Christian country and we have a Monarch who is defender of the faith and I don't like the fact that since the dreaded Roy Jenkins became home secretary both Labour and Tories have undermined this as it presented an obstacle to the persuit of self gratification by the elite.
Yes UKIP had too many golf club tories, but they are broadening towards supporting the lower middle and skilled working class who have been abandoned by the other parties. The fact that Paul Nuttal, a practicing catholic and member of SPUC is their deputy leader speaks volumes.
And of course UKIP are unambigously in favour of leaving the EU - I wouldn't trust Cameron further than I can throw him on his 2017 referendum promise.
Oddly, if I had to vote for any of the other three I would actually vote Liberal because they are the only one of those parties that actually pay heed to the democratic wishes of their members. But if UKIP don't stand in my constituency I will probably write none of the above on the ballot paper - or join them and stand myself :-)
How can you accept someone who is placed there merely by accident of birth as defender of your faith?
Ah the joys of the Divine right of kings. Egg and sperm, blessed by God himself, creating a leader for his flock
Miliband was particularly craven, suggesting that he would have stopped Juncker through magic.
Miliband's critique of what Cameron has done has been childish and nonsensical. The notion that simply being a bit nicer to certain European leaders would have garnered their support in this matter is not credible. These politicians were bought off and there was nothing cameron or anyone else could have done.
How the hell have we engineering a situation where the Conservatives are banging on about Europe again?
Extraordinary.
The choices are immigration, banksters or the EU so they pick EU.
Get it Sunshine.
Immigration=prosperity EU=prosperity
Virtually all the advanced democracies outside the EU are significantly wealthier than those in the EU: USA, Canada, Norway, Switzerland, Australia, New Zealand etc.
How the hell have we engineering a situation where the Conservatives are banging on about Europe again?
Extraordinary.
Because the European Parliament decided to have a huge power grab from national leaders? Do you think the UK should just not raise British concerns because it might help UKIP? Cameron took a moral and decent position here, while your Miliband was particularly craven, suggesting that he would have stopped Juncker through magic.
What do you mean a power grab? It was in the Lisbon treaty.
No, the Lisbon Treaty said the HoG should 'take account' of the EU Parl view - not delegate the decision to them......
Socrates Some of those yes, although New Zealand has a relatively low gdp per capita, behind France, Germany and the UK. Luxembourg has a higher GDP per capita than all the nations you mentioned
Miliband was particularly craven, suggesting that he would have stopped Juncker through magic.
Miliband's critique of what Cameron has done has been childish and nonsensical. The notion that simply being a bit nicer to certain European leaders would have garnered their support in this matter is not credible.
If you read the Continental press there isn't any doubt that it could have been a lot closer than 26-2, or at least that Cameron could have got some specific concessions in exchange. By the end they just found him embarrassing, and decided that he was just ranting for domestic purposes and there wasn't any point in trying to engage.
''If you read the Continental press there isn't any doubt that it could have been a lot closer than 26-2, or at least that Cameron could have got some specific concessions in exchange.''
So Labour is advocating carrying on with the grubby, backroom, you-scratch-my-back compromises that have created an explosion of fury across Europe in the last euro election, and prompted people in desperation to vote for some pretty undesirable creatures.
Labour, like many others in the political classes, wants to carry on playing a game that electorates all over Europe are starting to call time on.
So does Dave probably, but he has the sense to realise it just won;t do any more.
Socrates Some of those yes, although New Zealand has a relatively low gdp per capita, behind France, Germany and the UK. Luxembourg has a higher GDP per capita than all the nations you mentioned
Pulpstar Exactly
Antifrank Enjoy your travels
New Zealand is one of the laggers in the non-EU bloc, but it is still wealthier than half the western EU: Italy, Spain, Portugal, Malta, etc. Luxembourg is a completely dodgy number because many of the workers contributing to the GDP aren't resident there, so don't count in the "per capita" division.
How the hell have we engineering a situation where the Conservatives are banging on about Europe again?
Extraordinary.
The choices are immigration, banksters or the EU so they pick EU.
The main point was that is if a political party wants to address the current situation they have to pick one of those three: immigration, banksters, EU.
Lab pretends to talk about the banksters Con pretends to talk about the EU Libs don't talk about any Ukip talk about immigration and the EU
How the hell have we engineering a situation where the Conservatives are banging on about Europe again?
Extraordinary.
Because the European Parliament decided to have a huge power grab from national leaders? Do you think the UK should just not raise British concerns because it might help UKIP? Cameron took a moral and decent position here, while your Miliband was particularly craven, suggesting that he would have stopped Juncker through magic.
What do you mean a power grab? It was in the Lisbon treaty.
No, it wasn't. The Lisbon Treaty says the Council should propose the candidate. The Parliament just has approval. What happened was the Parliament announced that it would only approve its favoured candidate, and the Council buckled to them, because, except for the UK and Hungary, they were all cowards.
Socrates Indeed, New Zealand is wealthier than southern Europe, but that is not exactly hard at the moment. Luxembourg may have many commuters, but it is not unknown for New Zealanders to commute to Australia either. Beyond Luxembourg, 2 other EU nations, Sweden and Denmark, also have a higher gdp per capita than most of the Anglosphere at the moment with the exception of Australia
So Labour is advocating carrying on with the grubby, backroom, you-scratch-my-back compromises that have created an explosion of fury across Europe in the last euro election, and prompted people in desperation to vote for some pretty undesirable creatures.
So does Dave probably, but he has the sense to realise it just won;t do any more.
The European election didn't produce an explosion of fury. UKIP and the FN did well. In Italy and Germany, Eurosceptical parties got derisory votes. Overall, there was a very large majority for parties favouring membership - including Britain, unless you reckon the Conservatives now favour withdrawal.
There are two reasonable ways to run an international federation - by negotiation between the components, or by direct election of overall leaders. The latter would be more democratic, but we probably haven't got to that point yet. So we have the former, and for one member to refuse negotiation and go for an ultimatum is just silly, and against our own interest.
On topic, the Electoral Commission might do well to ditch their major / minor party distinction and go for four categories:
Major Party: one which stands a strong chance of forming the next government or being the next main party of opposition.
Secondary Party: one which enjoys substantial support across the country but which is not likely to be in a position to provide either the PM or the Leader of the Opposition, or which is likely to provide a sufficient number of MPs to be a meaningful force in the new parliament.
Minor Party: one which has a national presence but only limited support, or which is not a national party but which stands a reasonable chance of returning at least a modest number of MPs.
Peripheral Party: one of very limited support, either in terms of geographic concentration or total votes.
Coverage to be based on an approximate 5-3-1-0 basis.
You'd have Con & Labour in Cat 1 LD & UKIP in Cat 2 ? Greens, SNP, PC Cat 3 ? Merbyn Kernow, BNP Cat 4 ?
Socrates Indeed, New Zealand is wealthier than southern Europe, but that is not exactly hard at the moment. Luxembourg may have many commuters, but it is not unknown for New Zealanders to commute to Australia either. Beyond Luxembourg, 2 other EU nations, Sweden and Denmark, also have a higher gdp per capita than most of the Anglosphere at the moment with the exception of Australia
Commute: Travel some distance between one’s home and place of work on a regular basis: NZ to Australia approx 925 miles That's some commute, but I guess it depends how regularly.
On topic, the Electoral Commission might do well to ditch their major / minor party distinction and go for four categories:
Major Party: one which stands a strong chance of forming the next government or being the next main party of opposition.
Secondary Party: one which enjoys substantial support across the country but which is not likely to be in a position to provide either the PM or the Leader of the Opposition, or which is likely to provide a sufficient number of MPs to be a meaningful force in the new parliament.
Minor Party: one which has a national presence but only limited support, or which is not a national party but which stands a reasonable chance of returning at least a modest number of MPs.
Peripheral Party: one of very limited support, either in terms of geographic concentration or total votes.
Coverage to be based on an approximate 5-3-1-0 basis.
I see no reason to change the present format.
Correctly UKIP were afforded major party status for the Euro elections and should they achieve a substantial block of MPs next May then it would be perfectly correct for them to enjoy major party status in May 2020.
I'm unsure why we should substantially change the rules just for UKIP. Let them get plenty of bums on seats and then re-evaluate.
We should change the rules to reflect reality. The way things are heading, the Lib Dems are going to be a 'major' party on a single figure vote share and UKIP will be a minor one on double that. That seems inherently wrong. I accept that elections are won on seats not votes but even so, there needs to be more nuance to it than there currently is.
I also think that ideally, the coverage should reflect likely performance at this election, not at the last one. I accept that's not easily done and if we have to err, it's better to err on the cautious side, but again, for UKIP to be ranked below the Lib Dems despite their performance in just about every election and poll for the last two years is little more than establishment bias.
On topic, the Electoral Commission might do well to ditch their major / minor party distinction and go for four categories:
Major Party: one which stands a strong chance of forming the next government or being the next main party of opposition.
Secondary Party: one which enjoys substantial support across the country but which is not likely to be in a position to provide either the PM or the Leader of the Opposition, or which is likely to provide a sufficient number of MPs to be a meaningful force in the new parliament.
Minor Party: one which has a national presence but only limited support, or which is not a national party but which stands a reasonable chance of returning at least a modest number of MPs.
Peripheral Party: one of very limited support, either in terms of geographic concentration or total votes.
Coverage to be based on an approximate 5-3-1-0 basis.
I see no reason to change the present format.
Correctly UKIP were afforded major party status for the Euro elections and should they achieve a substantial block of MPs next May then it would be perfectly correct for them to enjoy major party status in May 2020.
I'm unsure why we should substantially change the rules just for UKIP. Let them get plenty of bums on seats and then re-evaluate.
We should change the rules to reflect reality. The way things are heading, the Lib Dems are going to be a 'major' party on a single figure vote share and UKIP will be a minor one on double that. That seems inherently wrong. I accept that elections are won on seats not votes but even so, there needs to be more nuance to it than there currently is.
Vested interests putting party politics before the public interest is the obvious conclusion
On topic, the Electoral Commission might do well to ditch their major / minor party distinction and go for four categories:
Major Party: one which stands a strong chance of forming the next government or being the next main party of opposition.
Secondary Party: one which enjoys substantial support across the country but which is not likely to be in a position to provide either the PM or the Leader of the Opposition, or which is likely to provide a sufficient number of MPs to be a meaningful force in the new parliament.
Minor Party: one which has a national presence but only limited support, or which is not a national party but which stands a reasonable chance of returning at least a modest number of MPs.
Peripheral Party: one of very limited support, either in terms of geographic concentration or total votes.
Coverage to be based on an approximate 5-3-1-0 basis.
I see no reason to change the present format.
Correctly UKIP were afforded major party status for the Euro elections and should they achieve a substantial block of MPs next May then it would be perfectly correct for them to enjoy major party status in May 2020.
I'm unsure why we should substantially change the rules just for UKIP. Let them get plenty of bums on seats and then re-evaluate.
We should change the rules to reflect reality. The way things are heading, the Lib Dems are going to be a 'major' party on a single figure vote share and UKIP will be a minor one on double that. That seems inherently wrong. I accept that elections are won on seats not votes but even so, there needs to be more nuance to it than there currently is.
We had a referendum remember. General elections ARE NOT decided by national vote shares but by first past the post elections in 650 separate seats.
The highest ever vote share that Ukip has ever achieved in any Westminster seat is 27.8%. Since GE10 five other parties have topped that.
On topic, the Electoral Commission might do well to ditch their major / minor party distinction and go for four categories:
Major Party: one which stands a strong chance of forming the next government or being the next main party of opposition.
Secondary Party: one which enjoys substantial support across the country but which is not likely to be in a position to provide either the PM or the Leader of the Opposition, or which is likely to provide a sufficient number of MPs to be a meaningful force in the new parliament.
Minor Party: one which has a national presence but only limited support, or which is not a national party but which stands a reasonable chance of returning at least a modest number of MPs.
Peripheral Party: one of very limited support, either in terms of geographic concentration or total votes.
Coverage to be based on an approximate 5-3-1-0 basis.
I see no reason to change the present format.
Correctly UKIP were afforded major party status for the Euro elections and should they achieve a substantial block of MPs next May then it would be perfectly correct for them to enjoy major party status in May 2020.
I'm unsure why we should substantially change the rules just for UKIP. Let them get plenty of bums on seats and then re-evaluate.
We should change the rules to reflect reality. The way things are heading, the Lib Dems are going to be a 'major' party on a single figure vote share and UKIP will be a minor one on double that. That seems inherently wrong. I accept that elections are won on seats not votes but even so, there needs to be more nuance to it than there currently is.
It also needs to be more able to react to shifts between elections. UKIP were barely even a minor party in 2010, but they're a major one today. Any system so based on the last GE results is going to have problems with sudden shifts in the political landscape.
Nick Palmer Well how do you explain Front National coming top in France, or the Peoples' Party in Denmark, as well as UKIP in the UK. In Sweden and Finland and Greece the Swedish Democrats and True Finns and Golden Dawn did well, Hungary's ruling party romped home (their PM Cameron's only ally), even in Germany the AfD overtook the FDP on a voteshare that would win it seats in the Bundestag, and of course in Italy Beppe Grillo has joined the EFD, UKIP's block. The Christian Democrat/Social Democrat block has a clear majority, but it was reduced and Hungary's ruling party is in the EPP and Labour, who opposed Juncker, in the PES, diminishing federalism's MEPs even further
Nick Clegg still draws relatively more support from students than the rest of the population despite the anger on campuses across Britain after the government sharply increased university tuition fees from 2012.
A poll by Populus for the Financial Times has found that Mr Clegg’s party, the Liberal Democrats, are still backed by 13.4 per cent of UK students – much higher than their national support of 8.8 per cent.
More broadly, the Populus/FT poll shows the Conservatives 2.7 per cent behind Labour – a gap that widened in June from May’s 2.1 per cent. However, when the figures are rounded, they show a generally stable picture this year, with Tory support hovering at 33-34 per cent, Ukip at 13-14 per cent and the Lib Dems at 9-10 per cent. Labour shows a trend of slight decline from 38 per cent in January to 36 per cent in the last three months.
(You need to google "UK students still back Nick Clegg despite tuition fee protest" to get the article for free)
The Populus/FT polling also finds that Labour’s support across the country is coming from a broad coalition of public sector workers, the unemployed, low-paid workers, students and mothers, as well as ethnic minorities.
Among mothers, support for Labour is ahead by 46 per cent compared with 29 per cent for the Tories, according to the opinion poll company.
“Women have been more uncomfortable than men with the cuts and the question of whether the cuts have been carried out fairly,” said Mr Cooper.
The Conservatives are ahead of Labour among pensioners by exactly the same margin of 17 percentage points: by 42 per cent to 25 per cent. That reflects the fact that older people are always more likely to vote for the Conservatives – they even did so in 1997 at the time of Labour’s landslide.
On topic, the Electoral Commission might do well to ditch their major / minor party distinction and go for four categories:
Major Party: one which stands a strong chance of forming the next government or being the next main party of opposition.
Secondary Party: one which enjoys substantial support across the country but which is not likely to be in a position to provide either the PM or the Leader of the Opposition, or which is likely to provide a sufficient number of MPs to be a meaningful force in the new parliament.
Minor Party: one which has a national presence but only limited support, or which is not a national party but which stands a reasonable chance of returning at least a modest number of MPs.
Peripheral Party: one of very limited support, either in terms of geographic concentration or total votes.
Coverage to be based on an approximate 5-3-1-0 basis.
I see no reason to change the present format.
Correctly UKIP were afforded major party status for the Euro elections and should they achieve a substantial block of MPs next May then it would be perfectly correct for them to enjoy major party status in May 2020.
I'm unsure why we should substantially change the rules just for UKIP. Let them get plenty of bums on seats and then re-evaluate.
We should change the rules to reflect reality. The way things are heading, the Lib Dems are going to be a 'major' party on a single figure vote share and UKIP will be a minor one on double that. That seems inherently wrong. I accept that elections are won on seats not votes but even so, there needs to be more nuance to it than there currently is.
We had a referendum remember. General elections ARE NOT decided by national vote shares but by first past the post elections in 650 separate seats.
The highest ever vote share that Ukip has ever achieved in any Westminster seat is 27.8%. Since GE10 five other parties have topped that.
I don't see what the referendum has to do with it. AV wouldn't have changed the requirements significantly (if anything FPTP makes it easier for UKIP).
As it happens, I agree with your point in the leader that a by-election win would make UKIP's case much firmer but that's a political rather than philosophical point.
The TV debates and media coverage *are* national matters, not a series of local ones. Why should any party which is an irrelevance over much of the country (and which may even choose to be so through its campaigning strategy) have the right to national media coverage?
How the hell have we engineering a situation where the Conservatives are banging on about Europe again?
Extraordinary.
The choices are immigration, banksters or the EU so they pick EU.
Get it Sunshine.
Immigration=prosperity EU=prosperity
Where do you get such an extraordinary idea?
Doesn't know any WWC?
If we were in the situation that the USA was in 1900 then the current levels of immigration would make a lot of sense. They had a huge territory that was mostly wilderness with massive potential for farming and able to export food, plenty of land, and plenty of natural resources.
We have one of the most densely populated countries in the world, able to produce only about 60% of our food and having to import energy owing to lack of natural resources. In this situation Immigration is like a tired person taking a sugar and caffeine fix instead of getting some rest.
It gives a short term boost to the economy at the expense of the working class who have to compete for work against incomers and in the longer term exacerbates the problems we already have, especially as nothing has been done to provide the additional infrastructure for the extra people over the last twenty years. Where are the extra schools, hospitals, reservoirs, power stations, new towns, railways and motorways to accomodate them?
Discussions as to whether we are getting the right sort of immigrant come far down the list compared with this.
What did the LDs get of the student vote in 2010? I seem to remember over 40% but my memory might be wrong.
Spinning like a top ^_~ If the Lib Dems are on 13% amongst their most supportive segement of the population their general support is going to be a fair bit lower. Be a bit like finding the CONs "over 30% still" with 65+s.
What did the LDs get of the student vote in 2010? I seem to remember over 40% but my memory might be wrong.
48%
48% of students voted for the Lib Dems on Election Day, compared to 22% voting for each of the other two main parties. (Fieldwork dates: 7 -10 May 2010)
Mr. PB, I have mixed views about DA2, and feel sympathy for Bioware (who were clearly working under the lash of EA with not enough time). There were some upsides. The Qunari were a rare case of retconning improving something, the menus were better (ok, nobody buys a game because of great menus, but it's a drag when they're stodgy like Origins or Dragon's Dogma) and it did set up a great premise for Inquisition.
Can't say for certain before it comes out (sadly over 3 months to go), but it's looking really rather good.
Nick Palmer Well how do you explain Front National coming top in France, or the Peoples' Party in Denmark, as well as UKIP in the UK. In Sweden and Finland and Greece the Swedish Democrats and True Finns and Golden Dawn did well, Hungary's ruling party romped home (their PM Cameron's only ally), even in Germany the AfD overtook the FDP on a voteshare that would win it seats in the Bundestag, and of course in Italy Beppe Grillo has joined the EFD, UKIP's block. The Christian Democrat/Social Democrat block has a clear majority, but it was reduced and Hungary's ruling party is in the EPP and Labour, who opposed Juncker, in the PES, diminishing federalism's MEPs even further
I mentioned the FN. The People's Party is right-wing but not that anti-EU: they're doing well for non-EU reasons. The Swedish, Finnish and German results all produced enormous pro-EU majorities and Grillo's party was comprehensively defeated. I'll give you Hungary!
New Zealand has been the biggest source of migrants to Australia for years. Kiwis do not need visa etc to work there. There are even maori meetinghouses in several Australian cities.
I am old enough to remember the UK brain drain of the seventies, when anyone who wanted to make a better life for themselves left the UK.
Socrates Indeed, New Zealand is wealthier than southern Europe, but that is not exactly hard at the moment. Luxembourg may have many commuters, but it is not unknown for New Zealanders to commute to Australia either. Beyond Luxembourg, 2 other EU nations, Sweden and Denmark, also have a higher gdp per capita than most of the Anglosphere at the moment with the exception of Australia
Commute: Travel some distance between one’s home and place of work on a regular basis: NZ to Australia approx 925 miles That's some commute, but I guess it depends how regularly.
I don't get the long term viability of 'Immigration = prosperity'
For how long? It is a continuous cycle with no logical end always needing more population or immigrants to support the previous record generation who are retired r the kids of the new enlarged working generation.
Learn to live with and prosper with a static or smaller population makes far more sense.
NP Yes you did, apologies. Nonetheless, victories for anti EU parties in 2/3 of the largest EU states + Denmark and shares of 10-20% in states like Italy, Sweden, the Netherlands, Greece etc cannot be ignored and with the AfD also over the 5% threshold taken together that constitutes a block of 1/3 of the European Parliament for anti EU parties if you also include the Tories and Fidesz in Hungary. That is significant and will be clear when the Parliament votes on Juncker, he will clearly win, but with a significantly smaller percentage than he won in the Council of Ministers, ironic considering it was his supporters' argument that it was his huge mandate in the Parliament which meant he had to be chosen
@Paul Mid Beds "Why. Because she has been anointed by the Archbishop of Canterbury as Monarch and therefore given that responsibility by God."
That would apply to any monarch. I don't deny that the Queen has been a good monarch, but she is there, nevertheless, as an accident of birth. If you get rum one, s/he is still appointed defender of your faith. Not the greatest recruitment filter, I'd venture.
How the hell have we engineering a situation where the Conservatives are banging on about Europe again?
Extraordinary.
The choices are immigration, banksters or the EU so they pick EU.
Get it Sunshine.
Immigration=prosperity EU=prosperity
Virtually all the advanced democracies outside the EU are significantly wealthier than those in the EU: USA, Canada, Norway, Switzerland, Australia, New Zealand etc.
I don't get the long term viability of 'Immigration = prosperity'
For how long? It is a continuous cycle with no logical end always needing more population or immigrants to support the previous record generation who are retired r the kids of the new enlarged working generation.
Learn to live with and prosper with a static or smaller population makes far more sense.
Well, I think we need to differentiate between two types of immigration.
Many, perhaps even most, of the Poles who come here, are here because wages are higher than back home. Often, the wife and kids are in Krawkow, and they live in bunks earning cash for six to eight weeks at a time, before heading back home for a couple of weeks. These are the Polish descendents of Auf Wiedersein, Pet. These people are probably net beneficiaries to the government in terms of tax take, but - as isam notes - they do exert downward pressure on wages, particularly for the lesser skilled.
Likewise, American fund managers, Italian derivatives specialists, French engineers, and Spanish lawyers are probably here because that's where the job they're working on right now is. They might stay, they might go, they probably send their kids to private school and get private medical insurance but by-and-large they are not drains on the state (although they certainly bid up house prices).
On the other hand, people who come here from Pakistan or Bangladesh are usually expecting to be here for ever. Home is fucked up, and they want to be somewhere less fucked up. Perfectly understandable. However, these people (unlike the Polish builder) probably will be drawing pensions. And they are much less likely to come with marketable skills (plumbing is definitely a marketable skill). While EU immigrants - as a group - earn slightly above average wages; immigrants without from outside the EU - as a group - earn more than a third less than average - and that's despite the Russians oligarchs and US hedge fund managers pushing the average up.
So Labour is advocating carrying on with the grubby, backroom, you-scratch-my-back compromises that have created an explosion of fury across Europe in the last euro election, and prompted people in desperation to vote for some pretty undesirable creatures.
So does Dave probably, but he has the sense to realise it just won;t do any more.
The European election didn't produce an explosion of fury. UKIP and the FN did well. In Italy and Germany, Eurosceptical parties got derisory votes. Overall, there was a very large majority for parties favouring membership - including Britain, unless you reckon the Conservatives now favour withdrawal.
There are two reasonable ways to run an international federation - by negotiation between the components, or by direct election of overall leaders. The latter would be more democratic, but we probably haven't got to that point yet. So we have the former, and for one member to refuse negotiation and go for an ultimatum is just silly, and against our own interest.
Eurosceptics polled very strongly in Italy. 17 MEPs are now in the EFD.
So Labour is advocating carrying on with the grubby, backroom, you-scratch-my-back compromises that have created an explosion of fury across Europe in the last euro election, and prompted people in desperation to vote for some pretty undesirable creatures.
So does Dave probably, but he has the sense to realise it just won;t do any more.
The European election didn't produce an explosion of fury. UKIP and the FN did well. In Italy and Germany, Eurosceptical parties got derisory votes. Overall, there was a very large majority for parties favouring membership - including Britain, unless you reckon the Conservatives now favour withdrawal.
There are two reasonable ways to run an international federation - by negotiation between the components, or by direct election of overall leaders. The latter would be more democratic, but we probably haven't got to that point yet. So we have the former, and for one member to refuse negotiation and go for an ultimatum is just silly, and against our own interest.
Eurosceptics polled very strongly in Italy. 17 MEPs are now in the EFD.
The Five Star movement believes in common Eurozone bonds, and Beppe Grillo once called for a single European language.
They might be more sceptical than the other major Italian parties, but (like the AfD) they are not sceptical in the FN or UKIP sense.
Socrates Some of those yes, although New Zealand has a relatively low gdp per capita, behind France, Germany and the UK. Luxembourg has a higher GDP per capita than all the nations you mentioned
Pulpstar Exactly
Antifrank Enjoy your travels
New Zealand is one of the laggers in the non-EU bloc, but it is still wealthier than half the western EU: Italy, Spain, Portugal, Malta, etc. Luxembourg is a completely dodgy number because many of the workers contributing to the GDP aren't resident there, so don't count in the "per capita" division.
From what I can see NZ is 30th and the UK 23rd. Spain and Italy are imediatgely behind NZ. Several EU countries are ahead of NZ. Given the varying reasons for the figures I am not sure what they are worth. The USA is a vast continental wide country and internal trading block with significant areas of poverty and a big problem with illegal immigration. Australia is a massive country with massive mineral resources and a relativly small population. Norway is in effect in the EU - it is a large country with a small population and great mineral reserves.
As we don't talk enough about Scotland and electoral reform on PB, here's a story to get us all excited
Plans to restrict the voting rights of Scottish MPs at Westminster have been scrapped after splits emerged in the UK government before September's independence referendum.
Senior sources say the coalition has dropped plans to tackle the so-called West Lothian question because of fears it could fuel Scottish resentment, but also because the Tories and Lib Dems cannot agree on whether voting restrictions on MPs are fair.
Moves to restrict Scottish MPs' votes – by limiting their rights to vote on England-only legislation – have also been fought off by Labour and by senior Lib Dem figures, who plan to increase devolution to major cities and regions within England.
Nick Sutton @suttonnick · 1 min Monday's FT front page - "Germany pledges to keep UK in Europe" #tomorrowspaperstoday #bbcpapers pic.twitter.com/nX08uiLkzW
One might cynically say that the Five Star position is: hey Germany, the Euro's been great for you, what with your 30 year low unemployment, but it's sucked for us. we'd like you to agree to Eurobonds, because that would be good for us, and if you don't agree we'll throw our toys out of the pram and break your precious Euro.
How the hell have we engineering a situation where the Conservatives are banging on about Europe again?
Extraordinary.
The choices are immigration, banksters or the EU so they pick EU.
Get it Sunshine.
Immigration=prosperity EU=prosperity
Like in Greece, Cyprus , Spain, Portugal, Spain, Italy, Ireland.........
You should probably leave Ireland off the list. 30 years ago it was very poor relative to the UK, now it is considerably richer.
It's also the only place in Europe where the 'business sentiment' figures are higher than the UK; and it's probably the only place that will grow faster than the UK this year. Finally, Irish debt-to-GDP is likely to start falling as of Q3 of this year - which is rather better than the UK.
TSE Surely in return for greater devolution, inevitable unless it is a thumping NO, then we can have English MPs only voting on English laws, I doubt the Scots would object if they vote to stay in the UK
How the hell have we engineering a situation where the Conservatives are banging on about Europe again?
Extraordinary.
The choices are immigration, banksters or the EU so they pick EU.
Get it Sunshine.
Immigration=prosperity EU=prosperity
Like in Greece, Cyprus , Spain, Portugal, Spain, Italy, Ireland.........
You should probably leave Ireland off the list. 30 years ago it was very poor relative to the UK, now it is considerably richer.
It's also the only place in Europe where the 'business sentiment' figures are higher than the UK; and it's probably the only place that will grow faster than the UK this year. Finally, Irish debt-to-GDP is likely to start falling as of Q3 of this year - which is rather better than the UK.
But isn't that mostly because Ireland is the low-tax "offshore" place for American companies to operate in Europe (and reduce their tax back home)?
How the hell have we engineering a situation where the Conservatives are banging on about Europe again?
Extraordinary.
The choices are immigration, banksters or the EU so they pick EU.
Get it Sunshine.
Immigration=prosperity EU=prosperity
Like in Greece, Cyprus , Spain, Portugal, Spain, Italy, Ireland.........
You should probably leave Ireland off the list. 30 years ago it was very poor relative to the UK, now it is considerably richer.
It's also the only place in Europe where the 'business sentiment' figures are higher than the UK; and it's probably the only place that will grow faster than the UK this year. Finally, Irish debt-to-GDP is likely to start falling as of Q3 of this year - which is rather better than the UK.
But isn't that mostly because Ireland is the low-tax "offshore" place for American companies to operate in Europe (and reduce their tax back home)?
Ireland makes hardly a penny from the off-shore shenanigans of Starbucks and co.
It has prospered because it has a highly educated workforce, that speaks English, with a very modest state sector, and which has low taxes and a flexible labour market.
Intel's most efficient chip fabrication plant is in Dublin, and Dell and Apple and others make their computers within five minutes walk of that (to minimise the amount of time chips have to travel).
There is also an enormous amount of pharmaceutical manufacturing in Ireland (Charles probably knows the exact numbers). Plus it has a growing financial services sector - mostly doing back office work, but with one Italian bank moving its fund management operations there.
The result is that Ireland - unlike the UK - runs a substantial trade surplus.
If you believe the UK will leave the EU, investing in Dublin property is probably the smartest thing you can do.
RCS1000 It is basically Grillo being an opportunist, and engaging in some anti German populism, but nonetheless he has signed up to Farage's EFD group which is firmly anti Federalist whatever his reasons for doing so
AndyJS never mind more money, as Liam Fox has said the ringfence should be ended and the NHS forced to face the same cuts as defence, local government, justice, culture, welfare etc The cuts can be made in non frontline services
Senior sources say the coalition has dropped plans to tackle the so-called West Lothian question because of fears it could fuel Scottish resentment
I am fed up with England being treated as a second class nation in the UK an I will not vote for any party which does not promise parity in self government in England and Scotland.
How the hell have we engineering a situation where the Conservatives are banging on about Europe again?
Extraordinary.
The choices are immigration, banksters or the EU so they pick EU.
Get it Sunshine.
Immigration=prosperity EU=prosperity
Like in Greece, Cyprus , Spain, Portugal, Spain, Italy, Ireland.........
You should probably leave Ireland off the list. 30 years ago it was very poor relative to the UK, now it is considerably richer.
It's also the only place in Europe where the 'business sentiment' figures are higher than the UK; and it's probably the only place that will grow faster than the UK this year. Finally, Irish debt-to-GDP is likely to start falling as of Q3 of this year - which is rather better than the UK.
But isn't that mostly because Ireland is the low-tax "offshore" place for American companies to operate in Europe (and reduce their tax back home)?
Ireland makes hardly a penny from the off-shore shenanigans of Starbucks and co.
It has prospered because it has a highly educated workforce, that speaks English, with a very modest state sector, and which has low taxes and a flexible labour market.
Intel's most efficient chip fabrication plant is in Dublin, and Dell and Apple and others make their computers within five minutes walk of that (to minimise the amount of time chips have to travel).
There is also an enormous amount of pharmaceutical manufacturing in Ireland (Charles probably knows the exact numbers). Plus it has a growing financial services sector - mostly doing back office work, but with one Italian bank moving its fund management operations there.
The result is that Ireland - unlike the UK - runs a substantial trade surplus.
If you believe the UK will leave the EU, investing in Dublin property is probably the smartest thing you can do.
TykeJohnno As I said earlier today he may prove better than feared, he was the only candidate for president to commit to address UK concerns in his manifesto
Nick Sutton @suttonnick · 45 secs Monday's Times front page - "Osborne's grand plan to join up tax systems" #tomorrowspaperstoday #bbcpapers pic.twitter.com/UNDDLADp9I
How the hell have we engineering a situation where the Conservatives are banging on about Europe again?
Extraordinary.
The choices are immigration, banksters or the EU so they pick EU.
Get it Sunshine.
Immigration=prosperity EU=prosperity
Like in Greece, Cyprus , Spain, Portugal, Spain, Italy, Ireland.........
You should probably leave Ireland off the list. 30 years ago it was very poor relative to the UK, now it is considerably richer.
It's also the only place in Europe where the 'business sentiment' figures are higher than the UK; and it's probably the only place that will grow faster than the UK this year. Finally, Irish debt-to-GDP is likely to start falling as of Q3 of this year - which is rather better than the UK.
But isn't that mostly because Ireland is the low-tax "offshore" place for American companies to operate in Europe (and reduce their tax back home)?
Yes, GNP per capita gives a more accurate picture of Ireland's wealth, or rather lack of. Their debt and deficit are still dire.
Nick Sutton @suttonnick · 45 secs Monday's Times front page - "Osborne's grand plan to join up tax systems" #tomorrowspaperstoday #bbcpapers pic.twitter.com/UNDDLADp9I
Made a few bob on the earlier match today and hoping to add to that with a Costa Rica victory. The strange thing is that I know absolutely nothing about football, whereas I've lost money recently on cricket, tennis and politics which I do know a bit about.
Comments
Why. Because she has been anointed by the Archbishop of Canterbury as Monarch and therefore given that responsibility by God.
And because someone who is heriditary has an incentive to conserve not revolute. If your house was going to go to the treasury, rather than your offspring, when you die would you bother to maintain it in your old age?
And also someone born and trained for the role who is given it rather than wants it will probably do a better job than someone who gets it by cunning, deviousness, political chicanery, croynyism and populism which are the necessary quialifications for an executive president.
Miliband's critique of what Cameron has done has been childish and nonsensical. The notion that simply being a bit nicer to certain European leaders would have garnered their support in this matter is not credible. These politicians were bought off and there was nothing cameron or anyone else could have done.
Europe has come to them !
Immigration=prosperity
EU=prosperity
For the lower middle and working class Immigration & EU means stagnatation of wages and insecurity of employment.
Pulpstar Exactly
Antifrank Enjoy your travels
"Ministry of Justice writes off £56m on duplicate IT project"
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/jun/29/ministry-justice-56m-writeoff-it-project
So Labour is advocating carrying on with the grubby, backroom, you-scratch-my-back compromises that have created an explosion of fury across Europe in the last euro election, and prompted people in desperation to vote for some pretty undesirable creatures.
Labour, like many others in the political classes, wants to carry on playing a game that electorates all over Europe are starting to call time on.
So does Dave probably, but he has the sense to realise it just won;t do any more.
Nice for people like Mike, bad for millions of working class
Bradford: Terrible drivers, great curries.
Lab pretends to talk about the banksters
Con pretends to talk about the EU
Libs don't talk about any
Ukip talk about immigration and the EU
Hence Ukip going up, Lib going down, Con/Lab mostly flat-lining
edit: at least one
There are two reasonable ways to run an international federation - by negotiation between the components, or by direct election of overall leaders. The latter would be more democratic, but we probably haven't got to that point yet. So we have the former, and for one member to refuse negotiation and go for an ultimatum is just silly, and against our own interest.
NZ to Australia approx 925 miles
That's some commute, but I guess it depends how regularly.
I also think that ideally, the coverage should reflect likely performance at this election, not at the last one. I accept that's not easily done and if we have to err, it's better to err on the cautious side, but again, for UKIP to be ranked below the Lib Dems despite their performance in just about every election and poll for the last two years is little more than establishment bias.
We had a referendum remember. General elections ARE NOT decided by national vote shares but by first past the post elections in 650 separate seats.
The highest ever vote share that Ukip has ever achieved in any Westminster seat is 27.8%. Since GE10 five other parties have topped that.
Nick Clegg still draws relatively more support from students than the rest of the population despite the anger on campuses across Britain after the government sharply increased university tuition fees from 2012.
A poll by Populus for the Financial Times has found that Mr Clegg’s party, the Liberal Democrats, are still backed by 13.4 per cent of UK students – much higher than their national support of 8.8 per cent.
More broadly, the Populus/FT poll shows the Conservatives 2.7 per cent behind Labour – a gap that widened in June from May’s 2.1 per cent. However, when the figures are rounded, they show a generally stable picture this year, with Tory support hovering at 33-34 per cent, Ukip at 13-14 per cent and the Lib Dems at 9-10 per cent. Labour shows a trend of slight decline from 38 per cent in January to 36 per cent in the last three months.
(You need to google "UK students still back Nick Clegg despite tuition fee protest" to get the article for free)
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/bbc3ef0e-fe1c-11e3-b4f1-00144feab7de.html#axzz363hMZXLq
Among mothers, support for Labour is ahead by 46 per cent compared with 29 per cent for the Tories, according to the opinion poll company.
“Women have been more uncomfortable than men with the cuts and the question of whether the cuts have been carried out fairly,” said Mr Cooper.
The Conservatives are ahead of Labour among pensioners by exactly the same margin of 17 percentage points: by 42 per cent to 25 per cent. That reflects the fact that older people are always more likely to vote for the Conservatives – they even did so in 1997 at the time of Labour’s landslide.
As it happens, I agree with your point in the leader that a by-election win would make UKIP's case much firmer but that's a political rather than philosophical point.
The TV debates and media coverage *are* national matters, not a series of local ones. Why should any party which is an irrelevance over much of the country (and which may even choose to be so through its campaigning strategy) have the right to national media coverage?
We have one of the most densely populated countries in the world, able to produce only about 60% of our food and having to import energy owing to lack of natural resources. In this situation Immigration is like a tired person taking a sugar and caffeine fix instead of getting some rest.
It gives a short term boost to the economy at the expense of the working class who have to compete for work against incomers and in the longer term exacerbates the problems we already have, especially as nothing has been done to provide the additional infrastructure for the extra people over the last twenty years. Where are the extra schools, hospitals, reservoirs, power stations, new towns, railways and motorways to accomodate them?
Discussions as to whether we are getting the right sort of immigrant come far down the list compared with this.
Many important events before the General Election. The Scottish vote, release of Dragon Age: Inquisition, the end of the 2014 F1 season.
48% of students voted for the Lib Dems on Election Day, compared to 22% voting for each of the other two main parties. (Fieldwork dates: 7 -10 May 2010)
http://www.opinionpanel.co.uk/2010/12/05/liberal-democrats-dumped-by-the-student-electorate-after-a-whirlwind-romance/
Ouch down from 48% in to 13.4% in 2014.
That's the rate of collapse you'd expect from the French Army.
So expect this match to be a bore draw and goes to penalties.
Can't say for certain before it comes out (sadly over 3 months to go), but it's looking really rather good.
I am old enough to remember the UK brain drain of the seventies, when anyone who wanted to make a better life for themselves left the UK.
For how long?
It is a continuous cycle with no logical end always needing more population or immigrants to support the previous record generation who are retired r the kids of the new enlarged working generation.
Learn to live with and prosper with a static or smaller population makes far more sense.
You have mail via "Vanilla"
Thank You.
That would apply to any monarch. I don't deny that the Queen has been a good monarch, but she is there, nevertheless, as an accident of birth. If you get rum one, s/he is still appointed defender of your faith. Not the greatest recruitment filter, I'd venture.
Expect your Greek bet to come in.
Many, perhaps even most, of the Poles who come here, are here because wages are higher than back home. Often, the wife and kids are in Krawkow, and they live in bunks earning cash for six to eight weeks at a time, before heading back home for a couple of weeks. These are the Polish descendents of Auf Wiedersein, Pet. These people are probably net beneficiaries to the government in terms of tax take, but - as isam notes - they do exert downward pressure on wages, particularly for the lesser skilled.
Likewise, American fund managers, Italian derivatives specialists, French engineers, and Spanish lawyers are probably here because that's where the job they're working on right now is. They might stay, they might go, they probably send their kids to private school and get private medical insurance but by-and-large they are not drains on the state (although they certainly bid up house prices).
On the other hand, people who come here from Pakistan or Bangladesh are usually expecting to be here for ever. Home is fucked up, and they want to be somewhere less fucked up. Perfectly understandable. However, these people (unlike the Polish builder) probably will be drawing pensions. And they are much less likely to come with marketable skills (plumbing is definitely a marketable skill). While EU immigrants - as a group - earn slightly above average wages; immigrants without from outside the EU - as a group - earn more than a third less than average - and that's despite the Russians oligarchs and US hedge fund managers pushing the average up.
They might be more sceptical than the other major Italian parties, but (like the AfD) they are not sceptical in the FN or UKIP sense.
Exactly,Same could be said about you on your sarcastic post to me.
I used a couple of my free cashback special returns from Bet365 instead.
Plans to restrict the voting rights of Scottish MPs at Westminster have been scrapped after splits emerged in the UK government before September's independence referendum.
Senior sources say the coalition has dropped plans to tackle the so-called West Lothian question because of fears it could fuel Scottish resentment, but also because the Tories and Lib Dems cannot agree on whether voting restrictions on MPs are fair.
Moves to restrict Scottish MPs' votes – by limiting their rights to vote on England-only legislation – have also been fought off by Labour and by senior Lib Dem figures, who plan to increase devolution to major cities and regions within England.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/jun/29/plans-to-restrict-scottish-mps-voting-rights-scrapped
Monday's FT front page - "Germany pledges to keep UK in Europe" #tomorrowspaperstoday #bbcpapers pic.twitter.com/nX08uiLkzW
Mark Pritchard @MPritchardMP
Conservatives are now more united over Europe than for at least two decades. This is down to David Cameron. It is Labour who are now split
One might cynically say that the Five Star position is: hey Germany, the Euro's been great for you, what with your 30 year low unemployment, but it's sucked for us. we'd like you to agree to Eurobonds, because that would be good for us, and if you don't agree we'll throw our toys out of the pram and break your precious Euro.
It's also the only place in Europe where the 'business sentiment' figures are higher than the UK; and it's probably the only place that will grow faster than the UK this year. Finally, Irish debt-to-GDP is likely to start falling as of Q3 of this year - which is rather better than the UK.
You have further mail via "Vanilla"
Thank You.
"NHS needs more money, say senior Tory and Lib Dem MPs"
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-28079720
National debt clock:
http://www.debtbombshell.com/
Ed's Labour party appears to be the equivalent of the Greek football team...
It has prospered because it has a highly educated workforce, that speaks English, with a very modest state sector, and which has low taxes and a flexible labour market.
Intel's most efficient chip fabrication plant is in Dublin, and Dell and Apple and others make their computers within five minutes walk of that (to minimise the amount of time chips have to travel).
There is also an enormous amount of pharmaceutical manufacturing in Ireland (Charles probably knows the exact numbers). Plus it has a growing financial services sector - mostly doing back office work, but with one Italian bank moving its fund management operations there.
The result is that Ireland - unlike the UK - runs a substantial trade surplus.
If you believe the UK will leave the EU, investing in Dublin property is probably the smartest thing you can do.
Obviously this Chilean journalist is the best (URL says it all)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/worldcup2014/article-2673471/Chile-journalist-Jhendelyn-Nunez-shows-bra-Alexis-Sanchez-goal-against-Brazil.html
Jean-Claude Juncker has told David Cameron he is "fully committed to finding solutions for the political concerns of the UK", No 10 has said.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-28081415
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_Irish_arrangement
which after all brought Apple to Ireland in the first place.
The 12.5% corporation tax also helps, but would the UK ever bring that in?
CR/Draw +4.05
Greece +3.28 now
Monday's Times front page - "Osborne's grand plan to join up tax systems" #tomorrowspaperstoday #bbcpapers pic.twitter.com/UNDDLADp9I