On the NHS, odd story. Friend of mine had an accident (broken bone) away from home, although not too far. Taken to hospital, sorted out, told they’d need physio. However, they couldn’t be transferred to their nearest physio service without the consent of their GP. The physio department would have to write (and the word used was write) to my friend’s GP, my friend would have to be called, when the letter arrived, to see their GP and a decision made on which local physio service to use. Their notes would then have to be sent to the selected service, and an appoinment made.
The patient decided they would rather be driven 25 miles to the original physio department.
Seems a great deal of bureaucracy to me. A great deal more than before the reforms.
He's lucky to get physio within six months, let alone a choice of two within 25 miles. Most people end up paying privately.
But the NHS should be able to fix you up with treatment anywhere in the country. I once waited a long time for an MRI scan on a badly sprained knee. I was young, otherwise fit and able to travel (I could still drive), would have been prepared to travel most places in England for it. Surely this would be a way of evening up waiting lists and making sure that those who need local treatment (the old and infirm) get it.
I was out canvassing yesterday and there is absolutely no enthusiasm for labour from previously labour voters.
So was I, and experienced exactly the opposite - Labour voters were really fired up to a degree I'd not expected - not just anti-Tory, too, but "it's time to have our people back in power". Two passers-by stopped their cars to shout out support.
I think that all of us who canvass need to be wary that we're told things we want to hear. In my experience, comparing with previous canvasses is a good guide, everything else is candy-floss.
However Cameron will get slaughtered if he refuses to deliver on The Vow by tying it up with EVEL.
Sort Scotland first.
Correct. There are prospects for Tory gains in Scotland that will be imperilled otherwise. And the small matter of keeping his word. The WLQ can be answered in a separate parallel bill.
@BBCAllegra: Miliband on #Marr sounding like he'll back McKay proposals "I am open to greater scrutiny of legislation by English MPs". McKay keeps Scots.
Ed doesn't want the English to have the same rights as Scots...
Suppose labour manage to win the GE despite Ed, the rich wont be taxed more, the middle cant be, and the working class dont pay tax anyway. So massive austerity will happen that will rip the labour party apart and finally destroy the tribalism that holds their electoral support together.
This is not going to end well for weird Ed. Or labour.
The working class don't pay tax? I fear you have confused them with the billion pound corporations that sell phones to the working class.
Labour are making such a big mistake on EV4EL. The idea that it is an easy concept to understand is slightly wrong. More accurately,. it is an easy concept to think you understand. The devil is in the detail as exchanges about what it means on here over the last two or three days have shown.
For example, is it, as I believe, simply a blocking mechanism preventing a UK government enacting England-only laws without the approval of English MPs? Or is it, as some others seem to think , a means of creating an English government within Parliament distinct from the UK government? Furthermore, if it is about fairness and ensuring the views of English voters are properly represented, would it be right to allow a party that 35% of voters in England have supported to block legislation proposed by parties that 50% of voters in England have supported? And so on.
A clever leader - ie, not Miliband - would have conceded the principle is a fair one and then said that he looked forward to seeing what the government proposed, knowing that whatever was proposed would in all likelihood be very easy to shoot down and to oppose with a rival proposition.
Impossible to argue with Mike's assessment,a reminder that local knowledge on the ground is essential in these important 3-ways.The NHS is likely to be a key issue and the L/D will have to find a way to deny her party's involvement in its fragmentation.Could be her achilles heel.
You mean it'll be difficult for a Coalition supporter to explain to Watford voters why they spent more on the NHS than Labour wanted and who called the additional NHS spending "reckless"
In contrast Watford Labour could always point to the success of the Welsh NHS ....
Oopps ....
JackW
How did you get on with MCARSE?
Nicely thanks.
Very well in the turnout markets, less so on the final YES/NO market but well enough from a final projection five weeks out. No complaints from those who followed McARSE so far.
My main difficulty was getting a handle on the trend to YES and the differential turnout and I had to make an assessment on those vital factors too far out.
@tnewtondunn: Ed Mili is in favour of "more scrutiny" of English laws by English MPs, but not giving them full say; now or ever. This will hurt him. #Marr
Fellow Citizens of the United Soviet Of Britain, hark to the wise words of Chairman Miliband!
He alone possesses the intellectual self-confidence to oppose the perfidious capitalist Cameron, who seeks to buy vulgar popularity with the meaningless pledge to allow the English some form of governance!
Instead, Chairman Miliband hears in his heart the dreams and desire of the workers. In Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland they yearn for the undeniable right to run their own affairs. Who are the Westminster elite to deny them this most basic of democratic rights!?
""Of course we need a solution to this dilemma but, by appearing to link it to the delivery of further devolution to Scotland, they risk reneging on the commitment made to the Scottish people that, in the event of a No vote, new powers would come what may. "Worse still, if the Conservatives enter into a Dutch auction with Ukip over ever more extreme solutions to the issue of English votes they could jeopardise the union they purport to defend."
If preserving the union means second class status for England then the UK isn't worth keeping. All Englishmen want is equality, but the left seem to think devolution is for other people. If it's good enough for Scotland, it's good enough for England.
Impossible to argue with Mike's assessment,a reminder that local knowledge on the ground is essential in these important 3-ways.The NHS is likely to be a key issue and the L/D will have to find a way to deny her party's involvement in its fragmentation.Could be her achilles heel.
You mean it'll be difficult for a Coalition supporter to explain to Watford voters why they spent more on the NHS than Labour wanted and who called the additional NHS spending "reckless"
In contrast Watford Labour could always point to the success of the Welsh NHS ....
Oopps ....
JackW
How did you get on with MCARSE?
Nicely thanks.
Very well in the turnout markets, less so on the final YES/NO market but well enough from a final projection five weeks out. No complaints from those who followed McARSE so far.
My main difficulty was getting a handle on the trend to YES and the differential turnout and I had to make an assessment on those vital factors too far out.
I thought you were wrong by about 4% did i miss your final MCARSE?
On another note, if the Tories are now directly linking the promises that Cameron made to Scottish voters with Labour agreeing to their proposals for EV4EL then I cannot help feeling they are making a huge mistake.
Lying to the Scots is a bad idea - not only for the Tories' slim chances in Scotland, but also because voters everywhere can spot this kind of thing even when it does not directly concern them. All TV and radio interviews that all Tories do on this subject will cover the fact that Cameron made no mention of anything to do with England when he signed that Vow - and that he had time to clarify his position before the referendum, but did not.
On the NHS, odd story. Friend of mine had an accident (broken bone) away from home, although not too far. Taken to hospital, sorted out, told they’d need physio. However, they couldn’t be transferred to their nearest physio service without the consent of their GP. The physio department would have to write (and the word used was write) to my friend’s GP, my friend would have to be called, when the letter arrived, to see their GP and a decision made on which local physio service to use. Their notes would then have to be sent to the selected service, and an appoinment made.
The patient decided they would rather be driven 25 miles to the original physio department.
Seems a great deal of bureaucracy to me. A great deal more than before the reforms.
He's lucky to get physio within six months, let alone a choice of two within 25 miles. Most people end up paying privately.
But the NHS should be able to fix you up with treatment anywhere in the country. I once waited a long time for an MRI scan on a badly sprained knee. I was young, otherwise fit and able to travel (I could still drive), would have been prepared to travel most places in England for it. Surely this would be a way of evening up waiting lists and making sure that those who need local treatment (the old and infirm) get it.
It was easy before the internal market.
But since Labour re- introduced the internal market, there is a need for the MRI to be paid for by the GP organisation (PCT now CCG) which requires the GP to authorise it and for the PCT to agree a price. Then there is the small matter of viewing the scans. An orthpaedic surgeon needs more than a report, they need to see the images...
Enough from me, I have some things to do before watching Man Uniteds overpaid mercenaries against the best Leicester City team for 15 years.
Impossible to argue with Mike's assessment,a reminder that local knowledge on the ground is essential in these important 3-ways.The NHS is likely to be a key issue and the L/D will have to find a way to deny her party's involvement in its fragmentation.Could be her achilles heel.
You mean it'll be difficult for a Coalition supporter to explain to Watford voters why they spent more on the NHS than Labour wanted and who called the additional NHS spending "reckless"
In contrast Watford Labour could always point to the success of the Welsh NHS ....
Oopps ....
Watford voters will know whether the local hospitals have got better or worse and all parties will be wasting their time trying to disabuse them with tractor stats.
Hertfordshire NHS tend to use ambulances. Things are worse than I thought if the Welsh NHS is using tractors. Presumably the sheep assist in the wards too ??
Bah ....
Very droll. Has the Conservative Party given up already on retaining its eight Welsh MPs?
Incidentally, after indyref, devomax and ev4el, Welsh politicians are raising the question of historic underfunding.
On another note, if the Tories are now directly linking the promises that Cameron made to Scottish voters with Labour agreeing to their proposals for EV4EL then I cannot help feeling they are making a huge mistake.
That depends.
If the Tories actually delay Scotland because Labour have not signed up to England, you would be right, but that is not the prize.
The prize is the Tories (and UKIP) going into the election on "Labour are anti-English"
Impossible to argue with Mike's assessment,a reminder that local knowledge on the ground is essential in these important 3-ways.The NHS is likely to be a key issue and the L/D will have to find a way to deny her party's involvement in its fragmentation.Could be her achilles heel.
You mean it'll be difficult for a Coalition supporter to explain to Watford voters why they spent more on the NHS than Labour wanted and who called the additional NHS spending "reckless"
In contrast Watford Labour could always point to the success of the Welsh NHS ....
Oopps ....
JackW
How did you get on with MCARSE?
Nicely thanks.
Very well in the turnout markets, less so on the final YES/NO market but well enough from a final projection five weeks out. No complaints from those who followed McARSE so far.
My main difficulty was getting a handle on the trend to YES and the differential turnout and I had to make an assessment on those vital factors too far out.
I thought you were wrong by about 4% did i miss your final MCARSE?
Those backing the 40-45% band were very happy, even if the MCARSE was at the other end of that band!
£8 Minimum wage saves money as official figures show.
isn't it a saving of nothing.. companies pay more in wages and therefore less in dividends or Corporation tax. More wages -= less benefits and slightly more income tax.. Overall no one gains anything as wage increases are inevitably inflationary.
Just because yougov poll daily doesn't mean they are more credible than the other polls that show a Con lead or level pegging. If people really believe that Labour a 5 ahead then you should get out more.
£8 Minimum wage saves money as official figures show.
The minimum wage is a disaster for those on low (but above minimum) wage in unskilled or relatively unskilled positions. It is dragging all those millions of workers towards the 'official government benchmarked' pay rate. An unintended but devastating consequence for millions of workers workers earning up to £10.00 per hour who see their differential from minimum erode year on year.
The 8.00 target is an increase of 3% pa over the time period + 24p.
That isn't Big change it is a complete insult and disaster to the low paid.
And I'm far from Labour in every way. The minimum wage is too low now. £8.00 ph is too low in 2020. It has negative effects by giving employers a fixed low point at which to start pay scales. It may protect some employees from unscrupulous employers.
On another note, if the Tories are now directly linking the promises that Cameron made to Scottish voters with Labour agreeing to their proposals for EV4EL then I cannot help feeling they are making a huge mistake.
Lying to the Scots is a bad idea - not only for the Tories' slim chances in Scotland, but also because voters everywhere can spot this kind of thing even when it does not directly concern them. All TV and radio interviews that all Tories do on this subject will cover the fact that Cameron made no mention of anything to do with England when he signed that Vow - and that he had time to clarify his position before the referendum, but did not.
This is such an easy win for Cameron. Deliver on Scotland. Separately put forward legislation on EVEL and fight GE2015 on Ed's refusal to grant it (and his refusal on fair constituency boundaries too).
By linking the two he is holding a gun to the heads of Scottish voters but it will end up being the Tory leader shooting himself in the foot.
£8 Minimum wage saves money as official figures show.
The minimum wage is a disaster for those on low (but above minimum) wage in unskilled or relatively unskilled positions. It is dragging all those millions of workers towards the 'official government benchmarked' pay rate. An unintended but devastating consequence for millions of workers workers earning up to £10.00 per hour.
The 8.00 target is an increase of 3% pa over the time period + 24p.
That isn't Big change it is a complete insult and disaster to the low paid.
And I'm far from Labour in every way. The minimum wage is too low now. £8.00 ph is too low in 2020. It has negative effects by giving employers a fixed low point at which to start pay scales. It may protect some employees from unscrupulous employers.
On another note, if the Tories are now directly linking the promises that Cameron made to Scottish voters with Labour agreeing to their proposals for EV4EL then I cannot help feeling they are making a huge mistake.
That depends.
If the Tories actually delay Scotland because Labour have not signed up to England, you would be right, but that is not the prize.
The prize is the Tories (and UKIP) going into the election on "Labour are anti-English"
That is certainly what Tory activists seem to want to fight the election on. So far as I can tell (which may not be very far, admittedly) they seem to have convinced themselves that the reason Cameron failed to get a majority in 2010 was because of Celtic and non-white votes. (For example, Labour did much better, not only absolutely but also relatively, in the big cities, especially London, than in the shires.) Hence the much greater rancour from the Right on this site to-day than, say, 5 or 10 years ago.
Once the principal source of political cleavage becomes race rather than class then the sky gets very dark indeed.
On another note, if the Tories are now directly linking the promises that Cameron made to Scottish voters with Labour agreeing to their proposals for EV4EL then I cannot help feeling they are making a huge mistake.
That depends.
If the Tories actually delay Scotland because Labour have not signed up to England, you would be right, but that is not the prize.
The prize is the Tories (and UKIP) going into the election on "Labour are anti-English"
This whole Tory pitch is aimed at UKIP voters, not at Labour ones. I am not sure that Labour voters are suddenly going to switch to the Tories because the Tories want to make it harder for Labour to pass laws in England. UKIP and Labour actually want the same thing - a constitutional convention.
And UKIP will certainly benefit when the Tories unveil their proposals, which are bound to be far less revolutionary and much more technical than anything that those who really want England's voice (whatever that is) to be heard.
@MichaelPDeacon: If what you're asking me is, Why do I keep asking myself questions instead of answering yours, then I've got to say you: well look #miliband
This is such an easy win for Cameron. Deliver on Scotland. Separately put forward legislation on EVEL and fight GE2015 on Ed's refusal to grant it (and his refusal on fair constituency boundaries too).
If the tories allow Scottish devolution with nothing for England before 2015 there will be a huge crack in the party and they will be hammered in England by UKIP.
Cameron would be crazy to do that and he won;t. He has nothing to lose in Scotland.
Who will the Scots blame if no devomax is delivered?
The conservatives? so what. Labour? 40 seats
If Dave refuses to deliver because he hasn't got his way on EVEL then the Tories are completely finished North of the border and I dare say the Union dies too.
Impossible to argue with Mike's assessment,a reminder that local knowledge on the ground is essential in these important 3-ways.The NHS is likely to be a key issue and the L/D will have to find a way to deny her party's involvement in its fragmentation.Could be her achilles heel.
You mean it'll be difficult for a Coalition supporter to explain to Watford voters why they spent more on the NHS than Labour wanted and who called the additional NHS spending "reckless"
In contrast Watford Labour could always point to the success of the Welsh NHS ....
Oopps ....
JackW
How did you get on with MCARSE?
Nicely thanks.
Very well in the turnout markets, less so on the final YES/NO market but well enough from a final projection five weeks out. No complaints from those who followed McARSE so far.
My main difficulty was getting a handle on the trend to YES and the differential turnout and I had to make an assessment on those vital factors too far out.
I thought you were wrong by about 4% did i miss your final MCARSE?
Correct. My final McARSE was five weeks before the poll.
If I'd been in a position to carry on a final McARSE would have been about 2 points out. Ok-ish but adrift of the usual on the button standard PB comes to expect. Binary referendum of this importance are a nightmare and fortunately we'll not see another in Scotland well past my use by date !!
On another note, if the Tories are now directly linking the promises that Cameron made to Scottish voters with Labour agreeing to their proposals for EV4EL then I cannot help feeling they are making a huge mistake.
Lying to the Scots is a bad idea - not only for the Tories' slim chances in Scotland, but also because voters everywhere can spot this kind of thing even when it does not directly concern them. All TV and radio interviews that all Tories do on this subject will cover the fact that Cameron made no mention of anything to do with England when he signed that Vow - and that he had time to clarify his position before the referendum, but did not.
But the same goes for the other two leaders as well - Miliband's proposal to kick the issue into the long grass only occurred after the vote. Since Labour witters constantly on about 'fairness', it is odd that they do not want to see the democratic deficit addressed.
Cameron can easily - and correctly - say that Labour has no intention to correct the imbalance, as they made it much worse with devolution and did nothing to address it. Tying it with the increased powers to Scotland stands a good chance of forcing it through.
Miliband's on the wrong side on this. Worse, his own proposal is utterly nonsensical and self-serving.
f Dave refuses to deliver because he hasn't got his way on EVEL then the Tories are completely finished North of the border and I dare say the Union dies too.
I completely disagree. The Scots will surely understand that England should have what Scotland has. They don;t object to that. They don;t want their MPs voting on |English matters.
They aren't afraid of what government is formed in England.
Only labour are. Labour is in the way. Not the tories.
Impossible to argue with Mike's assessment,a reminder that local knowledge on the ground is essential in these important 3-ways.The NHS is likely to be a key issue and the L/D will have to find a way to deny her party's involvement in its fragmentation.Could be her achilles heel.
You mean it'll be difficult for a Coalition supporter to explain to Watford voters why they spent more on the NHS than Labour wanted and who called the additional NHS spending "reckless"
In contrast Watford Labour could always point to the success of the Welsh NHS ....
Oopps ....
JackW
How did you get on with MCARSE?
Nicely thanks.
Very well in the turnout markets, less so on the final YES/NO market but well enough from a final projection five weeks out. No complaints from those who followed McARSE so far.
My main difficulty was getting a handle on the trend to YES and the differential turnout and I had to make an assessment on those vital factors too far out.
I thought you were wrong by about 4% did i miss your final MCARSE?
Those backing the 40-45% band were very happy, even if the MCARSE was at the other end of that band!
Well I went for 45 to 50 and made loads too by cashing out. Also got right the turnout and the result.
Jack W was a long way out on the Yes % and if he is as wrong with ARSE Ed would be landslide PM.
I dont think he will be 4% wrong but to hang on every word of the man who says it is 100% certain Ed cannot be PM is pretty bonkers IMO
On another note, if the Tories are now directly linking the promises that Cameron made to Scottish voters with Labour agreeing to their proposals for EV4EL then I cannot help feeling they are making a huge mistake.
Lying to the Scots is a bad idea - not only for the Tories' slim chances in Scotland, but also because voters everywhere can spot this kind of thing even when it does not directly concern them. All TV and radio interviews that all Tories do on this subject will cover the fact that Cameron made no mention of anything to do with England when he signed that Vow - and that he had time to clarify his position before the referendum, but did not.
But the same goes for the other two leaders as well - Miliband's proposal to kick the issue into the long grass only occurred after the vote. Since Labour witters constantly on about 'fairness', it is odd that they do not want to see the democratic deficit addressed.
Cameron can easily - and correctly - say that Labour has no intention to correct the imbalance, as they made it much worse with devolution and did nothing to address it. Tying it with the increased powers to Scotland stands a good chance of forcing it through.
Miliband's on the wrong side on this. Worse, his own proposal is utterly nonsensical and self-serving.
No - the leaders all made specific and time-lined commitments to Scotland in which there was no mention of anything having to be agreed for England in return for delivery. I have seen no evidence that Labour is backtracking on that. The Tories seem to be. If they are, then in my view it is a very bad mistake - not only will it ensure that the Union comes tom an end, but it will also harm them more widely.
I think the Tories position is going to unravel very quickly. EV4EL is a good short term tactic but offers to replace an unsustainable constitutional settlement with an unsustainable constitutional settlement. It's supposedly pro English but offers England further disparity with Scotland.
Cameron once again gets a daft idea, stands there with that swarmy superior look on his face that people want to punch, and does himself more damage. Farage once again has won the argument, Labour also agree on the need for a wider constitutional framework, the pox will vote for whatever they think will save their skins.
On the NHS, odd story. Friend of mine had an accident (broken bone) away from home, although not too far. Taken to hospital, sorted out, told they’d need physio. However, they couldn’t be transferred to their nearest physio service without the consent of their GP. The physio department would have to write (and the word used was write) to my friend’s GP, my friend would have to be called, when the letter arrived, to see their GP and a decision made on which local physio service to use. Their notes would then have to be sent to the selected service, and an appoinment made.
The patient decided they woud rather be driven 25 miles to the original physio department.
Seems a great deal of bureaucracy to me. A great deal more than before the reforms.
It has been like that since Labour introduced Choose and Book, nothing to do with more recent "reforms".
I see at PP it is now 7/4 at Watford. I am not tempted by that. Indeed 9/4 on Con is looking value as they do hold the seat and may have split opposition.
It seems to have got a great deal worse in the last couple of years. The GP’s in the surgery I use are complaining far more about it.
On another note, if the Tories are now directly linking the promises that Cameron made to Scottish voters with Labour agreeing to their proposals for EV4EL then I cannot help feeling they are making a huge mistake.
That depends.
If the Tories actually delay Scotland because Labour have not signed up to England, you would be right, but that is not the prize.
The prize is the Tories (and UKIP) going into the election on "Labour are anti-English"
This whole Tory pitch is aimed at UKIP voters, not at Labour ones. I am not sure that Labour voters are suddenly going to switch to the Tories because the Tories want to make it harder for Labour to pass laws in England. UKIP and Labour actually want the same thing - a constitutional convention.
And UKIP will certainly benefit when the Tories unveil their proposals, which are bound to be far less revolutionary and much more technical than anything that those who really want England's voice (whatever that is) to be heard.
It's the 'fairness' issue, which traditionally has been Labour's forte. *If* it becomes a big issue in the media, then Labour-leaning voters may well be less inclined to vote, or switch their vote elsewhere. After all, Labour's often had a rather interesting take on democracy.
"And UKIP will certainly benefit ..."
You hope. It's perfectly possible for the Conservatives (and Lib Dems?) to negotiate the waters and come out on top. EVEL first as it is relatively easy to do, followed by further change promised for later.
Who will the Scots blame if no devomax is delivered?
The conservatives? so what. Labour? 40 seats
If Dave refuses to deliver because he hasn't got his way on EVEL then the Tories are completely finished North of the border and I dare say the Union dies too.
That is correct. And it also shows in clear terms that the Tories cannot be trusted.
I think the Tories position is going to unravel very quickly. EV4EL is a good short term tactic but offers to replace an unsustainable constitutional settlement with an unsustainable constitutional settlement. It's supposedly pro English but offers England further disparity with Scotland.
Cameron once again gets a daft idea, stands there with that swarmy superior look on his face that people want to punch, and does himself more damage. Farage once again has won the argument, Labour also agree on the need for a wider constitutional framework, the pox will vote for whatever they think will save their skins.
Yeaah Nige has got it all sewn up. and is spot on, write a nice letter to all the Scottish MP's asking them not be be naughty boys and girls and vote on English matters.. ludicrously and completely undeliverable.
Who will the Scots blame if no devomax is delivered?
The conservatives? so what. Labour? 40 seats
If Dave refuses to deliver because he hasn't got his way on EVEL then the Tories are completely finished North of the border and I dare say the Union dies too.
Which ranks higher in the hierarchy of promises, a Cast Iron Guarantee or a Vow ?
But since Labour re- introduced the internal market, there is a need for the MRI to be paid for by the GP organisation (PCT now CCG) which requires the GP to authorise it and for the PCT to agree a price. Then there is the small matter of viewing the scans. An orthopaedic surgeon needs more than a report, they need to see the images...
Enough from me, I have some things to do before watching Man Uniteds overpaid mercenaries against the best Leicester City team for 15 years.
In the case of the MRI scan, it was an orthopaedic surgeon I had been referred to by my GP who was referring me for the MRI so I don't see a problem. In any case, this is the 21st century, aren't the scans emailed* or downloaded from an intranet site? And I would guess you would be able to see and compare prices easily from a website a bit like Amazon, and order online.
In fact I can imagine a discussion with my GP... "you can have one next week, it's in Sheffield but it's £100 cheaper so if you like I'll split the difference and give you £50 towards your travel"
* if there is a problem with confidentiality, just ask the patient, I have no problem with anyone seeing a picture of the inside of my knee.
(as I am a Civil Servant working for a Dept where the IT is out of the ark and not fit for purpose, and management do not see the utility of investing in it and improving staff productivity significantly, I realise this is probably pie-in-the-sky stuff).
On another note, if the Tories are now directly linking the promises that Cameron made to Scottish voters with Labour agreeing to their proposals for EV4EL then I cannot help feeling they are making a huge mistake.
That depends.
If the Tories actually delay Scotland because Labour have not signed up to England, you would be right, but that is not the prize.
The prize is the Tories (and UKIP) going into the election on "Labour are anti-English"
This whole Tory pitch is aimed at UKIP voters, not at Labour ones. I am not sure that Labour voters are suddenly going to switch to the Tories because the Tories want to make it harder for Labour to pass laws in England. UKIP and Labour actually want the same thing - a constitutional convention.
And UKIP will certainly benefit when the Tories unveil their proposals, which are bound to be far less revolutionary and much more technical than anything that those who really want England's voice (whatever that is) to be heard.
It's the 'fairness' issue, which traditionally has been Labour's forte. *If* it becomes a big issue in the media, then Labour-leaning voters may well be less inclined to vote, or switch their vote elsewhere. After all, Labour's often had a rather interesting take on democracy.
"And UKIP will certainly benefit ..."
You hope. It's perfectly possible for the Conservatives (and Lib Dems?) to negotiate the waters and come out on top. EVEL first as it is relatively easy to do, followed by further change promised for later.
It depends what you mean by EV4EL. The LDs would certainly not agree to anything that would, in practice, preclude Scottish MPs such as Danny Alexander sitting in the cabinet.
This is why Labour has played things so badly. Ruling out the principle of EV4EL is not only anti-democratic, it is also politically stupid because it will be possible to drive a coach and horses through whatever the Tories come up with.
On another note, if the Tories are now directly linking the promises that Cameron made to Scottish voters with Labour agreeing to their proposals for EV4EL then I cannot help feeling they are making a huge mistake.
Lying to the Scots is a bad idea - not only for the Tories' slim chances in Scotland, but also because voters everywhere can spot this kind of thing even when it does not directly concern them. All TV and radio interviews that all Tories do on this subject will cover the fact that Cameron made no mention of anything to do with England when he signed that Vow - and that he had time to clarify his position before the referendum, but did not.
But the same goes for the other two leaders as well - Miliband's proposal to kick the issue into the long grass only occurred after the vote. Since Labour witters constantly on about 'fairness', it is odd that they do not want to see the democratic deficit addressed.
Cameron can easily - and correctly - say that Labour has no intention to correct the imbalance, as they made it much worse with devolution and did nothing to address it. Tying it with the increased powers to Scotland stands a good chance of forcing it through.
Miliband's on the wrong side on this. Worse, his own proposal is utterly nonsensical and self-serving.
No - the leaders all made specific and time-lined commitments to Scotland in which there was no mention of anything having to be agreed for England in return for delivery. I have seen no evidence that Labour is backtracking on that. The Tories seem to be. If they are, then in my view it is a very bad mistake - not only will it ensure that the Union comes tom an end, but it will also harm them more widely.
Do you really think Mili will deliver without addressing the English deficit?
Labour may well be harmed if further powers are devolved to Scotland and the democratic deficit in England is not seen to be addressed to some extent. In fact, if the media get on board then they will be absolutely hammered. And they will deserve to be as the undemocratic, self-serving and nasty party they are.
Scotland have had their say. It looks as though Labour's word is "screw England!"
If Dave refuses to deliver because he hasn't got his way on EVEL then the Tories are completely finished North of the border and I dare say the Union dies too.
Not the plan. Deliver Scotland then hammer Labour with "why do you hate England?" all the way to the ballot box
nd it also shows in clear terms that the Tories cannot be trusted.
What would show the tories cannot be trusted is David Cameron turning his English power base into second class voters subject to the whims over what will to all intents and purposes be foreign MPs - without asking them.
Half the party at least would vote against that, it would be split down the middle in 2015 and get hammered in England by UKIP.
I'm sure that's what you, as a labour voter, would like to happen, but it won't.
To be fair, Miliband is both ambitious and consistent. He shafted his own brother, now he wants to shaft everyone in England.
Cameron wants to fulfil the Scottish powers promise, and he wants fairness for England. Do the Lib Dems and Labour want to vote down some measure of fairness for England and hereby fail to honour the promise to Scotland?
I think the Tories position is going to unravel very quickly. EV4EL is a good short term tactic but offers to replace an unsustainable constitutional settlement with an unsustainable constitutional settlement. It's supposedly pro English but offers England further disparity with Scotland.
Cameron once again gets a daft idea, stands there with that swarmy superior look on his face that people want to punch, and does himself more damage. Farage once again has won the argument, Labour also agree on the need for a wider constitutional framework, the pox will vote for whatever they think will save their skins.
As you say, EV4EL is unsustainable long term. However, short term, it gives breathing space to try to deliver increased Scots devo quickly enough while keeping the English on board. EV4EL can then be replaced by a better form of English devolution (which will take longer to sort out) in due course. Although there are all sorts of unknowns, such as who will be in power after next May and will the English trust him to deliver.
SO Devomax was not on the ballot paper, if the Scots wanted to be certain of more powers for Holyrood then they should have been certain to vote Yes. As today's Mail poll shows Scots do not want another independence referendum for at least a generation.
However, if we are going to get Devomax then England has to be included in the conversation, today's polling also shows at least 2/3 of the English want EVEL. If Cameron does not act on that Farage will. I would also like EVEL to be combined with the transfer of more powers to councils etc, maybe referendums on regional assemblies. However, whatever happens this must be taken cautiously and well worked out
Deliver Scotland then hammer Labour with "why do you hate England?" all the way to the ballot box
It will not happen, because half the tory party at least have made it clear they will vote against it. The rebellion against making English people second class voters would be enormous.
The tories would be fatally split going into 2015 and get stuffed.
On another note, if the Tories are now directly linking the promises that Cameron made to Scottish voters with Labour agreeing to their proposals for EV4EL then I cannot help feeling they are making a huge mistake.
Lying to the Scots is a bad idea - not only for the Tories' slim chances in Scotland, but also because voters everywhere can spot this kind of thing even when it does not directly concern them. All TV and radio interviews that all Tories do on this subject will cover the fact that Cameron made no mention of anything to do with England when he signed that Vow - and that he had time to clarify his position before the referendum, but did not.
But the same goes for the other two leaders as well - Miliband's proposal to kick the issue into the long grass only occurred after the vote. Since Labour witters constantly on about 'fairness', it is odd that they do not want to see the democratic deficit addressed.
Cameron can easily - and correctly - say that Labour has no intention to correct the imbalance, as they made it much worse with devolution and did nothing to address it. Tying it with the increased powers to Scotland stands a good chance of forcing it through.
Miliband's on the wrong side on this. Worse, his own proposal is utterly nonsensical and self-serving.
No - the leaders all made specific and time-lined commitments to Scotland in which there was no mention of anything having to be agreed for England in return for delivery. I have seen no evidence that Labour is backtracking on that. The Tories seem to be. If they are, then in my view it is a very bad mistake - not only will it ensure that the Union comes tom an end, but it will also harm them more widely.
Do you really think Mili will deliver without addressing the English deficit?
Labour may well be harmed if further powers are devolved to Scotland and the democratic deficit in England is not seen to be addressed to some extent. In fact, if the media get on board then they will be absolutely hammered. And they will deserve to be as the undemocratic, self-serving and nasty party they are.
Scotland have had their say. It looks as though Labour's word is "screw England!"
That would indeed be the right message for the Tories to run with and in opposing EV4EL Labour is needlessly lining itself up to face that charge. My point is that is the Tories are now linking the clear promise Cameron made to Labour support for EV4EL they are over-reaching themselves spectacularly - not only will they more or less ensure the end of the Union, but they will also expose themselves to accusations of lying that will be heard and understood by voters in England.
It will be interesting to see Salmond's take on ev4el and the vow -- both Labour and Tories are against separation, and the SNP already implements its own take on ev4el.
SO Devomax was not on the ballot paper, if the Scots wanted to be certain of more powers for Holyrood then they should have been certain to vote Yes. As today's Mail poll shows Scots do not want another independence referendum for at least a generation.
However, if we are going to get Devomax then England has to be included in the conversation, today's polling also shows at least 2/3 of the English want EVEL. If Cameron does not act on that Farage will. I would also like EVEL to be combined with the transfer of more powers to councils etc, maybe referendums on regional assemblies. However, whatever happens this must be taken cautiously and well worked out
Cameron made a very specific set of time-lined promises and put his name to them. There is no getting round that.
but they will also expose themselves to accusations of lying that will be heard and understood by voters in England.
I think you are completely wrong. Voters judge politicians by their actions. The conservatives could hardly accuse labour of being the anti English party, having just railroaded their MPs through the divisions to reduce the power of English voters themselves.
Most of those MPs would never go through the divisions on that basis anyway.
1) Make Hague's leadership of a new process a "Hague Commission", with a set of constitutional experts and consultation before reporting in January. That will destroy the "back of a fag packet" argument.
2) Keep Scottish new powers and EWNI devolution attached in a bill for six months, and then a month before the election, separate them, so that the Scottish bill passes and the English bill gets blocked by Labour. That will destroy the "Conservatives are breaking their promise to Scotland".
3) Make sure the devomax powers to Scotland are enough that they don't make sense to give those powers to city regions. If it includes things like welfare and corporation tax changes, then obviously that would be max to have different JSA and tax rates in Kent, London and Essex. This would force Labour to either oppose some powers for Scotland, meaning they'll piss of the Scots as well as the English, or to have to back something that they can't support for English regions.
On another note, if the Tories are now directly linking the promises that Cameron made to Scottish voters with Labour agreeing to their proposals for EV4EL then I cannot help feeling they are making a huge mistake.
Lying to the Scots is a bad idea - not only for the Tories' slim chances in Scotland, but also because voters everywhere can spot this kind of thing even when it does not directly concern them. All TV and radio interviews that all Tories do on this subject will cover the fact that Cameron made no mention of anything to do with England when he signed that Vow - and that he had time to clarify his position before the referendum, but did not.
But the same goes for the other two leaders as well - Miliband's proposal to kick the issue into the long grass only occurred after the vote. Since Labour witters constantly on about 'fairness', it is odd that they do not want to see the democratic deficit addressed.
Cameron can easily - and correctly - say that Labour has no intention to correct the imbalance, as they made it much worse with devolution and did nothing to address it. Tying it with the increased powers to Scotland stands a good chance of forcing it through.
Miliband's on the wrong side on this. Worse, his own proposal is utterly nonsensical and self-serving.
No - the leaders all made specific and time-lined commitments to Scotland in which there was no mention of anything having to be agreed for England in return for delivery. I have seen no evidence that Labour is backtracking on that. The Tories seem to be. If they are, then in my view it is a very bad mistake - not only will it ensure that the Union comes tom an end, but it will also harm them more widely.
It would have helped it they had promised something they can actually deliver, such as to put something to Parliament and try get it passed. But trying to deliver a whole-Union solution seems the best thing to do. The Scots will understand that, they have been worried about their constitutional position for years (unlike the English who have let it go over their heads). The two can be worked on simultaneously. If the English bit starts to unravel because there is no agreement between the parties, then a view can be taken at that point. Yes I know there is no agreement at the moment, but that's how negotiations start.
Mr. Observer, it's not lying to promise powers for Scotland, propose powers for Scotland and vote for powers for Scotland. Addressing the indefensible position of Scottish MPs voting on non-Scottish matters is necessary for England to have any semblance of fairness.
Of course, Miliband's full of shit on this. He loves devolution for Scotland but when it comes to tiniest level of devolution for England he wants to dither, dally and delay.
Labour ARE looking at EV4EL - that's why we've proposed a constitutional convention to agree on e hat we do.
The complaint at the current system is simple - Scotland has a parliament, England hasn't. Creating a Grand Committee of Parliament to deal with English issues is a 2nd class status for England - everyone else needs a parliament or assembly, we don't. Farage gets this, he's proposed an English parliament. Labour get this, have proposed a convention to look at parliaments or assemblies for England. We don't know what the yellow pox want (and it doesn't entirely matter....) But with their federal party structure I'd love them to argue against at least a parliament for England.
So its ONLY the Tories against an English parliament. Only the Tories ruling it out, preferring a 2nd rate solution for an England they don't see as comparable to Scotland. And this is why their position is going to unravel. They've tried to go pro-England unravel the pledge set a bear trap for Labour, and the only people falling in are themselves.
If a Grand Committee was the obvious solution to a post referendum Scotland they've had several years to propose it.
To be fair, Miliband is both ambitious and consistent. He shafted his own brother, now he wants to shaft everyone in England.
Cameron wants to fulfil the Scottish powers promise, and he wants fairness for England. Do the Lib Dems and Labour want to vote down some measure of fairness for England and hereby fail to honour the promise to Scotland?
Labour and the LDs want Cameron to keep the clear and unequivocal promise he made to Scotland. It is up to him to decide whether he wishes to do so. If he chooses not to, he will not only throw away the Union, he will also show himself to be a liar. These may not be electorally popular things to do.
@politicshome: Shadow Bis Sec Chuka Umunna on devolution: “What you are seeing is the Prime Minster here behaving in a dishonourable way.” @JPonpolitics
Deliver Scotland then hammer Labour with "why do you hate England?" all the way to the ballot box
It will not happen, because half the tory party at least have made it clear they will vote against it. The rebellion against making English people second class voters would be enormous.
The tories would be fatally split going into 2015 and get stuffed.
So Dave made a bit of a mistake when he signed the vow then.
So its ONLY the Tories against an English parliament. Only the Tories ruling it out, preferring a 2nd rate solution for an England they don't see as comparable to Scotland. And this is why their position is going to unravel. They've tried to go pro-England unravel the pledge set a bear trap for Labour, and the only people falling in are themselves.
That would indeed be the right message for the Tories to run with and in opposing EV4EL Labour is needlessly lining itself up to face that charge. My point is that is the Tories are now linking the clear promise Cameron made to Labour support for EV4EL they are over-reaching themselves spectacularly - not only will they more or less ensure the end of the Union, but they will also expose themselves to accusations of lying that will be heard and understood by voters in England.
What rubbish. It's just as easy to day that Labour's position of not addressing the democratic deficit will lead to the end of the union as the English get pi**ed off at being treated as second-class citizens.
Which is exactly how Labour treat them.
It's also fertile ground for UKIP and other parties. I cannot see how more powers can be given to Scotland *without* progress in England. It would be interesting to see what the Scots themselves feel about this ...
Mr. Observer, it's not lying to promise powers for Scotland, propose powers for Scotland and vote for powers for Scotland. Addressing the indefensible position of Scottish MPs voting on non-Scottish matters is necessary for England to have any semblance of fairness.
Of course, Miliband's full of shit on this. He loves devolution for Scotland but when it comes to tiniest level of devolution for England he wants to dither, dally and delay.
It is lying to specifically promise to deliver on something and then not to deliver it.
Miliband is certainly full of shit on this, but he is not now threatening to renege on the specific promise that all three leaders made to the Scots.
Is the big question on EVFEL not: Where are the LibDems?
Dave could safely split the Vow and EVFEL into two bills and pass both if Clegg and the LibDems are there. I think he'd have the Scottish, Welsh and NI votes too (plus potentially some honourable Labour rebel / marginal seat votes). Labour don't have a majority.
This whole Sindy thing for weeks - Clegg has not put his head above the parapet even once.
Mr. Observer, it's not lying to promise powers for Scotland, propose powers for Scotland and vote for powers for Scotland. Addressing the indefensible position of Scottish MPs voting on non-Scottish matters is necessary for England to have any semblance of fairness.
Of course, Miliband's full of shit on this. He loves devolution for Scotland but when it comes to tiniest level of devolution for England he wants to dither, dally and delay.
It is lying to specifically promise to deliver on something and then not to deliver it.
Miliband is certainly full of shit on this, but he is not now threatening to renege on the specific promise that all three leaders made to the Scots.
Which is why they should deliver it. But they should keep it attached to the English, Welsh and Northern Ireland bills until the last moment, so everyone is absolutely clear where Labour stand.
Labour ARE looking at EV4EL - that's why we've proposed a constitutional convention to agree on e hat we do.
The complaint at the current system is simple - Scotland has a parliament, England hasn't. Creating a Grand Committee of Parliament to deal with English issues is a 2nd class status for England - everyone else needs a parliament or assembly, we don't. Farage gets this, he's proposed an English parliament. Labour get this, have proposed a convention to look at parliaments or assemblies for England. We don't know what the yellow pox want (and it doesn't entirely matter....) But with their federal party structure I'd love them to argue against at least a parliament for England.
So its ONLY the Tories against an English parliament. Only the Tories ruling it out, preferring a 2nd rate solution for an England they don't see as comparable to Scotland. And this is why their position is going to unravel. They've tried to go pro-England unravel the pledge set a bear trap for Labour, and the only people falling in are themselves.
If a Grand Committee was the obvious solution to a post referendum Scotland they've had several years to propose it.
"Labour ARE looking at EV4EL - that's why we've proposed a constitutional convention to agree on e hat we do."
No. Miliband's already decided it would be regional governments, and is going to fill the committees with placemen. He has also firmly kicked it into the long grass, saying it will only be started after the next GE.
History shows us one thing: Labour cannot be trusted on this. They kicked it into the long grass after devolution, and are kicking it into the long grass now.
I know we have a quite a lot of horsey fans on here - thought you'd enjoy this piece about riding zebras, and how to start a horse in 30mins. I think this book will be on my Christmas list.
@politicshome: Shadow Bis Sec Chuka Umunna on devolution: “What you are seeing is the Prime Minster here behaving in a dishonourable way.” @JPonpolitics
I really do fear The Stupid Party is too stupid to see that this is how the nation will view it, our reaffirmed Scottish cousins particularly.
There will be riots in George Square and elsewhere if Cameron is shown to have blocked delivery of The Vow because he wanted to move the goalposts and tie it up with his entirely reasonable and correct policy on EVEL, but which was not a stated pre-condition when he signed up to the further Scottish powers.
He can certainly push EVEL on the same timetable as for Scotland's new powers, and exploit that for all it's worth against EdM, but he would be making the most fatal mistake in the modern history of the Tory Party and the Union if he sunk Scotland's new powers because he didn't get EVEL before the GE.
1) Make Hague's leadership of a new process a "Hague Commission", with a set of constitutional experts and consultation before reporting in January. That will destroy the "back of a fag packet" argument.
2) Keep Scottish new powers and EWNI devolution attached in a bill for six months, and then a month before the election, separate them, so that the Scottish bill passes and the English bill gets blocked by Labour. That will destroy the "Conservatives are breaking their promise to Scotland".
3) Make sure the devomax powers to Scotland are enough that they don't make sense to give those powers to city regions. If it includes things like welfare and corporation tax changes, then obviously that would be max to have different JSA and tax rates in Kent, London and Essex. This would force Labour to either oppose some powers for Scotland, meaning they'll piss of the Scots as well as the English, or to have to back something that they can't support for English regions.
But they should keep it attached to the English, Welsh and Northern Ireland bills until the last moment, so everyone is absolutely clear where Labour stand.
No. Why? because the electorate will see the tory MPs , after furious infighting., trooping through the lobbies in April 2015 to make them second class voters. A month before the vote.
That would indeed be the right message for the Tories to run with and in opposing EV4EL Labour is needlessly lining itself up to face that charge. My point is that is the Tories are now linking the clear promise Cameron made to Labour support for EV4EL they are over-reaching themselves spectacularly - not only will they more or less ensure the end of the Union, but they will also expose themselves to accusations of lying that will be heard and understood by voters in England.
What rubbish. It's just as easy to day that Labour's position of not addressing the democratic deficit will lead to the end of the union as the English get pi**ed off at being treated as second-class citizens.
Which is exactly how Labour treat them.
It's also fertile ground for UKIP and other parties. I cannot see how more powers can be given to Scotland *without* progress in England. It would be interesting to see what the Scots themselves feel about this ...
Are you seriously suggesting that the Vow Cameron signed was not binding? And that it is anything other than anti-democratic for a leader to make a specific, time-lined promise and them not to keep it?
Labour is clearly not addressing England's democratic deficit. I am not defending Labour's position - it is wrong and it is unsustainable. But I am afraid that does not let Cameron off the hook. He did not couple EV4EL to the promise he made to the Scottish people. That is just a matter of verifiable fact.
He can certainly push EVEL on the same timetable as for Scotland's new powers, and exploit that for all it's worth against EdM, but he would be making the most fatal mistake in the modern history of the Tory Party and the Union if he sunk Scotland's new powers because he didn't get EVEL before the GE.
It is perfectly simple.
And that's simply not what is happening.
The only person who threatens the process is Ed
If Cameron links EV4EL to the Scottish devo bill, the only people voting against will be Labour
SO He made a timetable to begin plans for constitutional reform, but England has to be a part of that too. Independence was clearly rejected by the Scots, devomax was not on the ballot paper. If devomax is going to occur then the unfairness of Scots MPs voting on English legislation while English MPs cannot do the same in Scotland has to be addressed, I do not see on what grounds you can possibly justify it?
On another note, if the Tories are now directly linking the promises that Cameron made to Scottish voters with Labour agreeing to their proposals for EV4EL then I cannot help feeling they are making a huge mistake.
Lying to the Scots is a bad idea - not only for the Tories' slim chances in Scotland, but also because voters everywhere can spot this kind of thing even when it does not directly concern them. All TV and radio interviews that all Tories do on this subject will cover the fact that Cameron made no mention of anything to do with England when he signed that Vow - and that he had time to clarify his position before the referendum, but did not.
This is such an easy win for Cameron. Deliver on Scotland. Separately put forward legislation on EVEL and fight GE2015 on Ed's refusal to grant it (and his refusal on fair constituency boundaries too).
By linking the two he is holding a gun to the heads of Scottish voters but it will end up being the Tory leader shooting himself in the foot.
Unlinking devolution from EVfEL would result in a loss for Cameron not a win, because devolution woud pass, and Cameron is against devolution.
@politicshome: Shadow Bis Sec Chuka Umunna on devolution: “What you are seeing is the Prime Minster here behaving in a dishonourable way.” @JPonpolitics
I really do fear The Stupid Party is too stupid to see that this is how the nation will view it, our reaffirmed Scottish cousins particularly.
There will be riots in George Square and elsewhere if Cameron is shown to have blocked delivery of The Vow because he wanted to move the goalposts and tie it up with his entirely reasonable and correct policy on EVEL, but which was not a stated pre-condition when he signed up to the further Scottish powers.
He can certainly push EVEL on the same timetable as for Scotland's new powers, and exploit that for all it's worth against EdM, but he would be making the most fatal mistake in the modern history of the Tory Party and the Union if he sunk Scotland's new powers because he didn't get EVEL before the GE.
It is perfectly simple.
It really, really is that simple, isn't it? Cameron made a promise to Scottish voters. If he does not keep it that will make him a liar and it will destroy the Union.
Comments
Ed Bolleaux is shadow chancellor. Funds will come from England's gold reserves innit,,,,
I think that all of us who canvass need to be wary that we're told things we want to hear. In my experience, comparing with previous canvasses is a good guide, everything else is candy-floss.
@oflynnmep: Ed Miliband dodging direct questions about English votes for English laws. He wants Scots MPs to repress England. Disgrace. #Marr
For example, is it, as I believe, simply a blocking mechanism preventing a UK government enacting England-only laws without the approval of English MPs? Or is it, as some others seem to think , a means of creating an English government within Parliament distinct from the UK government? Furthermore, if it is about fairness and ensuring the views of English voters are properly represented, would it be right to allow a party that 35% of voters in England have supported to block legislation proposed by parties that 50% of voters in England have supported? And so on.
A clever leader - ie, not Miliband - would have conceded the principle is a fair one and then said that he looked forward to seeing what the government proposed, knowing that whatever was proposed would in all likelihood be very easy to shoot down and to oppose with a rival proposition.
Very well in the turnout markets, less so on the final YES/NO market but well enough from a final projection five weeks out. No complaints from those who followed McARSE so far.
My main difficulty was getting a handle on the trend to YES and the differential turnout and I had to make an assessment on those vital factors too far out.
Imagine the high fives at UKIP HQ. and CCHQ.
@tnewtondunn: Ed Mili is in favour of "more scrutiny" of English laws by English MPs, but not giving them full say; now or ever. This will hurt him. #Marr
£8 Minimum wage saves money as official figures show.
He alone possesses the intellectual self-confidence to oppose the perfidious capitalist Cameron, who seeks to buy vulgar popularity with the meaningless pledge to allow the English some form of governance!
Instead, Chairman Miliband hears in his heart the dreams and desire of the workers. In Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland they yearn for the undeniable right to run their own affairs. Who are the Westminster elite to deny them this most basic of democratic rights!?
On a more serious note, this from Clegg:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-scotland-29299638
""Of course we need a solution to this dilemma but, by appearing to link it to the delivery of further devolution to Scotland, they risk reneging on the commitment made to the Scottish people that, in the event of a No vote, new powers would come what may.
"Worse still, if the Conservatives enter into a Dutch auction with Ukip over ever more extreme solutions to the issue of English votes they could jeopardise the union they purport to defend."
If preserving the union means second class status for England then the UK isn't worth keeping. All Englishmen want is equality, but the left seem to think devolution is for other people. If it's good enough for Scotland, it's good enough for England.
And the same for leaving EU if Labour win the election?
Lying to the Scots is a bad idea - not only for the Tories' slim chances in Scotland, but also because voters everywhere can spot this kind of thing even when it does not directly concern them. All TV and radio interviews that all Tories do on this subject will cover the fact that Cameron made no mention of anything to do with England when he signed that Vow - and that he had time to clarify his position before the referendum, but did not.
But since Labour re- introduced the internal market, there is a need for the MRI to be paid for by the GP organisation (PCT now CCG) which requires the GP to authorise it and for the PCT to agree a price. Then there is the small matter of viewing the scans. An orthpaedic surgeon needs more than a report, they need to see the images...
Enough from me, I have some things to do before watching Man Uniteds overpaid mercenaries against the best Leicester City team for 15 years.
UKIP support is increasing in the principality, too.
If the Tories actually delay Scotland because Labour have not signed up to England, you would be right, but that is not the prize.
The prize is the Tories (and UKIP) going into the election on "Labour are anti-English"
I am sorry but DH says that Ed Miliband is unsustainable full stop because he was made to look at Twat re David becoming leader.
Neither does Dave.
Who will the Scots blame if no devomax is delivered?
The conservatives? so what.
Labour? 40 seats
The 8.00 target is an increase of 3% pa over the time period + 24p.
That isn't Big change it is a complete insult and disaster to the low paid.
And I'm far from Labour in every way. The minimum wage is too low now. £8.00 ph is too low in 2020. It has negative effects by giving employers a fixed low point at which to start pay scales. It may protect some employees from unscrupulous employers.
By linking the two he is holding a gun to the heads of Scottish voters but it will end up being the Tory leader shooting himself in the foot.
If the tories let Scotland have devolution without reciprocal powers for England before 2015,. they are in as much trouble as labour. Maybe more.
We have four party politics now, and UKIP is lying in wait.
Once the principal source of political cleavage becomes race rather than class then the sky gets very dark indeed.
And UKIP will certainly benefit when the Tories unveil their proposals, which are bound to be far less revolutionary and much more technical than anything that those who really want England's voice (whatever that is) to be heard.
If the tories allow Scottish devolution with nothing for England before 2015 there will be a huge crack in the party and they will be hammered in England by UKIP.
Cameron would be crazy to do that and he won;t. He has nothing to lose in Scotland.
If I'd been in a position to carry on a final McARSE would have been about 2 points out. Ok-ish but adrift of the usual on the button standard PB comes to expect. Binary referendum of this importance are a nightmare and fortunately we'll not see another in Scotland well past my use by date !!
Cameron can easily - and correctly - say that Labour has no intention to correct the imbalance, as they made it much worse with devolution and did nothing to address it. Tying it with the increased powers to Scotland stands a good chance of forcing it through.
Miliband's on the wrong side on this. Worse, his own proposal is utterly nonsensical and self-serving.
I completely disagree. The Scots will surely understand that England should have what Scotland has. They don;t object to that. They don;t want their MPs voting on |English matters.
They aren't afraid of what government is formed in England.
Only labour are. Labour is in the way. Not the tories.
Also got right the turnout and the result.
Jack W was a long way out on the Yes % and if he is as wrong with ARSE Ed would be landslide PM.
I dont think he will be 4% wrong but to hang on every word of the man who says it is 100% certain Ed cannot be PM is pretty bonkers IMO
Cameron once again gets a daft idea, stands there with that swarmy superior look on his face that people want to punch, and does himself more damage. Farage once again has won the argument, Labour also agree on the need for a wider constitutional framework, the pox will vote for whatever they think will save their skins.
:tumbleweed:
"And UKIP will certainly benefit ..."
You hope. It's perfectly possible for the Conservatives (and Lib Dems?) to negotiate the waters and come out on top. EVEL first as it is relatively easy to do, followed by further change promised for later.
Simple, obvious politics, and Labour are on the wrong side. Again.
In fact I can imagine a discussion with my GP... "you can have one next week, it's in Sheffield but it's £100 cheaper so if you like I'll split the difference and give you £50 towards your travel"
* if there is a problem with confidentiality, just ask the patient, I have no problem with anyone seeing a picture of the inside of my knee.
(as I am a Civil Servant working for a Dept where the IT is out of the ark and not fit for purpose, and management do not see the utility of investing in it and improving staff productivity significantly, I realise this is probably pie-in-the-sky stuff).
This is why Labour has played things so badly. Ruling out the principle of EV4EL is not only anti-democratic, it is also politically stupid because it will be possible to drive a coach and horses through whatever the Tories come up with.
Labour may well be harmed if further powers are devolved to Scotland and the democratic deficit in England is not seen to be addressed to some extent. In fact, if the media get on board then they will be absolutely hammered. And they will deserve to be as the undemocratic, self-serving and nasty party they are.
Scotland have had their say. It looks as though Labour's word is "screw England!"
So Ed's position didn't last an hour between Marr and Murnaghan...
What would show the tories cannot be trusted is David Cameron turning his English power base into second class voters subject to the whims over what will to all intents and purposes be foreign MPs - without asking them.
Half the party at least would vote against that, it would be split down the middle in 2015 and get hammered in England by UKIP.
I'm sure that's what you, as a labour voter, would like to happen, but it won't.
To be fair, Miliband is both ambitious and consistent. He shafted his own brother, now he wants to shaft everyone in England.
Cameron wants to fulfil the Scottish powers promise, and he wants fairness for England. Do the Lib Dems and Labour want to vote down some measure of fairness for England and hereby fail to honour the promise to Scotland?
@DanHannanMEP: Ed Miliband may just have thrown away the general election. It's now clear that Labour is the party against fairness for England.
However, if we are going to get Devomax then England has to be included in the conversation, today's polling also shows at least 2/3 of the English want EVEL. If Cameron does not act on that Farage will. I would also like EVEL to be combined with the transfer of more powers to councils etc, maybe referendums on regional assemblies. However, whatever happens this must be taken cautiously and well worked out
It will not happen, because half the tory party at least have made it clear they will vote against it. The rebellion against making English people second class voters would be enormous.
The tories would be fatally split going into 2015 and get stuffed.
He has been set a very low bar at GE2015 by DH and the Tories
I think you are completely wrong. Voters judge politicians by their actions. The conservatives could hardly accuse labour of being the anti English party, having just railroaded their MPs through the divisions to reduce the power of English voters themselves.
Most of those MPs would never go through the divisions on that basis anyway.
1) Make Hague's leadership of a new process a "Hague Commission", with a set of constitutional experts and consultation before reporting in January. That will destroy the "back of a fag packet" argument.
2) Keep Scottish new powers and EWNI devolution attached in a bill for six months, and then a month before the election, separate them, so that the Scottish bill passes and the English bill gets blocked by Labour. That will destroy the "Conservatives are breaking their promise to Scotland".
3) Make sure the devomax powers to Scotland are enough that they don't make sense to give those powers to city regions. If it includes things like welfare and corporation tax changes, then obviously that would be max to have different JSA and tax rates in Kent, London and Essex. This would force Labour to either oppose some powers for Scotland, meaning they'll piss of the Scots as well as the English, or to have to back something that they can't support for English regions.
Of course, Miliband's full of shit on this. He loves devolution for Scotland but when it comes to tiniest level of devolution for England he wants to dither, dally and delay.
The complaint at the current system is simple - Scotland has a parliament, England hasn't. Creating a Grand Committee of Parliament to deal with English issues is a 2nd class status for England - everyone else needs a parliament or assembly, we don't. Farage gets this, he's proposed an English parliament. Labour get this, have proposed a convention to look at parliaments or assemblies for England. We don't know what the yellow pox want (and it doesn't entirely matter....) But with their federal party structure I'd love them to argue against at least a parliament for England.
So its ONLY the Tories against an English parliament. Only the Tories ruling it out, preferring a 2nd rate solution for an England they don't see as comparable to Scotland. And this is why their position is going to unravel. They've tried to go pro-England unravel the pledge set a bear trap for Labour, and the only people falling in are themselves.
If a Grand Committee was the obvious solution to a post referendum Scotland they've had several years to propose it.
@politicshome: Shadow Bis Sec Chuka Umunna on devolution: “What you are seeing is the Prime Minster here behaving in a dishonourable way.” @JPonpolitics
Which is exactly how Labour treat them.
It's also fertile ground for UKIP and other parties. I cannot see how more powers can be given to Scotland *without* progress in England. It would be interesting to see what the Scots themselves feel about this ...
Possibly. But I doubt its a mistake he will regret very much, politically,
* c.f. SoWo; :tumbleweed:.... :L
Miliband is certainly full of shit on this, but he is not now threatening to renege on the specific promise that all three leaders made to the Scots.
Dave could safely split the Vow and EVFEL into two bills and pass both if Clegg and the LibDems are there. I think he'd have the Scottish, Welsh and NI votes too (plus potentially some honourable Labour rebel / marginal seat votes). Labour don't have a majority.
This whole Sindy thing for weeks - Clegg has not put his head above the parapet even once.
The SNP could skewer labour by supporting English devolution. But I doubt they will
No. Miliband's already decided it would be regional governments, and is going to fill the committees with placemen. He has also firmly kicked it into the long grass, saying it will only be started after the next GE.
History shows us one thing: Labour cannot be trusted on this. They kicked it into the long grass after devolution, and are kicking it into the long grass now.
dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2763629/Your-eyes-not-deceiving-This-girl-really-riding-think-Prepare-amazed-magic-THE-ZEBRA-WHISPERER.html?ITO=1490&ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490
There will be riots in George Square and elsewhere if Cameron is shown to have blocked delivery of The Vow because he wanted to move the goalposts and tie it up with his entirely reasonable and correct policy on EVEL, but which was not a stated pre-condition when he signed up to the further Scottish powers.
He can certainly push EVEL on the same timetable as for Scotland's new powers, and exploit that for all it's worth against EdM, but he would be making the most fatal mistake in the modern history of the Tory Party and the Union if he sunk Scotland's new powers because he didn't get EVEL before the GE.
It is perfectly simple.
No. Why? because the electorate will see the tory MPs , after furious infighting., trooping through the lobbies in April 2015 to make them second class voters. A month before the vote.
Utterly lethal for the tories.
Labour is clearly not addressing England's democratic deficit. I am not defending Labour's position - it is wrong and it is unsustainable. But I am afraid that does not let Cameron off the hook. He did not couple EV4EL to the promise he made to the Scottish people. That is just a matter of verifiable fact.
The only person who threatens the process is Ed
If Cameron links EV4EL to the Scottish devo bill, the only people voting against will be Labour
This is not complicated