In all seriousness, I think we will see that come by the time of the GE. The unions want it, polling suggests on the surface it is popular, and the first attempt at some sort of state actors competing in the market sunk, so wouldn't surprise me if we see some sort of re-announcement that involves ability to gerrymander that could lead to nationalisation in they wanted it to.
Makes the unions happy, punters think it sounds good, and you can make it not too scary by fudging it slightly.
Shame. I can remember how truly awful British Rail were. Even at their very worst, my local operator, South West trains don't even come close, and that's saying something.
@paulwaugh: Overheard. One Lab MP to another LabMP after EdM speech.:"Well, I can remember four of the six points.. "
It was too long. I was always told that if you are going to make any type of presentation, it should not be more than 20 minutes. This comes from research where it was found that 20 minutes was the optimum amount of time for audiences to remember information.
incidentally, re DLT and the researcher of 1995 who's now a personality. What are the rumours as to who it was? Was it Davina McCall? I first saw her in front of the camera in God's Gift in 1996.
To give Miliband some credit for his speech, he has at least decided not to hide from the basic left-right divide in British politics.
The Left believes in people doing things, solving problems "together". You could call this collectivist, socialist, possibly statist, depending on the details and what labels you want to throw around.
The Right believes in people doing things and improving them "individually". You could talk about personal liberty, self-responsibility, market efficiency over bureaucratic stasis, or abandoning people to fend for themselves, depending on the details and what labels you want to throw around.
I don't think Miliband is making this argument very well, and he still substitutes the State too often where non-state groups of people might take charge, but at least he isn't pretending that this ideological divide doesn't exist [unlike a notably unsuccessful Middle East Peace Envoy I could mention].
In all seriousness, I think we will see that come by the time of the GE. The unions want it, polling suggests on the surface it is popular, and the first attempt at some sort of state actors competing in the market sunk, so wouldn't surprise me if we see some sort of re-announcement that involves ability to gerrymander that could lead to nationalisation in they wanted it to.
Makes the unions happy, punters think it sounds good, and you can make it not too scary by fudging it slightly.
We're seven months off the election. How long are they going to wait?
One thing to Miliband and his team's credit is they are pretty good on timing on populist policies. Maybe they feel that this far out, whatever fudge they have in mind might get too much scrutiny and fall apart, or maybe he has bottled it (but I don't think so on this...they keep flag flying the idea of something on this area).
As a tweet below indicates, the energy policy is really odd.
2013: we will have an energy price freeze! Down with the evil energy companies!
2014: we will move to total no-carbon energy by 2030. Which, leaving aside some miraculous technological breakthrough, will require massive investment by the energy companies, along with massive rises in bills.
The two just don't go together. Why should the energy companies invest with him at the helm?
To give Miliband some credit for his speech, he has at least decided not to hide from the basic left-right divide in British politics.
The Left believes in people doing things, solving problems "together". You could call this collectivist, socialist, possibly statist, depending on the details and what labels you want to throw around.
The Right believes in people doing things and improving them "individually". You could talk about personal liberty, self-responsibility, market efficiency over bureaucratic stasis, or abandoning people to fend for themselves, depending on the details and what labels you want to throw around.
I don't think Miliband is making this argument very well, and he still substitutes the State too often where non-state groups of people might take charge, but at least he isn't pretending that this ideological divide doesn't exist [unlike a notably unsuccessful Middle East Peace Envoy I could mention].
The Right doesn't just believe in doing things "individually". Proper Burkean conservatism celebrates the "little platoons" of society.
16 year olds are still doing their GCSEs and learning about life. They are barely out of their teeny tantrum stage. They are also very susceptible to their peers - witness the report of a class of 16 year olds voting Yes because the cool guy in the class said it was the right thing to do. There is more of a case with 17 year olds who at least have made a decision whether to stay at school/college or go out to work.
The good news is that this time next year EdM will not be Labour leader.
The bad news is: did you hear Chuka on the Today programme this morning?
I did not, but I can imagine.
As I say, what Labour needs and deserves is a good kicking from UKIP. Now that Scotland has voted No, perhaps only that will shake the party leadership out of its complacency.
Burnham having a mare on the Mansion Tax 'how will you value homes?' 'I'm not a treasury minister' 'But you're spending the money on Doctors and Nurses'........
I have not heard the speech, but from the sound of it on here Ed gave the worst one ever delivered.
One of his witnesses in chief was an 80 year old bloke called Colin, who apparently remembered how bad things were before the NHS. Unfortunately, following a few more weeks of NHS care, Colin died; hence he couldn't testify personally.
Ed ended that section by saying "I can tell Colin, that I'll save the NHS" or somesuch.
This conveyed the impression that conference was in fact a séance.
Andy Slaughter MP@hammersmithandy·19 mins This is the best, most progressive and popular speech I've heard in 30 yrs coming to Labour conference. Policies that will win the Election
To give Miliband some credit for his speech, he has at least decided not to hide from the basic left-right divide in British politics.
The Left believes in people doing things, solving problems "together". You could call this collectivist, socialist, possibly statist, depending on the details and what labels you want to throw around.
The Right believes in people doing things and improving them "individually". You could talk about personal liberty, self-responsibility, market efficiency over bureaucratic stasis, or abandoning people to fend for themselves, depending on the details and what labels you want to throw around.
I don't think Miliband is making this argument very well, and he still substitutes the State too often where non-state groups of people might take charge, but at least he isn't pretending that this ideological divide doesn't exist [unlike a notably unsuccessful Middle East Peace Envoy I could mention].
Guido posted a version of this quote earlier. Whether or not you agree, it certainly reflects a widely held criticism.
I missed some of it as I was trying to do three things at once (never particularly good for any of the tasks). Was TSE's hunch right: were railways mentioned at all?
Burnham having a mare on the Mansion Tax 'how will you value homes?' 'I'm not a treasury minister' 'But you're spending the money on Doctors and Nurses'........
The valuation question is one that hardly anybody in the mainstream media raises. It is incredibly difficult to do and all the pressure will be on people selling homes for £1.9999999m etc. Also, the market is constantly in flux, as anybody glancing at the front of the Daily Express can tell you :-)
If the man from the government is going to do it, we know that is incredibly costly and time consuming, hence why council tax bands haven't been re-evaluated for donkeys years (far longer than was designed to be the case). How many people are going to appeal a decision etc.
And then that is before all sorts of fudges surrounding split homes, and I bet there will be some sort of sell the home, not the land / garden avoidance schemes.
Putting aside the "rich bashing", on the face of it, it sounds great, tax assets rather than income, but it is much more complex than on the surface. And this before we get to little old granny in her home of 50 years, who is asset rich cash poor...now I would say great that will free up big homes for families, but think of the uproar of the "Bedroom tax" making people move to different accommodation, how is forcing grannies out going to play out?
Just listened to the interview with the punter who had 900,000 on No in the referendum, having missed the thread completely.
Don't know about anybody else, but he didn't pass the smell test as far as I was concerned. He took 1/4 about an outcome that was as big as 2/5 for a while; he used a Bookie, rather than Betfair, where there was ample liquidity available; he didn't sound or talk like a punter; and he got on for a mega-amount with a firm that regularly knocks back fifty pound punters.
We sure this wasn't just a Hills PR stunt?
Probably, although you would be amazed at how many big punters take worse odds than betfair
Why would anyone, ever take bookie odds when betfair was better?? Mystifying
So how did he get on, Isam?
I can't get 900p on with Hills. Can you?
I can't get anything on the internet or phone, but I'm not banned from all their shops!
I guess if I wrote my name on the bankers draught for 900 large they would clock I was banned and not accept... But you'd just get a mate to put it on wouldn't you?
They'd want to know who and what you were, Isam, no?
I'm afraid the whole 900k story whiffs a bit.
PtP/isam - FWIW, I believe the bet was placed - you've answered your own questions really - Hills were substantially worse than betfair, the market was solid enough, there was publicity to be gained, so they were happy to lay the bet. The punter didn't use betfair because trying to get on for 900k on betfair would have driven the price far below 1/4 anyway.
Hills don't lay the likes of you two £9 since I'd imagine you're mostly interested in top prices
The one bit that strikes me as odd is that he claimed a Yes rally and No re-rally was factored into his calculations (a la Quebec). Why not wait until the rally and get a better price? Sounds like after-the-event rationalisation for a close shave: in reality he thought he was buying money.
I said about a week ago that UKIP had a good chance in Heywood & Middleton, particularly since Clacton already appears to be in the bag for them, which means they can send plenty of activists up to Greater Manchester rather than Essex.
I wouldn't rule out the possibility of a UKIP win in H&M, Andy, but the best UKIP bet by far remains, as it has been for a very long while, that they win at least one seat at the next GE.
Carswell is massive odds on to win Clacton which makes him a very strong favorite to retain the seat in May. Then there's Farage, Eastleigh, and any number of seaside and/or East Anglia constituencies. That's a lot of good prospects running for you.
You can still lay 'None' on Betfair at 1/6. That's a gift.
To give Miliband some credit for his speech, he has at least decided not to hide from the basic left-right divide in British politics.
The Left believes in people doing things, solving problems "together". You could call this collectivist, socialist, possibly statist, depending on the details and what labels you want to throw around.
The Right believes in people doing things and improving them "individually". You could talk about personal liberty, self-responsibility, market efficiency over bureaucratic stasis, or abandoning people to fend for themselves, depending on the details and what labels you want to throw around.
I don't think Miliband is making this argument very well, and he still substitutes the State too often where non-state groups of people might take charge, but at least he isn't pretending that this ideological divide doesn't exist [unlike a notably unsuccessful Middle East Peace Envoy I could mention].
Guido posted a version of this quote earlier. Whether or not you agree, it certainly reflects a widely held criticism.
Just listened to the interview with the punter who had 900,000 on No in the referendum, having missed the thread completely.
Don't know about anybody else, but he didn't pass the smell test as far as I was concerned. He took 1/4 about an outcome that was as big as 2/5 for a while; he used a Bookie, rather than Betfair, where there was ample liquidity available; he didn't sound or talk like a punter; and he got on for a mega-amount with a firm that regularly knocks back fifty pound punters.
We sure this wasn't just a Hills PR stunt?
Probably, although you would be amazed at how many big punters take worse odds than betfair
Why would anyone, ever take bookie odds when betfair was better?? Mystifying
So how did he get on, Isam?
I can't get 900p on with Hills. Can you?
I can't get anything on the internet or phone, but I'm not banned from all their shops!
I guess if I wrote my name on the bankers draught for 900 large they would clock I was banned and not accept... But you'd just get a mate to put it on wouldn't you?
They'd want to know who and what you were, Isam, no?
I'm afraid the whole 900k story whiffs a bit.
PtP/isam - FWIW, I believe the bet was placed - you've answered your own questions really - Hills were substantially worse than betfair, the market was solid enough, there was publicity to be gained, so they were happy to lay the bet. The punter didn't use betfair because trying to get on for 900k on betfair would have driven the price far below 1/4 anyway.
Hills don't lay the likes of you two £9 since I'd imagine you're mostly interested in top prices
The one bit that strikes me as odd is that he claimed a Yes rally and No re-rally was factored into his calculations (a la Quebec). Why not wait until the rally and get a better price? Sounds like after-the-event rationalisation for a close shave: in reality he thought he was buying money.
OK, TP, I'll accept that explanation, although he didn't sound much like a proper punter to me.
Looks like Nationals going to have home-field advantage. :-)
Just listened to the interview with the punter who had 900,000 on No in the referendum, having missed the thread completely.
Don't know about anybody else, but he didn't pass the smell test as far as I was concerned. He took 1/4 about an outcome that was as big as 2/5 for a while; he used a Bookie, rather than Betfair, where there was ample liquidity available; he didn't sound or talk like a punter; and he got on for a mega-amount with a firm that regularly knocks back fifty pound punters.
We sure this wasn't just a Hills PR stunt?
Probably, although you would be amazed at how many big punters take worse odds than betfair
Why would anyone, ever take bookie odds when betfair was better?? Mystifying
So how did he get on, Isam?
I can't get 900p on with Hills. Can you?
I can't get anything on the internet or phone, but I'm not banned from all their shops!
I guess if I wrote my name on the bankers draught for 900 large they would clock I was banned and not accept... But you'd just get a mate to put it on wouldn't you?
They'd want to know who and what you were, Isam, no?
I'm afraid the whole 900k story whiffs a bit.
PtP/isam - FWIW, I believe the bet was placed - you've answered your own questions really - Hills were substantially worse than betfair, the market was solid enough, there was publicity to be gained, so they were happy to lay the bet. The punter didn't use betfair because trying to get on for 900k on betfair would have driven the price far below 1/4 anyway.
Hills don't lay the likes of you two £9 since I'd imagine you're mostly interested in top prices
The one bit that strikes me as odd is that he claimed a Yes rally and No re-rally was factored into his calculations (a la Quebec). Why not wait until the rally and get a better price? Sounds like after-the-event rationalisation for a close shave: in reality he thought he was buying money.
OK, TP, I'll accept that explanation, although he didn't sound much like a proper punter to me.
Looks like Nationals going to have home-field advantage. :-)
All going to plan... mind you it was all going to plan in 2012, too, when I had a bit of 65.0 & 80.0 on them :-)
Comments
Refreshingly honest. I reckon that's the view of a number of labour MPs too. Particularly the English ones.
The Left believes in people doing things, solving problems "together". You could call this collectivist, socialist, possibly statist, depending on the details and what labels you want to throw around.
The Right believes in people doing things and improving them "individually". You could talk about personal liberty, self-responsibility, market efficiency over bureaucratic stasis, or abandoning people to fend for themselves, depending on the details and what labels you want to throw around.
I don't think Miliband is making this argument very well, and he still substitutes the State too often where non-state groups of people might take charge, but at least he isn't pretending that this ideological divide doesn't exist [unlike a notably unsuccessful Middle East Peace Envoy I could mention].
2013: we will have an energy price freeze! Down with the evil energy companies!
2014: we will move to total no-carbon energy by 2030. Which, leaving aside some miraculous technological breakthrough, will require massive investment by the energy companies, along with massive rises in bills.
The two just don't go together. Why should the energy companies invest with him at the helm?
Wonder if 'All Together Now' by The Farm is going to be the Labour 2015 campaign theme tune
Should be -as the next line is "in no mans land"
Especially given the high regard held nationwide for the current incumbent and his penchant for chillaxing and sleepwalking into peril...
As I say, what Labour needs and deserves is a good kicking from UKIP. Now that Scotland has voted No, perhaps only that will shake the party leadership out of its complacency.
Ed ended that section by saying "I can tell Colin, that I'll save the NHS" or somesuch.
This conveyed the impression that conference was in fact a séance.
Retweeted by Greg Hands
Andy Slaughter MP@hammersmithandy·19 mins
This is the best, most progressive and popular speech I've heard in 30 yrs coming to Labour conference. Policies that will win the Election
http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=bn7hAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA2009&lpg=PA2009
Don't think this is a game changer though - can't see much that will change the NOM GE result - that looks a sure banker...
Fine, last two - he got away with it last year and perhaps the year before.
He didn't get away with it this time.
If the man from the government is going to do it, we know that is incredibly costly and time consuming, hence why council tax bands haven't been re-evaluated for donkeys years (far longer than was designed to be the case). How many people are going to appeal a decision etc.
And then that is before all sorts of fudges surrounding split homes, and I bet there will be some sort of sell the home, not the land / garden avoidance schemes.
Putting aside the "rich bashing", on the face of it, it sounds great, tax assets rather than income, but it is much more complex than on the surface. And this before we get to little old granny in her home of 50 years, who is asset rich cash poor...now I would say great that will free up big homes for families, but think of the uproar of the "Bedroom tax" making people move to different accommodation, how is forcing grannies out going to play out?
Hills don't lay the likes of you two £9 since I'd imagine you're mostly interested in top prices
The one bit that strikes me as odd is that he claimed a Yes rally and No re-rally was factored into his calculations (a la Quebec). Why not wait until the rally and get a better price? Sounds like after-the-event rationalisation for a close shave: in reality he thought he was buying money.
C 291 (-5)
L 304 (+6)
LD 26 (-2)
UKIP 1 (+1)
OTH 28
Some upward movement from Labour mainly due to the good ICM they had in August - this will probably unwind when the next MEF is released.
Looks like Nationals going to have home-field advantage. :-)
Disaster for Ed.