BBC Parliament marks the 40th anniversary of the historic October 1974 poll. A chance to relive the second General Election of 1974, which returned Harold Wilson to power with an overall majority of just three.
Alastair Burnet presents the BBC Election 74 results programme from Thursday 10 October 1974, with analysis by David Butler and Robert McKenzie (aided by his trusty swingometer) and interviews by Robin Day with leading political figures and commentators.
The BBC’s Michael Charlton is with Prime Minister Harold Wilson in his constituency of Huyton; David Dimbleby is with Conservative leader Edward Heath in Sidcup; and David Lomax is with Liberal leader Jeremy Thorpe in his Devon North constituency.
I think she makes a very valid point. Same reason credit cards and personal debt got out of hand -instant pain/deferred pleasure vs. instant pleasure/deferred pain. Until people see reward from paying off Britain's national debt -a reward of some sort, or penalty for failing to do so -a penalty of some sort, they will not be bothered about it.
Well, if you are standing for parliament, as she apparently is, then you could start by patiently explaining that the deficit and the NHS are not unrelated issues.
Looking at POTUS betting for 2016,Hilary Clinton is nailed on at 5-4.Elizabeth Warren has said she's not standing but would give her a good run for her money if she did.For 2020 onwards,like seeing a 2 year old first time out like Frankel,one for the future,Zephyr Teachout is an unpriced outsider.Timeform would mark her with a P.
You mean "nailed on as the Democrat candidate", not POTUS, surely?
You have to go back to FDR for the last time the Dems had 3-in-a-row (and then to well before Lincoln for another example).
Historical examples in such a small sample set are absurd to place confidence in. Especially as the current political alignment has only been forming since the 1960s.
Of course. It was the "nailed on" part I was objecting to. History is made to be broken, but the same history suggests it's far from the certainty being suggested. Here's the wonderful XKCD on the topic: http://xkcd.com/1122
I think "nailed on" is way over used in general. But Hillary Clinton has far better chances than the current odds suggest. There isn't a conceivable Republican majority in the electoral college without both Ohio and Florida, and Clinton polls well ahead in both of them, (particularly the former) with few undecideds. To believe the Republican party can win this election, you'd have to find someone that could reverse the situation in both states, despite very different demographics. Who can plausibly do that on the GOP side? Bush? Paul? Christie?
Surely, what will matter is how voters judge Obama's Presidency in two years' time?
If they view it as a success, I'm sure the Democratic candidate will win. If they don't, she won't.
I don't think that's the case, except in extreme situations. The American public seeing themselves as electing a candidate, not a party. In all likelihood, Obama's presidency will be seen in 2016 as a moderate disappointment, which won't be enough to tar Clinton.
Mr. Corporeal, you are being a silly sausage, and you know it.
Scotland has a Parliament. England does not.
Scottish MPs can vote on matters (which soon greatly expand in number) which do not affect their constituents. This is democratically indefensible.
It's bizarre that the left suddenly grows wary of devolution the instant it might be applied to England.
I acknowledge complaints about unfairness with the one sided nature of the situation.
But it's patently obvious that all MPs vote on matters not directly affecting their constituents pretty regularly. Urban/rural, inland/coastal and many other divides.
Yes but there's a certain reciprocity about the arrangement which feels democratic and fair, and [should] allow better scrutiny of the issues. To use your examples, inland MPs look at coastal issues, and coastal MPs look at inland issues.
There is no two-way street between spending on the English and Scottish NHS, or on tuition fees at the moment. The list will grow dramatically following devomax.
I've been busy today, any major political news happening?
Not really. Miliband and his aides are scurrying around trying to brief that leaving out the deficit in his speech wasn't a big deal. Parliament may also be recalled on Friday to debate the UK joining in airstrikes on IS.
I feel an Ed is so crap he must be descended from Carthage thread in the offing.
Morris' problem (and that generally of Eng Parl supporters) is they can cite no clear purpose for an EP short of it balancing some sort of perceived devolutionary injustice. It's a bit like the little sister who wants a new cocktail dress just because her older sister has one even though she no use for it. When you suggest city-regional devolution he flinches, even though there is a clear need for it and it has worked well in London.
"For most people, they don't understand what it [the deficit] is anyway. it's something that has been hyped by the Tories, who have made people scared of it. The NHS affects people's everyday lives," said Hanna Toms, Labour's Prospective Parliamentary Candidate for Truro and Falmouth.
I think she makes a very valid point. Same reason credit cards and personal debt got out of hand -instant pain/deferred pleasure vs. instant pleasure/deferred pain. Until people see reward from paying off Britain's national debt -a reward of some sort, or penalty for failing to do so -a penalty of some sort, they will not be bothered about it.
Illustrate the size of the deficit with graphics showing how many hospitals, nurses or schools that same amount of money would finance. Failing that, wide screen TV's or Hot Tubs.
"For most people, they don't understand what it [the deficit] is anyway. it's something that has been hyped by the Tories, who have made people scared of it. The NHS affects people's everyday lives," said Hanna Toms, Labour's Prospective Parliamentary Candidate for Truro and Falmouth.
I think she makes a very valid point. Same reason credit cards and personal debt got out of hand -instant pain/deferred pleasure vs. instant pleasure/deferred pain. Until people see reward from paying off Britain's national debt -a reward of some sort, or penalty for failing to do so -a penalty of some sort, they will not be bothered about it.
It would be interesting to see if there's any polling on whether people think the "deficit thingy" has actually already been sorted.
"For most people, they don't understand what it [the deficit] is anyway. it's something that has been hyped by the Tories, who have made people scared of it. The NHS affects people's everyday lives," said Hanna Toms, Labour's Prospective Parliamentary Candidate for Truro and Falmouth.
Yes but there's a certain reciprocity about the arrangement which feels democratic and fair, and [should] allow better scrutiny of the issues. To use your examples, inland MPs look at coastal issues, and coastal MPs look at inland issues.
There is no two-way street between spending on the English and Scottish NHS, or on tuition fees at the moment. The list will grow dramatically following devomax.
It's even clearer if you concentrate on voters, not MPs. Scottish voters get two bytes at the cherry: their representatives vote on Scottish-only stuff in Holyrood, AND their representatives in Westminster get to vote on English-only affairs.
"For most people, they don't understand what it [the deficit] is anyway. it's something that has been hyped by the Tories, who have made people scared of it. The NHS affects people's everyday lives," said Hanna Toms, Labour's Prospective Parliamentary Candidate for Truro and Falmouth.
Yes but there's a certain reciprocity about the arrangement which feels democratic and fair, and [should] allow better scrutiny of the issues. To use your examples, inland MPs look at coastal issues, and coastal MPs look at inland issues.
There is no two-way street between spending on the English and Scottish NHS, or on tuition fees at the moment. The list will grow dramatically following devomax.
It's even clearer if you concentrate on voters, not MPs. Scottish voters get two bytes at the cherry: their representatives vote on Scottish-only stuff in Holyrood, AND their representatives in Westminster get to vote on English-only affairs.
And their votes also help support both the Scottish government, who oversee Scottish departments, and the UK government, who oversee English departments. What's to be done to stop that injustice?
"For most people, they don't understand what it [the deficit] is anyway. it's something that has been hyped by the Tories, who have made people scared of it. The NHS affects people's everyday lives," said Hanna Toms, Labour's Prospective Parliamentary Candidate for Truro and Falmouth.
I think she makes a very valid point. Same reason credit cards and personal debt got out of hand -instant pain/deferred pleasure vs. instant pleasure/deferred pain. Until people see reward from paying off Britain's national debt -a reward of some sort, or penalty for failing to do so -a penalty of some sort, they will not be bothered about it.
It would be interesting to see if there's any polling on whether people think the "deficit thingy" has actually already been sorted.
Even if they do realise, they don't care. Lord Ashcroft in May found 60% saying either there was once a time for cuts but more are not needed, or that there were never any need for cuts in the first place:
AND more recently, this week's Ashcroft poll found 61% saying they thought the Tories had gone "too far" with the cuts, rising to 70% who said they feared they'd go too far in the future and that it was a reason to not vote for them:
"For most people, they don't understand what it [the deficit] is anyway. it's something that has been hyped by the Tories, who have made people scared of it. The NHS affects people's everyday lives," said Hanna Toms, Labour's Prospective Parliamentary Candidate for Truro and Falmouth.
Just catching up with this afternoon's events. Sounds like Burnham's stock is rising, but I agree with the earlier poster who says Liz Kendal is one to watch. A future deputy leader perhaps?
I find it hard to accept some of the criticism from the right wing BBC towards Ed Miliband's so called omissions from his speech.It's been obvious he delegates more and more to his trusted team members.Too much power in one man is a bad thing.Despite this conspiracy of the elite,Ed has come out of conference with his intellectual self-confidence enhanced.
"For most people, they don't understand what it [the deficit] is anyway. it's something that has been hyped by the Tories, who have made people scared of it. The NHS affects people's everyday lives," said Hanna Toms, Labour's Prospective Parliamentary Candidate for Truro and Falmouth.
"For most people, they don't understand what it [the deficit] is anyway. it's something that has been hyped by the Tories, who have made people scared of it. The NHS affects people's everyday lives," said Hanna Toms, Labour's Prospective Parliamentary Candidate for Truro and Falmouth.
"For most people, they don't understand what it [the deficit] is anyway. it's something that has been hyped by the Tories, who have made people scared of it. The NHS affects people's everyday lives," said Hanna Toms, Labour's Prospective Parliamentary Candidate for Truro and Falmouth.
Looking at POTUS betting for 2016,Hilary Clinton is nailed on at 5-4.Elizabeth Warren has said she's not standing but would give her a good run for her money if she did.For 2020 onwards,like seeing a 2 year old first time out like Frankel,one for the future,Zephyr Teachout is an unpriced outsider.Timeform would mark her with a P.
You mean "nailed on as the Democrat candidate", not POTUS, surely?
You have to go back to FDR for the last time the Dems had 3-in-a-row (and then to well before Lincoln for another example).
Historical examples in such a small sample set are absurd to place confidence in. Especially as the current political alignment has only been forming since the 1960s.
Of course. It was the "nailed on" part I was objecting to. History is made to be broken, but the same history suggests it's far from the certainty being suggested. Here's the wonderful XKCD on the topic: http://xkcd.com/1122
I think "nailed on" is way over used in general. But Hillary Clinton has far better chances than the current odds suggest. There isn't a conceivable Republican majority in the electoral college without both Ohio and Florida, and Clinton polls well ahead in both of them, (particularly the former) with few undecideds. To believe the Republican party can win this election, you'd have to find someone that could reverse the situation in both states, despite very different demographics. Who can plausibly do that on the GOP side? Bush? Paul? Christie?
Surely, what will matter is how voters judge Obama's Presidency in two years' time?
If they view it as a success, I'm sure the Democratic candidate will win. If they don't, she won't.
I don't think that's the case, except in extreme situations. The American public seeing themselves as electing a candidate, not a party. In all likelihood, Obama's presidency will be seen in 2016 as a moderate disappointment, which won't be enough to tar Clinton.
And of course he followed a distinctly poor one.
There are a number of lists of US Presidents around which place them in order of merit, such as this one:
The surprising thing about these lists is just how much consensus there is. Obama appears destined for middling status. Poor old George may never get out of the bottom six.
Mr. Carnyx, beg to differ very greatly. Shortly after evolution became widely accepted the view that separate human species (most notably separated into groups like blacks, Indians, Chinese and white Europeans) existed and was used precisely to justify dominance of one group over another (for their own good, you understand).
Even races within white Europe (as it was) were seen by some to exist.
I recall reading about it at university.
Oh, undoubtedly there were people who thought that. Quite so. i thought I had catered for that but not enough, evidently, and you are quite right to being it up.
But there were also anti-evolutionists who used their presumption of separate divine creation of the 'races'* to make similar arguments - one thinks of Louis Agassiz for one (though in his case it was more nuanced than that simple account suggests and there is much debate, and I'm not sure of the current state of play).
My example of Robert Knox was - it seems but again is debated - an evolutionist but not a Darwinian one. He is a fine example of your kind of chap who saw races within Europe (Celt versus Saxon and all that: and as he was of partly German descent, his conclusion is perhaps not surprising).
To be pedantic, the original PB debate was, also, specifically on Darwinian evolutionary thought, which is a subset of wider evolutionary thought: but that's not a reason not to let the discussion evolve, so to speak.
*Quoting their views: nothing to do with mine, you understand.
I've been busy today, any major political news happening?
Not really. Miliband and his aides are scurrying around trying to brief that leaving out the deficit in his speech wasn't a big deal. Parliament may also be recalled on Friday to debate the UK joining in airstrikes on IS.
I feel an Ed is so crap he must be descended from Carthage thread in the offing.
He has now moved beyond crap and is approaching the threshold of being piss-poor.
I think she makes a very valid point. Same reason credit cards and personal debt got out of hand -instant pain/deferred pleasure vs. instant pleasure/deferred pain. Until people see reward from paying off Britain's national debt -a reward of some sort, or penalty for failing to do so -a penalty of some sort, they will not be bothered about it.
Well, if you are standing for parliament, as she apparently is, then you could start by patiently explaining that the deficit and the NHS are not unrelated issues.
You could, but she wants to get elected.
I've occasionally thought about this. I did think about a huge 'National Debt' monitor screen in parliament square, like the opposite of one of those Church roof thermometers, showing the money ebbing away. You could also do something like promise a national holiday when the debt starts going down (ha ha). Neither of which is a blindingly brilliant idea I'll admit.
"For most people, they don't understand what it [the deficit] is anyway. it's something that has been hyped by the Tories, who have made people scared of it. The NHS affects people's everyday lives," said Hanna Toms, Labour's Prospective Parliamentary Candidate for Truro and Falmouth.
"For most people, they don't understand what it [the deficit] is anyway. it's something that has been hyped by the Tories, who have made people scared of it. The NHS affects people's everyday lives," said Hanna Toms, Labour's Prospective Parliamentary Candidate for Truro and Falmouth.
They should have interviewed the pb poster who doesnt see a problem with running 10% + deficits every year for eternity.
*ears burn*
She's spot on, and her opinion is in line with the 60% of the public who see no need for 5 more years of cuts.
c.55% regard the cuts as being "necessary", according to Yougov.
Firstly, that question (usually) relates to the cuts that have happened so far. That's different to whether more cuts should happen, that first Ashcroft poll I quoted shows people make a distinction between those two questions. I accept that Labour lost the battle over whether there should've been cuts a long time ago, and it's pointless them trying to keep on with the argument that the economy would've grown quicker had they been in the last 5 years and not made cuts.
For what it's worth, I think the main reason people accepted the cuts as necessary was because it happened against the Eurozone crisis, and it was easy to point to that and think that's what could happen here. Because the Euro crisis has gone away (if it does flare up again then admittedly that would make things more difficult), it's just not the same now. Even if people are aware that the deficit is still high, I genuinely don't think they'd care all that much or see what harm would come of it staying high, since there's no sense of doom about the global economy like there was a few years ago.
I've been busy today, any major political news happening?
Not really. Miliband and his aides are scurrying around trying to brief that leaving out the deficit in his speech wasn't a big deal. Parliament may also be recalled on Friday to debate the UK joining in airstrikes on IS.
I feel an Ed is so crap he must be descended from Carthage thread in the offing.
The options are endless. Hope to get my own version of that thread in first ;-)
This is the bit in the Dan Hodges piece that we need to pay attention to now:
But consider this. Imagine if it came to light that in another region of the country, organised gangs of white men had been systematically engaging in the rape and abuse of black children. The local white community knew about it, but shielded the crimes behind a wall of silence. Officers in the local authority were aware of it, but were told by their political masters to keep quiet about the racial element of the crime for fear of offending their local constituency. Police officers who attempted to investigate where specifically warned by their superiors to ignore any racial aspect to the offences.
There would be a national outcry. The racism inherent in those crimes would not be pushed to the margins, but to the forefront of our enraged response. There would be a full public inquiry, along the lines of Lawrence. And that reaction would be wholly appropriate.
We're now almost a month after the Rotherham revelations came out. I appreciate that Stephen Lawrence was murdered, but surely 1400 rape victims ranks similarly in magnitude, and needs a similar response?
I didn't honestly pay much attention to that section of the Hodges piece because it has been said many times before, not least on PB, and struck me, therefore, as not adding much to one's understanding of what happened and why... However, it is interesting to contrast the Lawrence response to what is happening post Rotherham... It's worth remembering that the Lawrence enquiry didn't start until five years after the murder and that it was Jack Straw who made it happen upon becoming Home Secretary; also if was the Daily Mail that forced the issue by naming the murderers and challenging them to sue.. The point being that criminal, private prosecution and inquest procedures ran their course before McPherson got stuck Into the cultural issues at the Met...
It may be that there are similar procedures that need to be given time now, particularly the rebooted investigations across a number of forces that were announced a few weeks ago, but I do agree that May or Cameron should be standing up and saying there will be a McPherson style inquiry once criminal investigations have concluded... Let's see what is announced at the Tory conference....
I find it hard to accept some of the criticism from the right wing BBC towards Ed Miliband's so called omissions from his speech.It's been obvious he delegates more and more to his trusted team members.Too much power in one man is a bad thing.Despite this conspiracy of the elite,Ed has come out of conference with his intellectual self-confidence enhanced.
Ha Ha.
The man can remember the names of people he met in the park, but forgets about Immigration and the Deficit. Perhaps he should have prioritised more time towards rehearsing the latter as part of his speech?
"For most people, they don't understand what it [the deficit] is anyway. it's something that has been hyped by the Tories, who have made people scared of it. The NHS affects people's everyday lives," said Hanna Toms, Labour's Prospective Parliamentary Candidate for Truro and Falmouth.
I think she makes a very valid point. Same reason credit cards and personal debt got out of hand -instant pain/deferred pleasure vs. instant pleasure/deferred pain. Until people see reward from paying off Britain's national debt -a reward of some sort, or penalty for failing to do so -a penalty of some sort, they will not be bothered about it.
Illustrate the size of the deficit with graphics showing how many hospitals, nurses or schools that same amount of money would finance. Failing that, wide screen TV's or Hot Tubs.
Good idea. Or do a similar thing to the TPA's 'tax freedom day' but to illustrate the point where people's taxes stop paying debt interest and start paying for actual schools n' 'ospitals. But the problem is it's really not much more in the interests of the Conservatives to let people see how bad things have got than it is for Labour. As long as they win the 'prudent' argument with some guff about 'paying down our debt', they're happy.
Very sad to note the redoubtable Deborah Mitford, Dowager Duchess of Devonshire, has died aged 94. She was the youngest of the sometime notorious "Mitford Sisters".
If you want to read a memoir about a rather remarkable family at an important point in history, then her book "Wait for me!" is hard to beat. From the tragic fascist Unity to communist Jessica, through writer Nancy, they covered the gamut of pre-war politics.
I've been busy today, any major political news happening?
Not really. Miliband and his aides are scurrying around trying to brief that leaving out the deficit in his speech wasn't a big deal. Parliament may also be recalled on Friday to debate the UK joining in airstrikes on IS.
I feel an Ed is so crap he must be descended from Carthage thread in the offing.
He has now moved beyond crap and is approaching the threshold of being piss-poor.
So pisspoor he has a six point lead on the Tory party. They must be beyond classification!
I still think the idea to tax second properties would be a winner as it would reduce the destructive buy-to-let culture in the middle classes and allow younger people to get on the property ladder.
As someone who lives in rented accommodation part of me agrees. However as surveyor I also realise that the consequences of this would be that 10,000's of landlords would look to sell as they are barely servicing the loan as it is.
The consequences of the policy would be a lot of people being served two months notice to quit as their lease comes up for renewal.
I've been busy today, any major political news happening?
Not really. Miliband and his aides are scurrying around trying to brief that leaving out the deficit in his speech wasn't a big deal. Parliament may also be recalled on Friday to debate the UK joining in airstrikes on IS.
I feel an Ed is so crap he must be descended from Carthage thread in the offing.
He has now moved beyond crap and is approaching the threshold of being piss-poor.
So pisspoor he has a six point lead on the Tory party. They must be beyond classification!
Keep up the cheerleading Bob. Eventually you might believe it yourself.
we "need" a thread on hacking at the Mirror....., after years of dissembling... finally the truth. acc to the media show , the numbers of people hacked is considerable.
I've been busy today, any major political news happening?
Not really. Miliband and his aides are scurrying around trying to brief that leaving out the deficit in his speech wasn't a big deal. Parliament may also be recalled on Friday to debate the UK joining in airstrikes on IS.
I feel an Ed is so crap he must be descended from Carthage thread in the offing.
He has now moved beyond crap and is approaching the threshold of being piss-poor.
Haha, I might have to steal that.
You'll be delighted to know, following on from my successful tip last night of Southampton to beat Arsenal, I'm backing Forest to qualify/beat Spurs tonight, and Sheffield Wednesday to qualify/beat Man City.
@Danny565 - So, to get this straight, you think opinion polls can and should determine reality?
Yes, I do think that public opinion on what should happen to the economy should come first. Isn't that what democracy's all about? Aren't you PBTories constantly slamming Labour for ignoring public opinion on immigration and Europe? Why does the same not apply to the economy?
"For most people, they don't understand what it [the deficit] is anyway. it's something that has been hyped by the Tories, who have made people scared of it. The NHS affects people's everyday lives," said Hanna Toms, Labour's Prospective Parliamentary Candidate for Truro and Falmouth.
I think she makes a very valid point. Same reason credit cards and personal debt got out of hand -instant pain/deferred pleasure vs. instant pleasure/deferred pain. Until people see reward from paying off Britain's national debt -a reward of some sort, or penalty for failing to do so -a penalty of some sort, they will not be bothered about it.
It would be interesting to see if there's any polling on whether people think the "deficit thingy" has actually already been sorted.
I don't think it's a big issue for people. If they realised how much of their tax money went to paying it off, it might be.
Mr. Carnyx, beg to differ very greatly. Shortly after evolution became widely accepted the view that separate human species (most notably separated into groups like blacks, Indians, Chinese and white Europeans) existed and was used precisely to justify dominance of one group over another (for their own good, you understand).
Even races within white Europe (as it was) were seen by some to exist.
I recall reading about it at university.
Oh, undoubtedly there were people who thought that. Quite so. i thought I had catered for that but not enough, evidently, and you are quite right to being it up.
But there were also anti-evolutionists who used their presumption of separate divine creation of the 'races'* to make similar arguments - one thinks of Louis Agassiz for one (though in his case it was more nuanced than that simple account suggests and there is much debate, and I'm not sure of the current state of play).
My example of Robert Knox was - it seems but again is debated - an evolutionist but not a Darwinian one. He is a fine example of your kind of chap who saw races within Europe (Celt versus Saxon and all that: and as he was of partly German descent, his conclusion is perhaps not surprising).
To be pedantic, the original PB debate was, also, specifically on Darwinian evolutionary thought, which is a subset of wider evolutionary thought: but that's not a reason not to let the discussion evolve, so to speak.
*Quoting their views: nothing to do with mine, you understand.
Mr Dancer - just spotted that 'your kind of chap' could be misinterpreted. I was, of course, referring to the type of chap whose existence you adduced, not anything else. My apologies for any misunderstanding.
we "need" a thread on hacking at the Mirror....., after years of dissembling... finally the truth. acc to the media show , the numbers of people hacked is considerable.
I await with bated breath 1000's of hours of rolling news coverage, panorama specials, etc on the BBC covering this story...or not...
Looking at POTUS betting for 2016,Hilary Clinton is nailed on at 5-4.Elizabeth Warren has said she's not standing but would give her a good run for her money if she did.For 2020 onwards,like seeing a 2 year old first time out like Frankel,one for the future,Zephyr Teachout is an unpriced outsider.Timeform would mark her with a P.
You mean "nailed on as the Democrat candidate", not POTUS, surely?
You have to go back to FDR for the last time the Dems had 3-in-a-row (and then to well before Lincoln for another example).
Historical examples in such a small sample set are absurd to place confidence in. Especially as the current political alignment has only been forming since the 1960s.
Of course. It was the "nailed on" part I was objecting to. History is made to be broken, but the same history suggests it's far from the certainty being suggested. Here's the wonderful XKCD on the topic: http://xkcd.com/1122
-
-
-
And of course he followed a distinctly poor one.
There are a number of lists of US Presidents around which place them in order of merit, such as this one:
The surprising thing about these lists is just how much consensus there is. Obama appears destined for middling status. Poor old George may never get out of the bottom six.
My view is that Obama has been a good 7.5/10 president and does not get nearly enough credit for presiding over some very tough times, with a historically unprecedented opposition, and achieving some major successes. I suspect that Clinton will not be as good a president, but will be dealing with a better political environment, and thus get much more credit in the historical legacy. C'est la vie.
"For most people, they don't understand what it [the deficit] is anyway. it's something that has been hyped by the Tories, who have made people scared of it. The NHS affects people's everyday lives," said Hanna Toms, Labour's Prospective Parliamentary Candidate for Truro and Falmouth.
"For most people, they don't understand what it [the deficit] is anyway. it's something that has been hyped by the Tories, who have made people scared of it. The NHS affects people's everyday lives," said Hanna Toms, Labour's Prospective Parliamentary Candidate for Truro and Falmouth.
They should have interviewed the pb poster who doesnt see a problem with running 10% + deficits every year for eternity.
*ears burn*
She's spot on, and her opinion is in line with the 60% of the public who see no need for 5 more years of cuts.
c.55% regard the cuts as being "necessary", according to Yougov.
Firstly, that question (usually) relates to the cuts that have happened so far. That's different to whether more cuts should happen, that first Ashcroft poll I quoted shows people make a distinction between those two questions. I accept that Labour lost the battle over whether there should've been cuts a long time ago, and it's pointless them trying to keep on with the argument that the economy would've grown quicker had they been in the last 5 years and not made cuts.
For what it's worth, I think the main reason people accepted the cuts as necessary was because it happened against the Eurozone crisis, and it was easy to point to that and think that's what could happen here. Because the Euro crisis has gone away (if it does flare up again then admittedly that would make things more difficult), it's just not the same now. Even if people are aware that the deficit is still high, I genuinely don't think they'd care all that much or see what harm would come of it staying high, since there's no sense of doom about the global economy like there was a few years ago.
That 55% figure has remained steady for four years, though, as the cuts have been happening.
I was really replying to oxfordsimon - who believes the theory of evolution should overrule Christian belief. Very few people of any persuasion think the earth was created 6000 years ago, the comment was made only to devalue Christians. The theory of evolution led to staggering numbers of deaths in the last century, Christianity not so much.
Of course the fact of evolution should overrule Christian belief.
And how on earth did the scientific breakthrough that showed evolution was at the heart of the development of life on this planet lead to a "staggering number of deaths"?
You are clearly a fool and/or a troll.
Very few Christians don't accept evolution.
Darwin explains how. Faith explains why.
Two different questions, two different answers.
Faith cannot explain anything. It is an irrational position where you accept the existence of something for which there is absolutely no evidence and use the existence of that 'being' as the basis for a belief system.
There is no question that can ever be answered by Faith.
If you are going to get into semantics I'd accept that "it provides an answer" but doesn't "explain".
But tell me, Mr Rational, why did the universe begin? Not how (Big Bang, et al) but why.
Oh that's easy. Basically, without Politicalbetting there would be nothingness and that simply wouldn't do. The whole universe exists, because that is necessary for this site to exist.
Ah, the little known Political Betting anthropic principle. I would imagine most people would extend your hypothesis by adding '...in order for [insert name here] to read it'.
we "need" a thread on hacking at the Mirror....., after years of dissembling... finally the truth. acc to the media show , the numbers of people hacked is considerable.
(hacking at the Mirror) I await with bated breath 1000's of hours of rolling news coverage, panorama specials, etc on the BBC covering this story...or not...
You have got a very long wait. When hell freezes over.
we "need" a thread on hacking at the Mirror....., after years of dissembling... finally the truth. acc to the media show , the numbers of people hacked is considerable.
I await with bated breath 1000's of hours of rolling news coverage, panorama specials, etc on the BBC covering this story...or not...
Its scary stuff and the fact that Miliband forgot to/chose not to (take your pick on from this morning's rescue attempts) mention it it in his speech setting out his 10 year vision (or 50 year vision according to one poster here this morning) is quite astonishing.
The scary thing in this situation is always the growth in interest payments which has been very rapid, so that's a notable absence from an otherwise interesting and sobering article.
The budget 2014 estimate for 2014-15 was £53bn on debt interest payments. The governments income from council tax and business rates combined is £54bn, so pretty much those two taxes are required to fund our debt interest payments.
Indeed, Mr. Me. I think the estimate for next year was £65bn. That is more than 10% of all tax receipts, and of course every year until the deficit is eliminated we will be spending more and more on interest payments. Even with HMG's creative accounting it is not a situation that can go on indefinitely.
And to add to the issue - this is with Interest Rates at record lows... It's even scarier to contemplate even a 1% or 2% rate rise...
Osborne needs to throw a pretty tempting piece of red meat on the table next week, IMHO. It has to be something headline grabbing to entice voters in the marginals
1) Exempt main home from Inheritance Tax?
2) Start 45p Tax band at £65k, but abolish 40p band?
3) Remove Child Benefit freeze - it would wrong foot Labour terribly as it seems to be their only cut;
4) Divert X billion from overseas aid budget to the NHS. £2.5 billion and one pence (The Wenger move)
Legal papers seen by the BBC show alleged hacking could have taken place as early as 1998 but that the bulk of the alleged wrongdoing took place in the early 2000s when Piers Morgan was Daily Mirror editor.
@Danny565 - So, to get this straight, you think opinion polls can and should determine reality?
Yes, I do think that public opinion on what should happen to the economy should come first. Isn't that what democracy's all about? Aren't you PBTories constantly slamming Labour for ignoring public opinion on immigration and Europe? Why does the same not apply to the economy?
The problem is that a government is doing no one any favours if it just borrows heavily, permanently, in order to plug the gap (even if that's what most people want). Eventually, lenders won't lend, or will only lend on harsh terms.
I might wish that my income was bigger than it is, but I have to match my expenditure to my income.
Looking at POTUS betting for 2016,Hilary Clinton is nailed on at 5-4.Elizabeth Warren has said she's not standing but would give her a good run for her money if she did.For 2020 onwards,like seeing a 2 year old first time out like Frankel,one for the future,Zephyr Teachout is an unpriced outsider.Timeform would mark her with a P.
You mean "nailed on as the Democrat candidate", not POTUS, surely?
You have to go back to FDR for the last time the Dems had 3-in-a-row (and then to well before Lincoln for another example).
Historical examples in such a small sample set are absurd to place confidence in. Especially as the current political alignment has only been forming since the 1960s.
Of course. It was the "nailed on" part I was objecting to. History is made to be broken, but the same history suggests it's far from the certainty being suggested. Here's the wonderful XKCD on the topic: http://xkcd.com/1122
-
-
-
And of course he followed a distinctly poor one.
There are a number of lists of US Presidents around which place them in order of merit, such as this one:
The surprising thing about these lists is just how much consensus there is. Obama appears destined for middling status. Poor old George may never get out of the bottom six.
My view is that Obama has been a good 7.5/10 president and does not get nearly enough credit for presiding over some very tough times, with a historically unprecedented opposition, and achieving some major successes. I suspect that Clinton will not be as good a president, but will be dealing with a better political environment, and thus get much more credit in the historical legacy. C'est la vie.
Perhaps, Socrates, but she'll never get her golf handicap down to his.
"For most people, they don't understand what it [the deficit] is anyway. it's something that has been hyped by the Tories, who have made people scared of it. The NHS affects people's everyday lives," said Hanna Toms, Labour's Prospective Parliamentary Candidate for Truro and Falmouth.
I think she makes a very valid point. Same reason credit cards and personal debt got out of hand -instant pain/deferred pleasure vs. instant pleasure/deferred pain. Until people see reward from paying off Britain's national debt -a reward of some sort, or penalty for failing to do so -a penalty of some sort, they will not be bothered about it.
It would be interesting to see if there's any polling on whether people think the "deficit thingy" has actually already been sorted.
Even if they do realise, they don't care. Lord Ashcroft in May found 60% saying either there was once a time for cuts but more are not needed, or that there were never any need for cuts in the first place:
AND more recently, this week's Ashcroft poll found 61% saying they thought the Tories had gone "too far" with the cuts, rising to 70% who said they feared they'd go too far in the future and that it was a reason to not vote for them:
Thing is ya see, mid-term all of this is just white noise. People will certainly start to see the point and 'get it' when their brains are switched on to the GE around March and April 2015. Miliband is screwed.
From a betting point of view there's less value in the Tories but then that was true of the No vote too, and look what happened. The markets know the way this is going.
Come the spring Labour are toast. A piece of mould-riddled burnt old crust found down the side of the cooker at that.
I find it hard to accept some of the criticism from the right wing BBC towards Ed Miliband's so called omissions from his speech.It's been obvious he delegates more and more to his trusted team members.Too much power in one man is a bad thing.Despite this conspiracy of the elite,Ed has come out of conference with his intellectual self-confidence enhanced.
Ha Ha.
The man can remember the names of people he met in the park, but forgets about Immigration and the Deficit. Perhaps he should have prioritised more time towards rehearsing the latter as part of his speech?
Miliband's a dud.
He's a poor communicator, but when it comes to strategic thinking he can rung rings round Cameron - and that is why I think he's likely to be in Downing Street this time next year.
I still think the idea to tax second properties would be a winner as it would reduce the destructive buy-to-let culture in the middle classes and allow younger people to get on the property ladder. As someone who lives in rented accommodation part of me agrees. However as surveyor I also realise that the consequences of this would be that 10,000's of landlords would look to sell as they are barely servicing the loan as it is. The consequences of the policy would be a lot of people being served two months notice to quit as their lease comes up for renewal.
So in the short term thousands of homeless and thousands more bankrupt? Anyone spot the problem?
PS In London the rental returns are far lower than the rest of the UK. There is little gain investing in such property in London. Outside London is different.
For next Labour leader betting,in the event of Ed falling under the proverbial bus,the 8-1 on offer on Andy Burnham still looks big.He seems sure to be a runner and the price can only contract.This was advised at bigger odds on PB.Piggybacking is worth consideration IMHO.
I've been busy today, any major political news happening?
Not really. Miliband and his aides are scurrying around trying to brief that leaving out the deficit in his speech wasn't a big deal. Parliament may also be recalled on Friday to debate the UK joining in airstrikes on IS.
I feel an Ed is so crap he must be descended from Carthage thread in the offing.
He has now moved beyond crap and is approaching the threshold of being piss-poor.
Haha, I might have to steal that.
You'll be delighted to know, following on from my successful tip last night of Southampton to beat Arsenal, I'm backing Forest to qualify/beat Spurs tonight, and Sheffield Wednesday to qualify/beat Man City.
(I also did tip Boro to beat Liverpool as well)
I would also put money on Palace to beat Newcastle, but the odds are probably too short.
'Len McCluskey, the leader of the Unite trade union which is one of Labour's biggest backers, said that the failure to mention the deficit was a "glaring omission".'
I've been busy today, any major political news happening?
Not really. Miliband and his aides are scurrying around trying to brief that leaving out the deficit in his speech wasn't a big deal. Parliament may also be recalled on Friday to debate the UK joining in airstrikes on IS.
I feel an Ed is so crap he must be descended from Carthage thread in the offing.
He has now moved beyond crap and is approaching the threshold of being piss-poor.
Haha, I might have to steal that.
You'll be delighted to know, following on from my successful tip last night of Southampton to beat Arsenal, I'm backing Forest to qualify/beat Spurs tonight, and Sheffield Wednesday to qualify/beat Man City.
(I also did tip Boro to beat Liverpool as well)
I predict a loss double - vs Forest tonight comfortably and then by 4 goals+ against the Goners on Saturday. Pardew will be thanking Poch my sunday.
Today was the day when the Magic Sign was out-gunned by the Mighty Machine in terms of market capitalisation: Ladbrokes ........... £1,172.56 million Betfair ................. £1,195.97 million
How are the once mighty now fallen! I wonder what Cyril Stein would have made of it. Of course it wouldn't have happened in his day. Judging by the following extract from his entry in Wiki the old boy who died three years ago did all right for himself and for his shareholders:
"Cyril ran his own small credit-betting office in the West End of London when (aged 28) he teamed up in 1956 with his bookmaker uncle Mark, who traded as Max Parker, to buy the venerable but failing bookmarking firm of Ladbrokes, founded in 1886, for a reported £100,000."
Just catching up with this afternoon's events. Sounds like Burnham's stock is rising, but I agree with the earlier poster who says Liz Kendal is one to watch. A future deputy leader perhaps?
Liz Kendall has many talents! But probably a little soon to be next leader. Isn't always having a female deputy leader a little bit sexist though?
Just catching up with this afternoon's events. Sounds like Burnham's stock is rising, but I agree with the earlier poster who says Liz Kendal is one to watch. A future deputy leader perhaps?
Liz Kendall has many talents! But probably a little soon to be next leader. Isn't always having a female deputy leader a little bit sexist though?
Put the kettle on Luv!
Well Harriet Harman has to keep herself in a job somehow
'Len McCluskey, the leader of the Unite trade union which is one of Labour's biggest backers, said that the failure to mention the deficit was a "glaring omission".'
Oh. Dear.
They couldn't get rid of him this late in the day. Could they? What a betting bonanza that would be. I already have Darling as next leader from about two years ago.
Mr. Charles, is there anything wrong with the answer "We don't know"?
Absolutely not, and we don't have the capacity to prove anything one way or the other (hence "faith")
But @oxfordsimon seems convinced that there some answers that are empirically wrong - which I don't believe
@corporeal why not indeed. I'm not convinced that luck/coincidence can explain such a complex chain of events - the probabilities seem implausible. But we'll never know.
@Danny565 - So, to get this straight, you think opinion polls can and should determine reality?
Yes, I do think that public opinion on what should happen to the economy should come first. Isn't that what democracy's all about? Aren't you PBTories constantly slamming Labour for ignoring public opinion on immigration and Europe? Why does the same not apply to the economy?
Are you for real? You must either be a very stupid person, or a very, very clever person trying to wind up the rest of us.
Comments
BBC PARLIAMENT
BBC Election 74
BBC Parliament marks the 40th anniversary of the historic October 1974 poll. A chance to relive the second General Election of 1974, which returned Harold Wilson to power with an overall majority of just three.
Alastair Burnet presents the BBC Election 74 results programme from Thursday 10 October 1974, with analysis by David Butler and Robert McKenzie (aided by his trusty swingometer) and interviews by Robin Day with leading political figures and commentators.
The BBC’s Michael Charlton is with Prime Minister Harold Wilson in his constituency of Huyton; David Dimbleby is with Conservative leader Edward Heath in Sidcup; and David Lomax is with Liberal leader Jeremy Thorpe in his Devon North constituency.
Friday 10 October
9.00am-11.45pm
BBC PARLIAMENT
There is no two-way street between spending on the English and Scottish NHS, or on tuition fees at the moment. The list will grow dramatically following devomax.
She's spot on, and her opinion is in line with the 60% of the public who see no need for 5 more years of cuts.
What is the Green policy on deficit management? You keen on their economic proposals?
http://lordashcroftpolls.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/ANP-summary-140527.pdf
AND more recently, this week's Ashcroft poll found 61% saying they thought the Tories had gone "too far" with the cuts, rising to 70% who said they feared they'd go too far in the future and that it was a reason to not vote for them:
http://lordashcroftpolls.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/ANP-summary-140922.pdf
Labour Party candidate brands Sir Winston Churchill as 'racist white supremacist'
Mr Whittingham is the prospective parliamentary candidate for Wyre and Preston North and describes himself as a teacher and a socialist.
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/labour-party-candidate-brands-sir-winston-churchill-as-racist-white-supremacist-9749623.html
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/transport/tube-to-run-24hours-at-weekend-from-september-next-year-9752126.html
This should have happened years and year ago.
What vote percentages would be in line with
2/9 labour
3/1 ukip
?
45/30?
There are a number of lists of US Presidents around which place them in order of merit, such as this one:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_rankings_of_Presidents_of_the_United_States
The surprising thing about these lists is just how much consensus there is. Obama appears destined for middling status. Poor old George may never get out of the bottom six.
But there were also anti-evolutionists who used their presumption of separate divine creation of the 'races'* to make similar arguments - one thinks of Louis Agassiz for one (though in his case it was more nuanced than that simple account suggests and there is much debate, and I'm not sure of the current state of play).
My example of Robert Knox was - it seems but again is debated - an evolutionist but not a Darwinian one. He is a fine example of your kind of chap who saw races within Europe (Celt versus Saxon and all that: and as he was of partly German descent, his conclusion is perhaps not surprising).
To be pedantic, the original PB debate was, also, specifically on Darwinian evolutionary thought, which is a subset of wider evolutionary thought: but that's not a reason not to let the discussion evolve, so to speak.
*Quoting their views: nothing to do with mine, you understand.
I've occasionally thought about this. I did think about a huge 'National Debt' monitor screen in parliament square, like the opposite of one of those Church roof thermometers, showing the money ebbing away. You could also do something like promise a national holiday when the debt starts going down (ha ha). Neither of which is a blindingly brilliant idea I'll admit.
For what it's worth, I think the main reason people accepted the cuts as necessary was because it happened against the Eurozone crisis, and it was easy to point to that and think that's what could happen here. Because the Euro crisis has gone away (if it does flare up again then admittedly that would make things more difficult), it's just not the same now. Even if people are aware that the deficit is still high, I genuinely don't think they'd care all that much or see what harm would come of it staying high, since there's no sense of doom about the global economy like there was a few years ago.
It may be that there are similar procedures that need to be given time now, particularly the rebooted investigations across a number of forces that were announced a few weeks ago, but I do agree that May or Cameron should be standing up and saying there will be a McPherson style inquiry once criminal investigations have concluded... Let's see what is announced at the Tory conference....
The man can remember the names of people he met in the park, but forgets about Immigration and the Deficit. Perhaps he should have prioritised more time towards rehearsing the latter as part of his speech?
Miliband's a dud.
If you want to read a memoir about a rather remarkable family at an important point in history, then her book "Wait for me!" is hard to beat. From the tragic fascist Unity to communist Jessica, through writer Nancy, they covered the gamut of pre-war politics.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Wait-For-Me-Memoirs-Youngest/dp/1848541910
As someone who lives in rented accommodation part of me agrees. However as surveyor I also realise that the consequences of this would be that 10,000's of landlords would look to sell as they are barely servicing the loan as it is.
The consequences of the policy would be a lot of people being served two months notice to quit as their lease comes up for renewal.
finally the truth.
acc to the media show , the numbers of people hacked is considerable.
You'll be delighted to know, following on from my successful tip last night of Southampton to beat Arsenal, I'm backing Forest to qualify/beat Spurs tonight, and Sheffield Wednesday to qualify/beat Man City.
(I also did tip Boro to beat Liverpool as well)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-29352537
2) Start 45p Tax band at £65k, but abolish 40p band?
3) Remove Child Benefit freeze - it would wrong foot Labour terribly as it seems to be their only cut;
4) Divert X billion from overseas aid budget to the NHS. £2.5 billion and one pence (The Wenger move)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-29339756
Nothing more to add.
I might wish that my income was bigger than it is, but I have to match my expenditure to my income.
From a betting point of view there's less value in the Tories but then that was true of the No vote too, and look what happened. The markets know the way this is going.
Come the spring Labour are toast. A piece of mould-riddled burnt old crust found down the side of the cooker at that.
PS In London the rental returns are far lower than the rest of the UK. There is little gain investing in such property in London. Outside London is different.
http://politicalscrapbook.net/2014/09/standing-ovation-for-andy-burnham-at-labour-conference/
tom_watson@tom_watson·1 hr
Personally speaking this has been the most enjoyable labour conference I've ever attended. #lab14
Oh. Dear.
Ladbrokes ........... £1,172.56 million
Betfair ................. £1,195.97 million
How are the once mighty now fallen! I wonder what Cyril Stein would have made of it. Of course it wouldn't have happened in his day. Judging by the following extract from his entry in Wiki the old boy who died three years ago did all right for himself and for his shareholders:
"Cyril ran his own small credit-betting office in the West End of London when (aged 28) he teamed up in 1956 with his bookmaker uncle Mark, who traded as Max Parker, to buy the venerable but failing bookmarking firm of Ladbrokes, founded in 1886, for a reported £100,000."
Wow!
How many Westminster constituencies have a coastline?
Put the kettle on Luv!
But @oxfordsimon seems convinced that there some answers that are empirically wrong - which I don't believe
@corporeal why not indeed. I'm not convinced that luck/coincidence can explain such a complex chain of events - the probabilities seem implausible. But we'll never know.