On topic: Lord Ashcroft, as ever, makes some good points. In particular, he's probably right that the incumbency bonus has to be 'earned'.
What we don't know is whether opinion polls, even detailed constituency polls such as he is conducting, would pick up any such bonus, or whether it is something which shows up only in the actual vote. I don't know whether there has been any real research on this; it might be that the data is simply not there for previous elections. Nor do we know whether constituency polls are actually of much use.
My overall take on this is that they add a little bit of supplementary information, and are useful for betting purpose in a few constituencies, but that we need to be very aware of the margin of error in these polls and therefore not attribute to them a significance which exceeds their expected accuracy. Overall, you're probably better off going on headline national voting intention from a basket of reputable pollsters.
There's an identifiable effect when you specify "thinking about your own constituency", although of course that's not just incumbency.
I think Ashcroft's polling doesn't name the candidates, and polls that have show a boost for candidates with a higher profile in the constituency.
@TGOHF As "any fule no", the figures are an estimate subject to revision. Which means the previous quarters downgrade is liable to be a better guess than this quarters estimate.
Yes but growth of 0.7, 0.9 results in a higher number than 0.8, 0.8 - so rejoice growth is better than previously thought !
It's extraordinary that Labour are 10/1 in a seat that they won in 2005. But since Ed Miliband's Labour don't really seem very interested in taking on challenging by-elections, those odds may well be right.
There were a couple of people (@NickPalmer?) posting they expected Labour to soft pedel.
I'm just wondering are there any by-elections Labour will try to win? Is money really that tight?
Labour have no chance of winning that seat, none. They are not awash with cash like the Tories so wisely will avoid wasting valuable resources just to come second. Playing the FPP game with an election 200 days away is about allocating scarce resources to the seats you can win. It really is that simple.
The swing required for Labour to win the seat is less than 11%.
Labour won the Corby by-election with a swing of 12.7%.
Have Labour's horizons narrowed by so much in just two years?
Mike can we have a thread sometime soon on economic policy and its electoral implications? .......
Well - the macroeconomic picture is alot more important to me than all the other issues put together. I think few people realise just how much danger we and the rest of the world are in right now. This guy gets it:
How important is 'saving the NHS' when your whole country has gone all Venezuela? Ed Miliband is a nice man. He's also exceptionally dangerous because he'll cause profound damage to our economy and national finances. If life after New Labour is 'austerity' you wait until life after New New Labour. It ain't gonna be pretty. For you and your family included.
...the last bloke who managed to kill off the recovery he inherited from Labour...
!!! Where to start? If what was inherited in 2010 was anything other than an economic clusterfu
I am that lefty. The only way that the public finances can be brought into order is by cutting pensions, and I don't mean 50p here or a £1 there. I'm talking means-testing (including capital value of homes owned outright) and cutting and/or taxing final salary occupational pensions for the rest of the money.
No, this is clearly wrong.
Total govt spending is £700bn/year and pensions only make up £200bn of that.
Consider this, the state spends about £5,500 per pupil in a state secondary school. Assuming 30 pupils per class thats £165,000/yr.
Assume £75,000 for one and a half teachers, £10,000 for the room, £10,000 for the books and desks and £10,000 for anything else.
That leaves £60,000.
Could someone please explain what happens to this please.
1. LEAs still soak up a lot. 2. Classes for the secondary schools level are typically closer to 12 than 30, but with a lower ratio of Assistants.
It's extraordinary that Labour are 10/1 in a seat that they won in 2005. But since Ed Miliband's Labour don't really seem very interested in taking on challenging by-elections, those odds may well be right.
There were a couple of people (@NickPalmer?) posting they expected Labour to soft pedel.
I'm just wondering are there any by-elections Labour will try to win? Is money really that tight?
I expect they just don't like RodCrosby and are trying to trash his by-election swingback forecast model for general elections.
More like they are trying to help him. IIRC Rodders' byelection swingback crossover forecast actually forecasts a Labour votes lead in May now - so he's stopped talking about that particular model!
@TGOHF As "any fule no", the figures are an estimate subject to revision. Which means the previous quarters downgrade is liable to be a better guess than this quarters estimate.
Yes but growth of 0.7, 0.9 results in a higher number than 0.8, 0.8 - so rejoice growth is better than previously thought !
Oh dear. Back to school for you. Try it on a calculator.
"George Osborne forgot something important in his speech, too The Chancellor should have mentioned that leaving the EU would be a disaster for Britain"
It's extraordinary that Labour are 10/1 in a seat that they won in 2005. But since Ed Miliband's Labour don't really seem very interested in taking on challenging by-elections, those odds may well be right.
There were a couple of people (@NickPalmer?) posting they expected Labour to soft pedel.
I'm just wondering are there any by-elections Labour will try to win? Is money really that tight?
It would also have a bad knock on effect in Labour groups in the area if a half-hearted approach was adopted in Rochester. Clacton is understandable as a decision to be a bystander. Rochester is indicative of a party that has given up in areas they used to be strong in. A 35% minus strategy?
We get this total and utter bilge every time when the Tories are defending a seat at a byelection. As if Labour will fall for it. Game theory says do what you chief opponent least wants you to do. When Labour starts taking election strategy advice from its key rival, it's in deep trouble.
So Labour are giving up on Kent. Just as they have given up on Cornwall, Devon and most of Dorset, Hampshire etc etc...
Total govt spending is £700bn/year and pensions only make up £200bn of that.
Consider this, the state spends about £5,500 per pupil in a state secondary school. Assuming 30 pupils per class thats £165,000/yr.
Assume £75,000 for one and a half teachers, £10,000 for the room, £10,000 for the books and desks and £10,000 for anything else.
That leaves £60,000.
Could someone please explain what happens to this please.
Doesn't something like 25% (ie £40,000) get taken by the LEA for central services? I can see the remaining £20K on school admin, janitors, kitchens etc being reasonable.
It's extraordinary that Labour are 10/1 in a seat that they won in 2005. But since Ed Miliband's Labour don't really seem very interested in taking on challenging by-elections, those odds may well be right.
There were a couple of people (@NickPalmer?) posting they expected Labour to soft pedel.
I'm just wondering are there any by-elections Labour will try to win? Is money really that tight?
It would also have a bad knock on effect in Labour groups in the area if a half-hearted approach was adopted in Rochester. Clacton is understandable as a decision to be a bystander. Rochester is indicative of a party that has given up in areas they used to be strong in. A 35% minus strategy?
We get this total and utter bilge every time when the Tories are defending a seat at a byelection.
As if Labour will fall for it. Game theory says do what you chief opponent least wants you to do.
When Labour starts taking election strategy advice from its key rival, it's in deep trouble.
But, this is a seat Labour held until the last election.
Mike can we have a thread sometime soon on economic policy and its electoral implications?
This is ultimately the big issue is it not? We have Ozzy who sees the bigger problem in a competitve world very clearly and is pushing hard to eliminate the deficit entirely (but therefore with all the attendant 'nasty Tory' noise) and Ed n Ed who are in full-on 'nice Labour' mode and promising to spend spend spend on more lovely nurses. We have the starkest electoral choice on economics for a very long
The 'Conservative or bust' slogan seems about right to me. I fear very much that the country looks set to choose to go bust.
Nice ramp, Patrick. Indeed, there are only two kinds of voters in England: Tory activists and the enemies of England. Teresa May is belatedly moving to a
Well - the macroeconomic picture is alot more important to me than all the other issues put together. I think few people realise just how much danger we and the rest of the world are in right now. This guy gets it:
How important is 'saving the NHS' when your whole country has gone all Venezuela? Ed Miliband is a nice man. He's also exceptionally dangerous because he'll cause profound damage to our economy and national finances. If life after New Labour is 'austerity' you wait until life after New New Labour. It ain't gonna be pretty. For you and your family included.
...the last bloke who managed to kill off the recovery he inherited from Labour...
-
No, this is clearly wrong.
Total govt spending is £700bn/year and pensions only make up £200bn of that.
Consider this, the state spends about £5,500 per pupil in a state secondary school. Assuming 30 pupils per class thats £165,000/yr.
Assume £75,000 for one and a half teachers, £10,000 for the room, £10,000 for the books and desks and £10,000 for anything else.
That leaves £60,000.
Could someone please explain what happens to this please.
I would imagine property costs are a lot higher than £10,000. Remember you need playground space, assembly halls, administrative offices, staff facilities, toilets etc. You also have staff costs that are higher: you have headteachers, deputies, classroom assistants, special needs staff, school nurses, office staff, janitors.
It's extraordinary that Labour are 10/1 in a seat that they won in 2005. But since Ed Miliband's Labour don't really seem very interested in taking on challenging by-elections, those odds may well be right.
There were a couple of people (@NickPalmer?) posting they expected Labour to soft pedel.
I'm just wondering are there any by-elections Labour will try to win? Is money really that tight?
Labour have no chance of winning that seat, none. They are not awash with cash like the Tories so wisely will avoid wasting valuable resources just to come second. Playing the FPP game with an election 200 days away is about allocating scarce resources to the seats you can win. It really is that simple.
That's simply not true.
With UKIP and the Tories tearing lumps out of each other, there is a clear chance to win. They held the seat from 1997-2010 (although notional 05 would have been Tory).
And they have the chance to position themselves to be the solid challenger in the GE.
There's an identifiable effect when you specify "thinking about your own constituency", although of course that's not just incumbency..
Yes, there's an identifiable difference (and quite a large one). But how do you know whether it makes the result more accurate or less accurate?
I think it's been looked into and shown as more accurate. National pollsters (ICM certainly) have worked some reference to the responder's local area into their VI questions (and I'm assuming they had a reason).
Total govt spending is £700bn/year and pensions only make up £200bn of that.
Consider this, the state spends about £5,500 per pupil in a state secondary school. Assuming 30 pupils per class thats £165,000/yr.
Assume £75,000 for one and a half teachers, £10,000 for the room, £10,000 for the books and desks and £10,000 for anything else.
That leaves £60,000.
Could someone please explain what happens to this please.
Doesn't something like 25% (ie £40,000) get taken by the LEA for central services? I can see the remaining £20K on school admin, janitors, kitchens etc being reasonable.
Sports grounds + equip, utilities, repairs, IT, wood/metal working equipment (they still do that, no?), etc, etc, etc.
It's extraordinary that Labour are 10/1 in a seat that they won in 2005. But since Ed Miliband's Labour don't really seem very interested in taking on challenging by-elections, those odds may well be right.
There were a couple of people (@NickPalmer?) posting they expected Labour to soft pedel.
I'm just wondering are there any by-elections Labour will try to win? Is money really that tight?
It would also have a bad knock on effect in Labour groups in the area if a half-hearted approach was adopted in Rochester. Clacton is understandable as a decision to be a bystander. Rochester is indicative of a party that has given up in areas they used to be strong in. A 35% minus strategy?
We get this total and utter bilge every time when the Tories are defending a seat at a byelection.
As if Labour will fall for it. Game theory says do what you chief opponent least wants you to do.
When Labour starts taking election strategy advice from its key rival, it's in deep trouble.
I think the area has too big a WWC demographic for Labour to compete.
My dear old Dad will be turning in his grave at the knowledge that Labour is no longer interested in the WWC he fought for as a Steward in the TGWU.
@Richard_Nabavi "Who is this twerp?" Simon Jack Business correspondent, BBC News (as it said on the tin). Get onto him and rip him a new one Richard, just don't shoot the messenger?
It's extraordinary that Labour are 10/1 in a seat that they won in 2005. But since Ed Miliband's Labour don't really seem very interested in taking on challenging by-elections, those odds may well be right.
There were a couple of people (@NickPalmer?) posting they expected Labour to soft pedel.
I'm just wondering are there any by-elections Labour will try to win? Is money really that tight?
It would also have a bad knock on effect in Labour groups in the area if a half-hearted approach was adopted in Rochester. Clacton is understandable as a decision to be a bystander. Rochester is indicative of a party that has given up in areas they used to be strong in. A 35% minus strategy?
We get this total and utter bilge every time when the Tories are defending a seat at a byelection.
As if Labour will fall for it. Game theory says do what you chief opponent least wants you to do.
When Labour starts taking election strategy advice from its key rival, it's in deep trouble.
But, this is a seat Labour held until the last election.
Confusingly it looks like the seat has precisely the same boundaries as the old Medway seat, but simply has the name changed. Is that right?
Mike can we have a thread sometime soon on economic policy and its electoral implications?
Well - the macroeconomic picture is alot more important to me than all the other issues put together. I think few people realise just how much danger we and the rest of the world are in right now. This guy gets it:
How important is 'saving the NHS' when your whole country has gone all Venezuela? Ed Miliband is a nice man. He's also exceptionally dangerous because he'll cause profound damage to our economy and national finances. If life after New Labour is 'austerity' you wait until life after New New Labour. It ain't gonna be pretty. For you and your family included.
...the last bloke who managed to kill off the recovery he inherited from Labour...
-
No, this is clearly wrong.
Total govt spending is £700bn/year and pensions only make up £200bn of that.
Consider this, the state spends about £5,500 per pupil in a state secondary school. Assuming 30 pupils per class thats £165,000/yr.
Assume £75,000 for one and a half teachers, £10,000 for the room, £10,000 for the books and desks and £10,000 for anything else.
That leaves £60,000.
Could someone please explain what happens to this please.
I would imagine property costs are a lot higher than £10,000. Remember you need playground space, assembly halls, administrative offices, staff facilities, toilets etc. You also have staff costs that are higher: you have headteachers, deputies, classroom assistants, special needs staff, school nurses, office staff, janitors.
The playground is tarmaced over when built so clearly wont need anything spent on it over its lifetime.
Consider a secondary school of 900 pupils. Six classes in five years, therefore 30 classrooms. assume a working life of 40 years is £12m to build and maintain the school which is clearly enough and also allows for an assembly hall and toilets.
Consider one and a half teachers per class, well clearly you dont need one and a half teachers per class, you only really need one and a quarter to allow for teacher sickness, etc, therefore you have £375,000 a year to pay for the headmaster, office staff and caretaker which is more than adequate.
It's extraordinary that Labour are 10/1 in a seat that they won in 2005. But since Ed Miliband's Labour don't really seem very interested in taking on challenging by-elections, those odds may well be right.
There were a couple of people (@NickPalmer?) posting they expected Labour to soft pedel.
I'm just wondering are there any by-elections Labour will try to win? Is money really that tight?
It would also have a bad knock on effect in Labour groups in the area if a half-hearted approach was adopted in Rochester. Clacton is understandable as a decision to be a bystander. Rochester is indicative of a party that has given up in areas they used to be strong in. A 35% minus strategy?
We get this total and utter bilge every time when the Tories are defending a seat at a byelection.
As if Labour will fall for it. Game theory says do what you chief opponent least wants you to do.
When Labour starts taking election strategy advice from its key rival, it's in deep trouble.
But, this is a seat Labour held until the last election.
I think hung parliament offers excellent value. As you say, Labour's path is narrower and may get narrower still if the SNP chip away.
The Tories will also suffer from UKIP. I'm not sure Lib Dem seat losses will make up for that as they may be split evenly enough between the two main parties not to make much of a difference.
It's extraordinary that Labour are 10/1 in a seat that they won in 2005. But since Ed Miliband's Labour don't really seem very interested in taking on challenging by-elections, those odds may well be right.
There were a couple of people (@NickPalmer?) posting they expected Labour to soft pedel.
I'm just wondering are there any by-elections Labour will try to win? Is money really that tight?
It would also have a bad knock on effect in Labour groups in the area if a half-hearted approach was adopted in Rochester. Clacton is understandable as a decision to be a bystander. Rochester is indicative of a party that has given up in areas they used to be strong in. A 35% minus strategy?
We get this total and utter bilge every time when the Tories are defending a seat at a byelection.
As if Labour will fall for it. Game theory says do what you chief opponent least wants you to do.
When Labour starts taking election strategy advice from its key rival, it's in deep trouble.
I think the area has too big a WWC demographic for Labour to compete. My dear old Dad will be turning in his grave at the knowledge that Labour is no longer interested in the WWC he fought for as a Steward in the TGWU.
Mine was also a shop steward in ship building. Amazed at the abandonment of the WC.
Mike can we have a thread sometime soon on economic policy and its electoral implications?
Well - the macroeconomic picture is alot more important to me than all the other issues put together. I think few people realise just how much danger we and the rest of the world are in right now. This guy gets it:
How important is 'saving the NHS' when your whole country has gone all Venezuela? Ed Miliband is a nice man. He's also exceptionally dangerous because he'll cause profound damage to our economy and national finances. If life after New Labour is 'austerity' you wait until life after New New Labour. It ain't gonna be pretty. For you and your family included.
...the last bloke who managed to kill off the recovery he inherited from Labour...
-
No, this is clearly wrong.
Total govt spending is £700bn/year and pensions only make up £200bn of that.
Consider this, the state spends about £5,500 per pupil in a state secondary school. Assuming 30 pupils per class thats £165,000/yr.
Assume £75,000 for one and a half teachers, £10,000 for the room, £10,000 for the books and desks and £10,000 for anything else.
That leaves £60,000.
Could someone please explain what happens to this please.
I would imagine property costs are a lot higher than £10,000. Remember you need playground space, assembly halls, administrative offices, staff facilities, toilets etc. You also have staff costs that are higher: you have headteachers, deputies, classroom assistants, special needs staff, school nurses, office staff, janitors.
The playground is tarmaced over when built so clearly wont need anything spent on it over its lifetime.
Consider a secondary school of 900 pupils. Six classes in five years, therefore 30 classrooms. assume a working life of 40 years is £12m to build and maintain the school which is clearly enough and also allows for an assembly hall and toilets.
Consider one and a half teachers per class, well clearly you dont need one and a half teachers per class, you only really need one and a quarter to allow for teacher sickness, etc, therefore you have £375,000 a year to pay for the headmaster, office staff and caretaker which is more than adequate.
So again, what happens to the £60,000 please.
Factor in IT costs too - fancy whiteboards and projectors etc leased no doubt at great expense.
I remember when he started on R4 his 'friendly don with a bright pupil who he suspects may be lying' is a lot more effective than the Paxman machine gun.....
King Cole, the most disturbing report I heard on local news was that a woman who conducted an earlier report found basically what was happening. But the report was suppressed, and she was visited by men and warned that if she kicked up a fuss her home address would be given to the rape gangs.
Visted by “men”, Mr D? Any indication of what sort of men? People who might reasonably have access to sensitive Council or Police documents or not. Or didn’t the report say? If it was the sort of person who might not be expected to have such access, I would have thought it a Police matter, although, given the track record of South Yorks I would understand her fears.
Mike can we have a thread sometime soon on economic policy and its electoral implications? .......
Well - the macroeconomic picture is alot more important to me than all the other issues put together. I think few people realise just how much danger we and the rest of the world are in right now. This guy gets it:
How important is 'saving the NHS' when your whole country has gone all Venezuela? Ed Miliband is a nice man. He's also exceptionally dangerous because he'll cause profound damage to our economy and national finances. If life after New Labour is 'austerity' you wait until life after New New Labour. It ain't gonna be pretty. For you and your family included.
...the last bloke who managed to kill off the recovery he inherited from Labour...
!!! Where to start? If what was inherited in 2010 was anything other than an economic clusterfu
I am that lefty. The only way that the public finances can be brought into order is by cutting pensions, and I don't mean 50p here or a £1 there. I'm talking means-testing (including capital value of homes owned outright) and cutting and/or taxing final salary occupational pensions for the rest of the money.
1. LEAs still soak up a lot. 2. Classes for the secondary schools level are typically closer to 12 than 30, but with a lower ratio of Assistants.
1. What do LEAs do?
2. We are talking about a secondary school without a sixth form, therefore class size is around 30.
"We don't often get to talk about sex and drugs on the New Channel," says Ben Thompson, asking how drug use and prostitutes are calculated. "What we don't do is have people to conduct direct surveys or take samples," the ONS's John Grice says.
It's extraordinary that Labour are 10/1 in a seat that they won in 2005. But since Ed Miliband's Labour don't really seem very interested in taking on challenging by-elections, those odds may well be right.
There were a couple of people (@NickPalmer?) posting they expected Labour to soft pedel.
I'm just wondering are there any by-elections Labour will try to win? Is money really that tight?
Labour have no chance of winning that seat, none. They are not awash with cash like the Tories so wisely will avoid wasting valuable resources just to come second. Playing the FPP game with an election 200 days away is about allocating scarce resources to the seats you can win. It really is that simple.
That's simply not true. With UKIP and the Tories tearing lumps out of each other, there is a clear chance to win. They held the seat from 1997-2010 (although notional 05 would have been Tory). And they have the chance to position themselves to be the solid challenger in the GE.
Far too sensible, Charles. There is also a large LD vote for Labour to feast on - that is if all these 2010 LDs really have gone to Labour!
Total govt spending is £700bn/year and pensions only make up £200bn of that.
Consider this, the state spends about £5,500 per pupil in a state secondary school. Assuming 30 pupils per class thats £165,000/yr.
Assume £75,000 for one and a half teachers, £10,000 for the room, £10,000 for the books and desks and £10,000 for anything else.
That leaves £60,000.
Could someone please explain what happens to this please.
Doesn't something like 25% (ie £40,000) get taken by the LEA for central services? I can see the remaining £20K on school admin, janitors, kitchens etc being reasonable.
"In Q2 2014, GDP was estimated to have been 2.7% higher than the pre-economic downturn peak of Q1 2008, having first exceeded this peak in Q3 2013."
The claim that this has been the slowest recovery from a major recession is now consigned to the same bucket as the double dip, the treble dip and various other fantasies. If growth or employment is the measure of success this has been a stunningly successful government. If deficit reduction is then they have done well but no doubt would have liked to have done better.
There is no question, sutainable growth having been attained, that the priority of the next government is and must be deficit reduction. All good Keynesians will recognise that. No wonder Ed was so focussed on the implications...
It's extraordinary that Labour are 10/1 in a seat that they won in 2005. But since Ed Miliband's Labour don't really seem very interested in taking on challenging by-elections, those odds may well be right.
There were a couple of people (@NickPalmer?) posting they expected Labour to soft pedel.
I'm just wondering are there any by-elections Labour will try to win? Is money really that tight?
It would also have a bad knock on effect in Labour groups in the area if a half-hearted approach was adopted in Rochester. Clacton is understandable as a decision to be a bystander. Rochester is indicative of a party that has given up in areas they used to be strong in. A 35% minus strategy?
We get this total and utter bilge every time when the Tories are defending a seat at a byelection. As if Labour will fall for it. Game theory says do what you chief opponent least wants you to do. When Labour starts taking election strategy advice from its key rival, it's in deep trouble.
So Labour are giving up on Kent. Just as they have given up on Cornwall, Devon and most of Dorset, Hampshire etc etc...
It's extraordinary that Labour are 10/1 in a seat that they won in 2005. But since Ed Miliband's Labour don't really seem very interested in taking on challenging by-elections, those odds may well be right.
There were a couple of people (@NickPalmer?) posting they expected Labour to soft pedel.
I'm just wondering are there any by-elections Labour will try to win? Is money really that tight?
It would also have a bad knock on effect in Labour groups in the area if a half-hearted approach was adopted in Rochester. Clacton is understandable as a decision to be a bystander. Rochester is indicative of a party that has given up in areas they used to be strong in. A 35% minus strategy?
We get this total and utter bilge every time when the Tories are defending a seat at a byelection.
As if Labour will fall for it. Game theory says do what you chief opponent least wants you to do.
When Labour starts taking election strategy advice from its key rival, it's in deep trouble.
But, this is a seat Labour held until the last election.
Confusingly it looks like the seat has precisely the same boundaries as the old Medway seat, but simply has the name changed. Is that right?
Virtually the same. Bob Marshall Andrews won it by 250 in 2005. Boundary changes gave it a notional Conservative lead of 200. In the past, it's regularly switched between Con. and Lab.
Mike can we have a thread sometime soon on economic policy and its electoral implications?
This is ultimately the big issue is it not? We have Ozzy who sees the bigger problem in a competitve world very clearly and is pushing hard to eliminate the deficit entirely (but therefore with all the attendant 'nasty Tory' noise) and Ed n Ed who are in full-on 'nice Labour' mode and promising to spend spend spend on more lovely nurses. We have the starkest electoral choice on economics for a very long
The 'Conservative or bust' slogan seems about right to me. I fear very much that the country looks set to choose to go bust.
Nice ramp, Patrick. Indeed, there are only two kinds of voters in England: Tory activists and the enemies of England. Teresa May is belatedly moving to a
Well - the macroeconomic picture is alot more important to me than all the other issues put together. I think few people realise just how much danger we and the rest of the world are in right now. This guy gets it:
How important is 'saving the NHS' when your whole country has gone all Venezuela? Ed Miliband is a nice man. He's also exceptionally dangerous because he'll cause profound damage to our economy and national finances. If life after New Labour is 'austerity' you wait until life after New New Labour. It ain't gonna be pretty. For you and your family included.
...the last bloke who managed to kill off the recovery he inherited from Labour...
-
No, this is clearly wrong.
Total govt spending is £700bn/year and pensions only make up £200bn of that.
Consider this, the state spends about £5,500 per pupil in a state secondary school. Assuming 30 pupils per class thats £165,000/yr.
Assume £75,000 for one and a half teachers, £10,000 for the room, £10,000 for the books and desks and £10,000 for anything else.
That leaves £60,000.
Could someone please explain what happens to this please.
I would imagine property costs are a lot higher than £10,000. Remember you need playground space, assembly halls, administrative offices, staff facilities, toilets etc. You also have staff costs that are higher: you have headteachers, deputies, classroom assistants, special needs staff, school nurses, office staff, janitors.
PFI markup.
That would certainly add to the cost, but not explain all of it.
I remember when he started on R4 his 'friendly don with a bright pupil who he suspects may be lying' is a lot more effective than the Paxman machine gun.....
@TGOHF As "any fule no", the figures are an estimate subject to revision. Which means the previous quarters downgrade is liable to be a better guess than this quarters estimate.
Yes but growth of 0.7, 0.9 results in a higher number than 0.8, 0.8 - so rejoice growth is better than previously thought !
Oh dear. Back to school for you. Try it on a calculator.
Nice ramp, Patrick. Indeed, there are only two kinds of voters in England: Tory activists and the enemies of England. Teresa May is belatedly moving to a
Well - the macroeconomic picture is alot more important to me than all the other issues put together. I think few people realise just how much danger we and the rest of the world are in right now. This guy gets it:
How important is 'saving the NHS' when your whole country has gone all Venezuela? Ed Miliband is a nice man. He's also exceptionally dangerous because he'll cause profound damage to our economy and national finances. If life after New Labour is 'austerity' you wait until life after New New Labour. It ain't gonna be pretty. For you and your family included.
...the last bloke who managed to kill off the recovery he inherited from Labour...
-
No, this is clearly wrong.
Total govt spending is £700bn/year and pensions only make up £200bn of that.
Consider this, the state spends about £5,500 per pupil in a state secondary school. Assuming 30 pupils per class thats £165,000/yr.
Assume £75,000 for one and a half teachers, £10,000 for the room, £10,000 for the books and desks and £10,000 for anything else.
That leaves £60,000.
Could someone please explain what happens to this please.
I would imagine property costs are a lot higher than £10,000. Remember you need playground space, assembly halls, administrative offices, staff facilities, toilets etc. You also have staff costs that are higher: you have headteachers, deputies, classroom assistants, special needs staff, school nurses, office staff, janitors.
PFI markup.
That would certainly add to the cost, but not explain all of it.
Have you under estimated the cost of building the school? Perhaps the answer lies in here somewhere.
'According to the House of Commons Education Select Committee, the average cost of a new secondary school under BSF was between £25-£30m, with some new builds costing over £50m. '
Total govt spending is £700bn/year and pensions only make up £200bn of that.
Consider this, the state spends about £5,500 per pupil in a state secondary school. Assuming 30 pupils per class thats £165,000/yr.
Assume £75,000 for one and a half teachers, £10,000 for the room, £10,000 for the books and desks and £10,000 for anything else.
That leaves £60,000.
Could someone please explain what happens to this please.
Doesn't something like 25% (ie £40,000) get taken by the LEA for central services? I can see the remaining £20K on school admin, janitors, kitchens etc being reasonable.
Sports grounds + equip, utilities, repairs, IT, wood/metal working equipment (they still do that, no?), etc, etc, etc.
We are talking about a descrepancy of £60,000 per classroom in an 30 classroom school. Do you honestly expect us to believe that schools spend anywear near £1.8m per year on the above.
Mike can we have a thread sometime soon on economic policy and its electoral implications?
Well - the macroeconomic picture is alot more important to me than all the other issues put together. I think few people realise just how much danger we and the rest of the world are in right now. This guy gets it:
How important is 'saving the NHS' when your whole country has gone all Venezuela? Ed Miliband is a nice man. He's also exceptionally dangerous because he'll cause profound damage to our economy and national finances. If life after New Labour is 'austerity' you wait until life after New New Labour. It ain't gonna be pretty. For you and your family included.
...the last bloke who managed to kill off the recovery he inherited from Labour...
-
No, this is clearly wrong.
Total govt spending is £700bn/year and pensions only make up £200bn of that.
Consider this, the state spends about £5,500 per pupil in a state secondary school. Assuming 30 pupils per class thats £165,000/yr.
Assume £75,000 for one and a half teachers, £10,000 for the room, £10,000 for the books and desks and £10,000 for anything else.
That leaves £60,000.
Could someone please explain what happens to this please.
I would imagine property costs are a lot higher than £10,000. Remember you need playground space, assembly halls, administrative offices, staff facilities, toilets etc. You also have staff costs that are higher: you have headteachers, deputies, classroom assistants, special needs staff, school nurses, office staff, janitors.
The playground is tarmaced over when built so clearly wont need anything spent on it over its lifetime.
Consider a secondary school of 900 pupils. Six classes in five years, therefore 30 classrooms. assume a working life of 40 years is £12m to build and maintain the school which is clearly enough and also allows for an assembly hall and toilets.
Consider one and a half teachers per class, well clearly you dont need one and a half teachers per class, you only really need one and a quarter to allow for teacher sickness, etc, therefore you have £375,000 a year to pay for the headmaster, office staff and caretaker which is more than adequate.
So again, what happens to the £60,000 please.
It's the LEA spending you should be asking about not the school spending particularly.
"In Q2 2014, GDP was estimated to have been 2.7% higher than the pre-economic downturn peak of Q1 2008, having first exceeded this peak in Q3 2013." The claim that this has been the slowest recovery from a major recession is now consigned to the same bucket as the double dip, the treble dip and various other fantasies. If growth or employment is the measure of success this has been a stunningly successful government. If deficit reduction is then they have done well but no doubt would have liked to have done better. ....
Good point, if only CCHQ kept records and used it in campaigns...
It's extraordinary that Labour are 10/1 in a seat that they won in 2005. But since Ed Miliband's Labour don't really seem very interested in taking on challenging by-elections, those odds may well be right.
There were a couple of people (@NickPalmer?) posting they expected Labour to soft pedel.
I'm just wondering are there any by-elections Labour will try to win? Is money really that tight?
It would also have a bad knock on effect in Labour groups in the area if a half-hearted approach was adopted in Rochester. Clacton is understandable as a decision to be a bystander. Rochester is indicative of a party that has given up in areas they used to be strong in. A 35% minus strategy?
We get this total and utter bilge every time when the Tories are defending a seat at a byelection.
As if Labour will fall for it. Game theory says do what you chief opponent least wants you to do.
When Labour starts taking election strategy advice from its key rival, it's in deep trouble.
But, this is a seat Labour held until the last election.
True. But this is not a Labour target seat. Ergo, no dice.
Nice ramp, Patrick. Indeed, there are only two kinds of voters in England: Tory activists and the enemies of England. Teresa May is belatedly moving to a
Well - the macroeconomic picture is alot more important to me than all the other issues put together. I think few people realise just how much danger we and the rest of the world are in right now. This guy gets it:
How important is 'saving the NHS' when your whole country has gone all Venezuela? Ed Miliband is a nice man. He's also exceptionally dangerous because he'll cause profound damage to our economy and national finances. If life after New Labour is 'austerity' you wait until life after New New Labour. It ain't gonna be pretty. For you and your family included.
...the last bloke who managed to kill off the recovery he inherited from Labour...
-
No, this is clearly wrong.
Total govt spending is £700bn/year and pensions only make up £200bn of that.
Consider this, the state spends about £5,500 per pupil in a state secondary school. Assuming 30 pupils per class thats £165,000/yr.
Assume £75,000 for one and a half teachers, £10,000 for the room, £10,000 for the books and desks and £10,000 for anything else.
That leaves £60,000.
Could someone please explain what happens to this please.
I would imagine property costs are a lot higher than £10,000. Remember you need playground space, assembly halls, administrative offices, staff facilities, toilets etc. You also have staff costs that are higher: you have headteachers, deputies, classroom assistants, special needs staff, school nurses, office staff, janitors.
PFI markup.
That would certainly add to the cost, but not explain all of it.
Have you under estimated the cost of building the school? Perhaps the answer lies in here somewhere.
'According to the House of Commons Education Select Committee, the average cost of a new secondary school under BSF was between £25-£30m, with some new builds costing over £50m. '
@Charles Why were the changes in methodology brought in? Greater accuracy, or something else? Better calculation of GDP might also be balanced by more accurate calculations elsewhere. Ask the ONS?
Nice ramp, Patrick. Indeed, there are only two kinds of voters in England: Tory activists and the enemies of England. Teresa May is belatedly moving to a
Well - the macroeconomic picture is alot more important to me than all the other issues put together. I think few people realise just how much danger we and the rest of the world are in right now. This guy gets it:
How important is 'saving the NHS' when your whole country has gone all Venezuela? Ed Miliband is a nice man. He's also exceptionally dangerous because he'll cause profound damage to our economy and national finances. If life after New Labour is 'austerity' you wait until life after New New Labour. It ain't gonna be pretty. For you and your family included.
...the last bloke who managed to kill off the recovery he inherited from Labour...
-
No, this is clearly wrong.
Total govt spending is £700bn/year and pensions only make up £200bn of that.
Consider this, the state spends about £5,500 per pupil in a state secondary school. Assuming 30 pupils per class thats £165,000/yr.
Assume £75,000 for one and a half teachers, £10,000 for the room, £10,000 for the books and desks and £10,000 for anything else.
That leaves £60,000.
Could someone please explain what happens to this please.
I would imagine property costs are a lot higher than £10,000. Remember you need playground space, assembly halls, administrative offices, staff facilities, toilets etc. You also have staff costs that are higher: you have headteachers, deputies, classroom assistants, special needs staff, school nurses, office staff, janitors.
PFI markup.
That would certainly add to the cost, but not explain all of it.
Have you under estimated the cost of building the school? Perhaps the answer lies in here somewhere.
'According to the House of Commons Education Select Committee, the average cost of a new secondary school under BSF was between £25-£30m, with some new builds costing over £50m. '
Total govt spending is £700bn/year and pensions only make up £200bn of that.
Consider this, the state spends about £5,500 per pupil in a state secondary school. Assuming 30 pupils per class thats £165,000/yr.
Assume £75,000 for one and a half teachers, £10,000 for the room, £10,000 for the books and desks and £10,000 for anything else.
That leaves £60,000.
Could someone please explain what happens to this please.
Doesn't something like 25% (ie £40,000) get taken by the LEA for central services? I can see the remaining £20K on school admin, janitors, kitchens etc being reasonable.
What are these central services?
Are they necessary?
Are they useful?
Can anyone actually name them?
Well the free schools and the academies seem to manage perfectly well without them.
(I'd imagine there are some - centralised procurement - that could be useful. And lots - like policy work, administration, central planning, union support, etc - that may have less obvious value)
I remember when he started on R4 his 'friendly don with a bright pupil who he suspects may be lying' is a lot more effective than the Paxman machine gun.....
I agree, after I got over the LOTR ears.
I was a big fan of Paxman so maybe I am biased a bit but Evan davis gets too emotional at times (look at or hear his radio 4 interview with Osborne). I like Newsnight to be an intelligent but relaxing discussion of events with a dabbing of humour (Paxman was perfect) which I am not sure Evan Davis is going to do
@TGOHF As "any fule no", the figures are an estimate subject to revision. Which means the previous quarters downgrade is liable to be a better guess than this quarters estimate.
Yes but growth of 0.7, 0.9 results in a higher number than 0.8, 0.8 - so rejoice growth is better than previously thought !
Oh dear. Back to school for you. Try it on a calculator.
...the last bloke who managed to kill off the recovery he inherited from Labour...
-
No, this is clearly wrong.
Total govt spending is £700bn/year and pensions only make up £200bn of that.
Consider this, the state spends about £5,500 per pupil in a state secondary school. Assuming 30 pupils per class thats £165,000/yr.
Assume £75,000 for one and a half teachers, £10,000 for the room, £10,000 for the books and desks and £10,000 for anything else.
That leaves £60,000.
Could someone please explain what happens to this please.
I would imagine property costs are a lot higher than £10,000. Remember you need playground space, assembly halls, administrative offices, staff facilities, toilets etc. You also have staff costs that are higher: you have headteachers, deputies, classroom assistants, special needs staff, school nurses, office staff, janitors.
PFI markup.
That would certainly add to the cost, but not explain all of it.
Have you under estimated the cost of building the school? Perhaps the answer lies in here somewhere.
'According to the House of Commons Education Select Committee, the average cost of a new secondary school under BSF was between £25-£30m, with some new builds costing over £50m. '
Yes, £10,000 a year for the cost of the classroom (and ancillary rooms) also includes the building cost.
What isn't being hosed on poorly negotiated PFI is disappearing into the coffers of the LEA's. That's where to dig. All the union 'Pilgrims' on the payroll.
It's extraordinary that Labour are 10/1 in a seat that they won in 2005. But since Ed Miliband's Labour don't really seem very interested in taking on challenging by-elections, those odds may well be right.
There were a couple of people (@NickPalmer?) posting they expected Labour to soft pedel.
I'm just wondering are there any by-elections Labour will try to win? Is money really that tight?
It would also have a bad knock on effect in Labour groups in the area if a half-hearted approach was adopted in Rochester. Clacton is understandable as a decision to be a bystander. Rochester is indicative of a party that has given up in areas they used to be strong in. A 35% minus strategy?
We get this total and utter bilge every time when the Tories are defending a seat at a byelection.
As if Labour will fall for it. Game theory says do what you chief opponent least wants you to do.
When Labour starts taking election strategy advice from its key rival, it's in deep trouble.
But, this is a seat Labour held until the last election.
True. But this is not a Labour target seat. Ergo, no dice.
Total govt spending is £700bn/year and pensions only make up £200bn of that.
Consider this, the state spends about £5,500 per pupil in a state secondary school. Assuming 30 pupils per class thats £165,000/yr.
Assume £75,000 for one and a half teachers, £10,000 for the room, £10,000 for the books and desks and £10,000 for anything else.
That leaves £60,000.
Could someone please explain what happens to this please.
Doesn't something like 25% (ie £40,000) get taken by the LEA for central services? I can see the remaining £20K on school admin, janitors, kitchens etc being reasonable.
Sports grounds + equip, utilities, repairs, IT, wood/metal working equipment (they still do that, no?), etc, etc, etc.
We are talking about a descrepancy of £60,000 per classroom in an 30 classroom school. Do you honestly expect us to believe that schools spend anywear near £1.8m per year on the above.
You aren't factoring in all the support staff (it would appear that teachers can't exist without classroom assistants these days) plus people like social workers (yes, some schools have those), plus the increased numbers in assistant and deputy heads that seem to litter the lists of school employees.
Oh yes and all the technology. The number of teachers I hear complaining that their electronic whiteboards aren't working properly would astound you.
And remember we are paying teachers for 52 weeks per year when the schools are only open for about 40 weeks. And teachers don't spend all day every day in the classroom.
I know teaching is a demanding profession and a very valuable one - but there is a limit to my sympathy when it comes to their bleating.
King Cole, the most disturbing report I heard on local news was that a woman who conducted an earlier report found basically what was happening. But the report was suppressed, and she was visited by men and warned that if she kicked up a fuss her home address would be given to the rape gangs.
These are probably not just rape gangs so much as gangsters who rape or procure victims for rape, which suggests it might be possible to get them off the streets for their other crimes -- adapting Eliot Ness, as it were. Or don't adapt but just adopt and send HMRC in to look at the taxi firms' books. Witnesses might then become easier to find and juries more likely to convict, once there is no-one free to nobble them.
@TGOHF As "any fule no", the figures are an estimate subject to revision. Which means the previous quarters downgrade is liable to be a better guess than this quarters estimate.
Yes but growth of 0.7, 0.9 results in a higher number than 0.8, 0.8 - so rejoice growth is better than previously thought !
Oh dear. Back to school for you. Try it on a calculator.
It's extraordinary that Labour are 10/1 in a seat that they won in 2005. But since Ed Miliband's Labour don't really seem very interested in taking on challenging by-elections, those odds may well be right.
There were a couple of people (@NickPalmer?) posting they expected Labour to soft pedel.
I'm just wondering are there any by-elections Labour will try to win? Is money really that tight?
It would also have a bad knock on effect in Labour groups in the area if a half-hearted approach was adopted in Rochester. Clacton is understandable as a decision to be a bystander. Rochester is indicative of a party that has given up in areas they used to be strong in. A 35% minus strategy?
We get this total and utter bilge every time when the Tories are defending a seat at a byelection.
As if Labour will fall for it. Game theory says do what you chief opponent least wants you to do.
When Labour starts taking election strategy advice from its key rival, it's in deep trouble.
But, this is a seat Labour held until the last election.
True. But this is not a Labour target seat. Ergo, no dice.
It's that simple.
Let's try another Kent seat. Suppose there was a by-election in Gillingham and Rainham. Do Labour seriously contest it?
Mr. L, not a bad idea. Al Capone, after all, went down due to tax evasion [I think].
Dr. Spyn, passing a new law gets you an exciting positive headline. Much more fun than actually enforcing the existing ones (cf media regulation).
I remain wholly unconvinced that justice will be done to even a majority of the scum involved. A few will probably go down, but it'll be a small proportion of the perpetrators. Just my guess, but there we are.
@Charles Why were the changes in methodology brought in? Greater accuracy, or something else? Better calculation of GDP might also be balanced by more accurate calculations elsewhere. Ask the ONS?
@Jonathan said it was reclassification of NR debt on balance sheet (presumably vs a contingent guarantee).
If the accounts accurately reflect the economically reality that is a good thing. But they don't change the economic reality, just the way we report it.
My FIL was a branch sec and would be voting Kipper now. My MIL is diehard Labour and star-struck after meeting Tony back in about 2000. She can't stand Labour now and won't vote.
It's extraordinary that Labour are 10/1 in a seat that they won in 2005. But since Ed Miliband's Labour don't really seem very interested in taking on challenging by-elections, those odds may well be right.
There were a couple of people (@NickPalmer?) posting they expected Labour to soft pedel.
I'm just wondering are there any by-elections Labour will try to win? Is money really that tight?
It would also have a bad knock on effect in Labour groups in the area if a half-hearted approach was adopted in Rochester. Clacton is understandable as a decision to be a bystander. Rochester is indicative of a party that has given up in areas they used to be strong in. A 35% minus strategy?
We get this total and utter bilge every time when the Tories are defending a seat at a byelection.
As if Labour will fall for it. Game theory says do what you chief opponent least wants you to do.
When Labour starts taking election strategy advice from its key rival, it's in deep trouble.
I think the area has too big a WWC demographic for Labour to compete. My dear old Dad will be turning in his grave at the knowledge that Labour is no longer interested in the WWC he fought for as a Steward in the TGWU.
Mine was also a shop steward in ship building. Amazed at the abandonment of the WC.
The Brooks Newmark Mirror entrapment story isn't going away - with the Mirror apologising to the young women whose images were used as it emerges that their "investigative reporter" works for Paul Staines:
Were my picture used - without my knowledge or permission - as as a part of some entrapment story by a newspaper, I would be getting my lawyer to write a very sharp letter indeed to the newspaper.
I wonder whether the Mirror lawyers approved the way this story was obtained, assuming they were told about it in advance, of course.
The Brooks Newmark Mirror entrapment story isn't going away - with the Mirror apologising to the young women whose images were used as it emerges that their "investigative reporter" works for Paul Staines:
Were my picture used - without my knowledge or permission - as as a part of some entrapment story by a newspaper, I would be getting my lawyer to write a very sharp letter indeed to the newspaper.
I wonder whether the Mirror lawyers approved the way this story was obtained, assuming they were told about it in advance, of course.
The level of sleaze at the Mirror going back many years is only slowly coming to light. I wonder why their illegal activities are not gaining the same level as attention as those of the Murdoch press?
Miss Cyclefree, apparently both the Sun and the Mail (or Mail on Sunday, I forget which) turned the story down.
Furthermore, Maguire's rubbish claim it's in 'the public interest' because of the MP's job simply doesn't stack up, because contact was made with a significant number of (exclusively Conservative) MPs.
Miss Cyclefree, apparently both the Sun and the Mail (or Mail on Sunday, I forget which) turned the story down.
Furthermore, Maguire's rubbish claim it's in 'the public interest' because of the MP's job simply doesn't stack up, because contact was made with a significant number of (exclusively Conservative) MPs.
Why does anyone listen to what Maguire says these days? He is persistent, I give him that, but when was he ever right?
@Charles "Either this is a real liability or it isn't. " Same could be said for the increase in GDP then?
All economic measurements are at best an estimate.
However, there is a clear difference in these cases.
One is an estimate of the increase in economic activity. It may be right or wrong but it indicates growth.
The other is simply a reclassification of a contingent liability to an actual liability. So the increase in public sector debt is matched by an equal reduction in contingent liabilities. If there had been a change in terms of the the agreement with National Rail resulting in the reclassification then you could make a case things had got worse, but it appears it was just the auditor changing its mind.
@Charles To be honest, GDP does not tell us much about our economy, other than how much money is being moved around. Useful for headlines, but not very informative, except in general terms.
The Grauniad continues to pursue the Brooks Newmark Mirror entrapment story:
But the Sun rejected the chance to run the "investigation". Its senior executives, who include the former Press Complaints Commission director Stig Abell, thought there were unjustifiable elements to the story.
Wickham then approached the Mail on Sunday's political editor, Simon Walters. He and his editor, Geordie Greig, did not take long to reject it out of hand.
Like the Sun, the MoS was concerned about the methodology employed to obtain the story, believing that it amounted to entrapment and also involved a fishing expedition.
Interesting statement "Turning to human rights, Chris Grayling says it is "crazy" that a terror suspect can "claim their human rights to stay here"" "Suspect" means you are innocent until proved guilty? Unless they intend to change our law?
"Cameron’s standing in the eyes of his contemporaries will depend greatly on whether he wins an outright majority in 2015, especially after his failure to do so in 2010. The judgment of history upon the years 2010–2015 will be far less dependent upon the result of the 2015 election. Indeed, Cameron’s place in history is already secure: by holding together the coalition for five years, significantly improving the economic outlook from a desperately weak starting point, overseeing some steady if still unproven domestic reforms, and possibly winning the Scottish referendum, Cameron has ensured that he will be seen as a prime minister of enduring importance. In particular, Cameron accomplished two profound achievements as prime minister: sticking to ‘plan A’ on the economy, and sticking with the coalition. The ‘big, open and comprehensive offer’ to the Lib Dems was very much his own initiative. For better or worse – and I think better – the coalition was his, and history will judge him for it."
"From Cameron’s personal perspective, his reputation might well be higher if he loses the 2015 election. The biggest cloud on Cameron’s horizon, should he win, will be the EU referendum, promised for 2017. As already noted, one of Cameron’s critical mistakes was to underestimate the Ukip threat until it was too late; Carswell’s defection (with the possibility of more to come) was widely seen as a harbinger of a long-awaited split on the right over Europe. Cameron now finds himself backed into a corner from which the only escape – if the EU refuses to agree to his demands – may be to take Britain out of the EU. This is something that Cameron undoubtedly feels would be disastrous for Britain, though he dare not say this publicly.
The worst-case scenario for Cameron in 2015 might be winning the general election with a very small majority, leaving him prey to the whims of his Eurosceptic and right-wing backbenchers. His skills as a leader were ideally suited to the fudges and compromises of coalition politics. A new era might call for a leader with an entirely different skillset, and a clearer set of defined beliefs."
Interesting statement "Turning to human rights, Chris Grayling says it is "crazy" that a terror suspect can "claim their human rights to stay here"" "Suspect" means you are innocent until proved guilty? Unless they intend to change our law?
I would have thought, too, that throwing a terror suspect out means you can’t get at them to prosecute them! Should they be running about in Syria or Iraq, or on remand in UK?
@OldKingCole I need a lawyer to explain....will we have a presumption of guilt, or will we change our law so that you can deport the "innocent*" to a country of your choosing? * obviously "innocent" as in the eyes of the law.
Apparently the Wag tax, that was announced by the UKIP economic spokesman, but was definitely not a policy, is "under active discussion" according to MEP James Carver.
The Grauniad continues to pursue the Brooks Newmark Mirror entrapment story:
But the Sun rejected the chance to run the "investigation". Its senior executives, who include the former Press Complaints Commission director Stig Abell, thought there were unjustifiable elements to the story.
Wickham then approached the Mail on Sunday's political editor, Simon Walters. He and his editor, Geordie Greig, did not take long to reject it out of hand.
Like the Sun, the MoS was concerned about the methodology employed to obtain the story, believing that it amounted to entrapment and also involved a fishing expedition.
The worst-case scenario for Cameron in 2015 might be winning the general election with a very small majority, leaving him prey to the whims of his Eurosceptic and right-wing backbenchers. His skills as a leader were ideally suited to the fudges and compromises of coalition politics. A new era might call for a leader with an entirely different skillset, and a clearer set of defined beliefs."
I for one am happier he has been at the tender mercies of the Lib Dems than some of his back benchers....like the Bourbons they have 'forgotten nothing and learned nothing.....'
Comments
GDP is good at telling you how much money is being shuffled, but not where it comes from or where it is going to.
I think Ashcroft's polling doesn't name the candidates, and polls that have show a boost for candidates with a higher profile in the constituency.
Labour won the Corby by-election with a swing of 12.7%.
Have Labour's horizons narrowed by so much in just two years?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/georgeosborne/11128277/George-Osborne-forgot-something-important-in-his-speech-too.html
"George Osborne forgot something important in his speech, too
The Chancellor should have mentioned that leaving the EU would be a disaster for Britain"
"Might" be better than thought (subject to revision)?
With UKIP and the Tories tearing lumps out of each other, there is a clear chance to win. They held the seat from 1997-2010 (although notional 05 would have been Tory).
And they have the chance to position themselves to be the solid challenger in the GE.
tweets: "Good news: GDP bigger, Bad news: debt proprtionately bigger still. Debt/GDP now 79 not 76 cos of new methodology. Public finances worse.
My dear old Dad will be turning in his grave at the knowledge that Labour is no longer interested in the WWC he fought for as a Steward in the TGWU.
"Who is this twerp?"
Simon Jack Business correspondent, BBC News (as it said on the tin). Get onto him and rip him a new one Richard, just don't shoot the messenger?
http://www.ft.com/reports/london-world
Anyone interested in the place that makes the money that keeps the rest of the country in the style to which it feels entitled should read it.
http://www.hillingdon.gov.uk/article/28189/Harefield-ward-results-2014
Consider a secondary school of 900 pupils. Six classes in five years, therefore 30 classrooms. assume a working life of 40 years is £12m to build and maintain the school which is clearly enough and also allows for an assembly hall and toilets.
Consider one and a half teachers per class, well clearly you dont need one and a half teachers per class, you only really need one and a quarter to allow for teacher sickness, etc, therefore you have £375,000 a year to pay for the headmaster, office staff and caretaker which is more than adequate.
So again, what happens to the £60,000 please.
The Tories will also suffer from UKIP. I'm not sure Lib Dem seat losses will make up for that as they may be split evenly enough between the two main parties not to make much of a difference.
http://www.theguardian.com/media/2014/sep/30/newsnight-evan-davis-cameron-review-paxman?CMP=twt_gu
I remember when he started on R4 his 'friendly don with a bright pupil who he suspects may be lying' is a lot more effective than the Paxman machine gun.....
If it was the sort of person who might not be expected to have such access, I would have thought it a Police matter, although, given the track record of South Yorks I would understand her fears.
"We don't often get to talk about sex and drugs on the New Channel," says Ben Thompson, asking how drug use and prostitutes are calculated. "What we don't do is have people to conduct direct surveys or take samples," the ONS's John Grice says.
Are they necessary?
Are they useful?
Can anyone actually name them?
"In Q2 2014, GDP was estimated to have been 2.7% higher than the pre-economic downturn peak of Q1 2008, having first exceeded this peak in Q3 2013."
The claim that this has been the slowest recovery from a major recession is now consigned to the same bucket as the double dip, the treble dip and various other fantasies. If growth or employment is the measure of success this has been a stunningly successful government. If deficit reduction is then they have done well but no doubt would have liked to have done better.
There is no question, sutainable growth having been attained, that the priority of the next government is and must be deficit reduction. All good Keynesians will recognise that. No wonder Ed was so focussed on the implications...
They are the party of the One Nation!
And we always believe a politician
Public finances are exactly the same before they changed the methodology.
We may have more or less information about them, but the reality hasn't changed.
Where I be wrung ?
'According to the House of Commons Education Select Committee, the average cost of a new secondary school under BSF was between £25-£30m, with some new builds costing over £50m. '
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/tobyyoung/100075715/michael-gove-was-right-to-scrap-building-schools-for-the-future/
Its the transfer of Network Rail debt onto the government balance sheet - about £34bn in total.
http://www.theguardian.com/business/2014/aug/28/network-rail-piublic-sector-dont-call-it-nationalisation
It's that simple.
Why were the changes in methodology brought in? Greater accuracy, or something else?
Better calculation of GDP might also be balanced by more accurate calculations elsewhere.
Ask the ONS?
(I'd imagine there are some - centralised procurement - that could be useful. And lots - like policy work, administration, central planning, union support, etc - that may have less obvious value)
1*1.008*1.008 == 1.6064
or
1*1.007*1.009 == 1.6063
Yes, you had better explain it to me, my stab at it downthread is a bit "barebones".
It's that simple.
Oh yes and all the technology. The number of teachers I hear complaining that their electronic whiteboards aren't working properly would astound you.
And remember we are paying teachers for 52 weeks per year when the schools are only open for about 40 weeks. And teachers don't spend all day every day in the classroom.
I know teaching is a demanding profession and a very valuable one - but there is a limit to my sympathy when it comes to their bleating.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-29415897
In other news a former Tory Deputy Mayor jumps ship, and Teresa May wants more powers, rather than to make use of laws already passed by Parliament.
Try 100*1.008*1.008 vs 100*1.007*1.009
Unless I'm having a moment as well.
Dr. Spyn, passing a new law gets you an exciting positive headline. Much more fun than actually enforcing the existing ones (cf media regulation).
I remain wholly unconvinced that justice will be done to even a majority of the scum involved. A few will probably go down, but it'll be a small proportion of the perpetrators. Just my guess, but there we are.
The same number will be prosecuted as those that have been fiddling with the financial markets. All fair an equatable?
If the accounts accurately reflect the economically reality that is a good thing. But they don't change the economic reality, just the way we report it.
Either this is a real liability or it isn't.
I wonder whether the Mirror lawyers approved the way this story was obtained, assuming they were told about it in advance, of course.
Something to blame on the EU!
"Either this is a real liability or it isn't. "
Same could be said for the increase in GDP then?
Where is Tom Watson?!
Furthermore, Maguire's rubbish claim it's in 'the public interest' because of the MP's job simply doesn't stack up, because contact was made with a significant number of (exclusively Conservative) MPs.
However, there is a clear difference in these cases.
One is an estimate of the increase in economic activity. It may be right or wrong but it indicates growth.
The other is simply a reclassification of a contingent liability to an actual liability. So the increase in public sector debt is matched by an equal reduction in contingent liabilities. If there had been a change in terms of the the agreement with National Rail resulting in the reclassification then you could make a case things had got worse, but it appears it was just the auditor changing its mind.
Quite.....
To be honest, GDP does not tell us much about our economy, other than how much money is being moved around.
Useful for headlines, but not very informative, except in general terms.
The Tory maj in Gillingham is only slightly less than the bumper 10k in Rochester.
Neither are Labour target seats, ergo no dice. I don't see why this is such a hard concept to grasp.
Nigel - apart from all the Labour held seats which are WWC strongholds you mean? Look north!
Heywood and Middleton is going to be interesting. Will labour's decent poll performance turn into actual votes on the day?
But the Sun rejected the chance to run the "investigation". Its senior executives, who include the former Press Complaints Commission director Stig Abell, thought there were unjustifiable elements to the story.
Wickham then approached the Mail on Sunday's political editor, Simon Walters. He and his editor, Geordie Greig, did not take long to reject it out of hand.
Like the Sun, the MoS was concerned about the methodology employed to obtain the story, believing that it amounted to entrapment and also involved a fishing expedition.
http://www.theguardian.com/media/greenslade/2014/sep/30/sundaymirror-guidofawkes
"Turning to human rights, Chris Grayling says it is "crazy" that a terror suspect can "claim their human rights to stay here""
"Suspect" means you are innocent until proved guilty? Unless they intend to change our law?
http://www.ippr.org/juncture/cameron-the-first-cut
His conclusion?
"Cameron’s standing in the eyes of his contemporaries will depend greatly on whether he wins an outright majority in 2015, especially after his failure to do so in 2010. The judgment of history upon the years 2010–2015 will be far less dependent upon the result of the 2015 election. Indeed, Cameron’s place in history is already secure: by holding together the coalition for five years, significantly improving the economic outlook from a desperately weak starting point, overseeing some steady if still unproven domestic reforms, and possibly winning the Scottish referendum, Cameron has ensured that he will be seen as a prime minister of enduring importance. In particular, Cameron accomplished two profound achievements as prime minister: sticking to ‘plan A’ on the economy, and sticking with the coalition. The ‘big, open and comprehensive offer’ to the Lib Dems was very much his own initiative. For better or worse – and I think better – the coalition was his, and history will judge him for it."
"From Cameron’s personal perspective, his reputation might well be higher if he loses the 2015 election. The biggest cloud on Cameron’s horizon, should he win, will be the EU referendum, promised for 2017. As already noted, one of Cameron’s critical mistakes was to underestimate the Ukip threat until it was too late; Carswell’s defection (with the possibility of more to come) was widely seen as a harbinger of a long-awaited split on the right over Europe. Cameron now finds himself backed into a corner from which the only escape – if the EU refuses to agree to his demands – may be to take Britain out of the EU. This is something that Cameron undoubtedly feels would be disastrous for Britain, though he dare not say this publicly.
The worst-case scenario for Cameron in 2015 might be winning the general election with a very small majority, leaving him prey to the whims of his Eurosceptic and right-wing backbenchers. His skills as a leader were ideally suited to the fudges and compromises of coalition politics. A new era might call for a leader with an entirely different skillset, and a clearer set of defined beliefs."
I need a lawyer to explain....will we have a presumption of guilt, or will we change our law so that you can deport the "innocent*" to a country of your choosing?
* obviously "innocent" as in the eyes of the law.
Arse. Elbow.