Here's one of my 'cuts' -I floated this yesterday but no-one took me up (I'll stop soon).
Abolish vehicle excise duty. Add it on to fuel duty. Use the redundant facility for administering VED to repatriate all the administrative jobs that are currently being done in India for the nationalised banks. Thus saving money now, and going forward. Saving people's time and effort. And not losing any jobs.
Someone posted here earlier that we currently run a balance of payments deficit of 90 billion a year. That should have us running for the hills in terror.
That was me.
Here's a crossover to consider - will the BoP deficit go over £100bn before the government deficit falls below £100bn ?
The BoP SHOULD have us running for the hills in terror but it wont.
It's a commonplace saying that the NHS is the nearest thing the British people have to a religion.
It isn't.
The true religion of the British people is the belief in the magic money tree.
I totally agree. And sadly it's a belief that is fostered by those in power. People bang on about the dangers of the gadflies, cranks, loonies etc. getting into power, but they simply do not appreciate the danger of politicians who either don't care about British interests, or who are actively stoking the engines toward insolvency, IMF-ville, bail out, and permanent surrender of sovereignty a la Greece. Politicians who are remarkably effective and professional would be ideal, but politicians who are actually on our side would be a start.
People do not see even in recent years what we've lost. Even in the late 90's we made huge amounts from Music, with EMI a world beating record company. All swallowed up by the Americans now. Takeover of EMI by Universal could have been stopped by existing competition laws, but our Government chose to override them.
Initially Stella Creasey seemed pretty on the ball, for whatever reason - she's become an ego on legs. Her behaviour on Twitter is often really off-putting, very smug and rude [she thought I was a man and golly...]
Her involvement in the smugfest that was TwitterSilence when she couldn't even stay off it for 24hrs despite exhorting her support just convinced me that she's swallowed her own PR and is still drunk on it.
Here's one of my 'cuts' -I floated this yesterday but no-one took me up (I'll stop soon).
Abolish vehicle excise duty. Add it on to fuel duty. Use the redundant facility for administering VED to repatriate all the administrative jobs that are currently being done in India for the nationalised banks. Thus saving money now, and going forward. Saving people's time and effort. And not losing any jobs.
Why not use the redundant facility to quietly move civil service functions from Scotland to England? It'd save us a couple of things to worry about come the next IndyRef.
Thanks for getting on board -interesting suggestion, but I don't think there will be another one. Certainly they won't allow one for another 18 years or so. Switching the jobs would cause unemployment in Scotland, which for the time being would still negatively affect the wider economy and tax base.
Lack of support for Britain by the Government in terms of its own economic activity in these desperate economic times amounts to nothing more or less than deliberate betrayal. Planes trains, automobiles, and everything in between is made abroad. This simply has to stop.
It's only at the likelihood of another IndyRef where we diverge. Your very sensible point about abolishing road tax was done over here years ago ... although we rolled the money raising into general taxation rather than specifically on to fuel duty. Tax simplification is a great thing.
Similarly, our telly tax was abolished about 5 years ago and also rolled into the general tax/theft pot. Although that was largely done for practical reasons due to widespread non-payment (including by me)
EMI's glory days are surely a long time ago. IIRC they were bought about 10yrs ago by a hedgefund who tried to knock some sense into the business that was badly failing to manage its cost base. They failed and stuck it back up for sale.
It got quite a lot of press at the time. It certainly was a great business once, but the industry has changed so much. Most of the records I have now seem to be a subsid of Sony or Virgin or a rag bag of names I don't recognise much. That may simply be my lack of observation of course.
Here's one of my 'cuts' -I floated this yesterday but no-one took me up (I'll stop soon).
Abolish vehicle excise duty. Add it on to fuel duty. Use the redundant facility for administering VED to repatriate all the administrative jobs that are currently being done in India for the nationalised banks. Thus saving money now, and going forward. Saving people's time and effort. And not losing any jobs.
Someone posted here earlier that we currently run a balance of payments deficit of 90 billion a year. That should have us running for the hills in terror.
That was me.
Here's a crossover to consider - will the BoP deficit go over £100bn before the government deficit falls below £100bn ?
The BoP SHOULD have us running for the hills in terror but it wont.
It's a commonplace saying that the NHS is the nearest thing the British people have to a religion.
It isn't.
The true religion of the British people is the belief in the magic money tree.
I totally agree. And sadly it's a belief that is fostered by those in power. People bang on about the dangers of the gadflies, cranks, loonies etc. getting into power, but they simply do not appreciate the danger of politicians who either don't care about British interests, or who are actively stoking the engines toward insolvency, IMF-ville, bail out, and permanent surrender of sovereignty a la Greece. Politicians who are remarkably effective and professional would be ideal, but politicians who are actually on our side would be a start.
People do not see even in recent years what we've lost. Even in the late 90's we made huge amounts from Music, with EMI a world beating record company. All swallowed up by the Americans now. Takeover of EMI by Universal could have been stopped by existing competition laws, but our Government chose to override them.
One Labour chap has just asked me, should he be worried that Labour are only gaining votes where they already have MPs?
Yes. Have thought that for a long time. They will gain the most votes where it doesn't matter. Hence the 7% lead in the national polls is bogus.
Where are you thinking?
Sorry, didn't explain that very well. I mean Labour will disproportionately put on votes in seats that they already hold, particularly in urban areas, such that the Conservatives won't need the full 2010 GE lead of 7% over Labour to win. This is in contrast to Blair, who was highly efficient with his votes in marginal seats.
I expect Cameron will turn out to be surprisingly efficient too.
I'm not sure Labour will do that well with their own seats. Remember one of Ed's biggest problems is he doesn't even convince all his own supporters. Many may stay at home.
Doubtful I think Ed is indeed pretty Crap but in a close election lots of LAB voters will be extremely keen to stick with LAB to try to get rid of the Tories.
You missed Tyson's comment this afternoon. He, a Labour voter was going to lend the Tories his vote to ensure that Milband didn't win, and that Labour survived in the long term.
One Labour chap has just asked me, should he be worried that Labour are only gaining votes where they already have MPs?
Yes. Have thought that for a long time. They will gain the most votes where it doesn't matter. Hence the 7% lead in the national polls is bogus.
Where are you thinking?
Sorry, didn't explain that very well. I mean Labour will disproportionately put on votes in seats that they already hold, particularly in urban areas, such that the Conservatives won't need the full 2010 GE lead of 7% over Labour to win. This is in contrast to Blair, who was highly efficient with his votes in marginal seats.
I expect Cameron will turn out to be surprisingly efficient too.
I'm not sure Labour will do that well with their own seats. Remember one of Ed's biggest problems is he doesn't even convince all his own supporters. Many may stay at home.
Doubtful I think Ed is indeed pretty Crap but in a close election lots of LAB voters will be extremely keen to stick with LAB to try to get rid of the Tories.
You missed Tyson's comment this afternoon. He, a Labour voter was going to lend the Tories his vote to ensure that Milband didn't win, and that Labour survived in the long term.
I am so fed up with those that claim we need to do more to get non voters engaged, and its somehow all the fault of politicians that folk cannot be ar*sed to get off their backsides and vote once every 4/5 years. Why the hell should they get away with blaming our current crop of politicians for their laziness, far less be rewarded at the expense of the many millions of Brits who not only engage in the GE debate, but also more importantly turned up to vote at a GE?! Rant over.
Here's one of my 'cuts' -I floated this yesterday but no-one took me up (I'll stop soon).
Abolish vehicle excise duty. Add it on to fuel duty. Use the redundant facility for administering VED to repatriate all the administrative jobs that are currently being done in India for the nationalised banks. Thus saving money now, and going forward. Saving people's time and effort. And not losing any jobs.
Someone posted here earlier that we currently run a balance of payments deficit of 90 billion a year. That should have us running for the hills in terror.
Well the ONS says of 2013 ''In 2013, the UK’s current account deficit was £71.1 billion.'' I'm not sure but other reports suggest it may have been recast a bit lower.
However that is not the 'trade deficit', the.... ''Current Account is the sum of the balance of trade (exports minus imports of goods and services), net factor income (such as interest and dividends) and net transfer payments (such as foreign aid). '' So our 'trade deficit' is lower than this. However the other side of this coin is that the sums paid out for goods come back as inward investment. The 'balance' must balance and our deficit on trade is paid for by a surplus on financial flows. As a small wealthy country is it a surprise that we cannot produce at home all we would like - ie mobile phones, cheap clothes? We may well be producing in absolute standards as much if more more than ever before but the more we spend ourselvesonn ourselves then the more we must import.
I dont agree with abolishing VED since many parts of the country need to use cars more than others. You may not care but it would have a disproportionate affect on many people. Then there is the transport of goods costs
Initially Stella Creasey seemed pretty on the ball, for whatever reason - she's become an ego on legs. Her behaviour on Twitter is often really off-putting, very smug and rude [she thought I was a man and golly...]
Her involvement in the smugfest that was TwitterSilence when she couldn't even stay off it for 24hrs despite exhorting her support just convinced me that she's swallowed her own PR and is still drunk on it.
Trident really is absurd. I could understand an independent nuclear deterrent, but it isn't.
Excluding the submarines, warheads, crews, command and control, British operated early warning etc, then yes you're right. The missiles are leased, and err that's it.
Lets make a scenario: On electoral calculus with this poll we have LAB 316, CON 296, LD 11, SNP 6, PC 3. Practically the LD are going to hold an extra 10 seats from the Tories and UKIP are probably going to elect 10 MP's too all of them from the Tories, also the SNP is going to gain a few LD and Labour seats lets say 3 from each , so the eventual number would be LAB 313, CON 276, LD 18, SNP 12, UKIP 10, PC 3.
Now lets try to form a long term stable coalition with these numbers.
That's easy, a Lab-Con coalition would have no more internal disagreement than the current Con-Lib one, and a majority of 263.
Here's one of my 'cuts' -I floated this yesterday but no-one took me up (I'll stop soon).
Abolish vehicle excise duty. Add it on to fuel duty. Use the redundant facility for administering VED to repatriate all the administrative jobs that are currently being done in India for the nationalised banks. Thus saving money now, and going forward. Saving people's time and effort. And not losing any jobs.
Someone posted here earlier that we currently run a balance of payments deficit of 90 billion a year. That should have us running for the hills in terror.
That was me.
Here's a crossover to consider - will the BoP deficit go over £100bn before the government deficit falls below £100bn ?
The BoP SHOULD have us running for the hills in terror but it wont.
It's a commonplace saying that the NHS is the nearest thing the British people have to a religion.
It isn't.
The true religion of the British people is the belief in the magic money tree.
I totally agree. And sadly it's a belief that is fostered by those in power. People bang on about the dangers of the gadflies, cranks, loonies etc. getting into power, but they simply do not appreciate the danger of politicians who either don't care about British interests, or who are actively stoking the engines toward insolvency, IMF-ville, bail out, and permanent surrender of sovereignty a la Greece. Politicians who are remarkably effective and professional would be ideal, but politicians who are actually on our side would be a start.
People do not see even in recent years what we've lost. Even in the late 90's we made huge amounts from Music, with EMI a world beating record company. All swallowed up by the Americans now. Takeover of EMI by Universal could have been stopped by existing competition laws, but our Government chose to override them.
Technology is dooming the old ways of doing business in the music industry. Using anti-competition laws etc to try to turn back the tide might buy the old giant dinosaurs a few more years.
Rather like the way a dwindling number of people still get their news printed on paper or still send their emails using a "post box" with a "stamp" on we'll see that the Americans you speak of have wasted their money.
EMI's glory days are surely a long time ago. IIRC they were bought about 10yrs ago by a hedgefund who tried to knock some sense into the business that was badly failing to manage its cost base. They failed and stuck it back up for sale.
It got quite a lot of press at the time. It certainly was a great business once, but the industry has changed so much. Most of the records I have now seem to be a subsid of Sony or Virgin or a rag bag of names I don't recognise much. That may simply be my lack of observation of course.
You're quite right, though even to the last, they had big artists like Katie Perry and Coldplay on their roster. The decline of the company has been long in coming, but it doesn't make the loss any less. It's not just record sales (which account for very little these days), it's the performing rights from their vast catalogue, that now obviously all goes elsewhere.
That rag bag of names that you see on records will be subsidiaries of Universal, Sony, or Warners, who are pretty much the only swollen conglomerates left in the game, having devoured the rest. Two American companies, one nominally Japanese -a tiny cadre of US corporations controlling pop culture -not healthy culturally, and for this country not healthy economically either.
I am so fed up with those that claim we need to do more to get non voters engaged, and its somehow all the fault of politicians that folk cannot be ar*sed to get off their backsides and vote once every 4/5 years. Why the hell should they get away with blaming our current crop of politicians for their laziness, far less be rewarded at the expense of the many millions of Brits who not only engage in the GE debate, but also more importantly turned up to vote at a GE?! Rant over.
I'm not quite at rant level, but part of me thinks the same thing sometimes. The thing is, politicians really do try to engage as many people as possible - every person engaged is a possible voter - but not much seems to work. Hell, even the IndyRef couldn't get some people engaged. I'm at a loss at what more could be done. I'm sure people talk about distant westminster being a part of it, but even fewer people vote for their local politicians, so that cannot be that big a part of it, and voters punish the politicians who don't conform to the styles of the leadership classes (or at least those that don't, who are better at engaging, may be able to win one seat but seem to get less benefit in a national sense).
One Labour chap has just asked me, should he be worried that Labour are only gaining votes where they already have MPs?
It would be worrying for Labour if it were the case, but it doesn't seem to be. Ashcroft's marginal polling suggests that Labour are doing disproportionately well in Lab-Tory marginals, largely thanks to Lib Dem to Labour switchers.
Voter concentration is a bigger issue for the Conservatives, who are racking up huge majorities in safe seats.
One Labour chap has just asked me, should he be worried that Labour are only gaining votes where they already have MPs?
Yes. Have thought that for a long time. They will gain the most votes where it doesn't matter. Hence the 7% lead in the national polls is bogus.
Where are you thinking?
Sorry, didn't explain that very well. I mean Labour will disproportionately put on votes in seats that they already hold, particularly in urban areas, such that the Conservatives won't need the full 2010 GE lead of 7% over Labour to win. This is in contrast to Blair, who was highly efficient with his votes in marginal seats.
I expect Cameron will turn out to be surprisingly efficient too.
I'm not sure Labour will do that well with their own seats. Remember one of Ed's biggest problems is he doesn't even convince all his own supporters. Many may stay at home.
Doubtful I think Ed is indeed pretty Crap but in a close election lots of LAB voters will be extremely keen to stick with LAB to try to get rid of the Tories.
You missed Tyson's comment this afternoon. He, a Labour voter was going to lend the Tories his vote to ensure that Milband didn't win, and that Labour survived in the long term.
Even BenM's had enough.
I thought Tyson lived in Tuscany now ?
And didn't he previously live in the Oxford West constituency and had never voted Labour but always LibDem ?
I am so fed up with those that claim we need to do more to get non voters engaged, and its somehow all the fault of politicians that folk cannot be ar*sed to get off their backsides and vote once every 4/5 years. Why the hell should they get away with blaming our current crop of politicians for their laziness, far less be rewarded at the expense of the many millions of Brits who not only engage in the GE debate, but also more importantly turned up to vote at a GE?! Rant over.
When this was discussed re the indyref it was suggested it was impossible to get more than 90% turn out because it was inevitable the electoral roll would be out of date. As I recall the turn out was about 85% - which we should remember for the survival of your country. So really anything above 70-75% does not seem too bad to me for a general election.
Lets make a scenario: On electoral calculus with this poll we have LAB 316, CON 296, LD 11, SNP 6, PC 3. Practically the LD are going to hold an extra 10 seats from the Tories and UKIP are probably going to elect 10 MP's too all of them from the Tories, also the SNP is going to gain a few LD and Labour seats lets say 3 from each , so the eventual number would be LAB 313, CON 276, LD 18, SNP 12, UKIP 10, PC 3.
Now lets try to form a long term stable coalition with these numbers.
That's easy, a Lab-Con coalition would have no more internal disagreement than the current Con-Lib one, and a majority of 263.
Now now, that's not true - even if one accepts the idea that ideologically and practically Labour and the Tories could conceivably do that, their defining aspects now are in opposition to the other one (at least nationally). So they could never work in a government together even if on every important issue there was no disagreement, as they would define their smaller differences as massive,
Initially Stella Creasey seemed pretty on the ball, for whatever reason - she's become an ego on legs. Her behaviour on Twitter is often really off-putting, very smug and rude [she thought I was a man and golly...]
Her involvement in the smugfest that was TwitterSilence when she couldn't even stay off it for 24hrs despite exhorting her support just convinced me that she's swallowed her own PR and is still drunk on it.
Here's one of my 'cuts' -I floated this yesterday but no-one took me up (I'll stop soon).
Abolish vehicle excise duty. Add it on to fuel duty. Use the redundant facility for administering VED to repatriate all the administrative jobs that are currently being done in India for the nationalised banks. Thus saving money now, and going forward. Saving people's time and effort. And not losing any jobs.
Someone posted here earlier that we currently run a balance of payments deficit of 90 billion a year. That should have us running for the hills in terror.
Well the ONS says of 2013 ''In 2013, the UK’s current account deficit was £71.1 billion.'' I'm not sure but other reports suggest it may have been recast a bit lower.
However that is not the 'trade deficit', the.... ''Current Account is the sum of the balance of trade (exports minus imports of goods and services), net factor income (such as interest and dividends) and net transfer payments (such as foreign aid). '' So our 'trade deficit' is lower than this. However the other side of this coin is that the sums paid out for goods come back as inward investment. The 'balance' must balance and our deficit on trade is paid for by a surplus on financial flows. As a small wealthy country is it a surprise that we cannot produce at home all we would like - ie mobile phones, cheap clothes? We may well be producing in absolute standards as much if more more than ever before but the more we spend ourselvesonn ourselves then the more we must import.
I dont agree with abolishing VED since many parts of the country need to use cars more than others. You may not care but it would have a disproportionate affect on many people. Then there is the transport of goods costs
I don't understand what you mean about financial flows. I would like further clarification, but I may have to read it tomorrow as bed is calling!
And I don't understand how abolishing VED would be unfair. Heavy car users would pay more, but heavy car users use the roads more, which is nominally (I realise not in actuality) what this tax is designed to pay for. Our whole system is geared to trying to make people use their cars less, so why suddenly pull back on this in this instance?
One Labour chap has just asked me, should he be worried that Labour are only gaining votes where they already have MPs?
Yes. Have thought that for a long time. They will gain the most votes where it doesn't matter. Hence the 7% lead in the national polls is bogus.
Where are you thinking?
Sorry, didn't explain that very well. I mean Labour will disproportionately put on votes in seats that they already hold, particularly in urban areas, such that the Conservatives won't need the full 2010 GE lead of 7% over Labour to win. This is in contrast to Blair, who was highly efficient with his votes in marginal seats.
I expect Cameron will turn out to be surprisingly efficient too.
I'm not sure Labour will do that well with their own seats. Remember one of Ed's biggest problems is he doesn't even convince all his own supporters. Many may stay at home.
Doubtful I think Ed is indeed pretty Crap but in a close election lots of LAB voters will be extremely keen to stick with LAB to try to get rid of the Tories.
You missed Tyson's comment this afternoon. He, a Labour voter was going to lend the Tories his vote to ensure that Milband didn't win, and that Labour survived in the long term.
Even BenM's had enough.
My money is still on PM Ed but we will see
Let's see, iirc that was pretty much all your money wasn't it?
Alan Milburn introduced a system ripe for privitisation coalition took that opportunity
The NHS is not being 'privatised' - and it was Gordon Brown in Labour's 2010 manifesto that promied the provoision of privatly provided services commissioned by and under the NHS.
Tories announce a pretend tax cut for the rich, which is really mostly just five years of inflation.
Labour can't say it's not real because that's too complicated, and they can't say it'll be unfunded because the voters think the Tories are deficit hawks, so they won't believe it.
As one of the poor sods who not only put themselves on the electoral register from the age of 18, and who then proceeded to pay ALL their taxes as well as turning up to vote.... There are no words to describe my anger at Salmond's latest stunt, I caught his announcement and the appalling weak response of the (SNP) Holyrood Speaker of the House on FM's questions this morning.
Surely the £800M wages figure should be zero, since whatever sort of doctors these graduates become, we'll still be paying them.
Interesting too that GP courses are not full, which runs contra to recent pb threads about how overpaid and under-worked GPs are. It seems the opposite might be true.
Tories announce a pretend tax cut for the rich, which is really mostly just five years of inflation.
Labour can't say it's not real because that's too complicated, and they can't say it'll be unfunded because the voters think the Tories are deficit hawks, so they won't believe it.
You know, I really can't remember which party started the silly game of pointing to unfunded commitments and "black holes", but it is certainly a game everyone now plays. Will there be a VAT rise? Who knows? But there is one party with a history of increasing VAT after denying any such plans, and it ain't Mebyon Kernow.
Back the Tories at 11/8 with SkyBet (with 48.14% of total stake) to win the Rochester and Strood by-election and back UKIP at 6/5 with Hills (51.86% of stake) likewise and make a 14% profit. But hurry, this can't last! As ever, DYOR.
Comments
People do not see even in recent years what we've lost. Even in the late 90's we made huge amounts from Music, with EMI a world beating record company. All swallowed up by the Americans now. Takeover of EMI by Universal could have been stopped by existing competition laws, but our Government chose to override them.
Woman who knows about NHS make them both look ridiculous
Westoe (South Tyneside) result:
UKIP - 40.9% (+40.9)
LAB - 37.9% (+2.2)
CON - 13.3% (+1.6)
GRN - 5.5% (-0.4)
LDEM - 2.5% (-0.2)
Been interesting. Next Thursday promises to be loads of fun too.
Nite everybody and thanx for your company.
Westoe (South Tyneside) vote result:
UKIP - 676
LAB - 625
CON - 219
GRN - 90
LDEM - 41
Similarly, our telly tax was abolished about 5 years ago and also rolled into the general tax/theft pot. Although that was largely done for practical reasons due to widespread non-payment (including by me)
It got quite a lot of press at the time. It certainly was a great business once, but the industry has changed so much. Most of the records I have now seem to be a subsid of Sony or Virgin or a rag bag of names I don't recognise much. That may simply be my lack of observation of course.
Alan Milburn introduced a system ripe for privitisation coalition took that opportunity
Even BenM's had enough.
Fret not, it's happened to the best of us.
Patricia Hewitt was the worst by miles. She could patronise for Britain.
However that is not the 'trade deficit', the.... ''Current Account is the sum of the balance of trade (exports minus imports of goods and services), net factor income (such as interest and dividends) and net transfer payments (such as foreign aid). ''
So our 'trade deficit' is lower than this.
However the other side of this coin is that the sums paid out for goods come back as inward investment. The 'balance' must balance and our deficit on trade is paid for by a surplus on financial flows.
As a small wealthy country is it a surprise that we cannot produce at home all we would like - ie mobile phones, cheap clothes? We may well be producing in absolute standards as much if more more than ever before but the more we spend ourselvesonn ourselves then the more we must import.
I dont agree with abolishing VED since many parts of the country need to use cars more than others. You may not care but it would have a disproportionate affect on many people. Then there is the transport of goods costs
Rather like the way a dwindling number of people still get their news printed on paper or still send their emails using a "post box" with a "stamp" on we'll see that the Americans you speak of have wasted their money.
That rag bag of names that you see on records will be subsidiaries of Universal, Sony, or Warners, who are pretty much the only swollen conglomerates left in the game, having devoured the rest. Two American companies, one nominally Japanese -a tiny cadre of US corporations controlling pop culture -not healthy culturally, and for this country not healthy economically either.
One of my GP colleagues with a head for sums does the maths here:
http://northern-doc.blogspot.co.uk/2014/09/fools-and-their-ideas-are-soon-parted.html
And with that, good night.
Voter concentration is a bigger issue for the Conservatives, who are racking up huge majorities in safe seats.
And didn't he previously live in the Oxford West constituency and had never voted Labour but always LibDem ?
So really anything above 70-75% does not seem too bad to me for a general election.
And I don't understand how abolishing VED would be unfair. Heavy car users would pay more, but heavy car users use the roads more, which is nominally (I realise not in actuality) what this tax is designed to pay for. Our whole system is geared to trying to make people use their cars less, so why suddenly pull back on this in this instance?
Cumbria CC result LD hold LD 1061 Con 810 Ind 123 Green 61
I see him more as sort of student for life, doing ever more postgrad courses whilst living off the family money.
I'd suggest people take the 6/5 available at William Hill now before it gets cut.
Tories announce a pretend tax cut for the rich, which is really mostly just five years of inflation.
Labour can't say it's not real because that's too complicated, and they can't say it'll be unfunded because the voters think the Tories are deficit hawks, so they won't believe it.
Instead Labour make up a pretend funding stream for the pretend tax cut, in the form of a VAT rise:
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/tory-chairman-cannot-rule-out-4370193
Interesting too that GP courses are not full, which runs contra to recent pb threads about how overpaid and under-worked GPs are. It seems the opposite might be true.
Back the Tories at 11/8 with SkyBet (with 48.14% of total stake) to win the Rochester and Strood by-election and back UKIP at 6/5 with Hills (51.86% of stake) likewise and make a 14% profit.
But hurry, this can't last!
As ever, DYOR.