politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The great CON Rochester primary mystery – how the reported

System

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The great CON Rochester primary mystery – how the reported turnout of 4,000 became 5,688

The first news that all was not well with the CON Rochester primary was this report, now not on the Spectator site, from the usually well informed Isabel Hardman.

Read the full story here

Gadfly

First!

audreyanne

4000 or 5688 I'm not really fussed because these are dreadful figures either way.

Truly shocking. I did say that not many political ideas make a successful transatlantic crossing and I think 'US primaries' might join the long list.

It also bodes extremely badly for the Conservatives in the by election.

Indigo

FPT:

dugarbandier said:

Indigo said:

And the EU just can't stop giving UKIP ammunition today

Herman Van Rompuy ‏@euHvR
Deal! At least 40% emissions cut by 2030. World's most ambitious, cost-effective, fair #EU2030 climate energy policy agreed #EUCO

where are the voters who believe in both limited immigration and science supposed to go?

Problem it is just nonsense, there is no buy in from anyone outside the EU, so its not going to cut emissions by any noticeable amount globally, its just going export emissions, and with them jobs and competitiveness.

Richard_Nabavi

audreyanne said:

4000 or 5688 I'm not really fussed because these are dreadful figures either way.

Truly shocking. I did say that not many political ideas make a successful transatlantic crossing and I think 'US primaries' might join the long list.

It also bodes extremely badly for the Conservatives in the by election.

Are they dreadful figures? I'm not sure what measures we've got to judge this by, but you'd expect a much lower response rate than in a very safe seat, the whole thing had to be done to a very tight timescale, there was little time for the candidates to present themselves to the electorate, and it's a by-election where fewer people vote anyway. Getting a quarter of the Totnes response rate might be disappointing, but it doesn't look dreadful in the circumstances.

dugarbandier

Indigo said:

FPT:

dugarbandier said:

Indigo said:

And the EU just can't stop giving UKIP ammunition today

Herman Van Rompuy ‏@euHvR
Deal! At least 40% emissions cut by 2030. World's most ambitious, cost-effective, fair #EU2030 climate energy policy agreed #EUCO

where are the voters who believe in both limited immigration and science supposed to go?

Problem it is just nonsense, there is no buy in from anyone outside the EU, so its not going to cut emissions by any noticeable amount globally, its just going export emissions, and with them jobs and competitiveness.

mainly a bargaining position for the upcoming summit next year, isn't it?

Indigo

dugarbandier said:

Indigo said:

FPT:

dugarbandier said:

Indigo said:

And the EU just can't stop giving UKIP ammunition today

Herman Van Rompuy ‏@euHvR
Deal! At least 40% emissions cut by 2030. World's most ambitious, cost-effective, fair #EU2030 climate energy policy agreed #EUCO

where are the voters who believe in both limited immigration and science supposed to go?

Problem it is just nonsense, there is no buy in from anyone outside the EU, so its not going to cut emissions by any noticeable amount globally, its just going export emissions, and with them jobs and competitiveness.

mainly a bargaining position for the upcoming summit next year, isn't it?

Yes, but its the same as Dave having a referendum before a treaty ratification. This has been passed as EU law now, if the American/Chinese/Indians/Brazilians/whoever decided they prefer their high growth rates to environmental restrictions and won't play ball, we are stuffed for competitiveness. If we have laws to cut by 40% and everyone else decides that 20% or 10% is a figure they are more comfortable with, we are stuffed for competitiveness. Posturing for a conference next year with the countries competitiveness over the next couple of decades is an idiotic way to run a show.

Paul_Mid_Beds

Meanwhile over at the Independent:

"Attacks on 'Ukip Calypso' show just how skewed people’s priorities are
Where is the Left’s outrage over the sexual abuse of girls?"

"How's this for having your priorities in order: 1,400 young girls are groomed and raped in the North of England, and yet this week we've seen a stronger reaction from many on the Left to a calypso song produced by a Ukip supporter....."

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/attacks-on-ukip-calypso-show-just-how-skewed-peoples-priorities-are-9814360.html

Indigo

Paul_Mid_Beds said:

Meanwhile over at the Independent:

"Attacks on 'Ukip Calypso' show just how skewed people’s priorities are
Where is the Left’s outrage over the sexual abuse of girls?"

"How's this for having your priorities in order: 1,400 young girls are groomed and raped in the North of England, and yet this week we've seen a stronger reaction from many on the Left to a calypso song produced by a Ukip supporter....."

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/attacks-on-ukip-calypso-show-just-how-skewed-peoples-priorities-are-9814360.html

Yes indeed, and then the Right-On Brigade in the comments proceed to prove him right. Apparently only a "small number" of people were involve in Rotherham (committing rape) whereas far more people were offended by the Calypso Song. So there you have it, for the left wing chattering classes, causing a bit of offense is more "vile" that raping children.

dugarbandier

Indigo said:

dugarbandier said:

Indigo said:

FPT:

dugarbandier said:

Indigo said:

And the EU just can't stop giving UKIP ammunition today

Herman Van Rompuy ‏@euHvR
Deal! At least 40% emissions cut by 2030. World's most ambitious, cost-effective, fair #EU2030 climate energy policy agreed #EUCO

where are the voters who believe in both limited immigration and science supposed to go?

Problem it is just nonsense, there is no buy in from anyone outside the EU, so its not going to cut emissions by any noticeable amount globally, its just going export emissions, and with them jobs and competitiveness.

mainly a bargaining position for the upcoming summit next year, isn't it?

Yes, but its the same as Dave having a referendum before a treaty ratification. This has been passed as EU law now, if the American/Chinese/Indians/Brazilians/whoever decided they prefer their high growth rates to environmental restrictions and won't play ball, we are stuffed for competitiveness. If we have laws to cut by 40% and everyone else decides that 20% or 10% is a figure they are more comfortable with, we are stuffed for competitiveness. Posturing for a conference next year with the countries competitiveness over the next couple of decades is an idiotic way to run a show.

what's yr alternative negotiating strategy?

audreyanne

Paul_Mid_Beds said:

Meanwhile over at the Independent:

That's Farage's own blog column isn't it?

In the midst of this story about abuse of girls largely by communities I hope we're not forgetting the part white middle-aged men play in this industry? How many of you commenting about Rotherham saw this shocking article?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2714200/How-London-child-abuse-capital-world-Trafficked-gangs-prey-pimps-paedophiles-murderers-booming-trade-lost-children-shames-all.html

Indigo

dugarbandier said:

what's yr alternative negotiating strategy?

Everyone else seems to be negotiating first, passing laws as required afterwards, why is that so difficult ?

Indigo

audreyanne said:

white middle-aged men

"The 2000 American Association of University Women (AAUW) data indicate that 57.2 percent of all students report a male offender and 42.4 percent a female offender with the Cameron et al. study reporting nearly identical proportions as the 2000 AAUW data (57 percent male offenders vs. 43 percent female offenders)"

david_herdson

On topic, yes, the full figures should be released. However, as Richard N has already said, we don't have any good yardstick to judge what's a good / poor / outstanding turnout, and there were sound reasons to expect a lower response rate on this occasion.

dugarbandier

Indigo said:

dugarbandier said:

what's yr alternative negotiating strategy?

Everyone else seems to be negotiating first, passing laws as required afterwards, why is that so difficult ?

presumably the thinking would be that the EU is going to negotiate as a whole, so there needs to be confidence that one country wouldn't just decide to do something else?

(think now would be the time to waffle on about prisoner's dilemma and "zero sum mentality" but i don't know much about that. so i won't)

OldKingCole

Exactly 4000’s odd, too.

dr_spyn

OK Cameron do something.

Put up.or shut up about reforming the EU.

A simple F U EU.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-29751124

Or the Tory Bunny gets shot in Rochester or Stroud.

It almost looks like the EU are determined to strengthen UKIP to split the Tories. Starts folding tin foil...

Indigo

dugarbandier said:

Indigo said:

dugarbandier said:

what's yr alternative negotiating strategy?

Everyone else seems to be negotiating first, passing laws as required afterwards, why is that so difficult ?

presumably the thinking would be that the EU is going to negotiate as a whole, so there needs to be confidence that one country wouldn't just decide to do something else?

(think now would be the time to waffle on about prisoner's dilemma and "zero sum mentality" but i don't know much about that. so i won't)

Yes I understand why they did it. But its still idiotic gambling your whole economic blocs future competitiveness on America being prepared to sign something similar, less than a year before their presidential elections.

JohnLoony

The publicity about the entirely non-controversial and eminently reasonable imminent release of Harry Roberts after 48 years reminds me of something which is mentioned in some of the older editions of the Guinness Book of Records in the section on longest sentences. Arthur William Skingle is mentioned because he was in 1971 given a whole-life tariff after murdering a police officer - at the time, the only person to have been sentenced thus.

Curiosity made me google him; he died in prison in 1989 at the age of 43, from a heart attack.

OldKingCole

JohnLoony said:

The publicity about the entirely non-controversial and eminently reasonable imminent release of Harry Roberts after 48 years reminds me of something which is mentioned in some of the older editions of the Guinness Book of Records in the section on longest sentences. Arthur William Skingle is mentioned because he was in 1971 given a whole-life tariff after murdering a police officer - at the time, the only person to have been sentenced thus.

Curiosity made me google him; he died in prison in 1989 at the age of 43, from a heart attack.

It’ll probably be tougher for Roberts out of prison than in. Elderly man, unaccustomed to looking after himself, unaware of the detail of modern life.

dr_spyn

"Smell that? You smell that?"
"What?"
"Bullshit, son. Nothing else in the world smells like that."
" I love the smell of bullshit in the morning."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-29751124

"The UK has been doing better since 1997 than we thought and that's resulted in this extra payment. The Netherlands will pay more, while France and Germany get a rebate." Sarah Hewin of Standard Chartered on 5 live says the payment has to be made in the next few months. That could mean more borrowing, she says.

Perhaps it is a time for Cameron to just say No. If he doesn't then he might as well disband the Tories now, let UKIP walk over them in R & S. With friends like this in the EU telling the UK to hand over move money cos the economy has done so well since 1997, who needs enemies. It looks like a scam, smells like a scam, and if a single extra £1 or €1 is handed over it just confirms that Cameron is like the jellyfish, spineless and floating on the tide.

Casino_Royale

Perhaps the EU are secretly trying to foment more discord in the Tory party, in the hope of getting Miliband elected?

Casino_Royale

david_herdson said:

On topic, yes, the full figures should be released. However, as Richard N has already said, we don't have any good yardstick to judge what's a good / poor / outstanding turnout, and there were sound reasons to expect a lower response rate on this occasion.

Whatever the yardstick was, this would be below it.

JohnLoony

The Veritas Party tried the same trick when they had a leadership election and released only the percentages (not the number of votes) in order to disguise the fact that so few people voted (i.e. how few people were in the party). (So much for being the party of the "truth".) But the numbers were leaked anyway - iirc, Winston McKenzie came last with 40 votes.

Socrates

@dr_spyn

Agreed. The EU can't just shake us down for more money whenever it decides to change the numbers.

Socrates

audreyanne said:

Paul_Mid_Beds said:

Meanwhile over at the Independent:

That's Farage's own blog column isn't it?

In the midst of this story about abuse of girls largely by communities I hope we're not forgetting the part white middle-aged men play in this industry? How many of you commenting about Rotherham saw this shocking article?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2714200/How-London-child-abuse-capital-world-Trafficked-gangs-prey-pimps-paedophiles-murderers-booming-trade-lost-children-shames-all.html

That article seems to be disproportionately mentioning Nigerian men. If you have a reason to believe there's a model of child abuse where white middle aged men are disproportionately involved, with a clear racial element to it than lets hear it. But it sounds like you're upset Pakistanis have been caught responsible for an abuse wave so you are desperately looking for some white people to blame.

TGOHF

Given that this is the first postal open primary for a bye election I can't see how anyone can see how this turnout is good bad or ugly.

The Cons had the nuts to try it - none of the other parties did - despite much noise about being the parties of the workers or the army of the people.

Extrapolate from a single data point at your peril.

edmundintokyo

On the face of it these don't sound like terrible numbers for a pair of fairly indistinguishable-looking candidates with about 25 minutes to campaign. But I'd also like to know how many people wrote in Benny Hill or whatever.

Millsy

Doesn't look good but at the end of the day it's 4000 or 5000 more people than decided the other party candidates.

Meanwhile, YouGov numbers continue to be bad for Labour.

Con & Lab tied at 34% in the voting intention.

Here are some statements that different people make about different political parties. In each case, which party do you think it applies to most - the Conservatives, Labour or the Liberal Democrats?

It is led by people of real ability

Labour at 11% is the lowest figure since May 2010

http://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/118eeuizl4/YG-Archive-Pol-Sun-results-231014.pdf

SouthamObserver

The hand of Shapps? Or whatever his name is.

Innocent_Abroad

A load of Moaning Minnies this morning, aren't we?

One of these fine mornings I'll come here only to be redirected to OneFootInTheGrave.com ...

JosiasJessop

Socrates said:

audreyanne said:

Paul_Mid_Beds said:

Meanwhile over at the Independent:

That's Farage's own blog column isn't it?

In the midst of this story about abuse of girls largely by communities I hope we're not forgetting the part white middle-aged men play in this industry? How many of you commenting about Rotherham saw this shocking article?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2714200/How-London-child-abuse-capital-world-Trafficked-gangs-prey-pimps-paedophiles-murderers-booming-trade-lost-children-shames-all.html

That article seems to be disproportionately mentioning Nigerian men. If you have a reason to believe there's a model of child abuse where white middle aged men are disproportionately involved, with a clear racial element to it than lets hear it. But it sounds like you're upset Pakistanis have been caught responsible for an abuse wave so you are desperately looking for some white people to blame.

Why does it have to have a 'clear racial element' to be important or noteworthy?

Millsy

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-29751124

Typical lefty nonsense punishing success.

Cameron should say we will pay it in late 2017.

chestnut

The Berwick primary attracted 300 or so.

Novelty value wears off quickly.

UKIP to win the seat with lead of 5% is my unscientific hunch.

Today's Yougov is more evidence that the real Con-Lab gap is close to eroded. Labour have had a string of subsample numbers in the Midlands/Wales which are implying Lab-Ukip switching gathering pace. Been in motion for weeks now.

Tory number up today largely on the back of southern subsample.

Innocent_Abroad

Millsy said:

Doesn't look good but at the end of the day it's 4000 or 5000 more people than decided the other party candidates.

Meanwhile, YouGov numbers continue to be bad for Labour.

Con & Lab tied at 34% in the voting intention.

Here are some statements that different people make about different political parties. In each case, which party do you think it applies to most - the Conservatives, Labour or the Liberal Democrats?

It is led by people of real ability

Labour at 11% is the lowest figure since May 2010

http://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/118eeuizl4/YG-Archive-Pol-Sun-results-231014.pdf

I am beginning to think that there has to be a real chance that Ed Miliband will achieve what Michael Foot couldn't quite pull off in 1983 and bring his Party in third in the popular vote.

And remember Foot only beat Healey on the votes on MPs who had already decided to leave the Party.

SouthamObserver

Indigo said:

Paul_Mid_Beds said:

Meanwhile over at the Independent:

"Attacks on 'Ukip Calypso' show just how skewed people’s priorities are
Where is the Left’s outrage over the sexual abuse of girls?"

"How's this for having your priorities in order: 1,400 young girls are groomed and raped in the North of England, and yet this week we've seen a stronger reaction from many on the Left to a calypso song produced by a Ukip supporter....."

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/attacks-on-ukip-calypso-show-just-how-skewed-peoples-priorities-are-9814360.html

Yes indeed, and then the Right-On Brigade in the comments proceed to prove him right. Apparently only a "small number" of people were involve in Rotherham (committing rape) whereas far more people were offended by the Calypso Song. So there you have it, for the left wing chattering classes, causing a bit of offense is more "vile" that raping children.

Spot on. You are the voice of reason. Left wingers are perfectly happy for children to be raped. Indeed, I would happily stand by and let it happen to my own kids. But if someone sang a calypso song in a crap Caribbean accent I would be manning the barricades.

dugarbandier

SouthamObserver said:

Indigo said:

Paul_Mid_Beds said:

Meanwhile over at the Independent:

"Attacks on 'Ukip Calypso' show just how skewed people’s priorities are
Where is the Left’s outrage over the sexual abuse of girls?"

"How's this for having your priorities in order: 1,400 young girls are groomed and raped in the North of England, and yet this week we've seen a stronger reaction from many on the Left to a calypso song produced by a Ukip supporter....."

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/attacks-on-ukip-calypso-show-just-how-skewed-peoples-priorities-are-9814360.html

Yes indeed, and then the Right-On Brigade in the comments proceed to prove him right. Apparently only a "small number" of people were involve in Rotherham (committing rape) whereas far more people were offended by the Calypso Song. So there you have it, for the left wing chattering classes, causing a bit of offense is more "vile" that raping children.

Spot on. You are the voice of reason. Left wingers are perfectly happy for children to be raped. Indeed, I would happily stand by and let it happen to my own kids. But if someone sang a calypso song in a crap Caribbean accent I would be manning the barricades.

irony on the internet: a risky strategy!

david_herdson

dr_spyn said:

"Smell that? You smell that?"
"What?"
"Bullshit, son. Nothing else in the world smells like that."
" I love the smell of bullshit in the morning."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-29751124

"The UK has been doing better since 1997 than we thought and that's resulted in this extra payment. The Netherlands will pay more, while France and Germany get a rebate." Sarah Hewin of Standard Chartered on 5 live says the payment has to be made in the next few months. That could mean more borrowing, she says.

Perhaps it is a time for Cameron to just say No. If he doesn't then he might as well disband the Tories now, let UKIP walk over them in R & S. With friends like this in the EU telling the UK to hand over move money cos the economy has done so well since 1997, who needs enemies. It looks like a scam, smells like a scam, and if a single extra £1 or €1 is handed over it just confirms that Cameron is like the jellyfish, spineless and floating on the tide.

On the one hand, it's not unreasonable that the richest, best-performing countries should contribute most, nor that from time to time, payments should be re-assessed to account for performance since the last assessment. On the other, this is a singularly poor time to be doing so, unless tied to institutional reform driven by those whose pockets are being tapped.

Casino_Royale

Innocent_Abroad said:

Millsy said:

Doesn't look good but at the end of the day it's 4000 or 5000 more people than decided the other party candidates.

Meanwhile, YouGov numbers continue to be bad for Labour.

Con & Lab tied at 34% in the voting intention.

Here are some statements that different people make about different political parties. In each case, which party do you think it applies to most - the Conservatives, Labour or the Liberal Democrats?

It is led by people of real ability

Labour at 11% is the lowest figure since May 2010

http://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/118eeuizl4/YG-Archive-Pol-Sun-results-231014.pdf

I am beginning to think that there has to be a real chance that Ed Miliband will achieve what Michael Foot couldn't quite pull off in 1983 and bring his Party in third in the popular vote.

And remember Foot only beat Healey on the votes on MPs who had already decided to leave the Party.

I think there's a realistic chance Miliband polls worse nationally next year than Brown did in GE2010.

SouthamObserver

david_herdson said:

dr_spyn said:

"Smell that? You smell that?"
"What?"
"Bullshit, son. Nothing else in the world smells like that."
" I love the smell of bullshit in the morning."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-29751124

"The UK has been doing better since 1997 than we thought and that's resulted in this extra payment. The Netherlands will pay more, while France and Germany get a rebate." Sarah Hewin of Standard Chartered on 5 live says the payment has to be made in the next few months. That could mean more borrowing, she says.

Perhaps it is a time for Cameron to just say No. If he doesn't then he might as well disband the Tories now, let UKIP walk over them in R & S. With friends like this in the EU telling the UK to hand over move money cos the economy has done so well since 1997, who needs enemies. It looks like a scam, smells like a scam, and if a single extra £1 or €1 is handed over it just confirms that Cameron is like the jellyfish, spineless and floating on the tide.

On the one hand, it's not unreasonable that the richest, best-performing countries should contribute most, nor that from time to time, payments should be re-assessed to account for performance since the last assessment. On the other, this is a singularly poor time to be doing so, unless tied to institutional reform driven by those whose pockets are being tapped.

This looks and smells like a story that the government has put out so that it can be seen to be tough when it does not make the payment on 1st December.

TGOHF

Casino_Royale said:

Innocent_Abroad said:

Millsy said:

Doesn't look good but at the end of the day it's 4000 or 5000 more people than decided the other party candidates.

Meanwhile, YouGov numbers continue to be bad for Labour.

Con & Lab tied at 34% in the voting intention.

Here are some statements that different people make about different political parties. In each case, which party do you think it applies to most - the Conservatives, Labour or the Liberal Democrats?

It is led by people of real ability

Labour at 11% is the lowest figure since May 2010

http://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/118eeuizl4/YG-Archive-Pol-Sun-results-231014.pdf

I am beginning to think that there has to be a real chance that Ed Miliband will achieve what Michael Foot couldn't quite pull off in 1983 and bring his Party in third in the popular vote.

And remember Foot only beat Healey on the votes on MPs who had already decided to leave the Party.

I think there's a realistic chance Miliband polls worse nationally next year than Brown did in GE2010.

He certainly doesn't have the Brown Scotland boost. Gordon got 42% North of the border in 2010 he got 42% - any odds on Ed getting that in 2015 ?

Indigo

SouthamObserver said:

Spot on. You are the voice of reason. Left wingers are perfectly happy for children to be raped. Indeed, I would happily stand by and let it happen to my own kids. But if someone sang a calypso song in a crap Caribbean accent I would be manning the barricades.

I was quoting the comment that appeared at the top of the comment section at the time I posted:

"The abuse was carried out by a small number of people. The 'calypso' insulted a great many."

SouthamObserver

dugarbandier said:

SouthamObserver said:

Indigo said:

Paul_Mid_Beds said:

Meanwhile over at the Independent:

"Attacks on 'Ukip Calypso' show just how skewed people’s priorities are
Where is the Left’s outrage over the sexual abuse of girls?"

"How's this for having your priorities in order: 1,400 young girls are groomed and raped in the North of England, and yet this week we've seen a stronger reaction from many on the Left to a calypso song produced by a Ukip supporter....."

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/attacks-on-ukip-calypso-show-just-how-skewed-peoples-priorities-are-9814360.html

Yes indeed, and then the Right-On Brigade in the comments proceed to prove him right. Apparently only a "small number" of people were involve in Rotherham (committing rape) whereas far more people were offended by the Calypso Song. So there you have it, for the left wing chattering classes, causing a bit of offense is more "vile" that raping children.

Spot on. You are the voice of reason. Left wingers are perfectly happy for children to be raped. Indeed, I would happily stand by and let it happen to my own kids. But if someone sang a calypso song in a crap Caribbean accent I would be manning the barricades.

irony on the internet: a risky strategy!

No, Indigo's comments have made me search deep into my soul. And it turns out that not only do I hate this country, its history and its indigenous (white) population - stuff that I know already - but I am also very comfortable with the rape of children. Crap calypso, though, that's a different matter ...

JosiasJessop

david_herdson said:

dr_spyn said:

"Smell that? You smell that?"
"What?"
"Bullshit, son. Nothing else in the world smells like that."
" I love the smell of bullshit in the morning."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-29751124

"The UK has been doing better since 1997 than we thought and that's resulted in this extra payment. The Netherlands will pay more, while France and Germany get a rebate." Sarah Hewin of Standard Chartered on 5 live says the payment has to be made in the next few months. That could mean more borrowing, she says.

Perhaps it is a time for Cameron to just say No. If he doesn't then he might as well disband the Tories now, let UKIP walk over them in R & S. With friends like this in the EU telling the UK to hand over move money cos the economy has done so well since 1997, who needs enemies. It looks like a scam, smells like a scam, and if a single extra £1 or €1 is handed over it just confirms that Cameron is like the jellyfish, spineless and floating on the tide.

On the one hand, it's not unreasonable that the richest, best-performing countries should contribute most, nor that from time to time, payments should be re-assessed to account for performance since the last assessment. On the other, this is a singularly poor time to be doing so, unless tied to institutional reform driven by those whose pockets are being tapped.

Does anyone know if we've had a cut in payments in the past, based on our economy underperforming? If no, then we should probably politely tell the EU to f'off. If yes, we should, with regret, pay.

We cannot take rebates in bad times and then refuse to par a surcharge in good times.

In fact, it would be interesting to know how often this has occurred in the past, and the amounts, and to which countries.

Indigo

SouthamObserver said:

This looks and smells like a story that the government has put out so that it can be seen to be tough when it does not make the payment on 1st December.

Then it subsequently leaves 1.5bn in used banknotes in a brown paper bag somewhere in Strasbourg the following month, preferably on a day where something else hogs the headlines ;-)

Luckyguy1983

david_herdson said:

dr_spyn said:

"Smell that? You smell that?"
"What?"
"Bullshit, son. Nothing else in the world smells like that."
" I love the smell of bullshit in the morning."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-29751124

"The UK has been doing better since 1997 than we thought and that's resulted in this extra payment. The Netherlands will pay more, while France and Germany get a rebate." Sarah Hewin of Standard Chartered on 5 live says the payment has to be made in the next few months. That could mean more borrowing, she says.

Perhaps it is a time for Cameron to just say No. If he doesn't then he might as well disband the Tories now, let UKIP walk over them in R & S. With friends like this in the EU telling the UK to hand over move money cos the economy has done so well since 1997, who needs enemies. It looks like a scam, smells like a scam, and if a single extra £1 or €1 is handed over it just confirms that Cameron is like the jellyfish, spineless and floating on the tide.

On the one hand, it's not unreasonable that the richest, best-performing countries should contribute most, nor that from time to time, payments should be re-assessed to account for performance since the last assessment. On the other, this is a singularly poor time to be doing so, unless tied to institutional reform driven by those whose pockets are being tapped.

This is total rot. We have been found 'best performing' by a ridiculous concocted method. We have a balance of payments deficit with the continent, meaning we put in far more money than we get out, so if any 'balancing' payment should be going anywhere, it should be to us -to redress the millions we spend on French wine and German cars a year.

JosiasJessop

SouthamObserver said:

david_herdson said:

dr_spyn said:

"Smell that? You smell that?"
"What?"
"Bullshit, son. Nothing else in the world smells like that."
" I love the smell of bullshit in the morning."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-29751124

"The UK has been doing better since 1997 than we thought and that's resulted in this extra payment. The Netherlands will pay more, while France and Germany get a rebate." Sarah Hewin of Standard Chartered on 5 live says the payment has to be made in the next few months. That could mean more borrowing, she says.

Perhaps it is a time for Cameron to just say No. If he doesn't then he might as well disband the Tories now, let UKIP walk over them in R & S. With friends like this in the EU telling the UK to hand over move money cos the economy has done so well since 1997, who needs enemies. It looks like a scam, smells like a scam, and if a single extra £1 or €1 is handed over it just confirms that Cameron is like the jellyfish, spineless and floating on the tide.

On the one hand, it's not unreasonable that the richest, best-performing countries should contribute most, nor that from time to time, payments should be re-assessed to account for performance since the last assessment. On the other, this is a singularly poor time to be doing so, unless tied to institutional reform driven by those whose pockets are being tapped.

This looks and smells like a story that the government has put out so that it can be seen to be tough when it does not make the payment on 1st December.

It's been announced by the EU, so I doubt the government had much to do with the timing. In fact, they need it like a hole in the head.

"The additional payment was requested after the European Commission's statistics agency, Eurostat, reviewed the economic performances of member states since 1995, and readjusted the contributions made by each state over the last four years - based on their pace of growth."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-29751124

Note France and Germany get rebates.

SouthamObserver

Indigo said:

SouthamObserver said:

Spot on. You are the voice of reason. Left wingers are perfectly happy for children to be raped. Indeed, I would happily stand by and let it happen to my own kids. But if someone sang a calypso song in a crap Caribbean accent I would be manning the barricades.

I was quoting the comment that appeared at the top of the comment section at the time I posted:

"The abuse was carried out by a small number of people. The 'calypso' insulted a great many."

Indeed. The people who post on newspaper message boards are entirely representative of the wider population. That's how I know that right wingers are all paranoid xenophobes who hate immigrants, think Moslems are taking over the UK and hate anything that smacks of social liberalism. The Mail and Telegraph comment sections make that clear.

nigel4england

david_herdson said:

dr_spyn said:

"Smell that? You smell that?"
"What?"
"Bullshit, son. Nothing else in the world smells like that."
" I love the smell of bullshit in the morning."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-29751124

"The UK has been doing better since 1997 than we thought and that's resulted in this extra payment. The Netherlands will pay more, while France and Germany get a rebate." Sarah Hewin of Standard Chartered on 5 live says the payment has to be made in the next few months. That could mean more borrowing, she says.

Perhaps it is a time for Cameron to just say No. If he doesn't then he might as well disband the Tories now, let UKIP walk over them in R & S. With friends like this in the EU telling the UK to hand over move money cos the economy has done so well since 1997, who needs enemies. It looks like a scam, smells like a scam, and if a single extra £1 or €1 is handed over it just confirms that Cameron is like the jellyfish, spineless and floating on the tide.

On the one hand, it's not unreasonable that the richest, best-performing countries should contribute most, nor that from time to time, payments should be re-assessed to account for performance since the last assessment. On the other, this is a singularly poor time to be doing so, unless tied to institutional reform driven by those whose pockets are being tapped.

Care to tell us what the point of austerity is then?

Innocent_Abroad

SouthamObserver said:

Indigo said:

SouthamObserver said:

Spot on. You are the voice of reason. Left wingers are perfectly happy for children to be raped. Indeed, I would happily stand by and let it happen to my own kids. But if someone sang a calypso song in a crap Caribbean accent I would be manning the barricades.

I was quoting the comment that appeared at the top of the comment section at the time I posted:

"The abuse was carried out by a small number of people. The 'calypso' insulted a great many."

Indeed. The people who post on newspaper message boards are entirely representative of the wider population. That's how I know that right wingers are all paranoid xenophobes who hate immigrants, think Moslems are taking over the UK and hate anything that smacks of social liberalism. The Mail and Telegraph comment sections make that clear.

Oh, come on, SO, that can't be true. Next you'll be telling me that Paul Staines has a political agenda beyond exposing corruption...

nigel4england

dugarbandier said:

SouthamObserver said:

Indigo said:

Paul_Mid_Beds said:

Meanwhile over at the Independent:

"Attacks on 'Ukip Calypso' show just how skewed people’s priorities are
Where is the Left’s outrage over the sexual abuse of girls?"

"How's this for having your priorities in order: 1,400 young girls are groomed and raped in the North of England, and yet this week we've seen a stronger reaction from many on the Left to a calypso song produced by a Ukip supporter....."

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/attacks-on-ukip-calypso-show-just-how-skewed-peoples-priorities-are-9814360.html

Yes indeed, and then the Right-On Brigade in the comments proceed to prove him right. Apparently only a "small number" of people were involve in Rotherham (committing rape) whereas far more people were offended by the Calypso Song. So there you have it, for the left wing chattering classes, causing a bit of offense is more "vile" that raping children.

Spot on. You are the voice of reason. Left wingers are perfectly happy for children to be raped. Indeed, I would happily stand by and let it happen to my own kids. But if someone sang a calypso song in a crap Caribbean accent I would be manning the barricades.

irony on the internet: a risky strategy!

That's all you have left when you cannot deny the facts.

SouthamObserver

JosiasJessop said:

SouthamObserver said:

david_herdson said:

dr_spyn said:

"Smell that? You smell that?"
"What?"
"Bullshit, son. Nothing else in the world smells like that."
" I love the smell of bullshit in the morning."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-29751124

"The UK has been doing better since 1997 than we thought and that's resulted in this extra payment. The Netherlands will pay more, while France and Germany get a rebate." Sarah Hewin of Standard Chartered on 5 live says the payment has to be made in the next few months. That could mean more borrowing, she says.

Perhaps it is a time for Cameron to just say No. If he doesn't then he might as well disband the Tories now, let UKIP walk over them in R & S. With friends like this in the EU telling the UK to hand over move money cos the economy has done so well since 1997, who needs enemies. It looks like a scam, smells like a scam, and if a single extra £1 or €1 is handed over it just confirms that Cameron is like the jellyfish, spineless and floating on the tide.

On the one hand, it's not unreasonable that the richest, best-performing countries should contribute most, nor that from time to time, payments should be re-assessed to account for performance since the last assessment. On the other, this is a singularly poor time to be doing so, unless tied to institutional reform driven by those whose pockets are being tapped.

This looks and smells like a story that the government has put out so that it can be seen to be tough when it does not make the payment on 1st December.

It's been announced by the EU, so I doubt the government had much to do with the timing. In fact, they need it like a hole in the head.

"The additional payment was requested after the European Commission's statistics agency, Eurostat, reviewed the economic performances of member states since 1995, and readjusted the contributions made by each state over the last four years - based on their pace of growth."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-29751124

Note France and Germany get rebates.

I am not sure the EU has "announced" anything. I can't find a press release or anything similar anywhere making the announcement. The story has come out here in the UK and nowhere else as far as I can tell. I am sure that the demand has been made, but it looks to me like it has been publicised at our end. It could be that the fact this allows the Tories to stand up to Europe is a coincidence, or not.

SouthamObserver

nigel4england said:

dugarbandier said:

SouthamObserver said:

Indigo said:

Paul_Mid_Beds said:

Meanwhile over at the Independent:

"Attacks on 'Ukip Calypso' show just how skewed people’s priorities are
Where is the Left’s outrage over the sexual abuse of girls?"

"How's this for having your priorities in order: 1,400 young girls are groomed and raped in the North of England, and yet this week we've seen a stronger reaction from many on the Left to a calypso song produced by a Ukip supporter....."

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/attacks-on-ukip-calypso-show-just-how-skewed-peoples-priorities-are-9814360.html

Yes indeed, and then the Right-On Brigade in the comments proceed to prove him right. Apparently only a "small number" of people were involve in Rotherham (committing rape) whereas far more people were offended by the Calypso Song. So there you have it, for the left wing chattering classes, causing a bit of offense is more "vile" that raping children.

Spot on. You are the voice of reason. Left wingers are perfectly happy for children to be raped. Indeed, I would happily stand by and let it happen to my own kids. But if someone sang a calypso song in a crap Caribbean accent I would be manning the barricades.

irony on the internet: a risky strategy!

That's all you have left when you cannot deny the facts.

I am agreeing. The fact is that lefties like me are perfectly content to see children raped, but are outraged by bad calypso.

Indigo

nigel4england said:

Care to tell us what the point of austerity is then?

Its so the British can work harder and more efficiently for less money, whilst putting up with reduced services and increased taxes, so that we can bail out the French and the Germans.

TOPPING

david_herdson said:

dr_spyn said:

"Smell that? You smell that?"
"What?"
"Bullshit, son. Nothing else in the world smells like that."
" I love the smell of bullshit in the morning."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-29751124

"The UK has been doing better since 1997 than we thought and that's resulted in this extra payment. The Netherlands will pay more, while France and Germany get a rebate." Sarah Hewin of Standard Chartered on 5 live says the payment has to be made in the next few months. That could mean more borrowing, she says.

Perhaps it is a time for Cameron to just say No. If he doesn't then he might as well disband the Tories now, let UKIP walk over them in R & S. With friends like this in the EU telling the UK to hand over move money cos the economy has done so well since 1997, who needs enemies. It looks like a scam, smells like a scam, and if a single extra £1 or €1 is handed over it just confirms that Cameron is like the jellyfish, spineless and floating on the tide.

On the one hand, it's not unreasonable that the richest, best-performing countries should contribute most, nor that from time to time, payments should be re-assessed to account for performance since the last assessment. On the other, this is a singularly poor time to be doing so, unless tied to institutional reform driven by those whose pockets are being tapped.

I think Moral Hazard is the term you are looking for.

rottenborough

Morning all,

Wasn't this ballot run by ERS? Surely they will put out final, detailed figures?

audreyanne

Casino_Royale said:

Innocent_Abroad said:

Millsy said:

Doesn't look good but at the end of the day it's 4000 or 5000 more people than decided the other party candidates.

Meanwhile, YouGov numbers continue to be bad for Labour.

Con & Lab tied at 34% in the voting intention.

Here are some statements that different people make about different political parties. In each case, which party do you think it applies to most - the Conservatives, Labour or the Liberal Democrats?

It is led by people of real ability

Labour at 11% is the lowest figure since May 2010

http://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/118eeuizl4/YG-Archive-Pol-Sun-results-231014.pdf

I am beginning to think that there has to be a real chance that Ed Miliband will achieve what Michael Foot couldn't quite pull off in 1983 and bring his Party in third in the popular vote.

And remember Foot only beat Healey on the votes on MPs who had already decided to leave the Party.

I think there's a realistic chance Miliband polls worse nationally next year than Brown did in GE2010.

If this and Innocent_Abroad's comments are true then we should be betting hard and deep on a Conservative win.

Unless there has been a paradigm shift in 4 years, which I don't believe, the centre is where power is won and Miliband and Farage may be doing the perfect job of letting Cameron through the middle where roughly 40% of votes are to be found.

rottenborough

Indigo said:

nigel4england said:

Care to tell us what the point of austerity is then?

Its so the British can work harder and more efficiently for less money, whilst putting up with reduced services and increased taxes, so that we can bail out the French and the Germans.

We are not in the Euro, so this doesn't apply. Austerity in UK was a choice made by our own government.

Easterross

Morning all and boy starting with OGH many of you seem to have been getting your knickers in a twist about the Rochester Tory selection. Frankly whether it is 4000 or 5600 votes which counted, it is a whole lot more than the roughly 100 or so who would have selected Mark Reckless as Tory candidate in 2005 or 2010.

EU 1.3 billion euros, Cameron should tell them to fcuk themselves.

2015 GE, it really looks more like 1983 all over again. So how about Ed to poll in the range 25-28% just ahead of UKIP with Tories in 33-35 range and Labour to lose seats to Tories south of Birmingham and win no seats back from Tories. SNP and Tories to take a dozen+ seats between them from Labour and LibDems in Scotland and UKIP to win fewer than 10 seats.

dr_spyn

Will Cameron stand up to Europe or will he just limp?

The 'revision' is helpful to the Commission, the timing couldn't be less unhelpful for Cameron. If the economy was so damaged from 2008, how is it a success which means more contributions. Must be a disguised bail out for the French.

Cameron is now caught between Scylla and Charybdis. His failure to secure any meaningful concessions in the last four years is going to hit him hard. UKIP and the EU Commission must be laughing. As for the LDs how do they sell austerity, if the economy is so successful c. Juncker and the Eurocrats, why were spending cuts ever needed. Silence from Labour could help, but even Miliband might recognise that selling more contributions (levied from UK taxes) might be a hard sell, especially if it is less spending for his party's beloved NHS.

Luckyguy1983

On topic, I did think when I heard the revised figure that the 4000 had been leaked to manage expectations so the 5000+ figure seemed good by comparison. However, this theory is probably nearer the truth. Not good if the press continues to dig.

FalseFlag

SouthamObserver said:

nigel4england said:

dugarbandier said:

SouthamObserver said:

Indigo said:

Paul_Mid_Beds said:

Meanwhile over at the Independent:

"Attacks on 'Ukip Calypso' show just how skewed people’s priorities are
Where is the Left’s outrage over the sexual abuse of girls?"

"How's this for having your priorities in order: 1,400 young girls are groomed and raped in the North of England, and yet this week we've seen a stronger reaction from many on the Left to a calypso song produced by a Ukip supporter....."

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/attacks-on-ukip-calypso-show-just-how-skewed-peoples-priorities-are-9814360.html

Yes indeed, and then the Right-On Brigade in the comments proceed to prove him right. Apparently only a "small number" of people were involve in Rotherham (committing rape) whereas far more people were offended by the Calypso Song. So there you have it, for the left wing chattering classes, causing a bit of offense is more "vile" that raping children.

Spot on. You are the voice of reason. Left wingers are perfectly happy for children to be raped. Indeed, I would happily stand by and let it happen to my own kids. But if someone sang a calypso song in a crap Caribbean accent I would be manning the barricades.

irony on the internet: a risky strategy!

That's all you have left when you cannot deny the facts.

I am agreeing. The fact is that lefties like me are perfectly content to see children raped, but are outraged by bad calypso.

Events do actually bear this out.

It's the who whom obsession of the left. Same reason Stephen Lawrence still gets dragged up whilst so many other crimes don't get a mention.

Luckyguy1983

rottenborough said:

Indigo said:

nigel4england said:

Care to tell us what the point of austerity is then?

Its so the British can work harder and more efficiently for less money, whilst putting up with reduced services and increased taxes, so that we can bail out the French and the Germans.

We are not in the Euro, so this doesn't apply. Austerity in UK was a choice made by our own government.

I think you missed the point.

Innocent_Abroad

Easterross said:

Morning all and boy starting with OGH many of you seem to have been getting your knickers in a twist about the Rochester Tory selection. Frankly whether it is 4000 or 5600 votes which counted, it is a whole lot more than the roughly 100 or so who would have selected Mark Reckless as Tory candidate in 2005 or 2010.

EU 1.3 billion euros, Cameron should tell them to fcuk themselves.

2015 GE, it really looks more like 1983 all over again. So how about Ed to poll in the range 25-28% just ahead of UKIP with Tories in 33-35 range and Labour to lose seats to Tories south of Birmingham and win no seats back from Tories. SNP and Tories to take a dozen+ seats between them from Labour and LibDems in Scotland and UKIP to win fewer than 10 seats.

Con 35, Lab 25, UKIP 23. SNP to poll more votes than LibDems do throughout Britain. As I have been saying here for some time.

Very hard to translate into seats, other than a clear Tory majority - anything from 20 to 120.

david_herdson

nigel4england said:

david_herdson said:

dr_spyn said:

"Smell that? You smell that?"
"What?"
"Bullshit, son. Nothing else in the world smells like that."
" I love the smell of bullshit in the morning."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-29751124

"The UK has been doing better since 1997 than we thought and that's resulted in this extra payment. The Netherlands will pay more, while France and Germany get a rebate." Sarah Hewin of Standard Chartered on 5 live says the payment has to be made in the next few months. That could mean more borrowing, she says.

Perhaps it is a time for Cameron to just say No. If he doesn't then he might as well disband the Tories now, let UKIP walk over them in R & S. With friends like this in the EU telling the UK to hand over move money cos the economy has done so well since 1997, who needs enemies. It looks like a scam, smells like a scam, and if a single extra £1 or €1 is handed over it just confirms that Cameron is like the jellyfish, spineless and floating on the tide.

On the one hand, it's not unreasonable that the richest, best-performing countries should contribute most, nor that from time to time, payments should be re-assessed to account for performance since the last assessment. On the other, this is a singularly poor time to be doing so, unless tied to institutional reform driven by those whose pockets are being tapped.

Care to tell us what the point of austerity is then?

To eradicate the structural deficit and place the government's books on a sustainable footing.

philiph

Innocent_Abroad said:

Easterross said:

Morning all and boy starting with OGH many of you seem to have been getting your knickers in a twist about the Rochester Tory selection. Frankly whether it is 4000 or 5600 votes which counted, it is a whole lot more than the roughly 100 or so who would have selected Mark Reckless as Tory candidate in 2005 or 2010.

EU 1.3 billion euros, Cameron should tell them to fcuk themselves.

2015 GE, it really looks more like 1983 all over again. So how about Ed to poll in the range 25-28% just ahead of UKIP with Tories in 33-35 range and Labour to lose seats to Tories south of Birmingham and win no seats back from Tories. SNP and Tories to take a dozen+ seats between them from Labour and LibDems in Scotland and UKIP to win fewer than 10 seats.

Con 35, Lab 25, UKIP 23. SNP to poll more votes than LibDems do throughout Britain. As I have been saying here for some time.

Very hard to translate into seats, other than a clear Tory majority - anything from 20 to 120.

While Labour led by Ed is pretty pointless, I think 25 is below minimum expectations. However the imaginable range they could get has plummeted in recent months. While they were a constant 36 - 38 through Summer (I think) it was hard to see them drifting below a 32% floor in the election. Now we can see how soft the support is it is easy to project a sub Brown total by a point or two at the most.

logical_song

JosiasJessop said:

david_herdson said:

dr_spyn said:

"Smell that? You smell that?"
"What?"
"Bullshit, son. Nothing else in the world smells like that."
" I love the smell of bullshit in the morning."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-29751124

"The UK has been doing better since 1997 than we thought and that's resulted in this extra payment. The Netherlands will pay more, while France and Germany get a rebate." Sarah Hewin of Standard Chartered on 5 live says the payment has to be made in the next few months. That could mean more borrowing, she says.

Perhaps it is a time for Cameron to just say No. If he doesn't then he might as well disband the Tories now, let UKIP walk over them in R & S. With friends like this in the EU telling the UK to hand over move money cos the economy has done so well since 1997, who needs enemies. It looks like a scam, smells like a scam, and if a single extra £1 or €1 is handed over it just confirms that Cameron is like the jellyfish, spineless and floating on the tide.

On the one hand, it's not unreasonable that the richest, best-performing countries should contribute most, nor that from time to time, payments should be re-assessed to account for performance since the last assessment. On the other, this is a singularly poor time to be doing so, unless tied to institutional reform driven by those whose pockets are being tapped.

Does anyone know if we've had a cut in payments in the past, based on our economy underperforming? If no, then we should probably politely tell the EU to f'off. If yes, we should, with regret, pay.

We cannot take rebates in bad times and then refuse to par a surcharge in good times.

In fact, it would be interesting to know how often this has occurred in the past, and the amounts, and to which countries.

Thanks Josias and David for some reasonable and reasoned thinking on this subject, pity about Dr Spyn.

HYUFD

dugarbandier The UK presently has a higher growth rate than both the US and Brazil

Innocent_Abroad

david_herdson said:

nigel4england said:

david_herdson said:

dr_spyn said:

"Smell that? You smell that?"
"What?"
"Bullshit, son. Nothing else in the world smells like that."
" I love the smell of bullshit in the morning."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-29751124

"The UK has been doing better since 1997 than we thought and that's resulted in this extra payment. The Netherlands will pay more, while France and Germany get a rebate." Sarah Hewin of Standard Chartered on 5 live says the payment has to be made in the next few months. That could mean more borrowing, she says.

Perhaps it is a time for Cameron to just say No. If he doesn't then he might as well disband the Tories now, let UKIP walk over them in R & S. With friends like this in the EU telling the UK to hand over move money cos the economy has done so well since 1997, who needs enemies. It looks like a scam, smells like a scam, and if a single extra £1 or €1 is handed over it just confirms that Cameron is like the jellyfish, spineless and floating on the tide.

On the one hand, it's not unreasonable that the richest, best-performing countries should contribute most, nor that from time to time, payments should be re-assessed to account for performance since the last assessment. On the other, this is a singularly poor time to be doing so, unless tied to institutional reform driven by those whose pockets are being tapped.

Care to tell us what the point of austerity is then?

To eradicate the structural deficit and place the government's books on a sustainable footing.

If only. But after four years the Government is further away than when it started. It cannot both deal with the deficit and protect the value of pensions & the NHS. You know that full well, David.

JosiasJessop

SouthamObserver said:

I am not sure the EU has "announced" anything. I can't find a press release or anything similar anywhere making the announcement. The story has come out here in the UK and nowhere else as far as I can tell. I am sure that the demand has been made, but it looks to me like it has been publicised at our end. It could be that the fact this allows the Tories to stand up to Europe is a coincidence, or not.

Considering the deadline for payment is December 1st - i.e. in about five weeks time - I doubt there is much chance to delay or fiddle the announcement's timing. The timing is the worst possible for the government - it would have been better coming after the by-election. If they could have delayed the announcement, that's when it would have been delayed to.

Even if Cameron gives a guarantee written in blood that it will not be paid, then his opponents will not believe him as the actual payment date is after the by-election.

"British and European commission officials confirmed that the Treasury had been told last week that budget contribution calculations based on gross national income (GNI) adjustments carried out by Eurostat, the EU statistics agency, had exposed a huge discrepancy between what Britain had been asked to contribute and what it should be paying, because of the UK’s recovery.

The bombshell, first reported by the Financial Times, was dropped into the middle of an EU summit in Brussels where Cameron and 27 other leaders were mired in tough negotiations over climate-change policy and attempts to agree big reductions in greenhouse gas emissions by 2030."

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/oct/23/uk-european-commission-eu-budget-contribution

CD13

Southam,

What about those racist meerkats in the adverts putting on fake Eastern European accents?

I think there were some protests initially but they were laughed at.

Itajai

SouthamObserver said:

Indigo said:

Paul_Mid_Beds said:

Meanwhile over at the Independent:

"Attacks on 'Ukip Calypso' show just how skewed people’s priorities are
Where is the Left’s outrage over the sexual abuse of girls?"

"How's this for having your priorities in order: 1,400 young girls are groomed and raped in the North of England, and yet this week we've seen a stronger reaction from many on the Left to a calypso song produced by a Ukip supporter....."

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/attacks-on-ukip-calypso-show-just-how-skewed-peoples-priorities-are-9814360.html

Yes indeed, and then the Right-On Brigade in the comments proceed to prove him right. Apparently only a "small number" of people were involve in Rotherham (committing rape) whereas far more people were offended by the Calypso Song. So there you have it, for the left wing chattering classes, causing a bit of offense is more "vile" that raping children.

Spot on. You are the voice of reason. Left wingers are perfectly happy for children to be raped. Indeed, I would happily stand by and let it happen to my own kids. But if someone sang a calypso song in a crap Caribbean accent I would be manning the barricades.

A poster on here a couple of days ago wrote that racism was the worst thing in the world. Even worse than murder. Let alone industrial child rape.

Indigo

JosiasJessop said:

The bombshell, first reported by the Financial Times, was dropped into the middle of an EU summit in Brussels where Cameron and 27 other leaders were mired in tough negotiations over climate-change policy and attempts to agree big reductions in greenhouse gas emissions by 2030."

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/oct/23/uk-european-commission-eu-budget-contribution

The irony here being that the additional money being demanded by the EU would barely count as a rounding error compared to how much money is going to be lost by exporting emissions and jobs as a result of that climate change policy agreement.

Richard_Tyndall

logical_song said:

JosiasJessop said:

david_herdson said:

dr_spyn said:

"Smell that? You smell that?"
"What?"
"Bullshit, son. Nothing else in the world smells like that."
" I love the smell of bullshit in the morning."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-29751124

"The UK has been doing better since 1997 than we thought and that's resulted in this extra payment. The Netherlands will pay more, while France and Germany get a rebate." Sarah Hewin of Standard Chartered on 5 live says the payment has to be made in the next few months. That could mean more borrowing, she says.

Perhaps it is a time for Cameron to just say No. If he doesn't then he might as well disband the Tories now, let UKIP walk over them in R & S. With friends like this in the EU telling the UK to hand over move money cos the economy has done so well since 1997, who needs enemies. It looks like a scam, smells like a scam, and if a single extra £1 or €1 is handed over it just confirms that Cameron is like the jellyfish, spineless and floating on the tide.

On the one hand, it's not unreasonable that the richest, best-performing countries should contribute most, nor that from time to time, payments should be re-assessed to account for performance since the last assessment. On the other, this is a singularly poor time to be doing so, unless tied to institutional reform driven by those whose pockets are being tapped.

Does anyone know if we've had a cut in payments in the past, based on our economy underperforming? If no, then we should probably politely tell the EU to f'off. If yes, we should, with regret, pay.

We cannot take rebates in bad times and then refuse to par a surcharge in good times.

In fact, it would be interesting to know how often this has occurred in the past, and the amounts, and to which countries.

Thanks Josias and David for some reasonable and reasoned thinking on this subject, pity about Dr Spyn.

Yes it is reasoned but it is based on a lack of information. This payment is not based solely on the last couple of years' performance by the UK economy but upon our performance over the last 20 years. This is why Greece is also having to pay extra in spite of the parlous state of their economy whilst Germany is getting a rebate!

Floater

Nice of the EU to offer UKIP such a helping hand before the election.

Oh, and tell the EU to F*ck off !

No way should we cough up extra to an undemocratic organisation that hasn't been able to have its account signed off in how many years........

Whilst they give France (who breaks a number of EU "rules with nigh on impunity a rebate - notwithstanding they will not fix their basket case economy and we subsidise their farmers

BOO anybody?

david_herdson

audreyanne said:

Casino_Royale said:

Innocent_Abroad said:

Millsy said:

Doesn't look good but at the end of the day it's 4000 or 5000 more people than decided the other party candidates.

Meanwhile, YouGov numbers continue to be bad for Labour.

Con & Lab tied at 34% in the voting intention.

Here are some statements that different people make about different political parties. In each case, which party do you think it applies to most - the Conservatives, Labour or the Liberal Democrats?

It is led by people of real ability

Labour at 11% is the lowest figure since May 2010

http://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/118eeuizl4/YG-Archive-Pol-Sun-results-231014.pdf

I am beginning to think that there has to be a real chance that Ed Miliband will achieve what Michael Foot couldn't quite pull off in 1983 and bring his Party in third in the popular vote.

And remember Foot only beat Healey on the votes on MPs who had already decided to leave the Party.

I think there's a realistic chance Miliband polls worse nationally next year than Brown did in GE2010.

If this and Innocent_Abroad's comments are true then we should be betting hard and deep on a Conservative win.

Unless there has been a paradigm shift in 4 years, which I don't believe, the centre is where power is won and Miliband and Farage may be doing the perfect job of letting Cameron through the middle where roughly 40% of votes are to be found.

Sorry Audrey but that's simplistic.

Elections are won when - and only when - a party can win the support of centrist, floating voters *and* turn out its core vote. The Liberals / Lib Dems have been the 'centre' party for over a hundred years but haven't won a general election since 1910. Simply being most central means little without being able to ally it to support elsewhere. If 40% of the votes are to be found in the centre, it's a fact that no party has been able to create a coaltion built on that 40% since the SDP-Liberal Alliance briefly did so in late 1981.

UKIP is taking support from both Labour and the Tories. In net terms, what matters is who they take more from (and also who they Lib Dems lose most to - the other point you make only implicitly), but I'm struggling to see how UKIP taking votes from the Tories is helping the Blue cause.

In any case, even if a party does win an election with 30-32% of the vote, it's a very poor mandate to govern.

Alanbrooke

So while Dave ponders whether to stump another couple of billion Francois tells the commission to get lost on budget targets.

http://www.lefigaro.fr/conjoncture/2014/10/24/20002-20141024ARTFIG00010-budget-hollande-refuse-de-devoiler-la-lettre-banale-de-bruxelles.php

blancmange versus jellyfish - who's got more backbone ?

Itajai

SouthamObserver said:

JosiasJessop said:

SouthamObserver said:

david_herdson said:

dr_spyn said:

"Smell that? You smell that?"
"What?"
"Bullshit, son. Nothing else in the world smells like that."
" I love the smell of bullshit in the morning."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-29751124

"The UK has been doing better since 1997 than we thought and that's resulted in this extra payment. The Netherlands will pay more, while France and Germany get a rebate." Sarah Hewin of Standard Chartered on 5 live says the payment has to be made in the next few months. That could mean more borrowing, she says.

Perhaps it is a time for Cameron to just say No. If he doesn't then he might as well disband the Tories now, let UKIP walk over them in R & S. With friends like this in the EU telling the UK to hand over move money cos the economy has done so well since 1997, who needs enemies. It looks like a scam, smells like a scam, and if a single extra £1 or €1 is handed over it just confirms that Cameron is like the jellyfish, spineless and floating on the tide.

On the one hand, it's not unreasonable that the richest, best-performing countries should contribute most, nor that from time to time, payments should be re-assessed to account for performance since the last assessment. On the other, this is a singularly poor time to be doing so, unless tied to institutional reform driven by those whose pockets are being tapped.

This looks and smells like a story that the government has put out so that it can be seen to be tough when it does not make the payment on 1st December.

It's been announced by the EU, so I doubt the government had much to do with the timing. In fact, they need it like a hole in the head.

"The additional payment was requested after the European Commission's statistics agency, Eurostat, reviewed the economic performances of member states since 1995, and readjusted the contributions made by each state over the last four years - based on their pace of growth."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-29751124

Note France and Germany get rebates.

I am not sure the EU has "announced" anything. I can't find a press release or anything similar anywhere making the announcement. The story has come out here in the UK and nowhere else as far as I can tell. I am sure that the demand has been made, but it looks to me like it has been publicised at our end. It could be that the fact this allows the Tories to stand up to Europe is a coincidence, or not.

There is nothing in the foreign press.

FalseFlag

Innocent_Abroad said:

david_herdson said:

nigel4england said:

david_herdson said:

dr_spyn said:

"Smell that? You smell that?"
"What?"
"Bullshit, son. Nothing else in the world smells like that."
" I love the smell of bullshit in the morning."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-29751124

"The UK has been doing better since 1997 than we thought and that's resulted in this extra payment. The Netherlands will pay more, while France and Germany get a rebate." Sarah Hewin of Standard Chartered on 5 live says the payment has to be made in the next few months. That could mean more borrowing, she says.

Perhaps it is a time for Cameron to just say No. If he doesn't then he might as well disband the Tories now, let UKIP walk over them in R & S. With friends like this in the EU telling the UK to hand over move money cos the economy has done so well since 1997, who needs enemies. It looks like a scam, smells like a scam, and if a single extra £1 or €1 is handed over it just confirms that Cameron is like the jellyfish, spineless and floating on the tide.

On the one hand, it's not unreasonable that the richest, best-performing countries should contribute most, nor that from time to time, payments should be re-assessed to account for performance since the last assessment. On the other, this is a singularly poor time to be doing so, unless tied to institutional reform driven by those whose pockets are being tapped.

Care to tell us what the point of austerity is then?

To eradicate the structural deficit and place the government's books on a sustainable footing.

If only. But after four years the Government is further away than when it started. It cannot both deal with the deficit and protect the value of pensions & the NHS. You know that full well, David.

We aren't further away than when it started.

Innocent_Abroad

Itajai said:

SouthamObserver said:

Indigo said:

Paul_Mid_Beds said:

Meanwhile over at the Independent:

"Attacks on 'Ukip Calypso' show just how skewed people’s priorities are
Where is the Left’s outrage over the sexual abuse of girls?"

"How's this for having your priorities in order: 1,400 young girls are groomed and raped in the North of England, and yet this week we've seen a stronger reaction from many on the Left to a calypso song produced by a Ukip supporter....."

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/attacks-on-ukip-calypso-show-just-how-skewed-peoples-priorities-are-9814360.html

Yes indeed, and then the Right-On Brigade in the comments proceed to prove him right. Apparently only a "small number" of people were involve in Rotherham (committing rape) whereas far more people were offended by the Calypso Song. So there you have it, for the left wing chattering classes, causing a bit of offense is more "vile" that raping children.

Spot on. You are the voice of reason. Left wingers are perfectly happy for children to be raped. Indeed, I would happily stand by and let it happen to my own kids. But if someone sang a calypso song in a crap Caribbean accent I would be manning the barricades.

A poster on here a couple of days ago wrote that racism was the worst thing in the world. Even worse than murder. Let alone industrial child rape.

Which of those three do you think kills most people?

dr_spyn

CD13 said:

Southam,

What about those racist meerkats in the adverts putting on fake Eastern European accents?

I think there were some protests initially but they were laughed at.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2009/aug/22/advertising-racism-meerkats

Journalist with Ukrainian girlfriend in outrage shock.

Pulpstar

Just had a look at the Yougov, no real worries for Labour there.

Except Scotland. Scotland is looking great for the SNP.

JosiasJessop

Richard_Tyndall said:

logical_song said:

JosiasJessop said:

david_herdson said:

dr_spyn said:

"Smell that? You smell that?"
"What?"
"Bullshit, son. Nothing else in the world smells like that."
" I love the smell of bullshit in the morning."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-29751124

"The UK has been doing better since 1997 than we thought and that's resulted in this extra payment. The Netherlands will pay more, while France and Germany get a rebate." Sarah Hewin of Standard Chartered on 5 live says the payment has to be made in the next few months. That could mean more borrowing, she says.

Perhaps it is a time for Cameron to just say No. If he doesn't then he might as well disband the Tories now, let UKIP walk over them in R & S. With friends like this in the EU telling the UK to hand over move money cos the economy has done so well since 1997, who needs enemies. It looks like a scam, smells like a scam, and if a single extra £1 or €1 is handed over it just confirms that Cameron is like the jellyfish, spineless and floating on the tide.

On the one hand, it's not unreasonable that the richest, best-performing countries should contribute most, nor that from time to time, payments should be re-assessed to account for performance since the last assessment. On the other, this is a singularly poor time to be doing so, unless tied to institutional reform driven by those whose pockets are being tapped.

Does anyone know if we've had a cut in payments in the past, based on our economy underperforming? If no, then we should probably politely tell the EU to f'off. If yes, we should, with regret, pay.

We cannot take rebates in bad times and then refuse to par a surcharge in good times.

In fact, it would be interesting to know how often this has occurred in the past, and the amounts, and to which countries.

Thanks Josias and David for some reasonable and reasoned thinking on this subject, pity about Dr Spyn.

Yes it is reasoned but it is based on a lack of information. This payment is not based solely on the last couple of years' performance by the UK economy but upon our performance over the last 20 years. This is why Greece is also having to pay extra in spite of the parlous state of their economy whilst Germany is getting a rebate!

Well, yes. I was specifically asking for information. In particular, two questions:

1) Has this revaluation occurred in the past; if so, how often, and what are the details.
2) Have we had a cut in payments in the past, based on our economy underperforming?

These seem particularly pertinent, to me at least. It'd be good to get the answers.

Financier

Surely the political statement of the week or even the year was yesterday by Len McCluskey who said that Ed Miliband could be "run over by a bus" and it would not make any difference to the future of his party.

Have not seen this picked up by the cartoonists, but it is akin to the banana moment that his brother had and could never shake off.

Itajai

philiph said:

Innocent_Abroad said:

Easterross said:

Morning all and boy starting with OGH many of you seem to have been getting your knickers in a twist about the Rochester Tory selection. Frankly whether it is 4000 or 5600 votes which counted, it is a whole lot more than the roughly 100 or so who would have selected Mark Reckless as Tory candidate in 2005 or 2010.

EU 1.3 billion euros, Cameron should tell them to fcuk themselves.

2015 GE, it really looks more like 1983 all over again. So how about Ed to poll in the range 25-28% just ahead of UKIP with Tories in 33-35 range and Labour to lose seats to Tories south of Birmingham and win no seats back from Tories. SNP and Tories to take a dozen+ seats between them from Labour and LibDems in Scotland and UKIP to win fewer than 10 seats.

Con 35, Lab 25, UKIP 23. SNP to poll more votes than LibDems do throughout Britain. As I have been saying here for some time.

Very hard to translate into seats, other than a clear Tory majority - anything from 20 to 120.

While Labour led by Ed is pretty pointless, I think 25 is below minimum expectations. However the imaginable range they could get has plummeted in recent months. While they were a constant 36 - 38 through Summer (I think) it was hard to see them drifting below a 32% floor in the election. Now we can see how soft the support is it is easy to project a sub Brown total by a point or two at the most.

Say Labour drop by 10% in Scotland to 32%, then that would shave 1% off their GB total.

rottenborough

Innocent_Abroad said:

david_herdson said:

nigel4england said:

david_herdson said:

dr_spyn said:

"Smell that? You smell that?"
"What?"
"Bullshit, son. Nothing else in the world smells like that."
" I love the smell of bullshit in the morning."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-29751124

e.

On the one hand, it's not unreasonable that the richest, best-performing countries should contribute most, nor that from time to time, payments should be re-assessed to account for performance since the last assessment. On the other, this is a singularly poor time to be doing so, unless tied to institutional reform driven by those whose pockets are being tapped.

Care to tell us what the point of austerity is then?

To eradicate the structural deficit and place the government's books on a sustainable footing.

If only. But after four years the Government is further away than when it started. It cannot both deal with the deficit and protect the value of pensions & the NHS. You know that full well, David.

The problem with discussions about the deficit, is that it is important to differentiate between the 'structural' deficit and any transient deficit. Economists are busy arguing about the UK's balance between these two, but economic growth over the next 5 years will get rid of at least part of what most people call the deficit. This happened in the post '92 recession. It'll happen again.

The question is how far has the UK lost, permanently, the ability to pay for some government spending at current levels. There's some odd stuff going which is confusing the number crunchers, for example, more jobs, but lower productivity leading to lower wages and thus less tax take.

Personally, I'm a Keynesian, and think all this austerity was an economic mistake, given the UK has its own currency and could borrow money at record low rates from rich people desperate to keep away from the EU states. We should have built up more debt pump priming investment in long-term infrastructure and innovation. But, I accept that politically that argument was lost and we need to move on.

BenM

More tedious europhobe frothing over something the EU has to do per the Treaties Britain freely signed up to.

rottenborough

Financier said:

Surely the political statement of the week or even the year was yesterday by Len McCluskey who said that Ed Miliband could be "run over by a bus" and it would not make any difference to the future of his party.

Have not seen this picked up by the cartoonists, but it is akin to the banana moment that his brother had and could never shake off.

Isn't this a rerun of Benn's famous - it's the "ishoos" that count?

david_herdson

BenM said:

More tedious europhobe frothing over something the EU has to do per the Treaties Britain freely signed up to.

And can freely withdraw from.

AlastairMeeks

It's obviously conspiracy theory Friday.

1) I expect the original leaked figures are about right. Not good for the Conservatives at all.

2) The idea that there's a vast conspiracy of the parties left of UKIP to conceal and accommodate industrial scale child abuse by members of a particular ethnic minority is... curious

3) The EU cash demand is a) a signal that the EU Commission doesn't care if Britain leaves b) a signal that the EU Commission reckons it can do better in 2015 without David Cameron or c) something that the British government is either conniving with or confecting in order to give David Cameron a chance to channel a nation's outrage against the EU. Since a) would be a bizarre misjudgement and b) is a high risk strategy indeed, I'm going with c).

[Deleted User]

BenM said:

More tedious europhobe frothing over something the EU has to do per the Treaties Britain freely signed up to.

Erm...that would be ' treaties that Labour politicians signed us up to without a referendum'. The British people haven't had any say on anything European since 1973.

rottenborough

Labour back at 8/1 for Rochester on BetFair. They drifted out as high as 29 yesterday.

Socrates

This shake down from the EU has TRACTION politically. I've looked round a few internet forums where the story has come up, chatted with a couple of colleagues in the office after I saw someone reading the Metro article about it. Even pro-EU people are pissed off.

A few of the comments I heard:

"They can't just ask us for more money whenever they decide!"
"So that's an extra £150 for my family, all because France is a basket case"
"We should just tell them to #### off"
"Sounds like an old-fashioned shakedown"

From a few forums:

"I support the EU in principle but for fuck sake, are they oblivious to the fact that there's a not insignificant chance that the UK will be voting to leave the EU in around 3 years?"

"Now all the swing voters will definitely vote to stay in Europe. Good move EU. It's like they want us to leave. I'm pro EU but fuck me, shit like this makes me think I could be very wrong."

"It's stupid in my opinion either way. It's subsidizing failure. It's encouraging bad economic policy, because the EU rewards economically illiterate governments (such as France) with rebates"

"Europe is like your brother who you love and wants to get a flat with you. You love him and all but you can just tell that your going to get stuck paying the rent"

"I'm probably Pro-EU, but great way to get Britain to stay with you, EU. Really.
Seriously though, fuck those guys. Cameron need to just laugh and tell them where to go. That's ridiculous. 'Oh you're doing well? Let us just hamstring you.' The correct response: 'No.'"

Plato

I'd be amazed if this isn't cooked up theatre from the EU, thus giving the UK some paper tiger to rail against.

It's all so marvellously OTT and perfectly timed - a lost Yes, Minister script...

Casino_Royale said:

Perhaps the EU are secretly trying to foment more discord in the Tory party, in the hope of getting Miliband elected?

Indigo

Financier said:

Surely the political statement of the week or even the year was yesterday by Len McCluskey who said that Ed Miliband could be "run over by a bus" and it would not make any difference to the future of his party.

Have not seen this picked up by the cartoonists, but it is akin to the banana moment that his brother had and could never shake off.

Even more damningly he said "I don't really know him well enough to say that I like him.", this from the man that said in June "Unite stands behind Labour and Ed Miliband" and was instrumental in him getting his current job.

CD13

dr_spyn,

Yes, that's one of the moans. I was never sure whether it was sarcasm or serious.

david_herdson

Innocent_Abroad said:

david_herdson said:

nigel4england said:

david_herdson said:

dr_spyn said:

"Smell that? You smell that?"
"What?"
"Bullshit, son. Nothing else in the world smells like that."
" I love the smell of bullshit in the morning."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-29751124

"The UK has been doing better since 1997 than we thought and that's resulted in this extra payment. The Netherlands will pay more, while France and Germany get a rebate." Sarah Hewin of Standard Chartered on 5 live says the payment has to be made in the next few months. That could mean more borrowing, she says.

Perhaps it is a time for Cameron to just say No. If he doesn't then he might as well disband the Tories now, let UKIP walk over them in R & S. With friends like this in the EU telling the UK to hand over move money cos the economy has done so well since 1997, who needs enemies. It looks like a scam, smells like a scam, and if a single extra £1 or €1 is handed over it just confirms that Cameron is like the jellyfish, spineless and floating on the tide.

On the one hand, it's not unreasonable that the richest, best-performing countries should contribute most, nor that from time to time, payments should be re-assessed to account for performance since the last assessment. On the other, this is a singularly poor time to be doing so, unless tied to institutional reform driven by those whose pockets are being tapped.

Care to tell us what the point of austerity is then?

To eradicate the structural deficit and place the government's books on a sustainable footing.

If only. But after four years the Government is further away than when it started. It cannot both deal with the deficit and protect the value of pensions & the NHS. You know that full well, David.

Actually, it's closer than when it started, though not as close as it should be. And it can protect the value of pensions and the NHS and deal with the deficit. The gap is £35-40bn, which is about 5% of government spending. That can be found without hitting those items, though it would put a lot of pressure on other departments. Whether it should be is another matter (in my opinion, the NHS budget should be preserved given the stresses there already; pensions and other benefits, not - but that's a policy choice, not a given).

audreyanne

david_herdson said:

audreyanne said:

Casino_Royale said:

Innocent_Abroad said:

Millsy said:

Doesn't look good but at the end of the day it's 4000 or 5000 more people than decided the other party candidates.

Meanwhile, YouGov numbers continue to be bad for Labour.

Con & Lab tied at 34% in the voting intention.

Here are some statements that different people make about different political parties. In each case, which party do you think it applies to most - the Conservatives, Labour or the Liberal Democrats?

It is led by people of real ability

Labour at 11% is the lowest figure since May 2010

http://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/118eeuizl4/YG-Archive-Pol-Sun-results-231014.pdf

I am beginning to think that there has to be a real chance that Ed Miliband will achieve what Michael Foot couldn't quite pull off in 1983 and bring his Party in third in the popular vote.

And remember Foot only beat Healey on the votes on MPs who had already decided to leave the Party.

I think there's a realistic chance Miliband polls worse nationally next year than Brown did in GE2010.

If this and Innocent_Abroad's comments are true then we should be betting hard and deep on a Conservative win.

Unless there has been a paradigm shift in 4 years, which I don't believe, the centre is where power is won and Miliband and Farage may be doing the perfect job of letting Cameron through the middle where roughly 40% of votes are to be found.

Sorry Audrey but that's simplistic.

The Liberals / Lib Dems have been the 'centre' party for over a hundred years but haven't won a general election since 1910. .

Sorry David but that's simplistic.

I would never describe LibDems as a centre party. With the unproven exception of the coalition government they have often, and normally, had far more radical policies than either the two main parties. If you've attended or listened to their conferences you would know what I mean, with a raft of speeches, statements and policies passed which would fair take away the breath of Labour and Conservative.

By the way, the Social Democrats prove my point. They formed in reaction to Labour's lurch leftward and the response to that was what? Labour moved to the centre under Kinnock, John Smith and Tony Blair. And that's where they won back power.

Centre = power. Thatcher got it. Major got it. Blair got it. Brown got it. Cameron has got it.

AlastairMeeks

Meanwhile, for the morning crowd who didn't see this yesterday, here's my piece on the Greens' prospects next year:

http://newstonoone.blogspot.co.uk/2014/10/a-short-story-greens-target-list-for.html

felix

BenM said:

More tedious europhobe frothing over something the EU has to do per the Treaties Britain freely signed up to.

Yeah - €2.8billion less to pay for public services , etc in the UK so France can be bailed out. Pure froth. You reckon that will be the Labour line on this?

OblitusSumMe

Isabel Hardman also said that the winner won by just 50 votes. Using that information and the percentages we can deduce the actual number of votes for each candidate.

Winning margin = 50 votes = 0.88%
Therefore, total number of valid ballots cast = ( 100/0.88 ) * 50 = 5682
Number of votes for Tolhurst = .5044 * 5682 = 2866
Number of votes for Firth = .4956 * 5682 = 2816

This would imply only 6 spoilt ballots, but because the reported percentages are only to two decimal places you can distribute these remaining six ballots evenly to each candidate and the percentages remain the same.

Therefore, the votes were:
Tolhurst 2869 (50.44%)
Firth 2819 (49.56%)
Turnout 5688 (~7.6%)

I expect that the figure of 4,000 was either a desperate attempt at expectations management, or it was from someone who only had a quick look at the figures and just added together two lots of "two thousand and something" to get "four thousand and something" ~ "four thousand".