Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » After yesterday’s dramatic Scottish polls LAB braces itself

2456789

Comments

  • philiphphiliph Posts: 4,704
    Jonathan said:

    Sean_F said:

    Do these things come in threes? First the two Scottish polls, then South Yorks.....?

    Troubles come, not as single spies, but in battalions.
    Can't remember the last time Ed had some good News.
    Big Brother David went to America
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Paul Waugh ‏@paulwaugh 2m2 minutes ago
    New Survation poll (for Unite) in Rochester & Strood finds local NHS (37%) more imp issue for voters than immigration (25%)
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,173

    I’m replying to a couple of eaerlier comments; sadly to reply direcdtly takes the post over the word limit.
    Mr Felix’ comment about “millions of new jobs” doesn’t take into account that that headline figure obscures the fact that too many of these jobs are low-wage or zero-hours contracts, or, worse, both. It is to be hoped that the Government will do something about ZHC’s but time is running out before the election.

    Mr Financier, that raises an interesting question for our Kipper friends. How are they going to square that circle? Clearly the current policy of insisting that claimants have a good reason for turning down jobs isn’t working, in your locality at least. Why not?

    So you would rather people had full-time benefits than jobs. it's an interesting view.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,564

    Oh How Nick Palmer must long for the days when he was posting that Labour were 5% ahead and the lead was pretty stable...

    Yep. What's changed is that UKIP's further advance has taken significant English Labour votes and the SNP's advance has taken significant Scottish Labour votes. The Tories' position is much as before. We're not seeing swingback, as many predicted, but a splintering of the opposition.

    That said, I think it's still very unpredictable how UKIP (and to a lesser extent the SNP) will do when it comes round to May, and where the votes will move.

    As for today's result, it's hard to guess. On paper, in the current climate, I'd think UKIP will win. But it'll be fascinating to see what the second preferences - which I'd guess will be decisive - will do.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,704
    felix said:

    I’m replying to a couple of eaerlier comments; sadly to reply direcdtly takes the post over the word limit.
    Mr Felix’ comment about “millions of new jobs” doesn’t take into account that that headline figure obscures the fact that too many of these jobs are low-wage or zero-hours contracts, or, worse, both. It is to be hoped that the Government will do something about ZHC’s but time is running out before the election.

    Mr Financier, that raises an interesting question for our Kipper friends. How are they going to square that circle? Clearly the current policy of insisting that claimants have a good reason for turning down jobs isn’t working, in your locality at least. Why not?

    So you would rather people had full-time benefits than jobs. it's an interesting view.
    Didn’t say that. Not my preference at all.
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,173
    Roger said:

    Jonathan

    "Can't remember the last time Ed had some good News."

    When David took up charity work.......

    Unfortunately what is dawning on even the faithful is that he really doesn't know what leading a party involves. I can't remember an occasion when I've felt he was obviously on the right side of an argument and leading the charge...

    Something which even Nick Clegg has managed (for example yesterday on drugs). If the Libs hadn't become Tories rthis would be a golden opportunity for them

    Yeah - Ed will solve all his problems by announcing new policies to decriminalise drugs.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340

    Socrates said:


    3. UKIP remain the great unknown. Whatever their tub-thumpers on here say national polling simply does not support the hype. At the moment they would be very fortunate to win a handful of seats. So unless they gain massive long-term traction from Rochester, that is sustained when politics gets serious next year, they will not be a major force in terms of Westminster seats.

    Most UKippers on here seem to be talking about half a dozen seats. That doesn't seem to be excessive tub-thumping. I know it's more than Baxter, but predicting UNS off such a huge increase is surely inaccurate. They're very likely to win their two incumbents, IMO, and Farage will win his too I expect. Three more across Kent and Essex is completely doable.
    Three is less than a handful, six only slightly more. As the poster said "At the moment they would be very fortunate to win a handful of seats." Looks like you both agree.
    UKIP are currently odds on in four seats for the next election and are also favourites in a fifth. They are priced below 2/1 in a further three seats. And there is no market in Rochester & Strood for the general election at the moment.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,406
    Do we have any moles on the ground at the count in Sheffield ?
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Pulpstar said:

    Do we have any moles on the ground at the count in Sheffield ?

    Wouldn't moles be underground? /pedant
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670

    dr_spyn said:

    If you know your history its enough to make your heart go oh, oh, oh...

    George OsborneVerified account
    @George_Osborne
    We'll redeem £218m of 4% Consols, including debts incurred because of South Sea Bubble. Another financial crisis we're clearing up after...

    All part of the "we're paying down Britain's debts" meme.

    Governments have been redeeming war debts every year since they took them out, just as they redeem other bonds when they become due.

    Its the net new borrowing that's the relevant value and that's going to be over £100bn this year, over £60bn more than Osborne said it would be,

    Has Osborne tweeted about that ?
    These are perpetual bonds, not ones that do ever fall due. Why they have not been bought back previously in favour of lower rate ones is a mystery.

    Gordon Brown wrecked UK finances. No way should his sidekick Balls be given the keys to the Treasury.
    The incumbent Chancellor in 2008 (when the shit hit the fan) had a choice between "wrecking" the public finances and wrecking the social fabric. It's easy enough for Tories here to point to those items of public expenditure they'd want cut even if we had a trillion dollar surplus on current account. Doing the job, as Osborne could tell them, is slightly harder.

    If our problems were really due to Labour, why is it that other European countries have similar - or worse - ones?

    If Gordon had not wrecked the finances by running a deficit during the growth years 2002-2008 there would have been no need for savage cuts. It will take a generation or two to get back where we were. Thanks to Gordon we are paying £75 billion on interest every year, which puts the EU bill of €2 billion into the petty cash book!
    Aren't the conservatives on course to have borrowed 100's billions more during their five years from 2010-to-2015 than Labour did from 2005-2010?
  • chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341
    antifrank said:

    Paul Waugh ‏@paulwaugh 2m2 minutes ago
    New Survation poll (for Unite) in Rochester & Strood finds local NHS (37%) more imp issue for voters than immigration (25%)

    So, Labour should romp home.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,406
    Financier said:

    BenM said:

    It's a glum BenM signing in this morning.

    With current polling and mood music (and utter Labour irrelevance in the last 2 to 3 weeks - something I hadn't banked on) I'm moving across to the @SouthamObserver school of dark pessimism and expecting the worst of all possible outcomes in all possible worlds!

    Not just today, but for GE2015.

    I'm announcing that from today I will be dropping my anti- Dan Hodges jibes. I've a growing feeling Dan is going to be more accurate about May's outcome than I've been for four years!

    BenM, well done. Can almost see the relief on your face as the weight is lifted from your shoulders. However, I am sure that there are still some 'events' to come before May that could well put all our pronostications in the shredder. It all depends on who is best able (and shows it) how to react to such events.
    Dan forecast UKIP 6%.
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,173

    felix said:

    I’m replying to a couple of eaerlier comments; sadly to reply direcdtly takes the post over the word limit.
    Mr Felix’ comment about “millions of new jobs” doesn’t take into account that that headline figure obscures the fact that too many of these jobs are low-wage or zero-hours contracts, or, worse, both. It is to be hoped that the Government will do something about ZHC’s but time is running out before the election.

    Mr Financier, that raises an interesting question for our Kipper friends. How are they going to square that circle? Clearly the current policy of insisting that claimants have a good reason for turning down jobs isn’t working, in your locality at least. Why not?

    So you would rather people had full-time benefits than jobs. it's an interesting view.
    Didn’t say that. Not my preference at all.
    Then presumably you welcome the achievements on unemployment, the personal allowance tax cuts, the freeze on council tax, the maintenance of low interest rates......
  • Jonathan said:

    Sean_F said:

    Do these things come in threes? First the two Scottish polls, then South Yorks.....?

    Troubles come, not as single spies, but in battalions.
    Can't remember the last time Ed had some good News.
    But we had a thread on it - don't you remember the substantial 1% lead in YouGov thread?
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    Alistair said:

    dr_spyn said:

    If you know your history its enough to make your heart go oh, oh, oh...

    George OsborneVerified account
    @George_Osborne
    We'll redeem £218m of 4% Consols, including debts incurred because of South Sea Bubble. Another financial crisis we're clearing up after...

    All part of the "we're paying down Britain's debts" meme.

    Governments have been redeeming war debts every year since they took them out, just as they redeem other bonds when they become due.

    Its the net new borrowing that's the relevant value and that's going to be over £100bn this year, over £60bn more than Osborne said it would be,

    Has Osborne tweeted about that ?
    These are perpetual bonds, not ones that do ever fall due. Why they have not been bought back previously in favour of lower rate ones is a mystery.

    Gordon Brown wrecked UK finances. No way should his sidekick Balls be given the keys to the Treasury.
    The incumbent Chancellor in 2008 (when the shit hit the fan) had a choice between "wrecking" the public finances and wrecking the social fabric. It's easy enough for Tories here to point to those items of public expenditure they'd want cut even if we had a trillion dollar surplus on current account. Doing the job, as Osborne could tell them, is slightly harder.

    If our problems were really due to Labour, why is it that other European countries have similar - or worse - ones?

    If Gordon had not wrecked the finances by running a deficit during the growth years 2002-2008 there would have been no need for savage cuts. It will take a generation or two to get back where we were. Thanks to Gordon we are paying £75 billion on interest every year, which puts the EU bill of €2 billion into the petty cash book!
    Aren't the conservatives on course to have borrowed 100's billions more during their five years from 2010-to-2015 than Labour did from 2005-2010?
    Yes they are. Labour would have borrowed even more, and refused to list their cuts and economies in advance of 2010. I seem to remember Balls predicting high unemployment and describing Osbornes plan as "too far, too fast", not " too little and too slow".
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,704
    felix said:

    Roger said:

    Jonathan

    "Can't remember the last time Ed had some good News."

    When David took up charity work.......

    Unfortunately what is dawning on even the faithful is that he really doesn't know what leading a party involves. I can't remember an occasion when I've felt he was obviously on the right side of an argument and leading the charge...

    Something which even Nick Clegg has managed (for example yesterday on drugs). If the Libs hadn't become Tories rthis would be a golden opportunity for them

    Yeah - Ed will solve all his problems by announcing new policies to decriminalise drugs.
    Actually, what with that and with the emphasis on Mental Health I suspect (hope ...... clutches at very small straw .......) that the LD’s might just begoin to claw something back.


    Hope, eternal, human breast and ll that, of course!
  • Oh How Nick Palmer must long for the days when he was posting that Labour were 5% ahead and the lead was pretty stable...

    Yep. What's changed is that UKIP's further advance has taken significant English Labour votes and the SNP's advance has taken significant Scottish Labour votes. The Tories' position is much as before. We're not seeing swingback, as many predicted, but a splintering of the opposition.

    That said, I think it's still very unpredictable how UKIP (and to a lesser extent the SNP) will do when it comes round to May, and where the votes will move.

    As for today's result, it's hard to guess. On paper, in the current climate, I'd think UKIP will win. But it'll be fascinating to see what the second preferences - which I'd guess will be decisive - will do.
    I recall posting on here months ago that Labour would lose WWC voters to UKIP and I was slaughtered for it, with a couple of posters saying there is no such thing as a WWC, that I was racist etc

    Haven't seen them posting for a while.............
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,461

    I’m replying to a couple of eaerlier comments; sadly to reply direcdtly takes the post over the word limit.
    Mr Felix’ comment about “millions of new jobs” doesn’t take into account that that headline figure obscures the fact that too many of these jobs are low-wage or zero-hours contracts, or, worse, both. It is to be hoped that the Government will do something about ZHC’s but time is running out before the election.

    Mr Financier, that raises an interesting question for our Kipper friends. How are they going to square that circle? Clearly the current policy of insisting that claimants have a good reason for turning down jobs isn’t working, in your locality at least. Why not?

    Zero-hours contracts are another area where labour's been incompetent. ZHC's are, from some polling, generally popular with people who have them, and the majority are not looking for other work.

    Instead, Labour has bashed the entire segment, stupidly. Especially when Labour MPs, charities and other groups also use ZHC's.

    However a major problem is exclusivity, where people cannot work for anyone else whilst on a ZHC. But you'll doubtless be glad that the government is addressing it:
    https://www.gov.uk/government/news/government-crackdown-on-zero-hours-contract-abusers
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    OT Every little helps... from Mail RSS
    The sign on a cash machine at the Tesco store in Aberystwyth should read 'arian am ddim' which means free money. But the sign said 'codiad am ddim' which means free erections.
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    LOL.

    I liked Mr Cameron's version with the lead pipe. I do love Cluedo.

    JohnLoony said:

    Not that anyone on this Forum wants Labour to do well in any election, but what do people think would count as a good result for them?

    Winning, by any margin at all, would be good for the Labour Party.

    Except...that would take the pressure off Ed going into the library with a glass of whisky and a loaded revolver. Which would be bad for the Labour Party.

    (It's hard to imagine though, isn't it?

    "Actually, I don't really do spirits. And - oh my God - there's a weapon in the library! Justine! Justine? How did this gun get in the library? Didn't we agree the children were to be brought up in an atmosphere free from any references to the military-industrial complex?" What do you mean "Ed Balls brought it round"? Why?"....)
  • FinancierFinancier Posts: 3,916

    I’m replying to a couple of eaerlier comments; sadly to reply direcdtly takes the post over the word limit.
    Mr Felix’ comment about “millions of new jobs” doesn’t take into account that that headline figure obscures the fact that too many of these jobs are low-wage or zero-hours contracts, or, worse, both. It is to be hoped that the Government will do something about ZHC’s but time is running out before the election.

    Mr Financier, that raises an interesting question for our Kipper friends. How are they going to square that circle? Clearly the current policy of insisting that claimants have a good reason for turning down jobs isn’t working, in your locality at least. Why not?

    @OldKingCole

    You ask a good question, but in the same office building there is an organisation that is supposed to get the unemployed into jobs. Met the manager the other day in the communal kitchen and she explained it to me.

    This organisation has a contract from the DWP to get people trained and employed. So all people signing on at the job centre are sent to them. They have been successful with the low hangng fruit and are now left mainly with people who were wrongly classified as 'disabled' in the 2000s and have few skill sets and a very imperfect education.

    Many of these people are now unfit and some are clinically obese. They all are very angry about being removed from disability but are not in any way disabled, and do not see why they should take work that involves unusual hours and work to which they have to travel, and even more do not want to work and wish to remain on their benefits as these give them a reasonable lifestyle - good enough for them to spend off-peak holidays in the Canaries during the winter etc. Some resent even help with their CVs as they do not see the need for one and the manager has nearly been physically assaulted by some of these 'clients' when she insisted.

    Apparently, if they attend some courses, then they allowed more time to find a job and she/they are not allowed to refer to anything personal (e.g. obesity) in order to help them get a job. So they are sent back to the job centre who gets them re-assessed and the cycle begins again - prevarication at its best.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,406
    Hills have pulled their

    "When Will David Cameron Leave The Post Of Prime Minister?" market, hope everyone got on at 7-2 or 5-2 on 2016 or later.
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,207
    Good luck to UKIP -Labour were pathetic over the ongoing abuse and deserve to be punished..
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,406
    antifrank said:

    Paul Waugh ‏@paulwaugh 2m2 minutes ago
    New Survation poll (for Unite) in Rochester & Strood finds local NHS (37%) more imp issue for voters than immigration (25%)

    Is there a VI with this poll ?
  • NinoinozNinoinoz Posts: 1,312
    BenM said:


    With current polling and mood music (and utter Labour irrelevance in the last 2 to 3 weeks - something I hadn't banked on)

    Labour resemble a golf club bore or someone speaking in a language that's not their native tongue; fine when it's their favourite subject or they can drag the conversation to that subject, but utterly irrelevant when the conversation moves on.

    See the South Yorkshire PCC Labour candidate's leaflet for an example; back page was about the NHS!
  • FinancierFinancier Posts: 3,916
    Plato said:

    OT Every little helps... from Mail RSS

    The sign on a cash machine at the Tesco store in Aberystwyth should read 'arian am ddim' which means free money. But the sign said 'codiad am ddim' which means free erections.
    Most of them are too fat around here even to see if they have one!
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,704

    I’m replying to a couple of eaerlier comments; sadly to reply direcdtly takes the post over the word limit.
    Mr Felix’ comment about “millions of new jobs” doesn’t take into account that that headline figure obscures the fact that too many of these jobs are low-wage or zero-hours contracts, or, worse, both. It is to be hoped that the Government will do something about ZHC’s but time is running out before the election.

    Mr Financier, that raises an interesting question for our Kipper friends. How are they going to square that circle? Clearly the current policy of insisting that claimants have a good reason for turning down jobs isn’t working, in your locality at least. Why not?

    Zero-hours contracts are another area where labour's been incompetent. ZHC's are, from some polling, generally popular with people who have them, and the majority are not looking for other work.

    Instead, Labour has bashed the entire segment, stupidly. Especially when Labour MPs, charities and other groups also use ZHC's.

    However a major problem is exclusivity, where people cannot work for anyone else whilst on a ZHC. But you'll doubtless be glad that the government is addressing it:
    https://www.gov.uk/government/news/government-crackdown-on-zero-hours-contract-abusers
    ZHC’s are indeed useful in many circumstances. I’ve worked on one a couple of times and was quite happy; suited both me and my employers. In my long ago employer days I employed someone on one. Worked fine. And Dr Fox will confirm, I’m sure, that many hospitals could not function without “bank” nurses.

    Exclusivity is probably the main issue, and I’m, of course, aware of the governments good intentions. However, what has actually happened to date? Apart from the announcement of intention?
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,704
    Financier said:

    Plato said:

    OT Every little helps... from Mail RSS

    The sign on a cash machine at the Tesco store in Aberystwyth should read 'arian am ddim' which means free money. But the sign said 'codiad am ddim' which means free erections.
    Most of them are too fat around here even to see if they have one!

    You're obsessed by weight.
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    Golly, the boom before Boo.com
    dr_spyn said:

    If you know your history its enough to make your heart go oh, oh, oh...

    George OsborneVerified account
    @George_Osborne
    We'll redeem £218m of 4% Consols, including debts incurred because of South Sea Bubble. Another financial crisis we're clearing up after...

  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,406
    Has Morrisey's wish come true ?

    "I've been dreaming of a time when
    the English are sick to death
    of Labour, and Tories"
  • JonathanDJonathanD Posts: 2,400

    I’m replying to a couple of eaerlier comments; sadly to reply direcdtly takes the post over the word limit.
    Mr Felix’ comment about “millions of new jobs” doesn’t take into account that that headline figure obscures the fact that too many of these jobs are low-wage or zero-hours contracts, or, worse, both. It is to be hoped that the Government will do something about ZHC’s but time is running out before the election.

    Mr Financier, that raises an interesting question for our Kipper friends. How are they going to square that circle? Clearly the current policy of insisting that claimants have a good reason for turning down jobs isn’t working, in your locality at least. Why not?

    Zero-hours contracts are another area where labour's been incompetent. ZHC's are, from some polling, generally popular with people who have them, and the majority are not looking for other work.

    Instead, Labour has bashed the entire segment, stupidly. Especially when Labour MPs, charities and other groups also use ZHC's.

    However a major problem is exclusivity, where people cannot work for anyone else whilst on a ZHC. But you'll doubtless be glad that the government is addressing it:
    https://www.gov.uk/government/news/government-crackdown-on-zero-hours-contract-abusers
    However, what has actually happened to date? Apart from the announcement of intention?

    The ban on ZHC exclusivity is going through as part of the Small Business, Enterprise and Employment Bill. Its in the Committee Stage of the House of Commons at the moment

    http://services.parliament.uk/bills/2014-15/smallbusinessenterpriseandemployment.html
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    That's how I felt when I voted for Paddy and his tokenism for 1p on education.

    I had nowhere to go and find the notion of DNV unacceptable. My condolences at your plight over Labour.

    Indeed, Mr SO (7.24) but what is the alternative for a “leftie”, or at least someone who is often appalled by the attiude of Tories en masse?
    I’m never going to vote Tory, I don’t see that the LD’s have a chance ..... and anyway they’ve never done well in this constituency, although there’s an LD MP nearby ........ Green’s a possibility of course.

    UKIP? If Labour are solving the problems of the late 20th Century, UKP would take us back to the mid 20th.

    I don't know where to go. I can't see myself voting next year. I certainly do not want this Labour party in power. It would put back the cause of the centre left in the UK by decades.

    My current justification is that I would like to see the back of the current local MP; UKIP-lite and unsympathetic to people with real problems as a result of Government policy.

    Our Labour candidate gives every impression of being just another photo-fit automaton with no independent thought process. I can't justify a vote for her.

  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    antifrank said:

    Paul Waugh ‏@paulwaugh 2m2 minutes ago
    New Survation poll (for Unite) in Rochester & Strood finds local NHS (37%) more imp issue for voters than immigration (25%)

    Labour should walk it then ?
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,564
    Entertaining snippet from Murphy sketch:

    The lifelong Celtic fan was given a taste of sensitivities over allegiances when he was photographed celebrating after scoring a goal while wearing a Rangers shirt in a charity football match. McTernan says: “The next week Jim was queueing up at Celtic Park with one of his kids and a Celtic fan shouted out to him: ‘Hey big man, you should be ashamed of yourself wearing a Rangers top. Couldn’t you just be like other decent MPs and fiddle your expenses?’”

    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/oct/31/jim-murphy-can-working-class-street-fighter-save-scottish-labour
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,704
    edited October 2014
    Financier said:

    I’m replying to a couple of eaerlier comments; sadly to reply direcdtly takes the post over the word limit.
    Mr Felix’ comment about “millions of new jobs” doesn’t take into account that that headline figure obscures the fact that too many of these jobs are low-wage or zero-hours contracts, or, worse, both. It is to be hoped that the Government will do something about ZHC’s but time is running out before the election.

    Mr Financier, that raises an interesting question for our Kipper friends. How are they going to square that circle? Clearly the current policy of insisting that claimants have a good reason for turning down jobs isn’t working, in your locality at least. Why not?

    @OldKingCole

    You ask a good question, but in the same office building there is an organisation that is supposed to get the unemployed into jobs. Met the manager the other day in the communal kitchen and she explained it to me.

    This organisation has a contract from the DWP to get people trained and employed. So all people signing on at the job centre are sent to them. They have been successful with the low hangng fruit and are now left mainly with people who were wrongly classified as 'disabled' in the 2000s and have few skill sets and a very imperfect education.

    Many of these people are now unfit and some are clinically obese. They all are very angry about being removed from disability but are not in any way disabled, and do not see why they should take work that involves unusual hours and work to which they have to travel, and even more do not want to work and wish to remain on their benefits as these give them a reasonable lifestyle - good enough for them to spend off-peak holidays in the Canaries during the winter etc. Some resent even help with their CVs as they do not see the need for one and the manager has nearly been physically assaulted by some of these 'clients' when she insisted.

    Apparently, if they attend some courses, then they allowed more time to find a job and she/they are not allowed to refer to anything personal (e.g. obesity) in order to help them get a job. So they are sent back to the job centre who gets them re-assessed and the cycle begins again - prevarication at its best.
    There are always some hard cases.... in both senses of the term. That’s not to say I don’t recognise the situation; I am reminded of the CAB Debt Counsellor who despairingly related to me the tale of a client who had been helped to get out of his problems, advised as to future conduct and got into difficulties again. He then had a reasonable Lottery win, was sorted out and vanished from the scene only to reappear a couple of years later back where he’d started!

    The “disability” scandal started ages ago as a “quick & dirty” method of reducing the unemployment figures, and with all such dodges has come back to bite us.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,461

    I’m replying to a couple of eaerlier comments; sadly to reply direcdtly takes the post over the word limit.
    Mr Felix’ comment about “millions of new jobs” doesn’t take into account that that headline figure obscures the fact that too many of these jobs are low-wage or zero-hours contracts, or, worse, both. It is to be hoped that the Government will do something about ZHC’s but time is running out before the election.

    Mr Financier, that raises an interesting question for our Kipper friends. How are they going to square that circle? Clearly the current policy of insisting that claimants have a good reason for turning down jobs isn’t working, in your locality at least. Why not?

    Zero-hours contracts are another area where labour's been incompetent. ZHC's are, from some polling, generally popular with people who have them, and the majority are not looking for other work.

    Instead, Labour has bashed the entire segment, stupidly. Especially when Labour MPs, charities and other groups also use ZHC's.

    However a major problem is exclusivity, where people cannot work for anyone else whilst on a ZHC. But you'll doubtless be glad that the government is addressing it:
    https://www.gov.uk/government/news/government-crackdown-on-zero-hours-contract-abusers
    ZHC’s are indeed useful in many circumstances. I’ve worked on one a couple of times and was quite happy; suited both me and my employers. In my long ago employer days I employed someone on one. Worked fine. And Dr Fox will confirm, I’m sure, that many hospitals could not function without “bank” nurses.

    Exclusivity is probably the main issue, and I’m, of course, aware of the governments good intentions. However, what has actually happened to date? Apart from the announcement of intention?
    Which is why Labour's war on ZHC's was so stupid - they're very useful. Instead of concentrating on the excesses, some were calling for them to be banned.

    It's another area where Miliband has noticed something that needs addressing (or at least one of his MPs did), and chose exactly the wrong sort of action.
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    I thought Maureen Lipman put it perfectly yesterday - and in much the same language as you do.

    Jonathan said:

    Indeed, Mr SO (7.24) but what is the alternative for a “leftie”, or at least someone who is often appalled by the attiude of Tories en masse?
    I’m never going to vote Tory, I don’t see that the LD’s have a chance ..... and anyway they’ve never done well in this constituency, although there’s an LD MP nearby ........ Green’s a possibility of course.

    UKIP? If Labour are solving the problems of the late 20th Century, UKP would take us back to the mid 20th.

    I don't know where to go. I can't see myself voting next year. I certainly do not want this Labour party in power. It would put back the cause of the centre left in the UK by decades.

    SO think you might seriously regret not voting. Just imagine if we ended up with a small majority Tory govt that at the mercy of its loony right took us out of the EU.

    The odd thing about politics at the moment is that despite deep general dissatisfaction with the main parties, some big decisions are on the horizon.

    You simply have to vote.

    I am sure I will. But I can't vote for Labour. Under Ed and the rest of the current leadership it is not fit to govern.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,704
    JonathanD said:

    I’m replying to a couple of eaerlier comments; sadly to reply direcdtly takes the post over the word limit.
    Mr Felix’ comment about “millions of new jobs” doesn’t take into account that that headline figure obscures the fact that too many of these jobs are low-wage or zero-hours contracts, or, worse, both. It is to be hoped that the Government will do something about ZHC’s but time is running out before the election.

    Mr Financier, that raises an interesting question for our Kipper friends. How are they going to square that circle? Clearly the current policy of insisting that claimants have a good reason for turning down jobs isn’t working, in your locality at least. Why not?

    Zero-hours contracts are another area where labour's been incompetent. ZHC's are, from some polling, generally popular with people who have them, and the majority are not looking for other work.

    Instead, Labour has bashed the entire segment, stupidly. Especially when Labour MPs, charities and other groups also use ZHC's.

    However a major problem is exclusivity, where people cannot work for anyone else whilst on a ZHC. But you'll doubtless be glad that the government is addressing it:
    https://www.gov.uk/government/news/government-crackdown-on-zero-hours-contract-abusers
    However, what has actually happened to date? Apart from the announcement of intention?

    The ban on ZHC exclusivity is going through as part of the Small Business, Enterprise and Employment Bill. Its in the Committee Stage of the House of Commons at the moment

    http://services.parliament.uk/bills/2014-15/smallbusinessenterpriseandemployment.html
    Thank you. Obliged.
  • " I seem to remember Balls predicting high unemployment and describing Osbornes plan as "too far, too fast", not " too little and too slow"."


    That's basically why its such an empty attack. Vague hint of wanting to have your cake and eat it, as well.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,972
    Felix

    "Yeah - Ed will solve all his problems by announcing new policies to decriminalise drugs."

    You miss the point. If Labour aren't seen as progressive they're nothing. I can't remember the last time during this parliament that a Labour politician seemed to be on the side of the angels and God knows with this government they've had enough opportunities.

    They need to take a page out of the Alex Salmond playlist who did it brilliantly in Scotland ("when we hit trouble we don't take it out on the disabled") and is still reaping the benefit for his party. Trying to out Tory the Tories or hiding behind the sofa is no way to lead a progressive movement
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    Left or Right foot for dinner first?
    felix said:

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Indeed, Mr SO (7.24) but what is the alternative for a “leftie”, or at least someone who is often appalled by the attiude of Tories en masse?
    I’m never going to vote Tory, I don’t see that the LD’s have a chance ..... and anyway they’ve never done well in this constituency, although there’s an LD MP nearby ........ Green’s a possibility of course.

    UKIP? If Labour are solving the problems of the late 20th Century, UKP would take us back to the mid 20th.

    I don't know where to go. I can't see myself voting next year. I certainly do not want this Labour party in power. It would put back the cause of the centre left in the UK by decades.

    SO think you might seriously regret not voting. Just imagine if we ended up with a small majority Tory govt that at the mercy of its loony right took us out of the EU.

    The odd thing about politics at the moment is that despite deep general dissatisfaction with the main parties, some big decisions are on the horizon.

    You simply have to vote.

    I am sure I will. But I can't vote for Labour. Under Ed and the rest of the current leadership it is not fit to govern.
    Good about voting! Sitting on your hands, to let the likes of UKIP wreak havoc surely is unthinkable.

    Understand some of your concerns. Would prefer to see folks like Nick Palmer back in Westminster and making decisions.
    Wow - are you aware of his record from last time he was an MP?
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,953
    Incidentally, I read the other day that the Conservative candidate in Morley & Outwood, who apparently is a pretty good singer, has invited Ed Balls (who is learning/has learnt to play the piano) to accompany her at a charity event. No word yet if he's accepted.
  • JonathanDJonathanD Posts: 2,400
    Roger said:

    Felix

    "Yeah - Ed will solve all his problems by announcing new policies to decriminalise drugs."

    You miss the point. If Labour aren't seen as progressive they're nothing. I can't remember the last time during this parliament that a Labour politician seemed to be on the side of the angels and God knows with this government they've had enough opportunities.


    Its OK, Labour are dealing with the big issues and Ed has his priorities straight


    "Miliband pledges London-style bus service across England"

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29839181
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,406
    Neil Wilby @Neil_Wilby
    At count for South Yorkshire PCC byelection this morning, Labour and UKIP tell @Tinglepolitics 'it's too close to call'. #sypcc
  • I don't think Labour has the ability to force Ed out as the Tories did with IDS, Thatcher.

    Does he have the self-awareness/guts to fall on his own sword? A speech saying 'I have to put the party and country ahead of personal ambitions' might actually get him some respect from the electorate for once.

    If this were the Tories there would be plots and movements galore. The parliamentary party seem to be sleepwalking into defeat despite flashing warning signals everywhere.

    By the way, i write this as a usually reliable Labour voter.
  • What got me with the ZHC was that debate was about some estimated number, that turned out to massively over-estimate the number using them. And it was stated "its increased", which is likely given more people are in the country, let alone in work.

    But I spent my entire youth on ZHC terms with either well known fast food companies, or college bars, or security. I cannot have been the only one.

    Is there any data beyond fake moral outrage on this topic?
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,300

    Entertaining snippet from Murphy sketch:

    The lifelong Celtic fan was given a taste of sensitivities over allegiances when he was photographed celebrating after scoring a goal while wearing a Rangers shirt in a charity football match. McTernan says: “The next week Jim was queueing up at Celtic Park with one of his kids and a Celtic fan shouted out to him: ‘Hey big man, you should be ashamed of yourself wearing a Rangers top. Couldn’t you just be like other decent MPs and fiddle your expenses?’”

    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/oct/31/jim-murphy-can-working-class-street-fighter-save-scottish-labour

    Sign of progress?

    http://willievass.photoshelter.com/gallery-image/180509-Politicians-at-Ibrox/G0000Fq2KLnTQ1gk/I0000GgqwKb.TtZk/C0000x13jVAiYA2o

  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,704
    edited October 2014
    JonathanD said:

    Roger said:

    Felix

    "Yeah - Ed will solve all his problems by announcing new policies to decriminalise drugs."

    You miss the point. If Labour aren't seen as progressive they're nothing. I can't remember the last time during this parliament that a Labour politician seemed to be on the side of the angels and God knows with this government they've had enough opportunities.


    Its OK, Labour are dealing with the big issues and Ed has his priorities straight


    "Miliband pledges London-style bus service across England"

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29839181
    Actually, that’s not a bad idea. Look at what’s happening in the NE.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    edited October 2014
    Alan Johnson on this week last night echoed my sentiments on the perils of legalising drugs... Arguing against ex Cameron speechwriter Ian Birrell, who it seems many on here would take side with in this, he grew visibly angry and showed the passion and conviction that's been lacking from Labour politicians for a long long while

    Worth a watch when it's on I player if you missed it
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,953
    Mr. Rob, very hard for Miliband to do that now, for psychological reasons if nothing else.

    He effectively ended his brother's political career, after reportedly advising him against following Purnell and bringing down Brown. To do that and then not even contest the prize would not feel good.

    If he went, there are two possibilities, Labour lose, or they win. If they lose, he would think to himself that resigning didn't achieve anything. If they won, he'd forever wonder if cowardice and resignation stopped him becoming PM.
  • SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    Blimey – In just two weeks, Dan Hodges has gone from renegade apostate to soothsayer.

    Things must be bad.
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    Well indeed.

    I'm all for helping those in need - but without sound finances we can't do it. Labour under Gordon shared my husband's mentality of I Have Cheques Therefore I Have Money.

    It's a blinking nightmare to deal with someone who doesn't know the difference.

    dr_spyn said:

    If you know your history its enough to make your heart go oh, oh, oh...

    George OsborneVerified account
    @George_Osborne
    We'll redeem £218m of 4% Consols, including debts incurred because of South Sea Bubble. Another financial crisis we're clearing up after...

    All part of the "we're paying down Britain's debts" meme.

    Governments have been redeeming war debts every year since they took them out, just as they redeem other bonds when they become due.

    Its the net new borrowing that's the relevant value and that's going to be over £100bn this year, over £60bn more than Osborne said it would be,

    Has Osborne tweeted about that ?
    These are perpetual bonds, not ones that do ever fall due. Why they have not been bought back previously in favour of lower rate ones is a mystery.

    Gordon Brown wrecked UK finances. No way should his sidekick Balls be given the keys to the Treasury.
    The incumbent Chancellor in 2008 (when the shit hit the fan) had a choice between "wrecking" the public finances and wrecking the social fabric. It's easy enough for Tories here to point to those items of public expenditure they'd want cut even if we had a trillion dollar surplus on current account. Doing the job, as Osborne could tell them, is slightly harder.

    If our problems were really due to Labour, why is it that other European countries have similar - or worse - ones?

    If Gordon had not wrecked the finances by running a deficit during the growth years 2002-2008 there would have been no need for savage cuts. It will take a generation or two to get back where we were. Thanks to Gordon we are paying £75 billion on interest every year, which puts the EU bill of €2 billion into the petty cash book!
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548

    I’m replying to a couple of eaerlier comments; sadly to reply direcdtly takes the post over the word limit.
    Mr Felix’ comment about “millions of new jobs” doesn’t take into account that that headline figure obscures the fact that too many of these jobs are low-wage or zero-hours contracts, or, worse, both. It is to be hoped that the Government will do something about ZHC’s but time is running out before the election.

    Mr Financier, that raises an interesting question for our Kipper friends. How are they going to square that circle? Clearly the current policy of insisting that claimants have a good reason for turning down jobs isn’t working, in your locality at least. Why not?

    Zero-hours contracts are another area where labour's been incompetent. ZHC's are, from some polling, generally popular with people who have them, and the majority are not looking for other work.

    Instead, Labour has bashed the entire segment, stupidly. Especially when Labour MPs, charities and other groups also use ZHC's.

    However a major problem is exclusivity, where people cannot work for anyone else whilst on a ZHC. But you'll doubtless be glad that the government is addressing it:
    https://www.gov.uk/government/news/government-crackdown-on-zero-hours-contract-abusers
    ZHC’s are indeed useful in many circumstances. I’ve worked on one a couple of times and was quite happy; suited both me and my employers. In my long ago employer days I employed someone on one. Worked fine. And Dr Fox will confirm, I’m sure, that many hospitals could not function without “bank” nurses.

    Exclusivity is probably the main issue, and I’m, of course, aware of the governments good intentions. However, what has actually happened to date? Apart from the announcement of intention?
    Which is why Labour's war on ZHC's was so stupid - they're very useful. Instead of concentrating on the excesses, some were calling for them to be banned.

    It's another area where Miliband has noticed something that needs addressing (or at least one of his MPs did), and chose exactly the wrong sort of action.
    I know quite a few bank nurses who work zero hours contracts so they can take the school holidays off to look after their kids. They would be very annoyed if forced out of the profession by having to work hours every week.

    BTW increments are not annual for most NHS staff and require an appraisal as well as having a ceiling. I haven't had one for five years. Not that I am complaining! I am well paid to do a job that I love.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,704
    edited October 2014

    I’m replying to a couple of eaerlier comments; sadly to reply direcdtly takes the post over the word limit.
    Mr Felix’ comment about “millions of new jobs” doesn’t take into account that that headline figure obscures the fact that too many of these jobs are low-wage or zero-hours contracts, or, worse, both. It is to be hoped that the Government will do something about ZHC’s but time is running out before the election.

    Mr Financier, that raises an interesting question for our Kipper friends. How are they going to square that circle? Clearly the current policy of insisting that claimants have a good reason for turning down jobs isn’t working, in your locality at least. Why not?

    Zero-hours contracts are another area where labour's been incompetent. ZHC's are, from some polling, generally popular with people who have them, and the majority are not looking for other work.

    Instead, Labour has bashed the entire segment, stupidly. Especially when Labour MPs, charities and other groups also use ZHC's.

    However a major problem is exclusivity, where people cannot work for anyone else whilst on a ZHC. But you'll doubtless be glad that the government is addressing it:
    https://www.gov.uk/government/news/government-crackdown-on-zero-hours-contract-abusers
    ZHC’s are indeed useful in many circumstances. I’ve worked on one a couple of times and was quite happy; suited both me and my employers. In my long ago employer days I employed someone on one. Worked fine. And Dr Fox will confirm, I’m sure, that many hospitals could not function without “bank” nurses.

    Exclusivity is probably the main issue, and I’m, of course, aware of the governments good intentions. However, what has actually happened to date? Apart from the announcement of intention?
    Which is why Labour's war on ZHC's was so stupid - they're very useful. Instead of concentrating on the excesses, some were calling for them to be banned.

    It's another area where Miliband has noticed something that needs addressing (or at least one of his MPs did), and chose exactly the wrong sort of action.
    I know quite a few bank nurses who work zero hours contracts so they can take the school holidays off to look after their kids. They would be very annoyed if forced out of the profession by having to work hours every week.

    BTW increments are not annual for most NHS staff and require an appraisal as well as having a ceiling. I haven't had one for five years. Not that I am complaining! I am well paid to do a job that I love.
    Bank nurses of course are not precluded from doing other jobs if the hospital don’t want them.
    That’s the issue.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,406
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-29821860

    A "good night" is around a thousand calories for me personally.
  • JonathanDJonathanD Posts: 2,400

    JonathanD said:

    Roger said:

    Felix

    "Yeah - Ed will solve all his problems by announcing new policies to decriminalise drugs."

    You miss the point. If Labour aren't seen as progressive they're nothing. I can't remember the last time during this parliament that a Labour politician seemed to be on the side of the angels and God knows with this government they've had enough opportunities.


    Its OK, Labour are dealing with the big issues and Ed has his priorities straight


    "Miliband pledges London-style bus service across England"

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29839181
    Actually, that’s not a bad idea. Look at what’s happening in the NE.

    There is nothing wrong with the idea and its already starting to happen in Manchester as well. However if that's Ed's big announcement with everything else that is going on around him, then it makes him look a bit detached.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    edited October 2014
    isam said:

    Alan Johnson on this week last night echoed my sentiments on the perils of legalising drugs... Arguing against ex Cameron speechwriter Ian Birrell, who it seems many on here would take side with in this, he grew visibly angry and showed the passion and conviction that's been lacking from Labour politicians for a long long while

    Worth a watch when it's on I player if you missed it

    Mind you Johnson has been hammered on twitter by pro drug legalisers do it seems the consensus us against him (& me!)

    Here's the show it's the first item

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b04n8xh6/this-week-30102014
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,704
    Pulpstar said:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-29821860

    A "good night" is around a thousand calories for me personally.

    My wife always has an alcohol free day the day before she goes to WeightWatchers. Unfortunately I have to support her!
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633

    Blimey – In just two weeks, Dan Hodges has gone from renegade apostate to soothsayer.

    Things must be bad.

    Hodges was right on Labour but looks like being wrong on Ukip - but we shall see.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,406

    Mr. Rob, very hard for Miliband to do that now, for psychological reasons if nothing else.

    He effectively ended his brother's political career, after reportedly advising him against following Purnell and bringing down Brown. To do that and then not even contest the prize would not feel good.

    If he went, there are two possibilities, Labour lose, or they win. If they lose, he would think to himself that resigning didn't achieve anything. If they won, he'd forever wonder if cowardice and resignation stopped him becoming PM.

    David Miliband ended his own political career. Just what do people see in him still I don't know ! Not saying Ed is any good, but the vision of David Miliband as some sort of latter day messiah amongst the Blairite hacks is laughable.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,406
    JonathanD said:

    JonathanD said:

    Roger said:

    Felix

    "Yeah - Ed will solve all his problems by announcing new policies to decriminalise drugs."

    You miss the point. If Labour aren't seen as progressive they're nothing. I can't remember the last time during this parliament that a Labour politician seemed to be on the side of the angels and God knows with this government they've had enough opportunities.


    Its OK, Labour are dealing with the big issues and Ed has his priorities straight


    "Miliband pledges London-style bus service across England"

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29839181
    Actually, that’s not a bad idea. Look at what’s happening in the NE.

    There is nothing wrong with the idea and its already starting to happen in Manchester as well. However if that's Ed's big announcement with everything else that is going on around him, then it makes him look a bit detached.
    The local bus service has been far more relevant to me and mine personally than any immigration or NHS concerns over the last few years actually. And I'm normally a car user ^_~
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    edited October 2014
    When I last worked in Norfolk there were 30 000 Portuguese employed by Bernard Matthew plucking turkeys and picking veg for other farmers.

    And then there were lots of local unemployed who didn't fancy it.

    That's the issue. It's excuse making like @ash and his buying toothpaste vs bus fare for a job interview.
    Financier said:

    felix said:

    Indeed, Mr SO (7.24) but what is the alternative for a “leftie”, or at least someone who is often appalled by the attiude of Tories en masse?
    I’m never going to vote Tory, I don’t see that the LD’s have a chance ..... and anyway they’ve never done well in this constituency, although there’s an LD MP nearby ........ Green’s a possibility of course.

    UKIP? If Labour are solving the problems of the late 20th Century, UKP would take us back to the mid 20th.

    I don't know where to go. I can't see myself voting next year. I certainly do not want this Labour party in power. It would put back the cause of the centre left in the UK by decades.

    My current justification is that I would like to see the back of the current local MP; UKIP-lite and unsympathetic to people with real problems as a result of Government policy.
    And therein lies your mistake. People have real problems that are simply not solveable by any government - times are hard and the cash ain't there. The UK is suffering much less than many in, eg, southern Europe but no-one wants to hear it. We have nurses going on strike because some of them will not get a 1% rise on top of a 3% annual increment while in the real world Monarch employees have opted for a big pay cut and some redundancies to save the business for the rest. None of the choices are easy and there will always be 'victims' who hog the headlines but the alternative to the hard medicine now is continual and steady decline.
    Mr Felix, the Government has absoluely no need to take it out on the poor and disadvantaged, the way this one is doing.
    No government can ever support and please everybody and be an economic prop for everybody. There is a principle called personal responsibility which some seem to have abandoned and expect the government to keep them in the (workfree) lifestyle to which they have become accustomed.

    A farm near me is desperate for more workers and even provides a car for the farming hours, but all the local unemployed have turned down the jobs because they do not want to start milking at 5am. The only people who are willing to do it are European immigrants.

    So please elaborate on your point of "taking it out on the poor and disadvantaged."
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    edited October 2014
    JonathanD said:

    Roger said:

    Felix

    "Yeah - Ed will solve all his problems by announcing new policies to decriminalise drugs."

    You miss the point. If Labour aren't seen as progressive they're nothing. I can't remember the last time during this parliament that a Labour politician seemed to be on the side of the angels and God knows with this government they've had enough opportunities.


    Its OK, Labour are dealing with the big issues and Ed has his priorities straight


    "Miliband pledges London-style bus service across England"

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29839181
    Ed Miliband will promise later that a Labour government would grant cities and regions greater powers to improve bus services across England.

    The Labour leader will say cities and counties should be able to set bus fares and routes and integrate them with local tram and rail services.


    Oh well that makes up for the English not being able to control their own education and healthcare systems. We don't need an English parliament after all.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,406
    TGOHF said:

    Blimey – In just two weeks, Dan Hodges has gone from renegade apostate to soothsayer.

    Things must be bad.

    Hodges was right on Labour but looks like being wrong on Ukip - but we shall see.
    A stopped clock is occasionally right.
  • Pulpstar said:

    Mr. Rob, very hard for Miliband to do that now, for psychological reasons if nothing else.

    He effectively ended his brother's political career, after reportedly advising him against following Purnell and bringing down Brown. To do that and then not even contest the prize would not feel good.

    If he went, there are two possibilities, Labour lose, or they win. If they lose, he would think to himself that resigning didn't achieve anything. If they won, he'd forever wonder if cowardice and resignation stopped him becoming PM.

    David Miliband ended his own political career. Just what do people see in him still I don't know ! Not saying Ed is any good, but the vision of David Miliband as some sort of latter day messiah amongst the Blairite hacks is laughable.
    I'm not a David Miliband enthusiast either, he didn't have the guts to challenge Brown, then lost fair and square to his brother and went off to America to sulk.

    In my opinion only Yvette Cooper or Sadiq Khan could unite the party if Ed stepped down.
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    As one of the most ardent Labourites on here - my sympathies. Genuinely. I don't agree with your views - but they are heartfelt. It must feel horrid right now.
    BenM said:

    It's a glum BenM signing in this morning.

    With current polling and mood music (and utter Labour irrelevance in the last 2 to 3 weeks - something I hadn't banked on) I'm moving across to the @SouthamObserver school of dark pessimism and expecting the worst of all possible outcomes in all possible worlds!

    Not just today, but for GE2015.

    I'm announcing that from today I will be dropping my anti- Dan Hodges jibes. I've a growing feeling Dan is going to be more accurate about May's outcome than I've been for four years!

  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,953
    Mr. Rob, Sadiq 'I want ethnic minority work quotas' Khan would not necessarily win back the WWC from UKIP.

    Cooper's voice has gone down an octave or two. Much less screechy these days.

    Mr. Socrates, it's, writ small, Brown's 35p (or whatever it was) pension increase. It's more insulting than nothing.
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    "If he were to become prime minister, Mr Miliband says he will chair regular meetings of a new English Regional Cabinet Committee, to be attended by relevant secretaries of state and city and county leaders."

    So no actual democratic control for the English then?

    Like his father, Ed Miliband has complete contempt for this country. He wants to transplant the culture with ongoing mass immigration, racially discriminate against the majority, prevent any form of self-rule, and sell us out to a European superstate.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,406
    Socrates said:

    JonathanD said:

    Roger said:

    Felix

    "Yeah - Ed will solve all his problems by announcing new policies to decriminalise drugs."

    You miss the point. If Labour aren't seen as progressive they're nothing. I can't remember the last time during this parliament that a Labour politician seemed to be on the side of the angels and God knows with this government they've had enough opportunities.


    Its OK, Labour are dealing with the big issues and Ed has his priorities straight


    "Miliband pledges London-style bus service across England"

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29839181
    Ed Miliband will promise later that a Labour government would grant cities and regions greater powers to improve bus services across England.

    The Labour leader will say cities and counties should be able to set bus fares and routes and integrate them with local tram and rail services.


    Oh well that makes up for the English not being able to control their own education and healthcare systems. We don't need an English parliament after all.
    Do the SNP vote on English only matters at the moment ?
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983


    In my opinion only Yvette Cooper or Sadiq Khan could unite the party if Ed stepped down.

    Can someone explain the electoral appeal of Yvette Cooper to me? I'm afraid it has totally passed me by.
  • Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256


    Our Labour candidate gives every impression of being just another photo-fit automaton with no independent thought process. I can't justify a vote for her.

    I am not too keen on my MP either, but at least he is not an "automaton". Having said that I do disagree with some of his more strongly held views.

    Ironically, I have known the Labour PPC for about 20 years, but I will not vote for her because ..... well....... Ed is crap

    I always wondered what would make Cameron appeal to the voters. It seems it is Ed Miliband.
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621
    Socrates said:

    "If he were to become prime minister, Mr Miliband says he will chair regular meetings of a new English Regional Cabinet Committee, to be attended by relevant secretaries of state and city and county leaders."

    So no actual democratic control for the English then?

    Like his father, Ed Miliband has complete contempt for this country. He wants to transplant the culture with ongoing mass immigration, racially discriminate against the majority, prevent any form of self-rule, and sell us out to a European superstate.

    Classic denial. I bet you've got an Ed Miliband poster on your bedroom ceiling.
  • dr_spyn said:

    If you know your history its enough to make your heart go oh, oh, oh...

    George OsborneVerified account
    @George_Osborne
    We'll redeem £218m of 4% Consols, including debts incurred because of South Sea Bubble. Another financial crisis we're clearing up after...

    All part of the "we're paying down Britain's debts" meme.

    Governments have been redeeming war debts every year since they took them out, just as they redeem other bonds when they become due.

    Its the net new borrowing that's the relevant value and that's going to be over £100bn this year, over £60bn more than Osborne said it would be,

    Has Osborne tweeted about that ?
    These are perpetual bonds, not ones that do ever fall due. Why they have not been bought back previously in favour of lower rate ones is a mystery.

    Gordon Brown wrecked UK finances. No way should his sidekick Balls be given the keys to the Treasury.
    The incumbent Chancellor in 2008 (when the shit hit the fan) had a choice between "wrecking" the public finances and wrecking the social fabric. It's easy enough for Tories here to point to those items of public expenditure they'd want cut even if we had a trillion dollar surplus on current account. Doing the job, as Osborne could tell them, is slightly harder.

    If our problems were really due to Labour, why is it that other European countries have similar - or worse - ones?

    You conveniently ignore the fact that the years leading up to 2008 left us the most ill-prepared of the major economies for the financial crisis. Labour had had a damn good go at wrecking the public finances during the good years.

    Other European countries have tended to have leftish crappish governments as well, with generally unaffordable public spending wishlists. But our deficit was, and remains, the worst of the lot, largely due to the vast structural overspending from ~2001-2008, (although today's govt has also signally failed to get a proper grip of it, despite the rhetoric.)
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,406

    Pulpstar said:

    Mr. Rob, very hard for Miliband to do that now, for psychological reasons if nothing else.

    He effectively ended his brother's political career, after reportedly advising him against following Purnell and bringing down Brown. To do that and then not even contest the prize would not feel good.

    If he went, there are two possibilities, Labour lose, or they win. If they lose, he would think to himself that resigning didn't achieve anything. If they won, he'd forever wonder if cowardice and resignation stopped him becoming PM.

    David Miliband ended his own political career. Just what do people see in him still I don't know ! Not saying Ed is any good, but the vision of David Miliband as some sort of latter day messiah amongst the Blairite hacks is laughable.
    I'm not a David Miliband enthusiast either, he didn't have the guts to challenge Brown, then lost fair and square to his brother and went off to America to sulk.

    In my opinion only Yvette Cooper or Sadiq Khan could unite the party if Ed stepped down.
    Sadiq Khan is going to be Mayor of London (Hopefully...)

    I think Jim Murphy would actually be the right man for the main job, but he'll probably get the Scottish gig..

    My money is down on Andy Burnham as per Henry Manson's tipping.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    isam said:

    isam said:

    Alan Johnson on this week last night echoed my sentiments on the perils of legalising drugs... Arguing against ex Cameron speechwriter Ian Birrell, who it seems many on here would take side with in this, he grew visibly angry and showed the passion and conviction that's been lacking from Labour politicians for a long long while

    Worth a watch when it's on I player if you missed it

    Mind you Johnson has been hammered on twitter by pro drug legalisers do it seems the consensus us against him (& me!)

    Here's the show it's the first item

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b04n8xh6/this-week-30102014
    Twitter is representative of not very much except intensity of feeling.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,704
    edited October 2014
    Plato said:

    When I last worked in Norfolk there were 30 000 Portuguese employed by Bernard Matthew plucking turkeys and picking veg for other farmers.

    And then there were lots of local unemployed who didn't fancy it.-<blockquote class="Quote"



    How long ago was that? I ask because exploitation of Portugese migrant workers in East Anglia was one of the triggers for the Gangmasters Licensing Act.

  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    Would it be okay if these jobs were down mines instead? In Durham? Or Merthyr?

    Low paid jobs are unskilled ones because we have people either too stupid or too lazy to get higher paying ones. It was always thus.

    I’m replying to a couple of eaerlier comments; sadly to reply direcdtly takes the post over the word limit.
    Mr Felix’ comment about “millions of new jobs” doesn’t take into account that that headline figure obscures the fact that too many of these jobs are low-wage or zero-hours contracts, or, worse, both. It is to be hoped that the Government will do something about ZHC’s but time is running out before the election.

    Mr Financier, that raises an interesting question for our Kipper friends. How are they going to square that circle? Clearly the current policy of insisting that claimants have a good reason for turning down jobs isn’t working, in your locality at least. Why not?

  • Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Mr. Rob, very hard for Miliband to do that now, for psychological reasons if nothing else.

    He effectively ended his brother's political career, after reportedly advising him against following Purnell and bringing down Brown. To do that and then not even contest the prize would not feel good.

    If he went, there are two possibilities, Labour lose, or they win. If they lose, he would think to himself that resigning didn't achieve anything. If they won, he'd forever wonder if cowardice and resignation stopped him becoming PM.

    David Miliband ended his own political career. Just what do people see in him still I don't know ! Not saying Ed is any good, but the vision of David Miliband as some sort of latter day messiah amongst the Blairite hacks is laughable.
    I'm not a David Miliband enthusiast either, he didn't have the guts to challenge Brown, then lost fair and square to his brother and went off to America to sulk.

    In my opinion only Yvette Cooper or Sadiq Khan could unite the party if Ed stepped down.
    Sadiq Khan is going to be Mayor of London (Hopefully...)

    I think Jim Murphy would actually be the right man for the main job, but he'll probably get the Scottish gig..

    My money is down on Andy Burnham as per Henry Manson's tipping.
    I like Burnham also, although a lot of the PB chat seems to flag up Staffordshire NHS everytime his name is mentioned, so I'm not sure how much of an albatross that would be?

    Agree on Murphy too, could kill 2 birds by becoming UK leader and easing issues in Scotland at the same time?
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,337
    Pulpstar said:

    Socrates said:

    JonathanD said:

    Roger said:

    Felix

    "Yeah - Ed will solve all his problems by announcing new policies to decriminalise drugs."

    You miss the point. If Labour aren't seen as progressive they're nothing. I can't remember the last time during this parliament that a Labour politician seemed to be on the side of the angels and God knows with this government they've had enough opportunities.


    Its OK, Labour are dealing with the big issues and Ed has his priorities straight


    "Miliband pledges London-style bus service across England"

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29839181
    Ed Miliband will promise later that a Labour government would grant cities and regions greater powers to improve bus services across England.

    The Labour leader will say cities and counties should be able to set bus fares and routes and integrate them with local tram and rail services.


    Oh well that makes up for the English not being able to control their own education and healthcare systems. We don't need an English parliament after all.
    Do the SNP vote on English only matters at the moment ?
    No, though the definition will always be a problem. Other PBers have noted that the polling trend, if confirmed at the UKGE, would obviate the WLQ as a result.

  • TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262
    felix said:

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Indeed, Mr SO (7.24) but what is the alternative for a “leftie”, or at least someone who is often appalled by the attiude of Tories en masse?
    I’m never going to vote Tory, I don’t see that the LD’s have a chance ..... and anyway they’ve never done well in this constituency, although there’s an LD MP nearby ........ Green’s a possibility of course.

    UKIP? If Labour are solving the problems of the late 20th Century, UKP would take us back to the mid 20th.

    I don't know where to go. I can't see myself voting next year. I certainly do not want this Labour party in power. It would put back the cause of the centre left in the UK by decades.

    SO think you might seriously regret not voting. Just imagine if we ended up with a small majority Tory govt that at the mercy of its loony right took us out of the EU.

    The odd thing about politics at the moment is that despite deep general dissatisfaction with the main parties, some big decisions are on the horizon.

    You simply have to vote.

    I am sure I will. But I can't vote for Labour. Under Ed and the rest of the current leadership it is not fit to govern.
    Good about voting! Sitting on your hands, to let the likes of UKIP wreak havoc surely is unthinkable.

    Understand some of your concerns. Would prefer to see folks like Nick Palmer back in Westminster and making decisions.
    Wow - are you aware of his record from last time he was an MP?
    An expensive MP too.
  • Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256


    Agree on Murphy too, could kill 2 birds by becoming UK leader and easing issues in Scotland at the same time?

    Another Scot running England? Surely no one would portray it that way?
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Mr. Rob, very hard for Miliband to do that now, for psychological reasons if nothing else.

    He effectively ended his brother's political career, after reportedly advising him against following Purnell and bringing down Brown. To do that and then not even contest the prize would not feel good.

    If he went, there are two possibilities, Labour lose, or they win. If they lose, he would think to himself that resigning didn't achieve anything. If they won, he'd forever wonder if cowardice and resignation stopped him becoming PM.

    David Miliband ended his own political career. Just what do people see in him still I don't know ! Not saying Ed is any good, but the vision of David Miliband as some sort of latter day messiah amongst the Blairite hacks is laughable.
    I'm not a David Miliband enthusiast either, he didn't have the guts to challenge Brown, then lost fair and square to his brother and went off to America to sulk.

    In my opinion only Yvette Cooper or Sadiq Khan could unite the party if Ed stepped down.
    Sadiq Khan is going to be Mayor of London (Hopefully...)

    I think Jim Murphy would actually be the right man for the main job, but he'll probably get the Scottish gig..

    My money is down on Andy Burnham as per Henry Manson's tipping.
    I like Burnham also, although a lot of the PB chat seems to flag up Staffordshire NHS everytime his name is mentioned, so I'm not sure how much of an albatross that would be?

    Agree on Murphy too, could kill 2 birds by becoming UK leader and easing issues in Scotland at the same time?
    It was Alan Johnson that was health minister when Stafford got Foundation status despite what was going on. A lot went on under Hewitt and Reid too. Andy Burnham set up an inquiry within a month of taking over at Health in May 2009.

    Classic shoot the messenger!
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,406
    edited October 2014

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Mr. Rob, very hard for Miliband to do that now, for psychological reasons if nothing else.

    He effectively ended his brother's political career, after reportedly advising him against following Purnell and bringing down Brown. To do that and then not even contest the prize would not feel good.

    If he went, there are two possibilities, Labour lose, or they win. If they lose, he would think to himself that resigning didn't achieve anything. If they won, he'd forever wonder if cowardice and resignation stopped him becoming PM.

    David Miliband ended his own political career. Just what do people see in him still I don't know ! Not saying Ed is any good, but the vision of David Miliband as some sort of latter day messiah amongst the Blairite hacks is laughable.
    I'm not a David Miliband enthusiast either, he didn't have the guts to challenge Brown, then lost fair and square to his brother and went off to America to sulk.

    In my opinion only Yvette Cooper or Sadiq Khan could unite the party if Ed stepped down.
    Sadiq Khan is going to be Mayor of London (Hopefully...)

    I think Jim Murphy would actually be the right man for the main job, but he'll probably get the Scottish gig..

    My money is down on Andy Burnham as per Henry Manson's tipping.
    I like Burnham also, although a lot of the PB chat seems to flag up Staffordshire NHS everytime his name is mentioned, so I'm not sure how much of an albatross that would be?

    Agree on Murphy too, could kill 2 birds by becoming UK leader and easing issues in Scotland at the same time?
    If Findlay gets the Scottish gig off the back off union votes only then I think it leaves him in a very strong position going forward.

    He is also likely to hold his seat at the GE even in the face of SNPgeddon.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,406


    Agree on Murphy too, could kill 2 birds by becoming UK leader and easing issues in Scotland at the same time?

    Another Scot running England? Surely no one would portray it that way?
    England has no parliament.

    Yet.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,046

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Mr. Rob, very hard for Miliband to do that now, for psychological reasons if nothing else.

    He effectively ended his brother's political career, after reportedly advising him against following Purnell and bringing down Brown. To do that and then not even contest the prize would not feel good.

    If he went, there are two possibilities, Labour lose, or they win. If they lose, he would think to himself that resigning didn't achieve anything. If they won, he'd forever wonder if cowardice and resignation stopped him becoming PM.

    David Miliband ended his own political career. Just what do people see in him still I don't know ! Not saying Ed is any good, but the vision of David Miliband as some sort of latter day messiah amongst the Blairite hacks is laughable.
    I'm not a David Miliband enthusiast either, he didn't have the guts to challenge Brown, then lost fair and square to his brother and went off to America to sulk.

    In my opinion only Yvette Cooper or Sadiq Khan could unite the party if Ed stepped down.
    Sadiq Khan is going to be Mayor of London (Hopefully...)

    I think Jim Murphy would actually be the right man for the main job, but he'll probably get the Scottish gig..

    My money is down on Andy Burnham as per Henry Manson's tipping.
    I like Burnham also, although a lot of the PB chat seems to flag up Staffordshire NHS everytime his name is mentioned, so I'm not sure how much of an albatross that would be?

    Agree on Murphy too, could kill 2 birds by becoming UK leader and easing issues in Scotland at the same time?
    It was Alan Johnson that was health minister when Stafford got Foundation status despite what was going on. A lot went on under Hewitt and Reid too. Andy Burnham set up an inquiry within a month of taking over at Health in May 2009.

    Classic shoot the messenger!
    Burnham has that Blears-like indefatigability. Which makes him an irritating opponent but a worthy one.
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    I didn't believe it was possible to go on holiday aboard or afford a 60" Sony TV or live on delivered pizza - and then I met a load of those who are entitled to ESA [on long term sick], who also qualify for Personal Independence Payments with marginal disabilities. DWP give them £185 every two weeks and another £400 a month.

    And they pay no rent or council tax - £800 net a month to blow on utilities and shopping. No wonder some are very reluctant to change their lifestyle.
    Financier said:

    I’m replying to a couple of eaerlier comments; sadly to reply direcdtly takes the post over the word limit.
    Mr Felix’ comment about “millions of new jobs” doesn’t take into account that that headline figure obscures the fact that too many of these jobs are low-wage or zero-hours contracts, or, worse, both. It is to be hoped that the Government will do something about ZHC’s but time is running out before the election.

    Mr Financier, that raises an interesting question for our Kipper friends. How are they going to square that circle? Clearly the current policy of insisting that claimants have a good reason for turning down jobs isn’t working, in your locality at least. Why not?

    @OldKingCole

    You ask a good question, but in the same office building there is an organisation that is supposed to get the unemployed into jobs. Met the manager the other day in the communal kitchen and she explained it to me.

    This organisation has a contract from the DWP to get people trained and employed. So all people signing on at the job centre are sent to them. They have been successful with the low hangng fruit and are now left mainly with people who were wrongly classified as 'disabled' in the 2000s and have few skill sets and a very imperfect education.

    Many of these people are now unfit and some are clinically obese. They all are very angry about being removed from disability but are not in any way disabled, and do not see why they should take work that involves unusual hours and work to which they have to travel, and even more do not want to work and wish to remain on their benefits as these give them a reasonable lifestyle - good enough for them to spend off-peak holidays in the Canaries during the winter etc. Some resent even help with their CVs as they do not see the need for one and the manager has nearly been physically assaulted by some of these 'clients' when she insisted.

    Apparently, if they attend some courses, then they allowed more time to find a job and she/they are not allowed to refer to anything personal (e.g. obesity) in order to help them get a job. So they are sent back to the job centre who gets them re-assessed and the cycle begins again - prevarication at its best.
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    Anorak said:

    Socrates said:

    "If he were to become prime minister, Mr Miliband says he will chair regular meetings of a new English Regional Cabinet Committee, to be attended by relevant secretaries of state and city and county leaders."

    So no actual democratic control for the English then?

    Like his father, Ed Miliband has complete contempt for this country. He wants to transplant the culture with ongoing mass immigration, racially discriminate against the majority, prevent any form of self-rule, and sell us out to a European superstate.

    Classic denial. I bet you've got an Ed Miliband poster on your bedroom ceiling.
    What on Earth are you talking about?
  • TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262
    TGOHF said:

    antifrank said:

    Paul Waugh ‏@paulwaugh 2m2 minutes ago
    New Survation poll (for Unite) in Rochester & Strood finds local NHS (37%) more imp issue for voters than immigration (25%)

    Labour should walk it then ?
    They'll have to get there first, from wherever they're hiding in the North, Rochester being a constituency in which they've given up.
  • Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256
    edited October 2014
    Pulpstar said:


    England has no parliament.

    Indeed, but these days reason seems to play second fiddle to politics. Twas ever thus in Labour but now they all seem to be at it.
    Pulpstar said:


    Yet.

    Indeed. I live in hope.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,406

    TGOHF said:

    antifrank said:

    Paul Waugh ‏@paulwaugh 2m2 minutes ago
    New Survation poll (for Unite) in Rochester & Strood finds local NHS (37%) more imp issue for voters than immigration (25%)

    Labour should walk it then ?
    They'll have to get there first, from wherever they're hiding in the North, Rochester being a constituency in which they've given up.
    They're hiding in Bobajob's back garden.
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,207

    Not that anyone on this Forum wants Labour to do well in any election, but what do people think would count as a good result for them?

    What Labour needs is a result that forces the party to challenge all its complacent assumptions about what it stands for, how it is perceived and who should lead it. Labour basically has to start again. There is a need for a strong centre left voice in this country and there is a desire for one. But, sadly, Labour just isn't it. It has far too many MPs who are divorced from the communities they represent (Miliband, Balls, Hunt and most of the Scottish cohort being perfect examples), its policy-making is shambolic, its worldview is stuck in the 20th century, its assumptions are lazy. I could go on, but you get the picture. Essentially, Labour has let the people of this country down - not only in government, but also in its failure to articulate and set out a coherent, credible opposition to the Coalition. It deserves to lose the next election heavily. That it probably won't is down to FPTP and the toxicity of the Tory brand.
    Yep, couldn't agree more. The Tories are however, one election away from the same place. These are interesting times. I predict that whoever tries to govern in 2015 will be utterly annihilated in 2020.
    To be fair they said that about 2010
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    Has Ed Miliband ordered a party inquiry into his councillors' actions in Rotherham yet? Or can we add "not believing a national response Pakistani men raping thousands of white kids is needed" to the list of ways he hates the white English working class...
  • TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262
    JonathanD said:

    Roger said:

    Felix

    "Yeah - Ed will solve all his problems by announcing new policies to decriminalise drugs."

    You miss the point. If Labour aren't seen as progressive they're nothing. I can't remember the last time during this parliament that a Labour politician seemed to be on the side of the angels and God knows with this government they've had enough opportunities.


    Its OK, Labour are dealing with the big issues and Ed has his priorities straight


    "Miliband pledges London-style bus service across England"

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29839181
    I heard that on Today, and laughed. Miliband is a joke.
  • Sleazy broken etc

    @PopulusPolls: Latest Populus VI: Lab 34 (-2), Con 34 (=), LD 8 (=), UKIP 15 (+2), Oth 9 (+1). Tables here: http://t.co/63VoC9JqjL
  • JWisemannJWisemann Posts: 1,082
    'Low paid jobs are unskilled ones because we have people either too stupid or too lazy to get higher paying ones. It was always thus.'
    Oh dear.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    edited October 2014
    Plato said:

    Would it be okay if these jobs were down mines instead? In Durham? Or Merthyr?

    Low paid jobs are unskilled ones because we have people either too stupid or too lazy to get higher paying ones. It was always thus.

    I’m replying to a couple of eaerlier comments; sadly to reply direcdtly takes the post over the word limit.
    Mr Felix’ comment about “millions of new jobs” doesn’t take into account that that headline figure obscures the fact that too many of these jobs are low-wage or zero-hours contracts, or, worse, both. It is to be hoped that the Government will do something about ZHC’s but time is running out before the election.

    Mr Financier, that raises an interesting question for our Kipper friends. How are they going to square that circle? Clearly the current policy of insisting that claimants have a good reason for turning down jobs isn’t working, in your locality at least. Why not?

    There is a simple (ish) solution the problem of our unemployed refusing jobs to stay on the dole while Eastern Europeans fall over themselves for the work

    After a certain time on the dole (3 months?) a person is required to take any unskilled job on offer in the job centre.. for 3 days a week. In the areas concerned I would think picking crops on a farm would be such a job.

    This gets them 24 hours money a week (over £150) which wont be taxable so they keep the lot, gets them used to working, is better for them socially as they will be interacting with other people, and also gives them 4 other days a week to be looking for the job they actually want or are trained to do.

    I would still pay them half of their JSA, but if they didn't do the job they would be getting their JSA halved

    For every two such people, a job is filled (they would effectively job share), and the state pays one less person JSA

    What is wrong with that?
  • ItajaiItajai Posts: 721

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Mr. Rob, very hard for Miliband to do that now, for psychological reasons if nothing else.

    He effectively ended his brother's political career, after reportedly advising him against following Purnell and bringing down Brown. To do that and then not even contest the prize would not feel good.

    If he went, there are two possibilities, Labour lose, or they win. If they lose, he would think to himself that resigning didn't achieve anything. If they won, he'd forever wonder if cowardice and resignation stopped him becoming PM.

    David Miliband ended his own political career. Just what do people see in him still I don't know ! Not saying Ed is any good, but the vision of David Miliband as some sort of latter day messiah amongst the Blairite hacks is laughable.
    I'm not a David Miliband enthusiast either, he didn't have the guts to challenge Brown, then lost fair and square to his brother and went off to America to sulk.

    In my opinion only Yvette Cooper or Sadiq Khan could unite the party if Ed stepped down.
    Sadiq Khan is going to be Mayor of London (Hopefully...)

    I think Jim Murphy would actually be the right man for the main job, but he'll probably get the Scottish gig..

    My money is down on Andy Burnham as per Henry Manson's tipping.
    I like Burnham also, although a lot of the PB chat seems to flag up Staffordshire NHS everytime his name is mentioned, so I'm not sure how much of an albatross that would be?

    Agree on Murphy too, could kill 2 birds by becoming UK leader and easing issues in Scotland at the same time?
    It was Alan Johnson that was health minister when Stafford got Foundation status despite what was going on. A lot went on under Hewitt and Reid too. Andy Burnham set up an inquiry within a month of taking over at Health in May 2009.

    Classic shoot the messenger!
    Reminds me of the sanctimoniousness of Labour when attacking the government:
    -not deporting foreign criminals. Can't as Labour signed the HRA and ECHR
    -pressure on schools. Labour imported 3m immigrant voters
    -NHS short of funds. Caused by Labour importing 3m immigrant voters
    -pressure on housing. Caused by Labour importing 3m immigrant voters and these being fast tracked for social housing
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,406

    Pulpstar said:


    England has no parliament.

    Indeed, but these days reason seems to play second fiddle to politics. Twas ever thus in Labour but now they all seem to be at it.
    Pulpstar said:


    Yet.

    Indeed. I live in hope.
    Turning the HoL into an English parliament based on STV would be my personal preferred option.
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    Ha! Perhaps we can have whip round and buy them mirrors?

    Scratch that - they can use their mobiles to take a selfie *reaches for mind bleach*
    Financier said:

    Plato said:

    OT Every little helps... from Mail RSS

    The sign on a cash machine at the Tesco store in Aberystwyth should read 'arian am ddim' which means free money. But the sign said 'codiad am ddim' which means free erections.
    Most of them are too fat around here even to see if they have one!

  • murali_smurali_s Posts: 3,067
    Too much doom and gloom from my fellow progressives. It's not as if the Tories are popular - far from it.

    Yes, at this moment in time, things aren't looking rosy, BUT there are still SIX months before the GE. No doubt Ed is a drag on the Labour brand - if Lab had a half decent leader we would be heading comfortably towards a Labour Government.

    No-one has a clue what will happen at the GE - all conventional models, methodology and thinking are broken in a 5 party system.

    Having said that the MEF (Murali Election Forecast) will be out in the next few days...
This discussion has been closed.