People care about their own experiences, those of their families and the major stories that make the news like grooming and beheadings.
If you proclaim that housing is unaffordable, wages are falling, schools are overloaded and that the NHS is collapsing under the strain, people aren't going to buy into the idea that 250,000 extra people turning up every year is good for them.
Trying to use some report to try to preach to people just reinforces the message that the liberal left is really out of touch and actively refusing to listen.
So this morning Miliband is indeed reduced to standing over his map, shuffling around imaginary divisions. The progressive majority. The squeezed middle. The jilted generation. Surely they will come to his aid?
“Where is Balls? Where is Burnham? Where is Murphy?” he asks. And deep in the bunker, his small band of advisers look nervously at one another, and then at the floor.
Ed Miliband is being left to face his destiny. Alone.
"Labour might have collapsed in Scotland but the gainers are not the Tories but the SNP – which means this development does not in any way help CON with their overall majority ambition."
Of course it does.
Labour will be challenged to produce a manifesto that appeals in Scotland rather than relying on their vote straight-off; by definition and in fact this will make them less attractive in England.
Secondly the money, time and people Labour puts in to campaigning in Scotland will draw those resources away from England.
"Yet for all the skilful diplomacy, there is something important missing both in Mr Steinmeier’s careful canvassing of public opinion and Ms Merkel’s effort to hold Europe together. It is a question of mindset as much as anything – the gap between the leadership calculated to set a course and an approach that simply channels the prevailing mood.
Of course, consensus helps but it is not a substitute for policy choices. The danger is that Europe’s response to Ukraine is driven by the lowest common denominator rather than a hard-headed effort to deter Mr Putin. Moscow’s defiant blessing this week for sham elections in Russian-controlled eastern Ukraine points precisely to this danger.
Ms Merkel has built her political career on caution – on taking the temperature and weighing all the options before acting. The approach has served her well. But leadership in foreign policy demands something more: an understanding that doing nothing can be more dangerous than doing something, and a readiness to step out in front of the crowd. Consensus may be comforting; it does not impress the likes of Mr Putin."
It also does not help in setting clear priorities on negotiating with Britain. There is no doubt that Angela Merkel would profoundly wish that the British would just subside on the subject of the EU. She might get lucky and get Ed Miliband as Prime Minister next year, in which case that will happen for a while. But if she doesn't, she's going to have to engage properly with the subject, like it or not. If she doesn't, she might very well see Britain leave the EU in entirely avoidable circumstances.
I think the point it made was that immigration from the EU has been generally very good for the country, and immigration from outside the EU had not been. Given the extreme variability of non-EU immigration (American hedge fund managers plus illiterate third world'ers), it would suggest the correct thing to do would be clamp down on third world immigration, but leave the doors open to our European breatheren.
Which can be done by moving to a contributory benefits system, no/ Open-borders and no-benefits/passports.
Shame that their kids need a chance to eat and be educated though. [And let us not forget the 5cum-lawyers who feed parasitically upon them.]
Open-borders and free-movement-of labour would work but it requires the rule-of-law-and property be respected and the use of charities (19thC not T'urd Way!) to replace the Marxist nomeclatura. Where people help themselves and do not rely on a state-machine that will benefit itself more then anyone else.
Not that extraordinary - the public agree he is doing ok at raising the profile of his fruitcake fringe party but obviously they don't want him anywhere near no 10.
Every time I read this sort of smug self-satisfied comment from Conservatives here and in the press, I feel more tempted to vote for UKIP, the attempts to brush under the carpet the views of 15% of the population, while being in coalition with a party with around half that support feels anti-democratic in the extreme. One of the down sides of democracy is sometimes the people elect candidates you dont like, it used to be only the left that did not understand this basic principle, but it seems to be infecting the right as well these days.
"Labour might have collapsed in Scotland but the gainers are not the Tories but the SNP – which means this development does not in any way help CON with their overall majority ambition."
Of course it does.
Labour will be challenged to produce a manifesto that appeals in Scotland rather than relying on their vote straight-off; by definition and in fact this will make them less attractive in England.
Secondly the money, time and people Labour puts in to campaigning in Scotland will draw those resources away from England.
Labour don't need to make an effort to steal Tory seats in England. Their helpers UKIP will do that for them, and let dozens of Tory seats turn red without any effort required at all.
The most extraordinary pair of results in that poll for me concern Nigel Farage:
Do you think that Nigel Farage is doing well or badly as leader of the UK Independence Party?
TOTAL WELL 55 TOTAL BADLY 25
And regardless of what you think the most likely result is, do you think the following would or would not be up to job of Prime Minister?
Nigel Farage Would be up to the job of Prime Minister 15 Would not be up to the job of Prime Minister 61 Not sure 24
Make of that pair of answers what you will.
Not that extraordinary - the public agree he is doing ok at raising the profile of his fruitcake fringe party but obviously they don't want him anywhere near no 10.
... and embrace the progressive mood in the country....
What is he smoking. The progressive consensus always was fantasyland, and when people are tightening their belts and worrying about the economic realities, they tend to become even more (small c) conservative than usual. I think most people are less concerned that things get better than they are that things dont get any worse, and those are tough times to sell a radical policy program. The reason Farage is winning hearts and minds is because he is proposing a program of (small c) conservatism, which appeals to fearful WWC and elderly voters, and disaffected Conservatives that feel their party is too liberal and to detached from their everyday life. Its the whole "understands people like us" issue.
Most of it is a good article, particularly in understanding the human response and political consequences. Where it falls down is the economic understanding: no party can credibly offer an answer to those demanding 'stop the world, I want to get off'. Those that do are fools and/or frauds. It would do Labour little good to join them.
Where he's right is that the post-crisis reaction has hit parties of the centre-left far harder than those of the centre-right (curiously, he doesn't mention the obvious British example, the Lib Dems). I'm quite sure he's right that a Labour Party, signed up to and delivering continued austerity policies in government (as it would have to, sooner or later), would suffer massively. I've said before, I could well imagine Labour hitting 15% in the polls within eighteen months if they form a majority government. They could delay it if they ignored financial gravity and went on a spending spree but if so, the crash would be all the faster and harder when it came.
It's true that the centre-right has been losing support but often the big losses to the hard right have been wholly or partially offset by gains in the centre (see the Tories, CDU, ND and so on). Moderate centre-right voters demand stability above all other things and for all the pain, are content when a government appears to be taking the necessary steps to deliver it.
Regardless of how you intend to vote, what do you think is the most LIKELY result of the general election next year?
Con Maj 14% Hung Parliament, with the Tories as the biggest Party 30% Hung Parliament, with Lab as the biggest Party 22% Lab Maj 9% Something else 7% DK 16%
'Something else' is almost infinitesimal. I presume that's uber-optimistic kippers. But, if you compensate for that, and remove the don't knows, that looks a remarkably sensible prediction. Although Con maj is too low.
The taking down of that poppy memorial is a classic example of how useless we are on tourism in this country. It's bringing in absolutely huge numbers of crowds, is a great source of pride for Britons, and will make the country a lot of money. Why on Earth aren't we making it a permanent fixture?
... and embrace the progressive mood in the country....
What is he smoking. The progressive consensus always was fantasyland, and when people are tightening their belts and worrying about the economic realities, they tend to become even more (small c) conservative than usual. I think most people are less concerned that things get better than they are that things dont get any worse, and those are tough times to sell a radical policy program. The reason Farage is winning hearts and minds is because he is proposing a program of (small c) conservatism, which appeals to fearful WWC and elderly voters, and disaffected Conservatives that feel their party is too liberal and to detached from their everyday life. Its the whole "understands people like us" issue.
Most of it is a good article, particularly in understanding the human response and political consequences. Where it falls down is the economic understanding: no party can credibly offer an answer to those demanding 'stop the world, I want to get off'. Those that do are fools and/or frauds. It would do Labour little good to join them.
Where he's right is that the post-crisis reaction has hit parties of the centre-left far harder than those of the centre-right (curiously, he doesn't mention the obvious British example, the Lib Dems). I'm quite sure he's right that a Labour Party, signed up to and delivering continued austerity policies in government (as it would have to, sooner or later), would suffer massively. I've said before, I could well imagine Labour hitting 15% in the polls within eighteen months if they form a majority government. They could delay it if they ignored financial gravity and went on a spending spree but if so, the crash would be all the faster and harder when it came.
It's true that the centre-right has been losing support but often the big losses to the hard right have been wholly or partially offset by gains in the centre (see the Tories, CDU, ND and so on). Moderate centre-right voters demand stability above all other things and for all the pain, are content when a government appears to be taking the necessary steps to deliver it.
Which is why it is barking mad for the Conservatives to go chasing votes on the irreconcilable right when they could be hovering up the sensible centrist vote, still more so because Labour seems to have decided that would just be too much hard work.
Regardless of how you intend to vote, what do you think is the most LIKELY result of the general election next year?
Con Maj 14% Hung Parliament, with the Tories as the biggest Party 30% Hung Parliament, with Lab as the biggest Party 22% Lab Maj 9% Something else 7% DK 16%
The most extraordinary pair of results in that poll for me concern Nigel Farage:
Do you think that Nigel Farage is doing well or badly as leader of the UK Independence Party?
TOTAL WELL 55 TOTAL BADLY 25
And regardless of what you think the most likely result is, do you think the following would or would not be up to job of Prime Minister?
Nigel Farage Would be up to the job of Prime Minister 15 Would not be up to the job of Prime Minister 61 Not sure 24
Make of that pair of answers what you will.
My guess would be that they don't yet judge that the job of the leader of UKIP is to be a potential PM but to pressure the governing or potentially governing parties by highlighting and campaigning on the issues he and his supporters think important.
I know this is a betting site but looking to GE 2015 it is the trend that is more important than daily polls and equally the daily negative narrative about Ed Miliband collectively will almost certainly deny him No 10. Having lived in Scotland and being married to a Scot for 50 years there is virtually no chance of labour not losing many seats to the SNP in 2015 and probably in the 2016 Holyrood election
The taking down of that poppy memorial is a classic example of how useless we are on tourism in this country. It's bringing in absolutely huge numbers of crowds, is a great source of pride for Britons, and will make the country a lot of money. Why on Earth aren't we making it a permanent fixture?
Which is why it is barking mad for the Conservatives to go chasing votes on the irreconcilable right when they could be hovering up the sensible centrist vote, still more so because Labour seems to have decided that would just be too much hard work.
Except the centrist vote, as it exists in reality rather than the imaginations of metropolitans, wants to cut immigration by a lot and reclaim powers from the European Union.
I need to free up some liability on the Betfair Rochester UKIP % market - I've put up some ladbrokes-beating prices on the lower & upper % bands if anyone's interested;
Not that extraordinary - the public agree he is doing ok at raising the profile of his fruitcake fringe party but obviously they don't want him anywhere near no 10.
Every time I read this sort of smug self-satisfied comment from Conservatives here and in the press, I feel more tempted to vote for UKIP, the attempts to brush under the carpet the views of 15% of the population, while being in coalition with a party with around half that support feels anti-democratic in the extreme. One of the down sides of democracy is sometimes the people elect candidates you dont like, it used to be only the left that did not understand this basic principle, but it seems to be infecting the right as well these days.
Well quite. It doesn't really feel safe round here any more in the constant bombardment of toys being thrown out of tory prams. What is particularly silly is that there really, really are tory/ukip undecideds out here. How much do these posters think they are advancing their cause?
Is this Laurence person really a UKIP candidate? If so, time he was chopped -his comment was nasty and not constructive. I don't mind someone breaking the rules of PC, but only in the cause of truth, not to be mean-spirited.
Of course he isn't a candidate... just a random on twitter
Looks to me like a troll trying to make UKIP look bad then.
If he thinks the DUP aren't right wing enough, then I guess you're wrong. More likely he shares UKIP's perceived views.
19% of people now think that Ed is up to the job of being PM. 54% of current Labour voters. If that is not a soft vote liable to crumbing in the election campaign I really don't know what is.
Either his numbers get a lot better or Labour will lose. Its too late to get someone else now.
I suspect now that Lucy Powell is in charge of Ed’s election campaign, things will change drastically for him – didn’t she tweet her plans to get Ed out and meet the people cause he’s an asset to the party?
Has any PB'er actually met and talked with EdM? It is possible that in person he is nicer and more impressive than he appears on television. If so Ms Powell's plan might not be a bad idea.
I think it dangerous to assume that just because he appears awkward in photos or looks a bit Wallace-like that will be enough to turn people away from him.
The taking down of that poppy memorial is a classic example of how useless we are on tourism in this country. It's bringing in absolutely huge numbers of crowds, is a great source of pride for Britons, and will make the country a lot of money. Why on Earth aren't we making it a permanent fixture?
I think they've all been sold and there's a contractual obligation to deliver them to the buyers by a certain date. But I also think some on the Left are worried that if it were left there too long it might increase patriotic feeling.
Which is why it is barking mad for the Conservatives to go chasing votes on the irreconcilable right when they could be hovering up the sensible centrist vote, still more so because Labour seems to have decided that would just be too much hard work.
Except the centrist vote, as it exists in reality rather than the imaginations of metropolitans, wants to cut immigration by a lot and reclaim powers from the European Union.
You have this strange idea that you're some kind of centrist. Most people in the centre are not permanently angry about absolutely everything and don't hate what the country has become.
There remains a strong centrist vote comprised of those that like Britain as it is today and who are looking for an optimistic outward-looking vision rather than a bitter and incoherent xenophobic reaction. As long as the Conservatives keep being dragged rightwards by sour backwoodsmen, they will be leaving that centrist vote orphaned.
The taking down of that poppy memorial is a classic example of how useless we are on tourism in this country. It's bringing in absolutely huge numbers of crowds, is a great source of pride for Britons, and will make the country a lot of money. Why on Earth aren't we making it a permanent fixture?
Seems like the existing poppies have all been sold at £25 each, but it wouldn't be impossible to replace them. Would seem obvious to have them there at least until the centenary of Armistice Day in four years time, if not permanently.
The taking down of that poppy memorial is a classic example of how useless we are on tourism in this country. It's bringing in absolutely huge numbers of crowds, is a great source of pride for Britons, and will make the country a lot of money. Why on Earth aren't we making it a permanent fixture?
That's a really good idea.
Nations around the world are desperate to have tourist attractions. We have managed to create one out of nowhere here. The thing could be a highlight of tourist trips to London for decades to come.
Yet do you think anyone in power will make it happen? Of course not.
What the hell is Helen Turner, Under Secretary for Sport and Tourism doing? She should be jumping on this.
I need to free up some liability on the Betfair Rochester UKIP % market - I've put up some ladbrokes-beating prices on the lower & upper % bands if anyone's interested;
I've been to the poppy memorial a few times in the last few weeks, most recently today. The crowds at weekends are gargantuan - it has really captured the public's imagination.
Should it be a permanent installation? It wasn't the basis on which it was put up (but the Eiffel Tower and the Eye were both supposed to be temporary also). We would need a wider public debate than has taken place so far.
The taking down of that poppy memorial is a classic example of how useless we are on tourism in this country. It's bringing in absolutely huge numbers of crowds, is a great source of pride for Britons, and will make the country a lot of money. Why on Earth aren't we making it a permanent fixture?
That's a really good idea.
The thing could be a highlight of tourist trips to London for decades to come.
Seriously?
The memorial was only designed to exist short term. The grass the poppies are 'planted' in will grow in parts, and be affected by sun deprivation in others.
The poppies themselves will degrade - they're not made for long term environmental exposure, and will likely crack and fade, red pigmentation being the most rapidly destroyed by sunlight.
Has any PB'er actually met and talked with EdM? It is possible that in person he is nicer and more impressive than he appears on television. If so Ms Powell's plan might not be a bad idea.
How many million voters does he need to personally speak to before May for that plan to work?
19% of people now think that Ed is up to the job of being PM. 54% of current Labour voters. If that is not a soft vote liable to crumbing in the election campaign I really don't know what is.
Either his numbers get a lot better or Labour will lose. Its too late to get someone else now.
I suspect now that Lucy Powell is in charge of Ed’s election campaign, things will change drastically for him – didn’t she tweet her plans to get Ed out and meet the people cause he’s an asset to the party?
Has any PB'er actually met and talked with EdM? It is possible that in person he is nicer and more impressive than he appears on television. If so Ms Powell's plan might not be a bad idea.
I think it dangerous to assume that just because he appears awkward in photos or looks a bit Wallace-like that will be enough to turn people away from him.
You might be right. Sadly, the strength of the current narrative is such that he could have 1,000 normal conversations and a single awkward one, and only the latter would be reported on widely.
The most extraordinary pair of results in that poll for me concern Nigel Farage:
Do you think that Nigel Farage is doing well or badly as leader of the UK Independence Party?
TOTAL WELL 55 TOTAL BADLY 25
And regardless of what you think the most likely result is, do you think the following would or would not be up to job of Prime Minister?
Nigel Farage Would be up to the job of Prime Minister 15 Would not be up to the job of Prime Minister 61 Not sure 24
Make of that pair of answers what you will.
Not that extraordinary - the public agree he is doing ok at raising the profile of his fruitcake fringe party but obviously they don't want him anywhere near no 10.
Yes.
My understanding is that Farage has always said the same thing. I can't vouch for the site 'The Daily Bell?' but I googled and found this quote:
Daily Bell: Would you like to be prime minister?
Nigel Farage: I am a political campaigner, not someone seeking high office.
Farage joined UKIP because he saw something was wrong and he wanted to change it. I don't think he wants to be PM.
The taking down of that poppy memorial is a classic example of how useless we are on tourism in this country. It's bringing in absolutely huge numbers of crowds, is a great source of pride for Britons, and will make the country a lot of money. Why on Earth aren't we making it a permanent fixture?
I think they've all been sold and there's a contractual obligation to deliver them to the buyers by a certain date. But I also think some on the Left are worried that if it were left there too long it might increase patriotic feeling.
I don't think there's any basis for that last statement. Patriotism is not the prerogative of any political party or viewpoint. Apparently the artist wanted it to be removed after a certain period to emphasis the transience of life. The decision to remove it after Remembrance Day was made on the basis that that was the culmination of the remembrance ceremonies, which makes sense.
I think the authorities have hugely underestimated how popular it has turned out to be and I can see a case for extending it to the end of the year, say, if only to allow those who have not yet seen it to do so.
The taking down of that poppy memorial is a classic example of how useless we are on tourism in this country. It's bringing in absolutely huge numbers of crowds, is a great source of pride for Britons, and will make the country a lot of money. Why on Earth aren't we making it a permanent fixture?
That's a really good idea.
Nations around the world are desperate to have tourist attractions. We have managed to create one out of nowhere here. The thing could be a highlight of tourist trips to London for decades to come.
Yet do you think anyone in power will make it happen? Of course not.
What the hell is Helen Turner, Under Secretary for Sport and Tourism doing? She should be jumping on this.
I've been to the poppy memorial a few times in the last few weeks, most recently today. The crowds at weekends are gargantuan - it has really captured the public's imagination.
Should it be a permanent installation?
If nothing else, what happens in the Spring when the grass starts growing? Does that change it in an organic and pleasing way, or does it spoil the effect? Do you have to spend millions on a cunning plan to keep the grass short?
The taking down of that poppy memorial is a classic example of how useless we are on tourism in this country. It's bringing in absolutely huge numbers of crowds, is a great source of pride for Britons, and will make the country a lot of money. Why on Earth aren't we making it a permanent fixture?
That's a really good idea.
Nations around the world are desperate to have tourist attractions. We have managed to create one out of nowhere here. The thing could be a highlight of tourist trips to London for decades to come.
Yet do you think anyone in power will make it happen? Of course not.
What the hell is Helen Turner, Under Secretary for Sport and Tourism doing? She should be jumping on this.
There is one of those Government petition things you can sign (I have done so). It only asks to keep the poppies for another year, but it would at least open the debate a bit wider.
Your point about the initial temporary nature of iconic attractions such as the Eiffel Tower and the London Eye is well made.
I think the authorities have hugely underestimated how popular it has turned out to be and I can see a case for extending it to the end of the year, say, if only to allow those who have not yet seen it to do so.
How many people will visit it under 2 feet of snow?
The taking down of that poppy memorial is a classic example of how useless we are on tourism in this country. It's bringing in absolutely huge numbers of crowds, is a great source of pride for Britons, and will make the country a lot of money. Why on Earth aren't we making it a permanent fixture?
That's a really good idea.
Nations around the world are desperate to have tourist attractions. We have managed to create one out of nowhere here. The thing could be a highlight of tourist trips to London for decades to come.
Yet do you think anyone in power will make it happen? Of course not.
What the hell is Helen Turner, Under Secretary for Sport and Tourism doing? She should be jumping on this.
Part of it's appeal, and the reason for the large crowds, is its transience. "Only opportunity to see it" will naturally swell numbers - but that doesn't mean it would generate that level of interest indefinitely.
Personally, I'd like to see it kept there until after Christmas, and dismantled in the New Year as per the original plan.
[Edit: I see Cyclefree has said much the same thing]
19% of people now think that Ed is up to the job of being PM. 54% of current Labour voters. If that is not a soft vote liable to crumbing in the election campaign I really don't know what is.
Either his numbers get a lot better or Labour will lose. Its too late to get someone else now.
I suspect now that Lucy Powell is in charge of Ed’s election campaign, things will change drastically for him – didn’t she tweet her plans to get Ed out and meet the people cause he’s an asset to the party?
Has any PB'er actually met and talked with EdM? It is possible that in person he is nicer and more impressive than he appears on television. If so Ms Powell's plan might not be a bad idea.
I think it dangerous to assume that just because he appears awkward in photos or looks a bit Wallace-like that will be enough to turn people away from him.
But how many people can he actually meet in person, even if he is impressive there? (In my experience, most politicians are at least quite impressive when speaking with individuals or small groups). It's simply not a viable strategy except if it can be used to promote him more positively via the media - but in terms of mass-connection, the media, and especially TV, is the only game in town.
Has any PB'er actually met and talked with EdM? It is possible that in person he is nicer and more impressive than he appears on television. If so Ms Powell's plan might not be a bad idea.
How many million voters does he need to personally speak to before May for that plan to work?
I've been to the poppy memorial a few times in the last few weeks, most recently today. The crowds at weekends are gargantuan - it has really captured the public's imagination.
Should it be a permanent installation? It wasn't the basis on which it was put up (but the Eiffel Tower and the Eye were both supposed to be temporary also). We would need a wider public debate than has taken place so far.
Do you know if it will still be open on the 21st of this month?
The taking down of that poppy memorial is a classic example of how useless we are on tourism in this country. It's bringing in absolutely huge numbers of crowds, is a great source of pride for Britons, and will make the country a lot of money. Why on Earth aren't we making it a permanent fixture?
Talk about picking out niff naff and trivia. The facts don't support the hysterical anti-immigration case regardless of consituent elements.
@BenM are second generation immigrants, ie those born in the UK whose parents were born abroad, considered to be natives? Or are they immigrants? Or are they a bit of both?
And is this question niff naff and trivia, and am I a hysterical anti-immigrant for asking?
19% of people now think that Ed is up to the job of being PM. 54% of current Labour voters. If that is not a soft vote liable to crumbing in the election campaign I really don't know what is.
Either his numbers get a lot better or Labour will lose. Its too late to get someone else now.
I suspect now that Lucy Powell is in charge of Ed’s election campaign, things will change drastically for him – didn’t she tweet her plans to get Ed out and meet the people cause he’s an asset to the party?
Has any PB'er actually met and talked with EdM? It is possible that in person he is nicer and more impressive than he appears on television. If so Ms Powell's plan might not be a bad idea.
I think it dangerous to assume that just because he appears awkward in photos or looks a bit Wallace-like that will be enough to turn people away from him.
There's no "will be" about it. It has happened.
If he is that much cuddlier than he looks in photo ops he needs a nice heart to heart with a friendly interviewer on prime time tv (cf Brown/Morgan).
So Labour's 2004 decision to not impose restrictions on citizens from the A8 countries was enormously beneficial to the country economically with few social issues. End of story in that regard.
On the politics however it was also benefical to the non thinking Right, which has used immigration to spread unwarranted fear and bash Labour ever since. Labour did not help themselves in that regard, basically dancing to the same tune under a spineless Tony Blair.
The facts are on Labour's side.
The screaming fact free hysteria benefits the Tories and UKIP though.
You are referring to the immigration report right?
If so you do realise that it was written by the same bloke that proclaimed in 2004 that immigration from Eastern European countries would be very low, maybe 13,000 a year?
Not very bright is he?
You understand the qualitative difference between a 'prediction' and an analysis of historical data right?
Not understanding this fundamental difference rather calls your own intelligence into question does it not?
And not forgetting that 13k forecast was based on assumption ALL countries would open their borders. In the event only the UK, Ireland and Sweden did.
I've been to the poppy memorial a few times in the last few weeks, most recently today. The crowds at weekends are gargantuan - it has really captured the public's imagination.
Should it be a permanent installation? It wasn't the basis on which it was put up (but the Eiffel Tower and the Eye were both supposed to be temporary also). We would need a wider public debate than has taken place so far.
Do you know if it will still be open on the 21st of this month?
It was due to finish on 11 November. I don't know in practice how quickly it will be dismantled. It will not be the work of a few hours.
I think the authorities have hugely underestimated how popular it has turned out to be and I can see a case for extending it to the end of the year, say, if only to allow those who have not yet seen it to do so.
How many people will visit it under 2 feet of snow?
Given how warm and mild it still is and how mild last winter was, I think the chances of 2 feet of snow in London within the next 6 weeks are probably remote.
(Obviously am not a meteorologist but all my summer flowers - geraniums, cannas, dahlias and roses - are still flowering.)
19% of people now think that Ed is up to the job of being PM. 54% of current Labour voters. If that is not a soft vote liable to crumbing in the election campaign I really don't know what is.
Either his numbers get a lot better or Labour will lose. Its too late to get someone else now.
I suspect now that Lucy Powell is in charge of Ed’s election campaign, things will change drastically for him – didn’t she tweet her plans to get Ed out and meet the people cause he’s an asset to the party?
Has any PB'er actually met and talked with EdM? It is possible that in person he is nicer and more impressive than he appears on television. If so Ms Powell's plan might not be a bad idea.
I think it dangerous to assume that just because he appears awkward in photos or looks a bit Wallace-like that will be enough to turn people away from him.
But how many people can he actually meet in person, even if he is impressive there? (In my experience, most politicians are at least quite impressive when speaking with individuals or small groups). It's simply not a viable strategy except if it can be used to promote him more positively via the media - but in terms of mass-connection, the media, and especially TV, is the only game in town.
Anecdotally I've heard Boris is terrible in a small group.
The taking down of that poppy memorial is a classic example of how useless we are on tourism in this country. It's bringing in absolutely huge numbers of crowds, is a great source of pride for Britons, and will make the country a lot of money. Why on Earth aren't we making it a permanent fixture?
I don't think I agree. I see it as more like the Queen Mother's lying in state -a chance for the nation to come together and share a remarkable and solemn experience. To make it permanent would be to remove that significance.
I agree we're useless at tourism though. I'm always astonished when I'm out in London and Trafalgar Square is just in pitch darkness, not floodlit and alive with activity. We run a tourism deficit in this country -a great shame for such a beautiful country with so much heritage.
I've been to the poppy memorial a few times in the last few weeks, most recently today. The crowds at weekends are gargantuan - it has really captured the public's imagination.
Should it be a permanent installation? It wasn't the basis on which it was put up (but the Eiffel Tower and the Eye were both supposed to be temporary also). We would need a wider public debate than has taken place so far.
Do you know if it will still be open on the 21st of this month?
It was due to finish on 11 November. I don't know in practice how quickly it will be dismantled. It will not be the work of a few hours.
Thanks, I have a few hours spare before the Dirty Dicks shindig.
But how many people can he actually meet in person, even if he is impressive there? (In my experience, most politicians are at least quite impressive when speaking with individuals or small groups).
I believe the trick is to avoid calling them a bigot when you get back into the car
Talk about picking out niff naff and trivia. The facts don't support the hysterical anti-immigration case regardless of consituent elements.
@BenM are second generation immigrants, ie those born in the UK whose parents were born abroad, considered to be natives? Or are they immigrants? Or are they a bit of both?
And is this question niff naff and trivia, and am I a hysterical anti-immigrant for asking?
If you're born in this country how can you be an immigrant? I was born here. My parents weren't. I'm a native. What's with this 2nd generation immigrant rubbish?
You have this strange idea that you're some kind of centrist. Most people in the centre are not permanently angry about absolutely everything and don't hate what the country has become.
There remains a strong centrist vote comprised of those that like Britain as it is today and who are looking for an optimistic outward-looking vision rather than a bitter and incoherent xenophobic reaction. As long as the Conservatives keep being dragged rightwards by sour backwoodsmen, they will be leaving that centrist vote orphaned.
Lots of luv, bloke from Jobbik-land. [A nation that even the EU despises.]
I've been to the poppy memorial a few times in the last few weeks, most recently today. The crowds at weekends are gargantuan - it has really captured the public's imagination.
Should it be a permanent installation? It wasn't the basis on which it was put up (but the Eiffel Tower and the Eye were both supposed to be temporary also). We would need a wider public debate than has taken place so far.
Do you know if it will still be open on the 21st of this month?
It was due to finish on 11 November. I don't know in practice how quickly it will be dismantled. It will not be the work of a few hours.
Thanks, I have a few hours spare before the Dirty Dicks shindig.
What shall I do?
It's about a 20 minute walk from the Tower to Dirty Dicks. It's an interesting walk if you go past the Heron Tower, the Gherkin and you get the opportunity to walk down Mincing Lane, which I expect would appeal to you. The Tower is always worth a look anyway. I'd go and have a look.
The taking down of that poppy memorial is a classic example of how useless we are on tourism in this country. It's bringing in absolutely huge numbers of crowds, is a great source of pride for Britons, and will make the country a lot of money. Why on Earth aren't we making it a permanent fixture?
That's a really good idea.
Nations around the world are desperate to have tourist attractions. We have managed to create one out of nowhere here. The thing could be a highlight of tourist trips to London for decades to come.
Yet do you think anyone in power will make it happen? Of course not.
What the hell is Helen Turner, Under Secretary for Sport and Tourism doing? She should be jumping on this.
There is no doubt that the ToL poppy memorial has been a great success (a fitting tribute to the Remembrance Day centenary imho) but disagree that it should be kept in situ as a ‘tourist attraction’ – part of its success is precisely because of its short duration on display and successfully ‘capturing the moment’ which was its sole purpose. Leaving aside the fact that the poppies have all been sold, as far as I’m aware’ - I’d rather have a fitting memory of something done well, than a faded ‘attraction’ for people to gawk at.
The taking down of that poppy memorial is a classic example of how useless we are on tourism in this country. It's bringing in absolutely huge numbers of crowds, is a great source of pride for Britons, and will make the country a lot of money. Why on Earth aren't we making it a permanent fixture?
That's a really good idea.
Nations around the world are desperate to have tourist attractions. We have managed to create one out of nowhere here. The thing could be a highlight of tourist trips to London for decades to come.
Yet do you think anyone in power will make it happen? Of course not.
What the hell is Helen Turner, Under Secretary for Sport and Tourism doing? She should be jumping on this.
Who the hell is Helen Turner?
I meant Helen Grant, but was responding to an email of someone called Turner at the same time. Silly me.
Talk about picking out niff naff and trivia. The facts don't support the hysterical anti-immigration case regardless of consituent elements.
@BenM are second generation immigrants, ie those born in the UK whose parents were born abroad, considered to be natives? Or are they immigrants? Or are they a bit of both?
And is this question niff naff and trivia, and am I a hysterical anti-immigrant for asking?
If you're born in this country how can you be an immigrant? I was born here. My parents weren't. I'm a native. What's with this 2nd generation immigrant rubbish?
I think the kipper "code word" usually deployed at this point would be 'indigenous'.
19% of people now think that Ed is up to the job of being PM. 54% of current Labour voters. If that is not a soft vote liable to crumbing in the election campaign I really don't know what is.
Either his numbers get a lot better or Labour will lose. Its too late to get someone else now.
I suspect now that Lucy Powell is in charge of Ed’s election campaign, things will change drastically for him – didn’t she tweet her plans to get Ed out and meet the people cause he’s an asset to the party?
Has any PB'er actually met and talked with EdM? It is possible that in person he is nicer and more impressive than he appears on television. If so Ms Powell's plan might not be a bad idea.
I think it dangerous to assume that just because he appears awkward in photos or looks a bit Wallace-like that will be enough to turn people away from him.
But how many people can he actually meet in person, even if he is impressive there? (In my experience, most politicians are at least quite impressive when speaking with individuals or small groups). It's simply not a viable strategy except if it can be used to promote him more positively via the media - but in terms of mass-connection, the media, and especially TV, is the only game in town.
Anecdotally I've heard Boris is terrible in a small group.
Not on the times I have met him. No doubt he has good and bad days.
I've been to the poppy memorial a few times in the last few weeks, most recently today. The crowds at weekends are gargantuan - it has really captured the public's imagination.
Should it be a permanent installation?
If nothing else, what happens in the Spring when the grass starts growing? Does that change it in an organic and pleasing way, or does it spoil the effect? Do you have to spend millions on a cunning plan to keep the grass short?
With all respect, this seems to be the typical negative British reaction of immediately shooting down any proposal with all the reasons why it can't be done. I see it in business all the time.
19% of people now think that Ed is up to the job of being PM. 54% of current Labour voters. If that is not a soft vote liable to crumbing in the election campaign I really don't know what is.
Either his numbers get a lot better or Labour will lose. Its too late to get someone else now.
I suspect now that Lucy Powell is in charge of Ed’s election campaign, things will change drastically for him – didn’t she tweet her plans to get Ed out and meet the people cause he’s an asset to the party?
Has any PB'er actually met and talked with EdM? It is possible that in person he is nicer and more impressive than he appears on television. If so Ms Powell's plan might not be a bad idea.
I think it dangerous to assume that just because he appears awkward in photos or looks a bit Wallace-like that will be enough to turn people away from him.
In the interviews I have seen with him he seems a likeable bloke
The taking down of that poppy memorial is a classic example of how useless we are on tourism in this country. It's bringing in absolutely huge numbers of crowds, is a great source of pride for Britons, and will make the country a lot of money. Why on Earth aren't we making it a permanent fixture?
I don't think I agree. I see it as more like the Queen Mother's lying in state -a chance for the nation to come together and share a remarkable and solemn experience. To make it permanent would be to remove that significance.
I agree we're useless at tourism though. I'm always astonished when I'm out in London and Trafalgar Square is just in pitch darkness, not floodlit and alive with activity. We run a tourism deficit in this country -a great shame for such a beautiful country with so much heritage.
Talk about picking out niff naff and trivia. The facts don't support the hysterical anti-immigration case regardless of consituent elements.
@BenM are second generation immigrants, ie those born in the UK whose parents were born abroad, considered to be natives? Or are they immigrants? Or are they a bit of both?
And is this question niff naff and trivia, and am I a hysterical anti-immigrant for asking?
If you're born in this country how can you be an immigrant? I was born here. My parents weren't. I'm a native. What's with this 2nd generation immigrant rubbish?
I think the kipper "code word" usually deployed at this point would be 'indigenous'.
I'm definitely sticking with 'native', and I'm really keen to know what @BenM thinks.
19% of people now think that Ed is up to the job of being PM. 54% of current Labour voters. If that is not a soft vote liable to crumbing in the election campaign I really don't know what is.
Either his numbers get a lot better or Labour will lose. Its too late to get someone else now.
I suspect now that Lucy Powell is in charge of Ed’s election campaign, things will change drastically for him – didn’t she tweet her plans to get Ed out and meet the people cause he’s an asset to the party?
Has any PB'er actually met and talked with EdM? It is possible that in person he is nicer and more impressive than he appears on television. If so Ms Powell's plan might not be a bad idea.
I think it dangerous to assume that just because he appears awkward in photos or looks a bit Wallace-like that will be enough to turn people away from him.
But how many people can he actually meet in person, even if he is impressive there? (In my experience, most politicians are at least quite impressive when speaking with individuals or small groups). It's simply not a viable strategy except if it can be used to promote him more positively via the media - but in terms of mass-connection, the media, and especially TV, is the only game in town.
As any really good marketer knows, you don't try and change a perception -it's the most useless thing you can do. You work with an existing perception to get the required result. Therefore you don't try to make Ed look less geeky and awkward (even if he actually isn't that geeky or awkward) -this is what Amanda Platell tried to do with Hague, and it didn't work. You take that awkwardness and geekiness and say -what's the advantage? How can we positively contrast Ed's geekiness with Cameron's slippery salesmanlike quality? Well, geeks are clever. how many people want a Prime Minister they would be happy to down pints with, or how many would prefer their PM to be burning the midnight oil at a desk in a window somewhere tirelessly solving the nation's problems? Ed needs to be marketed as a clever dick with clever dick policies. Also he could do with sacking someone because they're not up to it -like Clement Atlee did. Though granted he may not have the support to sack someone these days. Then when people attack Ed's weirdness, you can riposte with -perhaps if Cameron spent a bit more time on policy and a little less 'chillaxing', the country wouldn't be in such a mess. However, Labour are too stupid to do this. Instead they will patronise their voters with a lot of guff about the NHS needing yet more money.
Talk about picking out niff naff and trivia. The facts don't support the hysterical anti-immigration case regardless of consituent elements.
@BenM are second generation immigrants, ie those born in the UK whose parents were born abroad, considered to be natives? Or are they immigrants? Or are they a bit of both?
And is this question niff naff and trivia, and am I a hysterical anti-immigrant for asking?
If you're born in this country how can you be an immigrant? I was born here. My parents weren't. I'm a native. What's with this 2nd generation immigrant rubbish?
I think the kipper "code word" usually deployed at this point would be 'indigenous'.
Scottish nationalists are for some reason much keener on promoting the Gaelic language than Urdu, despite the fact that it is only the eighth most spoken language in Scotland:
The taking down of that poppy memorial is a classic example of how useless we are on tourism in this country. It's bringing in absolutely huge numbers of crowds, is a great source of pride for Britons, and will make the country a lot of money. Why on Earth aren't we making it a permanent fixture?
That's a really good idea.
Nations around the world are desperate to have tourist attractions. We have managed to create one out of nowhere here. The thing could be a highlight of tourist trips to London for decades to come.
Yet do you think anyone in power will make it happen? Of course not.
What the hell is Helen Turner, Under Secretary for Sport and Tourism doing? She should be jumping on this.
There is no doubt that the ToL poppy memorial has been a great success (a fitting tribute to the Remembrance Day centenary imho) but disagree that it should be kept in situ as a ‘tourist attraction’ – part of its success is precisely because of its short duration on display and successfully ‘capturing the moment’ which was its sole purpose. Leaving aside the fact that the poppies have all been sold, as far as I’m aware’ - I’d rather have a fitting memory of something done well, than a faded ‘attraction’ for people to gawk at.
Do you feel the cemetaries at Normandy are something for people to gawk at? Or the Holocaust museums in Germany? Things can be solemn and noble - and, yes, permanent - while also attracting people from around the world.
The taking down of that poppy memorial is a classic example of how useless we are on tourism in this country. It's bringing in absolutely huge numbers of crowds, is a great source of pride for Britons, and will make the country a lot of money. Why on Earth aren't we making it a permanent fixture?
I don't think I agree. I see it as more like the Queen Mother's lying in state -a chance for the nation to come together and share a remarkable and solemn experience. To make it permanent would be to remove that significance.
I agree we're useless at tourism though. I'm always astonished when I'm out in London and Trafalgar Square is just in pitch darkness, not floodlit and alive with activity. We run a tourism deficit in this country -a great shame for such a beautiful country with so much heritage.
Talk about picking out niff naff and trivia. The facts don't support the hysterical anti-immigration case regardless of consituent elements.
@BenM are second generation immigrants, ie those born in the UK whose parents were born abroad, considered to be natives? Or are they immigrants? Or are they a bit of both?
And is this question niff naff and trivia, and am I a hysterical anti-immigrant for asking?
If you're born in this country how can you be an immigrant? I was born here. My parents weren't. I'm a native. What's with this 2nd generation immigrant rubbish?
I think the kipper "code word" usually deployed at this point would be 'indigenous'.
I'm definitely sticking with 'native', and I'm really keen to know what @BenM thinks.
The other thing that could be done, if people are insistent on the transience of it, would be to repeat the memorial every year in the run up to Remembrance Sunday at a different British landmark each time. One year it could be Edinburgh Castle, the next time the Angel of the North, etc. It would be the start of a great British tradition.
I've been to the poppy memorial a few times in the last few weeks, most recently today. The crowds at weekends are gargantuan - it has really captured the public's imagination.
Should it be a permanent installation? It wasn't the basis on which it was put up (but the Eiffel Tower and the Eye were both supposed to be temporary also). We would need a wider public debate than has taken place so far.
Do you know if it will still be open on the 21st of this month?
It was due to finish on 11 November. I don't know in practice how quickly it will be dismantled. It will not be the work of a few hours.
Thanks, I have a few hours spare before the Dirty Dicks shindig.
What shall I do?
It's about a 20 minute walk from the Tower to Dirty Dicks. It's an interesting walk if you go past the Heron Tower, the Gherkin and you get the opportunity to walk down Mincing Lane, which I expect would appeal to you. The Tower is always worth a look anyway. I'd go and have a look.
I think you go past Mitre Square as well, where Catherine Eddowes was murdered by the Ripper.
The taking down of that poppy memorial is a classic example of how useless we are on tourism in this country. It's bringing in absolutely huge numbers of crowds, is a great source of pride for Britons, and will make the country a lot of money. Why on Earth aren't we making it a permanent fixture?
I don't think I agree. I see it as more like the Queen Mother's lying in state -a chance for the nation to come together and share a remarkable and solemn experience. To make it permanent would be to remove that significance.
I agree we're useless at tourism though. I'm always astonished when I'm out in London and Trafalgar Square is just in pitch darkness, not floodlit and alive with activity. We run a tourism deficit in this country -a great shame for such a beautiful country with so much heritage.
Is that before 1am though? I'm talking early hours. Perhaps it just seems dark to me!
Hmm well I doubt anywhere in London is "pitch black" to be perfectly honest, a 'proper' night's sky is something I'd like to see from time to time... and I live in the sticks of Derbyshire.
I've been to the poppy memorial a few times in the last few weeks, most recently today. The crowds at weekends are gargantuan - it has really captured the public's imagination.
Should it be a permanent installation?
If nothing else, what happens in the Spring when the grass starts growing? Does that change it in an organic and pleasing way, or does it spoil the effect? Do you have to spend millions on a cunning plan to keep the grass short?
With all respect, this seems to be the typical negative British reaction of immediately shooting down any proposal with all the reasons why it can't be done. I see it in business all the time.
If I may be so bold as to suggest an amendment then, perhaps the exercise should be repeated annually. That way it's an annual out of tourist season draw, but doesn't lose its novelty value.
I think the authorities have hugely underestimated how popular it has turned out to be and I can see a case for extending it to the end of the year, say, if only to allow those who have not yet seen it to do so.
How many people will visit it under 2 feet of snow?
"According to Dr David Viner, a senior research scientist at the climatic research unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia,within a few years winter snowfall will become "a very rare and exciting event".
"Children just aren't going to know what snow is," he said."
The other thing that could be done, if people are insistent on the transience of it, would be to repeat the memorial every year in the run up to Remembrance Sunday at a different British landmark each time. One year it could be Edinburgh Castle, the next time the Angel of the North, etc. It would be the start of a great British tradition.
The problem is that Ed Miliband isn't clever. His political views are typical centre-left Guardianista boiler plate. Has he a single original view that deviates from social democratic orthodoxy?
I've been to the poppy memorial a few times in the last few weeks, most recently today. The crowds at weekends are gargantuan - it has really captured the public's imagination.
Should it be a permanent installation? It wasn't the basis on which it was put up (but the Eiffel Tower and the Eye were both supposed to be temporary also). We would need a wider public debate than has taken place so far.
Do you know if it will still be open on the 21st of this month?
It was due to finish on 11 November. I don't know in practice how quickly it will be dismantled. It will not be the work of a few hours.
Thanks, I have a few hours spare before the Dirty Dicks shindig.
What shall I do?
It's about a 20 minute walk from the Tower to Dirty Dicks. It's an interesting walk if you go past the Heron Tower, the Gherkin and you get the opportunity to walk down Mincing Lane, which I expect would appeal to you. The Tower is always worth a look anyway. I'd go and have a look.
Many thanks. I might just do that.
Yes Mincing Lane does appeal to me.
Although will I have as much fun there, as I have had in the very tight Back Passage nearby?
Comments
If you proclaim that housing is unaffordable, wages are falling, schools are overloaded and that the NHS is collapsing under the strain, people aren't going to buy into the idea that 250,000 extra people turning up every year is good for them.
Trying to use some report to try to preach to people just reinforces the message that the liberal left is really out of touch and actively refusing to listen.
Someone has accidentally deleted one poll and then also messed up the dates.
2/3 Nov is 33/34
3/4 Nov is 32/34
4/5 Nov is 32/33
Looks like the 2/3 Nov poll has been deleted but someone has then mislabelled the 3/4 Nov poll with 2/3 Nov!
Dr. Spyn, someone asks Yvette Cooper the difference between a misfortune and a calamity.
"It would be a misfortune if Ed Miliband fell into the Thames. And a calamity if someone pulled him out."
Edited extra bit: paraphrased from Disraeli, by the way.
Of course it does.
Labour will be challenged to produce a manifesto that appeals in Scotland rather than relying on their vote straight-off; by definition and in fact this will make them less attractive in England.
Secondly the money, time and people Labour puts in to campaigning in Scotland will draw those resources away from England.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/history/world-war-one/11207880/Nigel-Farage-wipes-tears-from-his-eyes-as-he-visits-poppy-memorial.html
I am not sure whether this is more or less cynical than the Ed and his beggar stunt or Dave and his Guinness.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/45b88b9a-6432-11e4-8ade-00144feabdc0.html?ftcamp=published_links/rss/brussels/feed//product&siteedition=uk#axzz3HzzeOh64
"Yet for all the skilful diplomacy, there is something important missing both in Mr Steinmeier’s careful canvassing of public opinion and Ms Merkel’s effort to hold Europe together. It is a question of mindset as much as anything – the gap between the leadership calculated to set a course and an approach that simply channels the prevailing mood.
Of course, consensus helps but it is not a substitute for policy choices. The danger is that Europe’s response to Ukraine is driven by the lowest common denominator rather than a hard-headed effort to deter Mr Putin. Moscow’s defiant blessing this week for sham elections in Russian-controlled eastern Ukraine points precisely to this danger.
Ms Merkel has built her political career on caution – on taking the temperature and weighing all the options before acting. The approach has served her well. But leadership in foreign policy demands something more: an understanding that doing nothing can be more dangerous than doing something, and a readiness to step out in front of the crowd. Consensus may be comforting; it does not impress the likes of Mr Putin."
It also does not help in setting clear priorities on negotiating with Britain. There is no doubt that Angela Merkel would profoundly wish that the British would just subside on the subject of the EU. She might get lucky and get Ed Miliband as Prime Minister next year, in which case that will happen for a while. But if she doesn't, she's going to have to engage properly with the subject, like it or not. If she doesn't, she might very well see Britain leave the EU in entirely avoidable circumstances.
Shame that their kids need a chance to eat and be educated though. [And let us not forget the 5cum-lawyers who feed parasitically upon them.]
Open-borders and free-movement-of labour would work but it requires the rule-of-law-and property be respected and the use of charities (19thC not T'urd Way!) to replace the Marxist nomeclatura. Where people help themselves and do not rely on a state-machine that will benefit itself more then anyone else.
@BBCNormanS: Ed Balls dismisses as "nonsense" reports of Labour MPs preparing a letter calling on Ed Miliband to go
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-29919075
Where he's right is that the post-crisis reaction has hit parties of the centre-left far harder than those of the centre-right (curiously, he doesn't mention the obvious British example, the Lib Dems). I'm quite sure he's right that a Labour Party, signed up to and delivering continued austerity policies in government (as it would have to, sooner or later), would suffer massively. I've said before, I could well imagine Labour hitting 15% in the polls within eighteen months if they form a majority government. They could delay it if they ignored financial gravity and went on a spending spree but if so, the crash would be all the faster and harder when it came.
It's true that the centre-right has been losing support but often the big losses to the hard right have been wholly or partially offset by gains in the centre (see the Tories, CDU, ND and so on). Moderate centre-right voters demand stability above all other things and for all the pain, are content when a government appears to be taking the necessary steps to deliver it.
Do you think Nigel had half an onion tucked up the sleeve of his Covert coat?
Miliband - 6 with 2010 Labour voters
Maybe sven, should the northern eejits elect him, should start a similar campaign against the dog-eaters? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-29929333
Doubt it somehow, but hic...!
http://www.betfair.com/exchange/politics/market?id=1.115925336
Also, over on the GE seats market, someone wants to bet £1200 on ukip getting over 25 seats @ 7/1.
That's a serious punt!
I think it dangerous to assume that just because he appears awkward in photos or looks a bit Wallace-like that will be enough to turn people away from him.
There remains a strong centrist vote comprised of those that like Britain as it is today and who are looking for an optimistic outward-looking vision rather than a bitter and incoherent xenophobic reaction. As long as the Conservatives keep being dragged rightwards by sour backwoodsmen, they will be leaving that centrist vote orphaned.
Yet do you think anyone in power will make it happen? Of course not.
What the hell is Helen Turner, Under Secretary for Sport and Tourism doing? She should be jumping on this.
That is hardly a golf club subscription for a year.
Should it be a permanent installation? It wasn't the basis on which it was put up (but the Eiffel Tower and the Eye were both supposed to be temporary also). We would need a wider public debate than has taken place so far.
The memorial was only designed to exist short term. The grass the poppies are 'planted' in will grow in parts, and be affected by sun deprivation in others.
The poppies themselves will degrade - they're not made for long term environmental exposure, and will likely crack and fade, red pigmentation being the most rapidly destroyed by sunlight.
And when I say 'sadly', I actually mean 'happily'
Daily Bell: Would you like to be prime minister?
Nigel Farage: I am a political campaigner, not someone seeking high office.
Farage joined UKIP because he saw something was wrong and he wanted to change it. I don't think he wants to be PM.
I think the authorities have hugely underestimated how popular it has turned out to be and I can see a case for extending it to the end of the year, say, if only to allow those who have not yet seen it to do so.
Your point about the initial temporary nature of iconic attractions such as the Eiffel Tower and the London Eye is well made.
Personally, I'd like to see it kept there until after Christmas, and dismantled in the New Year as per the original plan.
[Edit: I see Cyclefree has said much the same thing]
And is this question niff naff and trivia, and am I a hysterical anti-immigrant for asking?
Ladbrokes Politics @LadPolitics · 2 mins2 minutes ago
It's 50/1 that the Lib Dems get ZERO seats at the general election.
http://ow.ly/DUHCT
If he is that much cuddlier than he looks in photo ops he needs a nice heart to heart with a friendly interviewer on prime time tv (cf Brown/Morgan).
(Obviously am not a meteorologist but all my summer flowers - geraniums, cannas, dahlias and roses - are still flowering.)
I agree we're useless at tourism though. I'm always astonished when I'm out in London and Trafalgar Square is just in pitch darkness, not floodlit and alive with activity. We run a tourism deficit in this country -a great shame for such a beautiful country with so much heritage.
What shall I do?
a. A man living in Cornwall, has a mortgage and wife, loses his job but can find one in London.
b. A man living in Poland, has a home, moves to London to look for a job.
Which man gets housing benefit to help with the move?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N-hq_PtiqoA
One wonders how tax-efficient - yet pension-friendly - such hypocrisy is...?
Then when people attack Ed's weirdness, you can riposte with -perhaps if Cameron spent a bit more time on policy and a little less 'chillaxing', the country wouldn't be in such a mess. However, Labour are too stupid to do this. Instead they will patronise their voters with a lot of guff about the NHS needing yet more money.
http://www.scotlandscensus.gov.uk/documents/censusresults/release2a/rel2A_Language_detailed_Scotland.pdf
They are not split. They are united in thinking he is crap...
http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/snowfalls-are-now-just-a-thing-of-the-past-724017.html
"According to Dr David Viner, a senior research scientist at the climatic research unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia,within a few years winter snowfall will become "a very rare and exciting event".
"Children just aren't going to know what snow is," he said."
The problem is that Ed Miliband isn't clever. His political views are typical centre-left Guardianista boiler plate. Has he a single original view that deviates from social democratic orthodoxy?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-29921816
"I like Islamic State because they pursue Sharia and kill infidels, non-Sunnis and those who converted from Islam," he says.
"The people killed by Islamic State are American agents. We must behead them as Allah said in the Koran."
He is 13 years old. His mother would be happy if he died fighting for IS.
Yes Mincing Lane does appeal to me.
Although will I have as much fun there, as I have had in the very tight Back Passage nearby?
https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/32/37857281_d80cc0fd95.jpg