Were people required to fill out the 2011 UK Census? Yes: it was a crime if you didn't and some people were prosecuted. Not all were (that would have been wildly implausible) or even most, but if you refused to fill the forms out and made a cause celebre of it, then you stood a good chance of it.
Did people complete the 2011 UK Census? Broadly speaking, yes. Most *households* did do their forms, and not by a whisker: from memory, compliance was over 80-90%. There are different patterns to compliance (see below) but the 2011 UK Census performed well in this respect.
Is there still a census? Yes. There won't be a solely-paper census in 2021, but there will be a method of counting the citizenry that demands their cooperation. There is a debate about how *much* of it will require data linkage (i.e. how many questions need to be filled out by the individual and how many can be deduced from govt. data) but whatever the conclusion, it will involve people answering questions (see the US Census for how you can do a census with just ten questions).
Was the 2011 UK Census known to be inaccurate? No: in fact, it was one of the better ones. The worst E&W[1] census of modern times was in 1991. The sense of duty underpinning citizen compliance decreased after WWII, and in 1991 crossed a threshold: compliance fell to a level that made the error bars of the estimates a bit too large for comfort. This was magnified by the fact that noncompliance is not evenly spread: middle-aged women always fill out their forms, but teenage males wouldn't complete one at gunpoint.
This was discussed at the time and a solution implemented: the Census Coverage Survey (CCS). This is a more concentrated survey of approx 100,000 people held 3-6 months after the Census proper and involves an interviewer sitting in your house going thru each question. Participation is compulsory. The different responses to the Census and the CCS enable the gaps in the Census to be deduced and repaired ("imputation").
The CCS was done for the first time in 2001 and repeated in 2011. Combined with greater advertising, it made the 2011 UK Census one of the more accurate ones.
[1] NI excepted. When you consider the level of noncompliance in Northern Ireland during the 70/80's, this should have made it obvious that accuracy is much better now than then. The Republicans used to threaten (and in at least one case, murder) census takers. Thankfully those days are behind us.
Does the UK Government want an inaccurate figure? The figure is accurate and the UK Government wants an accurate one. The Census figures are used by the UK Govt, the devolved administrations, the transnational bodies (European and global) and your local authority to decide what money gets put where, ranging from baby incubators to parliamentary constituencies.
Are other published estimates accurate? Not as accurate as a census certainly, and the fact that the range is so large ("70-80 million" is a gap of 10 million - twice the population of Scotland!) should have given a clue to this. Citizens make their own estimates and they are only as accurate as they need to be - 70-80 million is close enough for some purposes (compared to, say 100-200 million), but for figures down to the ward/LSOA/whatever area they aren't nearly close enough.
How does the Government know this? Feedback. The census figures reset the estimates every ten years, and the figures are updated yearly with the mid-year population estimates. But the updates are inevitably less accurate and the errors get progressively more pronounced and uneven. This is noticed: the upswell of migration to the South Coast became obvious in the mid-Noughties because maternity units in Brighton (for example) became overstretched. Eventually the cumulative errors become worrying and the system has to be reset...with another census. Which is why we have a census every ten years.
I hope that has dealt with some of the points. I assume some people will still disagree, but pressure of time will probably prevent me from addressing that disagreement: for that, I apologise in advance.
Matthew Goodwin (@GoodwinMJ) 15/11/2014 21:37 This reads like desperate stuff from Cameron, and also rather odd - "They will celebrate with pint in pub" telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/…
I wonder how long it will be until a quick witted photo journalist catches Ed Bland or Justine buying trainers in their local branch of Sports Direct. Maybe the good folks at Newcastle Utd will have a view on Ed's comments.
Surely the question is, what do the zero-hour employees at Sports Direct think? Are zero hours better than none?
In my experience a great many people on zero hours contracts work as many hours as they are available. In a shop like Sports Direct, most of the zero hours staff will be students who work evenings and weekends.
Presumably Ed Miliband's calculation is that most of these zero-hour employees who work all the hours available would prefer regular contracts, and will vote accordingly.
Andy JS as I am a former Tory PPC that should give you a clue Bernard Jenkin was the Tory candidate in the neighbouring seat to the south and his wife Ann in the neighbouring seat to the north.
It's becoming clear that Ed is appropriating the SNP/YES campaign's hymn sheet down to the last semiquaver. It was a pretty obvious thing to do but regardless I doubt he came up with the notion himself. So the good news is 1. He's finally got some smart advisors and 2. He's going on the offensive.
My remaining worry is that his lieutenants aren't for the most part articulate enough to deliver the message
I'm sure Tories in Rochester are over the moon about this. Just what they need to encourage the footsoldiers to get out the vote on Thursday.
Some senior Tory MPs should be taken aside by the PM and Chief Whip and told to shut the fcuk up and concentrate on helping the party win a majority in May. Party workers get really sick of self-indulgent MPs who undo much of their hard work.
No doubt Labour activists would say the same thing, mutatis mutandis.
Of course, wearing our other hats as political punters, we should welcome this freedom of speech.
Andy JS as I am a former Tory PPC that should give you a clue Bernard Jenkin was the Tory candidate in the neighbouring seat to the south and his wife Ann in the neighbouring seat to the north.
If PB Tories are going to ignore me about what Major said then I'll switch to rugby...
TSE, do you agree with what I heard Stuart Barnes say this morning, ie that Stuart Lancaster should be sacked because we didn't beat the Saffers?
I'm still reading Sir John Major's comments/intervention.
Sacking Stuart Lancaster seems very knee jerky.
So why did Barnes say that this morning? Is he stupid when it comes to rugby, or is he still harbouring his vendetta against the England rugby establishment which failed to pick him ahead of Rob Andrew? Or some other reason?
I wonder how long it will be until a quick witted photo journalist catches Ed Bland or Justine buying trainers in their local branch of Sports Direct. Maybe the good folks at Newcastle Utd will have a view on Ed's comments.
Surely the question is, what do the zero-hour employees at Sports Direct think? Are zero hours better than none?
In my experience a great many people on zero hours contracts work as many hours as they are available. In a shop like Sports Direct, most of the zero hours staff will be students who work evenings and weekends.
Presumably Ed Miliband's calculation is that most of these zero-hour employees who work all the hours available would prefer regular contracts, and will vote accordingly.
And risk losing their job as there would be fewer jobs available at a higer cost to their employer?
If PB Tories are going to ignore me about what Major said then I'll switch to rugby...
TSE, do you agree with what I heard Stuart Barnes say this morning, ie that Stuart Lancaster should be sacked because we didn't beat the Saffers?
I'm still reading Sir John Major's comments/intervention.
Sacking Stuart Lancaster seems very knee jerky.
So why did Barnes say that this morning? Is he stupid when it comes to rugby, or is he still harbouring his vendetta against the England rugby establishment which failed to pick him ahead of Rob Andrew? Or some other reason?
David Cameron could face a vote of no confidence if the Tories crash to a heavy defeat in Thursday’s by-election.
Rattled backbench MPs are ready to trigger a leadership challenge if UKIP win Rochester and Strood in Kent by a big margin, party sources said.
The expected victory by ex Tory Mark Reckless could prompt more right-wingers to defect to Nigel Farage’s party, leading to a crisis. The PM admitted at the G20 summit in Australia that it would be a “sort of notch for them”.
He is preparing a major speech on the EU and immigration to try to recover from his likely loss.
Andy JS as I am a former Tory PPC that should give you a clue Bernard Jenkin was the Tory candidate in the neighbouring seat to the south and his wife Ann in the neighbouring seat to the north.
I found out recently that the one-time girlfriend of my uncle was the Tory candidate for Glasgow Provan in 1983.
It was one of 5 seats where the Tories lost their deposit that year.
David Cameron could face a vote of no confidence if the Tories crash to a heavy defeat in Thursday’s by-election.
Rattled backbench MPs are ready to trigger a leadership challenge if UKIP win Rochester and Strood in Kent by a big margin, party sources said.
The expected victory by ex Tory Mark Reckless could prompt more right-wingers to defect to Nigel Farage’s party, leading to a crisis. The PM admitted at the G20 summit in Australia that it would be a “sort of notch for them”.
He is preparing a major speech on the EU and immigration to try to recover from his likely loss.
Viewcode is pointing out some facts about the census. Good.
Swiss Bob repeating the 77 million population canard is pretty daft. Tesco set that one rolling way back in 2007 when some vague unnamed person tried to persuade the govt that they could build more supermarkets because the population was bigger. Nice try. it was rubbish then and its rubbish now.
The amount of food we throw away is massive. Do we see clothes retailers claiming the population is massively more than predicted? Funeral directors? To be fair there are a lot of coffee shops... but a close study reveals that they are full of young mothers and pensioners
If PB Tories are going to ignore me about what Major said then I'll switch to rugby...
TSE, do you agree with what I heard Stuart Barnes say this morning, ie that Stuart Lancaster should be sacked because we didn't beat the Saffers?
I'm still reading Sir John Major's comments/intervention.
Sacking Stuart Lancaster seems very knee jerky.
So why did Barnes say that this morning? Is he stupid when it comes to rugby, or is he still harbouring his vendetta against the England rugby establishment which failed to pick him ahead of Rob Andrew? Or some other reason?
Vendetta I think.
That's what I thought when I suggested he might have hated England as much as that terrible referee who I prefer not to think of when I'm trying to remain calm.
I'm sure Barnes loves England, but I'm also sure that he still hates the England team. And he will do until we pick Ford (him) over Farrell (Andrew), or while we pick any of our good defensive backs over the flair players.
If PB Tories are going to ignore me about what Major said then I'll switch to rugby...
TSE, do you agree with what I heard Stuart Barnes say this morning, ie that Stuart Lancaster should be sacked because we didn't beat the Saffers?
I'm still reading Sir John Major's comments/intervention.
Sacking Stuart Lancaster seems very knee jerky.
So why did Barnes say that this morning? Is he stupid when it comes to rugby, or is he still harbouring his vendetta against the England rugby establishment which failed to pick him ahead of Rob Andrew? Or some other reason?
Vendetta I think.
That's what I thought when I suggested he might have hated England as much as that terrible referee who I prefer not to think of when I'm trying to remain calm.
I'm sure Barnes loves England, but I'm also sure that he still hates the England team. And he will do until we pick Ford (him) over Farrell (Andrew), or while we pick any of our good defensive backs over the flair players.
I will defend Lancaster, injuries haven't allowed him to select a settled side.
I'm sure Tories in Rochester are over the moon about this. Just what they need to encourage the footsoldiers to get out the vote in Thursday.
It is expectations management.
Surely TSE will arrive to save the day.
Or has he given up as well.
TSE on Reckless:
"He tasks me! He tasks me and I shall have him! I'll chase him round the Moons of Newbury and round the Angus Maelstrom and round Pendle's flames before I give him up!"
I wonder how long it will be until a quick witted photo journalist catches Ed Bland or Justine buying trainers in their local branch of Sports Direct. Maybe the good folks at Newcastle Utd will have a view on Ed's comments.
Surely the question is, what do the zero-hour employees at Sports Direct think? Are zero hours better than none?
In my experience a great many people on zero hours contracts work as many hours as they are available. In a shop like Sports Direct, most of the zero hours staff will be students who work evenings and weekends.
Presumably Ed Miliband's calculation is that most of these zero-hour employees who work all the hours available would prefer regular contracts, and will vote accordingly.
And risk losing their job as there would be fewer jobs available at a higer cost to their employer?
In the case of a national retail chain, I'd guess that opening hours, and hence working hours, are pretty fixed. There might be a case at the margins for casual staff providing holiday or other absence cover, but if all of the store staff are on zero hour contracts, then eyebrows might be raised.
But in any case, Labour's political calculation will be that this is good for votes.
And presumably the Conservative Party has reached the same conclusion, since: Business and Enterprise Minister Matthew Hancock said: "We're already tackling the abuse of zero-hours contracts -- after 13 years of Labour doing absolutely nothing about it."
If PB Tories are going to ignore me about what Major said then I'll switch to rugby...
TSE, do you agree with what I heard Stuart Barnes say this morning, ie that Stuart Lancaster should be sacked because we didn't beat the Saffers?
I'm still reading Sir John Major's comments/intervention.
Sacking Stuart Lancaster seems very knee jerky.
So why did Barnes say that this morning? Is he stupid when it comes to rugby, or is he still harbouring his vendetta against the England rugby establishment which failed to pick him ahead of Rob Andrew? Or some other reason?
Vendetta I think.
That's what I thought when I suggested he might have hated England as much as that terrible referee who I prefer not to think of when I'm trying to remain calm.
I'm sure Barnes loves England, but I'm also sure that he still hates the England team. And he will do until we pick Ford (him) over Farrell (Andrew), or while we pick any of our good defensive backs over the flair players.
I will defend Lancaster, injuries haven't allowed him to select a settled side.
I think our big problem right now, and why we should be pretty pleased at having only lost by three points to both of the world's top two teams, is that our best front row is injured.
Alex Corbisiero is IMO the best prop in world rugby and we're a different team when he plays. We're also missing our best hooker and our best tight head, if they're all fit next summer we're serious contenders for the title
David Cameron could face a vote of no confidence if the Tories crash to a heavy defeat in Thursday’s by-election.
Rattled backbench MPs are ready to trigger a leadership challenge if UKIP win Rochester and Strood in Kent by a big margin, party sources said.
The expected victory by ex Tory Mark Reckless could prompt more right-wingers to defect to Nigel Farage’s party, leading to a crisis. The PM admitted at the G20 summit in Australia that it would be a “sort of notch for them”.
He is preparing a major speech on the EU and immigration to try to recover from his likely loss.
John Baron is likely to go if the margin is more than 20% IMO.
I would hazard a guess that no matter what the result there will be no more defections at the moment. Why would an MP defect now and risk fighting a by-election when they could wait less than 2 months and defect with no by-election risk?
It is not honourable but then we are talking about politicians and I have never expected honour from any of them.
If PB Tories are going to ignore me about what Major said then I'll switch to rugby...
TSE, do you agree with what I heard Stuart Barnes say this morning, ie that Stuart Lancaster should be sacked because we didn't beat the Saffers?
I'm still reading Sir John Major's comments/intervention.
Sacking Stuart Lancaster seems very knee jerky.
So why did Barnes say that this morning? Is he stupid when it comes to rugby, or is he still harbouring his vendetta against the England rugby establishment which failed to pick him ahead of Rob Andrew? Or some other reason?
Vendetta I think.
That's what I thought when I suggested he might have hated England as much as that terrible referee who I prefer not to think of when I'm trying to remain calm.
I'm sure Barnes loves England, but I'm also sure that he still hates the England team. And he will do until we pick Ford (him) over Farrell (Andrew), or while we pick any of our good defensive backs over the flair players.
I will defend Lancaster, injuries haven't allowed him to select a settled side.
I think our big problem right now, and why we should be pretty pleased at having only lost by three points to both of the world's top two teams, is that our best front row is injured.
Alex Corbisiero is IMO the best prop in world rugby and we're a different team when he plays. We're also missing our best hooker and our best tight head, if they're all fit next summer we're serious contenders for the title
BTW, at the height of my rugby playing career, before I dislocated my kneecap when I was 16, I used to play in the front row, prop or hooker, for the first team for my year at Marlborough College (if anyone who's met me doesn't believe that, at that age I was two inches shorter and three stone heavier) so I understand the finer points of front row rugby.
I'd be interested to know how much rugby Mr Reckless played when he was there (and what position), not as a judge of his suitability for the job he's applying for, just out of curiosity
If PB Tories are going to ignore me about what Major said then I'll switch to rugby...
TSE, do you agree with what I heard Stuart Barnes say this morning, ie that Stuart Lancaster should be sacked because we didn't beat the Saffers?
I'm still reading Sir John Major's comments/intervention.
Sacking Stuart Lancaster seems very knee jerky.
So why did Barnes say that this morning? Is he stupid when it comes to rugby, or is he still harbouring his vendetta against the England rugby establishment which failed to pick him ahead of Rob Andrew? Or some other reason?
Vendetta I think.
That's what I thought when I suggested he might have hated England as much as that terrible referee who I prefer not to think of when I'm trying to remain calm.
I'm sure Barnes loves England, but I'm also sure that he still hates the England team. And he will do until we pick Ford (him) over Farrell (Andrew), or while we pick any of our good defensive backs over the flair players.
I will defend Lancaster, injuries haven't allowed him to select a settled side.
I think our big problem right now, and why we should be pretty pleased at having only lost by three points to both of the world's top two teams, is that our best front row is injured.
Alex Corbisiero is IMO the best prop in world rugby and we're a different team when he plays. We're also missing our best hooker and our best tight head, if they're all fit next summer we're serious contenders for the title
I'm sure Tories in Rochester are over the moon about this. Just what they need to encourage the footsoldiers to get out the vote in Thursday.
It is expectations management.
Surely TSE will arrive to save the day.
Or has he given up as well.
TSE on Reckless:
"He tasks me! He tasks me and I shall have him! I'll chase him round the Moons of Newbury and round the Angus Maelstrom and round Pendle's flames before I give him up!"
I view Mark Reckless as more Neelix than Khan.
Jeez, I wanted to slap Neelix with a breeze block and throw him out of the nearest airlock for most of Voyager's run.
David Cameron could face a vote of no confidence if the Tories crash to a heavy defeat in Thursday’s by-election.
Rattled backbench MPs are ready to trigger a leadership challenge if UKIP win Rochester and Strood in Kent by a big margin, party sources said.
The expected victory by ex Tory Mark Reckless could prompt more right-wingers to defect to Nigel Farage’s party, leading to a crisis. The PM admitted at the G20 summit in Australia that it would be a “sort of notch for them”.
He is preparing a major speech on the EU and immigration to try to recover from his likely loss.
John Baron is likely to go if the margin is more than 20% IMO.
I would hazard a guess that no matter what the result there will be no more defections at the moment. Why would an MP defect now and risk fighting a by-election when they could wait less than 2 months and defect with no by-election risk?
It is not honourable but then we are talking about politicians and I have never expected honour from any of them.
There have been reports that some Tory MPs are planning to defect in the New Year, so it will be close enough to the general election as not to trigger a by-election.
I'm sure Tories in Rochester are over the moon about this. Just what they need to encourage the footsoldiers to get out the vote in Thursday.
It is expectations management.
Surely TSE will arrive to save the day.
Or has he given up as well.
TSE on Reckless:
"He tasks me! He tasks me and I shall have him! I'll chase him round the Moons of Newbury and round the Angus Maelstrom and round Pendle's flames before I give him up!"
I view Mark Reckless as more Neelix than Khan.
Jeez, I wanted to slap Neelix with a breeze block and throw him out of the nearest airlock for most of Voyager's run.
No, no! I have you playing Khan! Hence the quote above!
If PB Tories are going to ignore me about what Major said then I'll switch to rugby...
TSE, do you agree with what I heard Stuart Barnes say this morning, ie that Stuart Lancaster should be sacked because we didn't beat the Saffers?
I'm still reading Sir John Major's comments/intervention.
Sacking Stuart Lancaster seems very knee jerky.
So why did Barnes say that this morning? Is he stupid when it comes to rugby, or is he still harbouring his vendetta against the England rugby establishment which failed to pick him ahead of Rob Andrew? Or some other reason?
Vendetta I think.
That's what I thought when I suggested he might have hated England as much as that terrible referee who I prefer not to think of when I'm trying to remain calm.
I'm sure Barnes loves England, but I'm also sure that he still hates the England team. And he will do until we pick Ford (him) over Farrell (Andrew), or while we pick any of our good defensive backs over the flair players.
I will defend Lancaster, injuries haven't allowed him to select a settled side.
I think our big problem right now, and why we should be pretty pleased at having only lost by three points to both of the world's top two teams, is that our best front row is injured.
Alex Corbisiero is IMO the best prop in world rugby and we're a different team when he plays. We're also missing our best hooker and our best tight head, if they're all fit next summer we're serious contenders for the title
David Cameron could face a vote of no confidence if the Tories crash to a heavy defeat in Thursday’s by-election.
Rattled backbench MPs are ready to trigger a leadership challenge if UKIP win Rochester and Strood in Kent by a big margin, party sources said.
The expected victory by ex Tory Mark Reckless could prompt more right-wingers to defect to Nigel Farage’s party, leading to a crisis. The PM admitted at the G20 summit in Australia that it would be a “sort of notch for them”.
He is preparing a major speech on the EU and immigration to try to recover from his likely loss.
John Baron is likely to go if the margin is more than 20% IMO.
I would hazard a guess that no matter what the result there will be no more defections at the moment. Why would an MP defect now and risk fighting a by-election when they could wait less than 2 months and defect with no by-election risk?
It is not honourable but then we are talking about politicians and I have never expected honour from any of them.
There have been reports that some Tory MPs are planning to defect in the New Year, so it will be close enough to the general election as not to trigger a by-election.
I suspect that will be the order of the day. Funnily enough, whilst that would give them a few months as UKIP MPs without the risk of losing a by-election, I think it would make it more likely that they would then lose at the GE as they would not have done the honourable thing of giving the electorate the chance to approve or reject their defection.
If PB Tories are going to ignore me about what Major said then I'll switch to rugby...
TSE, do you agree with what I heard Stuart Barnes say this morning, ie that Stuart Lancaster should be sacked because we didn't beat the Saffers?
I'm still reading Sir John Major's comments/intervention.
Sacking Stuart Lancaster seems very knee jerky.
So why did Barnes say that this morning? Is he stupid when it comes to rugby, or is he still harbouring his vendetta against the England rugby establishment which failed to pick him ahead of Rob Andrew? Or some other reason?
Vendetta I think.
That's what I thought when I suggested he might have hated England as much as that terrible referee who I prefer not to think of when I'm trying to remain calm.
I'm sure Barnes loves England, but I'm also sure that he still hates the England team. And he will do until we pick Ford (him) over Farrell (Andrew), or while we pick any of our good defensive backs over the flair players.
I will defend Lancaster, injuries haven't allowed him to select a settled side.
I think our big problem right now, and why we should be pretty pleased at having only lost by three points to both of the world's top two teams, is that our best front row is injured.
Alex Corbisiero is IMO the best prop in world rugby and we're a different team when he plays. We're also missing our best hooker and our best tight head, if they're all fit next summer we're serious contenders for the title
If PB Tories are going to ignore me about what Major said then I'll switch to rugby...
TSE, do you agree with what I heard Stuart Barnes say this morning, ie that Stuart Lancaster should be sacked because we didn't beat the Saffers?
I'm still reading Sir John Major's comments/intervention.
Sacking Stuart Lancaster seems very knee jerky.
So why did Barnes say that this morning? Is he stupid when it comes to rugby, or is he still harbouring his vendetta against the England rugby establishment which failed to pick him ahead of Rob Andrew? Or some other reason?
Vendetta I think.
That's what I thought when I suggested he might have hated England as much as that terrible referee who I prefer not to think of when I'm trying to remain calm.
I'm sure Barnes loves England, but I'm also sure that he still hates the England team. And he will do until we pick Ford (him) over Farrell (Andrew), or while we pick any of our good defensive backs over the flair players.
I will defend Lancaster, injuries haven't allowed him to select a settled side.
I think our big problem right now, and why we should be pretty pleased at having only lost by three points to both of the world's top two teams, is that our best front row is injured.
Alex Corbisiero is IMO the best prop in world rugby and we're a different team when he plays. We're also missing our best hooker and our best tight head, if they're all fit next summer we're serious contenders for the title
If PB Tories are going to ignore me about what Major said then I'll switch to rugby...
TSE, do you agree with what I heard Stuart Barnes say this morning, ie that Stuart Lancaster should be sacked because we didn't beat the Saffers?
I'm still reading Sir John Major's comments/intervention.
Sacking Stuart Lancaster seems very knee jerky.
So why did Barnes say that this morning? Is he stupid when it comes to rugby, or is he still harbouring his vendetta against the England rugby establishment which failed to pick him ahead of Rob Andrew? Or some other reason?
Vendetta I think.
That's what I thought when I suggested he might have hated England as much as that terrible referee who I prefer not to think of when I'm trying to remain calm.
I'm sure Barnes loves England, but I'm also sure that he still hates the England team. And he will do until we pick Ford (him) over Farrell (Andrew), or while we pick any of our good defensive backs over the flair players.
I will defend Lancaster, injuries haven't allowed him to select a settled side.
I think our big problem right now, and why we should be pretty pleased at having only lost by three points to both of the world's top two teams, is that our best front row is injured.
Alex Corbisiero is IMO the best prop in world rugby and we're a different team when he plays. We're also missing our best hooker and our best tight head, if they're all fit next summer we're serious contenders for the title
I'm sure Tories in Rochester are over the moon about this. Just what they need to encourage the footsoldiers to get out the vote in Thursday.
It is expectations management.
Surely TSE will arrive to save the day.
Or has he given up as well.
TSE on Reckless:
"He tasks me! He tasks me and I shall have him! I'll chase him round the Moons of Newbury and round the Angus Maelstrom and round Pendle's flames before I give him up!"
I view Mark Reckless as more Neelix than Khan.
Jeez, I wanted to slap Neelix with a breeze block and throw him out of the nearest airlock for most of Voyager's run.
Only 'most of' it, not all? More leeway than most give him at least.
I'm sure Tories in Rochester are over the moon about this. Just what they need to encourage the footsoldiers to get out the vote in Thursday.
It is expectations management.
Surely TSE will arrive to save the day.
Or has he given up as well.
TSE on Reckless:
"He tasks me! He tasks me and I shall have him! I'll chase him round the Moons of Newbury and round the Angus Maelstrom and round Pendle's flames before I give him up!"
I view Mark Reckless as more Neelix than Khan.
Jeez, I wanted to slap Neelix with a breeze block and throw him out of the nearest airlock for most of Voyager's run.
Only 'most of' it, not all? More leeway than most give him at least.
When I say most, I mean up to the episodes he was in.
I'm sure Tories in Rochester are over the moon about this. Just what they need to encourage the footsoldiers to get out the vote in Thursday.
It is expectations management.
Surely TSE will arrive to save the day.
Or has he given up as well.
TSE on Reckless:
"He tasks me! He tasks me and I shall have him! I'll chase him round the Moons of Newbury and round the Angus Maelstrom and round Pendle's flames before I give him up!"
I view Mark Reckless as more Neelix than Khan.
Jeez, I wanted to slap Neelix with a breeze block and throw him out of the nearest airlock for most of Voyager's run.
Only 'most of' it, not all? More leeway than most give him at least.
When I say most, I mean up to the episodes he was in.
He left part way through season 7.
Ah. It's been so long since I've seen through the last season - whenever I do a binge watch I seem to peter out toward the end of 6 and never push through. Better than my attempts with Enterprise though.
I'm sure Tories in Rochester are over the moon about this. Just what they need to encourage the footsoldiers to get out the vote in Thursday.
It is expectations management.
Surely TSE will arrive to save the day.
Or has he given up as well.
TSE on Reckless:
"He tasks me! He tasks me and I shall have him! I'll chase him round the Moons of Newbury and round the Angus Maelstrom and round Pendle's flames before I give him up!"
I view Mark Reckless as more Neelix than Khan.
Jeez, I wanted to slap Neelix with a breeze block and throw him out of the nearest airlock for most of Voyager's run.
Only 'most of' it, not all? More leeway than most give him at least.
When I say most, I mean up to the episodes he was in.
He left part way through season 7.
Ah. It's been so long since I've seen through the last season - whenever I do a binge watch I seem to peter out toward the end of 6 and never push through. Better than my attempts with Enterprise though.
Season 7 ended well, it had a better finale than Enterprise.
I don't think I've ever rewatched a single episode of Enterprise, whilst I regularly rewatch TOS, TNG, DS9 and Voyager.
I see that the save Ed Miliband campaign is now in full flow at the Mirror.... Speaking of Ed Miliband, how many times has Miliband and his Shadow Cabinet been down to Rochester to help the Labour candidate?
We keep getting told just how superior the Labour on the ground operation is compared to that of the Conservatives, we really don't seem to be seeing much of an effort or any real hunger to win from the Labour party in any of the recent by-elections. While Cameron's personal ratings are so much better than Miliband's, he is safe until the GE.
Could Ed Miliband not only end up being regarded as one of the most ineffective and out of touch Leaders of the Opposition, but also the laziest one we have had in recent times?
David Cameron could face a vote of no confidence if the Tories crash to a heavy defeat in Thursday’s by-election.
Rattled backbench MPs are ready to trigger a leadership challenge if UKIP win Rochester and Strood in Kent by a big margin, party sources said.
The expected victory by ex Tory Mark Reckless could prompt more right-wingers to defect to Nigel Farage’s party, leading to a crisis. The PM admitted at the G20 summit in Australia that it would be a “sort of notch for them”.
He is preparing a major speech on the EU and immigration to try to recover from his likely loss.
They say their source saw a Tory MP strangle a boy, and "another MP" watched two men kill a boy.
Whilst both are obviously disgraceful crimes, why wouldn't they have identified the party of the other MP?
It's not, I'm sure, hard to work out
It actually says the other MP was a Conservative minister
Ah, so it does. Apologies for my misreading of it.
I've got a feeling though that both of these MPs were dead before Jimmy Saville. While I think it's still important that any such crimes are fully investigated, and any living perpetrators or abettors are brought to justice, our police and judiciary should focus first on those child rapists already exposed who are still freely walking the streets and probably still raping children.
They say their source saw a Tory MP strangle a boy, and "another MP" watched two men kill a boy.
Whilst both are obviously disgraceful crimes, why wouldn't they have identified the party of the other MP?
It's not, I'm sure, hard to work out
It actually says the other MP was a Conservative minister
Ah, so it does. Apologies for my misreading of it.
I've got a feeling though that both of these MPs were dead before Jimmy Saville. While I think it's still important that any such crimes are fully investigated, and any living perpetrators or abettors are brought to justice, our police and judiciary should focus first on those child rapists already exposed who are still freely walking the streets and probably still raping children.
They say their source saw a Tory MP strangle a boy, and "another MP" watched two men kill a boy.
Whilst both are obviously disgraceful crimes, why wouldn't they have identified the party of the other MP?
It's not, I'm sure, hard to work out
As I said at the time, the s**t is seriously going to hit the fan. The location of Dolphin Square will be familiar for anyone who has followed this story, and is a very big thing to have come out. Political party destroyingly-big.
I see that the save Ed Miliband campaign is now in full flow at the Mirror.... Speaking of Ed Miliband, how many times has Miliband and his Shadow Cabinet been down to Rochester to help the Labour candidate?
We keep getting told just how superior the Labour on the ground operation is compared to that of the Conservatives, we really don't seem to be seeing much of an effort or any real hunger to win from the Labour party in any of the recent by-elections. While Cameron's personal ratings are so much better than Miliband's, he is safe until the GE.
Could Ed Miliband not only end up being regarded as one of the most ineffective and out of touch Leaders of the Opposition, but also the laziest one we have had in recent times?
Laziest? Possibly, people with a longer memory could answer that better, but to my mind Labour have been very lazy since 2010. Calculatingly cautious with a sprinkling of eye-catching announcements - today's on SportsDirect being an example - with the intent of not doing too much to upset the old guard, but saying enough popular things, whether or not they contain effective or viable suggestions for action, to keep recent converts happy and the core fired up just enough.
Ineffective though? They should have worked harder, not relied on the basic and lazy attacks, as given the failure of the LDs to capitalize in any way from any government accomplishments, and the Tories more divided than ever, they could and probably should be doing a lot better than they are. But they will probably still win, so not really ineffective, if not as effective there was potential for. Lack of effort at seats that were Labour or Labour targets not long ago is a good example, as they retreat to a comfort zone to win the long game, which is unnecessarily risky and, yes, lazy, but also probably a gamble they have called correctly, so no lesson will be learned - which is the danger with getting back into government so soon with so little effort of course.
On the out of touch thing, I don't think it holds up. Miliband has made enough announcements on some major areas which at least on the face of it are popular with people, so it seems he gets us all enough for that. That personally he is an out of touch wonk matters a little, but as it is a question of degree and, as the above poll illustrates, more people think he will stand up for them than Cameron, he's doing better than his opponents.
They say their source saw a Tory MP strangle a boy, and "another MP" watched two men kill a boy.
Whilst both are obviously disgraceful crimes, why wouldn't they have identified the party of the other MP?
It's not, I'm sure, hard to work out
As I said at the time, the s**t is seriously going to hit the fan. The location of Dolphin Square will be familiar for anyone who has followed this story, and is a very big thing to have come out. Political party destroyingly-big.
I'm familiar with the location, having lived in pimlico and worked at 30 millbank (though not in any kind of politics related job), but no idea of what story you mean
They say their source saw a Tory MP strangle a boy, and "another MP" watched two men kill a boy.
Whilst both are obviously disgraceful crimes, why wouldn't they have identified the party of the other MP?
It's not, I'm sure, hard to work out
It actually says the other MP was a Conservative minister
Ah, so it does. Apologies for my misreading of it.
I've got a feeling though that both of these MPs were dead before Jimmy Saville. While I think it's still important that any such crimes are fully investigated, and any living perpetrators or abettors are brought to justice, our police and judiciary should focus first on those child rapists already exposed who are still freely walking the streets and probably still raping children.
If PB Tories are going to ignore me about what Major said then I'll switch to rugby...
TSE, do you agree with what I heard Stuart Barnes say this morning, ie that Stuart Lancaster should be sacked because we didn't beat the Saffers?
I'm still reading Sir John Major's comments/intervention.
Sacking Stuart Lancaster seems very knee jerky.
So why did Barnes say that this morning? Is he stupid when it comes to rugby, or is he still harbouring his vendetta against the England rugby establishment which failed to pick him ahead of Rob Andrew? Or some other reason?
Vendetta I think.
That's what I thought when I suggested he might have hated England as much as that terrible referee who I prefer not to think of when I'm trying to remain calm.
I'm sure Barnes loves England, but I'm also sure that he still hates the England team. And he will do until we pick Ford (him) over Farrell (Andrew), or while we pick any of our good defensive backs over the flair players.
If a rugby union side is being beat its because of the pack not the fly half. You can't blame Burgess (or his agent) if people are paying him silly money, but paying a fortune for a rugby league prop forward (intending to play him at centre) is hardly brilliant strategy by either the RFU Bath or Lancaster - no matter what his rugby playing talents. I'd like to see Burgess succeed but he will be playing rugby league for Wigan in 2 years. You never know, so might Owen Farrel. And I can assure everybody that the recent RL tournament in Australia was 5 times faster 10 times more skilful and 20 times more entertaining than the dreary tosh served up recently here.
They say their source saw a Tory MP strangle a boy, and "another MP" watched two men kill a boy.
Whilst both are obviously disgraceful crimes, why wouldn't they have identified the party of the other MP?
It's not, I'm sure, hard to work out
It actually says the other MP was a Conservative minister
Ah, so it does. Apologies for my misreading of it.
I've got a feeling though that both of these MPs were dead before Jimmy Saville. While I think it's still important that any such crimes are fully investigated, and any living perpetrators or abettors are brought to justice, our police and judiciary should focus first on those child rapists already exposed who are still freely walking the streets and probably still raping children.
Why would you have that feeling?
Nothing other than having seen that these stories seem to come out about establishment figures after they've died.
If there are living Tory MPs or exMPs that are guilty of these crimes then they should be sharing cells with Rotherham child rapists for a long time
They say their source saw a Tory MP strangle a boy, and "another MP" watched two men kill a boy.
Whilst both are obviously disgraceful crimes, why wouldn't they have identified the party of the other MP?
It's not, I'm sure, hard to work out
As I said at the time, the s**t is seriously going to hit the fan. The location of Dolphin Square will be familiar for anyone who has followed this story, and is a very big thing to have come out. Political party destroyingly-big.
I'm familiar with the location, having lived in pimlico and worked at 30 millbank (though not in any kind of politics related job), but no idea of what story you mean
Previous allegations aired by alleged victims involving living and active politicians have mentioned the same address. The fact that a murder investigation now involving the same location is taking place and the location has been named suggests to me that this investigation has reached a tipping point whereby it can no longer be hushed up and that therefore things are soon to get very interesting. I will obviously mention no names out of respect for the site.
They say their source saw a Tory MP strangle a boy, and "another MP" watched two men kill a boy.
Whilst both are obviously disgraceful crimes, why wouldn't they have identified the party of the other MP?
It's not, I'm sure, hard to work out
It actually says the other MP was a Conservative minister
I've got a feeling though that both of these MPs were dead before Jimmy Saville.
If they were they would have been named - the Exaro website is clear both are still alive.
While these cases of historic abuse certainly need to be investigated, I do think much more recent abuse - on apparently orders of magnitude greater scale - deserve even more attention......
Comments
Were people required to fill out the 2011 UK Census? Yes: it was a crime if you didn't and some people were prosecuted. Not all were (that would have been wildly implausible) or even most, but if you refused to fill the forms out and made a cause celebre of it, then you stood a good chance of it.
Did people complete the 2011 UK Census? Broadly speaking, yes. Most *households* did do their forms, and not by a whisker: from memory, compliance was over 80-90%. There are different patterns to compliance (see below) but the 2011 UK Census performed well in this respect.
Is there still a census? Yes. There won't be a solely-paper census in 2021, but there will be a method of counting the citizenry that demands their cooperation. There is a debate about how *much* of it will require data linkage (i.e. how many questions need to be filled out by the individual and how many can be deduced from govt. data) but whatever the conclusion, it will involve people answering questions (see the US Census for how you can do a census with just ten questions).
Was the 2011 UK Census known to be inaccurate? No: in fact, it was one of the better ones. The worst E&W[1] census of modern times was in 1991. The sense of duty underpinning citizen compliance decreased after WWII, and in 1991 crossed a threshold: compliance fell to a level that made the error bars of the estimates a bit too large for comfort. This was magnified by the fact that noncompliance is not evenly spread: middle-aged women always fill out their forms, but teenage males wouldn't complete one at gunpoint.
This was discussed at the time and a solution implemented: the Census Coverage Survey (CCS). This is a more concentrated survey of approx 100,000 people held 3-6 months after the Census proper and involves an interviewer sitting in your house going thru each question. Participation is compulsory. The different responses to the Census and the CCS enable the gaps in the Census to be deduced and repaired ("imputation").
The CCS was done for the first time in 2001 and repeated in 2011. Combined with greater advertising, it made the 2011 UK Census one of the more accurate ones.
[1] NI excepted. When you consider the level of noncompliance in Northern Ireland during the 70/80's, this should have made it obvious that accuracy is much better now than then. The Republicans used to threaten (and in at least one case, murder) census takers. Thankfully those days are behind us.
But YouGov shows Labour party would be 6 points better off with http://D.Mil and 5 with AJ
Does the UK Government want an inaccurate figure? The figure is accurate and the UK Government wants an accurate one. The Census figures are used by the UK Govt, the devolved administrations, the transnational bodies (European and global) and your local authority to decide what money gets put where, ranging from baby incubators to parliamentary constituencies.
Are other published estimates accurate? Not as accurate as a census certainly, and the fact that the range is so large ("70-80 million" is a gap of 10 million - twice the population of Scotland!) should have given a clue to this. Citizens make their own estimates and they are only as accurate as they need to be - 70-80 million is close enough for some purposes (compared to, say 100-200 million), but for figures down to the ward/LSOA/whatever area they aren't nearly close enough.
How does the Government know this? Feedback. The census figures reset the estimates every ten years, and the figures are updated yearly with the mid-year population estimates. But the updates are inevitably less accurate and the errors get progressively more pronounced and uneven. This is noticed: the upswell of migration to the South Coast became obvious in the mid-Noughties because maternity units in Brighton (for example) became overstretched. Eventually the cumulative errors become worrying and the system has to be reset...with another census. Which is why we have a census every ten years.
It was merely that they had the largest Con leads.
Most people on here, then and now still regard ICM as the gold standard.
Seems the public don't think Ed would stand up for working people either.
TSE, do you agree with what I heard Stuart Barnes say this morning, ie that Stuart Lancaster should be sacked because we didn't beat the Saffers?
15/11/2014 21:37
This reads like desperate stuff from Cameron, and also rather odd - "They will celebrate with pint in pub" telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/…
Sacking Stuart Lancaster seems very knee jerky.
My remaining worry is that his lieutenants aren't for the most part articulate enough to deliver the message
Of course, wearing our other hats as political punters, we should welcome this freedom of speech.
Tory 31-34
Lab 32-35
The bigger question is "what is their usual level of inaccuracy compared to reality?"
In the Euros their overstatement of the Lab-Tory gap was 2.5%.
Rattled backbench MPs are ready to trigger a leadership challenge if UKIP win Rochester and Strood in Kent by a big margin, party sources said.
The expected victory by ex Tory Mark Reckless could prompt more right-wingers to defect to Nigel Farage’s party, leading to a crisis. The PM admitted at the G20 summit in Australia that it would be a “sort of notch for them”.
He is preparing a major speech on the EU and immigration to try to recover from his likely loss.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/david-cameron-could-face-no-4636055
It was one of 5 seats where the Tories lost their deposit that year.
Or has he given up as well.
Swiss Bob repeating the 77 million population canard is pretty daft. Tesco set that one rolling way back in 2007 when some vague unnamed person tried to persuade the govt that they could build more supermarkets because the population was bigger.
Nice try. it was rubbish then and its rubbish now.
The amount of food we throw away is massive. Do we see clothes retailers claiming the population is massively more than predicted? Funeral directors? To be fair there are a lot of coffee shops... but a close study reveals that they are full of young mothers and pensioners
I'm sure Barnes loves England, but I'm also sure that he still hates the England team. And he will do until we pick Ford (him) over Farrell (Andrew), or while we pick any of our good defensive backs over the flair players.
The 1931 and 1935 constituency results were tabulated by me a couple of years ago. I was intending to do 1929 as well but haven't got round to it yet:
http://www.politicsresources.net/area/uk/edates.htm
I'm planning to visit this Lisbon establishment tomorrow, but if anyone can think of anything more interesting to do, let me know, thanks:
http://www.cam.gulbenkian.pt/
"He tasks me! He tasks me and I shall have him! I'll chase him round the Moons of Newbury and round the Angus Maelstrom and round Pendle's flames before I give him up!"
But in any case, Labour's political calculation will be that this is good for votes.
And presumably the Conservative Party has reached the same conclusion, since: Business and Enterprise Minister Matthew Hancock said: "We're already tackling the abuse of zero-hours contracts -- after 13 years of Labour doing absolutely nothing about it."
Alex Corbisiero is IMO the best prop in world rugby and we're a different team when he plays. We're also missing our best hooker and our best tight head, if they're all fit next summer we're serious contenders for the title
He showed the biggest Tory leads for the longest period of time. He almost got the PB lifetime achievement award
SNP: 59% (+21)
Lab: 14% (-19)
Con: 12% (-5)
Green: 8% (+6)
Lib: 4% (-1)
UKIP: 2% (-3)
Anyone seen this corker?
It is not honourable but then we are talking about politicians and I have never expected honour from any of them.
I'd be interested to know how much rugby Mr Reckless played when he was there (and what position), not as a judge of his suitability for the job he's applying for, just out of curiosity
Not a real Scotland poll
Jeez, I wanted to slap Neelix with a breeze block and throw him out of the nearest airlock for most of Voyager's run.
We'll beat Wales and Australia.
What kind of English Tory are you?
"I saw MP throttle young boy to death"
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B2hDPdlCMAEY7dQ.png
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/international/england/11225078/Are-we-at-the-stage-where-England-are-in-danger-of-not-even-making-it-out-of-their-Rugby-World-Cup-pool.html
Populus Scottish subsample
SNP 37 minus 22
Lab 31 plus 17
Con 18 plus 6
LDem 8 plus 4
UKIP 3 plus 1
Green 2 minus 6
Alternatively we can conclude that sub samples are meaningless
A victim of the Westminster paedophile abuse scandal has claimed he saw a Conservative MP murder a young boy during a depraved sex party.
And the Sunday People can reveal that detectives are investigating THREE murders allegedly linked to a network of VIP perverts.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/i-watched-tory-mp-murder-4636497
Whilst both are obviously disgraceful crimes, why wouldn't they have identified the party of the other MP?
It's not, I'm sure, hard to work out
He left part way through season 7.
http://www.betfair.com/exchange/tennis/market?id=1.116233689
Though The Express has 50 MPs about to call for end of the TV licence fee.
I don't think I've ever rewatched a single episode of Enterprise, whilst I regularly rewatch TOS, TNG, DS9 and Voyager.
We keep getting told just how superior the Labour on the ground operation is compared to that of the Conservatives, we really don't seem to be seeing much of an effort or any real hunger to win from the Labour party in any of the recent by-elections. While Cameron's personal ratings are so much better than Miliband's, he is safe until the GE.
Could Ed Miliband not only end up being regarded as one of the most ineffective and out of touch Leaders of the Opposition, but also the laziest one we have had in recent times?
I've got a feeling though that both of these MPs were dead before Jimmy Saville. While I think it's still important that any such crimes are fully investigated, and any living perpetrators or abettors are brought to justice, our police and judiciary should focus first on those child rapists already exposed who are still freely walking the streets and probably still raping children.
I'd like to see Burgess succeed but he will be playing rugby league for Wigan in 2 years. You never know, so might Owen Farrel. And I can assure everybody that the recent RL tournament in Australia was 5 times faster 10 times more skilful and 20 times more entertaining than the dreary tosh served up recently here.
If there are living Tory MPs or exMPs that are guilty of these crimes then they should be sharing cells with Rotherham child rapists for a long time
While these cases of historic abuse certainly need to be investigated, I do think much more recent abuse - on apparently orders of magnitude greater scale - deserve even more attention......