Mr. Isam, a dozen seats (or even something like eight) would be a serious breakthrough.
By-elections are one thing (especially sort-of holds), but a dozen wins in a General Election would be another bag of monkeys entirely.
With Farage presently in a dogfight in Thanet South, according to Lord A's poll, and a likely fall in kipper polling at the general election, a dozen Faragist MP's in on the far side of most unlikely.
However I do expect Nige will prevail alongside Carswell and probably A N Other.
You dont see any Heywood and Middletons where UKIP manage to find another 700 votes ?
I would also like to think that if we left the CAP we would not repeat some of the most idiotic schemes that have some out of the EU in recent years. The most recent one - which is having a very serious effect on archaeological and wildlife sites - is the rules on permanent pasture. The Guardian highlighted the potential damage back in 2012 and unfortunately everything they feared has come to pass. with large tracts of previously unploughed pasture being ploughed up to meet EU regulations for subsidies.
UKIP apparently tried desperatley to stop the lady from resigning before suspending Bird, which lookes pretty reynardesque to me.
Pretty sure that whatever the facts of the situation, you'd have judged it to be "reynardesque". And racist somehow too. Your anti-UKIP prejudice is off the chart.
I can't believe anyone in the real world is going to care about the general secretary of UKIP's love life.
That's true, of course. However, the original UKIP statement referred to allegations ‘about the conduct of Mr Bird with regard to candidate selection’. If those allegations are substantiated, that could put UKIP into a difficult position. We'll have to wait and see, it may end up being nothing significant.
UKIP apparently tried desperatley to stop the lady from resigning before suspending Bird, which lookes pretty reynardesque to me.
Pretty sure that whatever the facts of the situation, you'd have judged it to be "reynardesque". And racist somehow too. Your anti-UKIP prejudice is off the chart.
One mustn't forget that anti-establishment UKIP are different from the other parties.
Except for the fruity office antics, allowance trousering, parachuting in favoured candidates, and wining and dining of the City boys in St James's gentlemen's clubs.
Groping is wrong, but to my mind is not as serious as something involving sexual activity.
One party claims it was consensual, the other denies it happened at all. At worst its a party ethics issue, there is nothing unlawful there. The facts of the matter such as have been disclosed at the moment seem to be he made a couple of rather tasteless passes at her and she turned him down.
Tough choices for the kippers. Who do they believe? The black woman socialist who has accused them of being mysogenistic racists or their highest paid official who just happens to be a posh member of an elite metropolitan club who has nothing more than a PPE from Cambridge?
UKIP apparently tried desperatley to stop the lady from resigning before suspending Bird, which lookes pretty reynardesque to me.
If Nigel Farage ordered a black coffee you'd claim that he was racist.
UKIP apparently tried desperatley to stop the lady from resigning before suspending Bird, which lookes pretty reynardesque to me.
Pretty sure that whatever the facts of the situation, you'd have judged it to be "reynardesque". And racist somehow too. Your anti-UKIP prejudice is off the chart.
One mustn't forget that anti-establishment UKIP are different from the other parties.
Except for the fruity office antics, allowance trousering, parachuting in favoured candidates, and wining and dining of the City boys in St James's gentlemen's clubs.
Ah, another independent observer of UKIP! Your objectivity is clearly evidence by the fact that, even though you overall dislike UKIP, you're capable of giving them credit on occasion.
By the way, can you point to a single time you've done that?
Incidentally I'm blocked from comments in my former identity. Just add -stry to my new name for improved continuity. I wonder what offended the monitors.
Maybe it was my suggestion that the rape accusation against the MP for Telford might have been connected in some way with his perceived likelihood to defect to UKIP. He was expected to be the next one to jump.
What are the WTO policies on agriculture and fisheries, foreign policy, defence, immigration, criminal justice, regional policy or human rights ?
None, but other international treaties will cover some of them, and if we were to leave the EU we would certainly enter into a treaty with the EU which would cover much of the rest.
Anyway, you seem to have missed my point. It is not the case, as UKIP and the BOOers pretend, that leaving the EU will mean parliament suddenly becomes sovereign (except in the formal sense in which it is sovereign today) over a whole range of areas. It's a much more nuanced position than that, and they are not being straight about how little difference it would make in practice. Actually, maybe it's not so much that they are not being straight, as that they haven't actually done any serious thinking at all on the matter.
That's why I was so impressed by Owen Paterson's speech. He does seem to be taking a serious look at what Brexit might actually mean. If we can get more of a handle on that, we can assess the pros and cons of leaving, but UKIP don't seem interested in that; in fact they don't even seem to understand the question.
Richard, there are several posters on this board that get into the policy detail of what we could and couldn't do if we left the EU, what various treaties require etc. To your credit, you are one of them, but all the rest are UKIP supporters.
Nope - all we have is 'it will be all right on the night' speculation. But on the assumption we want to maintain our high level of inward investment into the EU area - and want to maintain the presence of billions of pounds worth of our car industry - we would still want to be in the single market even if we left the EU. This being so as Mr Nabavi patiently points out, there would be very little difference to our current position. Parliament can be as sovereign as it wants but it being between a rock and a hard place in its choices will not make us better off or less beholden. Sovereignty is not a magic wand. It may well be that being in the EEA suits us, but only a fool would even begin to pretend it would make any real difference. And for this we get UKIP reduced to peddling its racist cant in order to steal votes from the Tory party and let in a Europhile Labour govt.
The latest allegations concerning a senior Ukip official will not help Ukip with its overall problem of differential polling between men and women and between young and old.The Ukip demographic of Daily Express readers is quickly running out of time to catch up.
UKIP apparently tried desperatley to stop the lady from resigning before suspending Bird, which lookes pretty reynardesque to me.
Pretty sure that whatever the facts of the situation, you'd have judged it to be "reynardesque". And racist somehow too. Your anti-UKIP prejudice is off the chart.
One mustn't forget that anti-establishment UKIP are different from the other parties.
Except for the fruity office antics, allowance trousering, parachuting in favoured candidates, and wining and dining of the City boys in St James's gentlemen's clubs.
Ah, another independent observer of UKIP! Your objectivity is clearly evidence by the fact that, even though you overall dislike UKIP, you're capable of giving them credit on occasion.
By the way, can you point to a single time you've done that?
Its just this weeks wishful thinking that something will damage the UKIP vote. The usual frothers come up with at least one a week, its doesnt seem to work, and just seems to piss off more waverers and send them to UKIP. Most people seem to have twigged it doesnt work, hell even the Spectator have worked it out
What are the WTO policies on agriculture and fisheries, foreign policy, defence, immigration, criminal justice, regional policy or human rights ?
None, but other international treaties will cover some of them, and if we were to leave the EU we would certainly enter into a treaty with the EU which would cover much of the rest.
Anyway, you seem to have missed my point. It is not the case, as UKIP and the BOOers pretend, that leaving the EU will mean parliament suddenly becomes sovereign (except in the formal sense in which it is sovereign today) over a whole range of areas. It's a much more nuanced position than that, and they are not being straight about how little difference it would make in practice. Actually, maybe it's not so much that they are not being straight, as that they haven't actually done any serious thinking at all on the matter.
That's why I was so impressed by Owen Paterson's speech. He does seem to be taking a serious look at what Brexit might actually mean. If we can get more of a handle on that, we can assess the pros and cons of leaving, but UKIP don't seem interested in that; in fact they don't even seem to understand the question.
Richard, there are several posters on this board that get into the policy detail of what we could and couldn't do if we left the EU, what various treaties require etc. To your credit, you are one of them, but all the rest are UKIP supporters.
Nope - all we have is 'it will be all right on the night' speculation. But on the assumption we want to maintain our high level of inward investment into the EU area - and want to maintain the presence of billions of pounds worth of our car industry - we would still want to be in the single market even if we left the EU. This being so as Mr Nabavi patiently points out, there would be very little difference to our current position. Parliament can be as sovereign as it wants but it being between a rock and a hard place in its choices will not make us better off or less beholden. Sovereignty is not a magic wand. It may well be that being in the EEA suits us, but only a fool would even begin to pretend it would make any real difference. And for this we get UKIP reduced to peddling its racist cant in order to steal votes from the Tory party and let in a Europhile Labour govt.
One can never be sure how self-government will turn out. That doesn't mean it isn't worth pursuing.
This is one person's response to Cable's comments. Sums up the mood.
Nobody is suggesting that the changes to VAT are new or sudden. They may be old news to you. We are simply pointing out that you forget to tell us. If you feel you have done a lot to communicate it to business, can I suggest you take a long hard look at your communications channels? They are clearly ineffective.
So, if I trade only in the UK, I don’t have to do anything. You do realise the Internet is a global marketplace, yes? Did I mention that there may be legal ramifications for avoiding sales to the EU? That big, happy, single market we all trade in.
If I sell through a marketplace [e.g. Amazon], I don’t have to do anything. So you are quite happy for us to feed the profits of global organisations - those that have manipulated their tax liability prior to these changes which, if rumours are true, forced this legislative change in the first place. Interesting that I will be worse off because I can’t afford to pay accountants to find loopholes for me. The global organisations will be better off because they can afford to pay accountants - and will continue to do so - and they will now benefit from a cut of my below-VAT-threshold turnover.
And, as a one-person, sole-trader operation, I should just register and administer VAT, keep records securely for 10 years (on a European server, no less), produce multi-currency invoices, and collect and verify instantly 2 pieces of place-of-supply evidence (and if these don’t match, one more for luck)? Evidence, I might add, that is not available to individuals to collect (and quite rightly so) - a point that has been verified by payment processors.
Yes, that clears up the change for me.
And, it clears up any doubts I had about the Government’s interest, or even knowledge of, the burgeoning and innovative micro-business sector in the UK
I can't believe anyone in the real world is going to care about the general secretary of UKIP's love life.
That's true, of course. However, the original UKIP statement referred to allegations ‘about the conduct of Mr Bird with regard to candidate selection’. If those allegations are substantiated, that could put UKIP into a difficult position. We'll have to wait and see, it may end up being nothing significant.
I doubt that the general public will care about that either. They aren't interested in any details about UKIP at all. Nothing short of a sex tape involving Nigel Farage in Nazi paraphernalia, meerkats and the Clacton Women's Institute is likely to be noticed with disfavour by their supporters. Even then, I expect that some on here would be arguing that it would be potentially well-received in Thurrock and Thanet. And who knows, they might be right.
Incidentally I'm blocked from comments in my former identity. Just add -stry to my new name for improved continuity. I wonder what offended the monitors.
Maybe it was my suggestion that the rape accusation against the MP for Telford might have been connected in some way with his perceived likelihood to defect to UKIP. He was expected to be the next one to jump.
That would seem sufficiently incendiary to supress. Dark forces at work.
I can't believe anyone in the real world is going to care about the general secretary of UKIP's love life.
I think the General Secretary and his alleged lover may. Beyond them there is very little of interest for people with real lives.
The General Secretary using his posh London Metropolitan Elite private club as a honey trap (''he took me down to the snooker room'') for prospective candidates who he has power over is not a 'love life'. Its sleazy UKIP hypocrisy coming on top of other accusations of 'fixing' selection.
Roger Bird, Ukip's General Secretary, tells The Telegraph he has emails and texts to prove his innocence and that he had a 'consensual' relationship with star Ukip candidate
The plot thickens
Wouldn't surprise me if the next PB collective outrage against Ukip was for its hasty suspension of an innocent ex Tory councillor to curry favour with the leftys & get Ed in no 10
it was "swiftly and decisively" done - so I'd imagine these texts don't amount to a hill of beans as they will have been thoroughly checked out ?
You are always wrong so I'm thinking he is probably telling the truth
A yes it's my fault. I am an immigrant after all so that is consistent.
But you are consistently wrong when making calls on here.
What ever happened to that "PB Tories always wrong " chap ?
1970s yearning, 2009 trolling.
He is easy enough to find on twitter if you are missing him.. his comments/views have not changed
I don't mean anything personal to you, just that you keep making big statements that turn out to be wrong
I can't believe anyone in the real world is going to care about the general secretary of UKIP's love life.
I think the General Secretary and his alleged lover may. Beyond them there is very little of interest for people with real lives.
The General Secretary using his posh London Metropolitan Elite private club as a honey trap (''he took me down to the snooker room'') for prospective candidates who he has power over is not a 'love life'. Its sleazy UKIP hypocrisy coming on top of other accusations of 'fixing' selection.
I doubt that the general public will care about that either. They aren't interested in any details about UKIP at all. Nothing short of a sex tape involving Nigel Farage in Nazi paraphernalia, meerkats and the Clacton Women's Institute is likely to be noticed with disfavour by their supporters. Even then, I expect that some on here would be arguing that it would be potentially well-received in Thurrock and Thanet. And who knows, they might be right.
I wasn't thinking about the reaction of the general public, but more about the internal tensions regarding candidate selection and possible disruption in some constituency parties if the selection process has to be redone. It may all amount to nothing, of course, but, if there is a danger to UKIP, that is where it might lie.
What are the WTO policies on agriculture and fisheries, foreign policy, defence, immigration, criminal justice, regional policy or human rights ?
None, but other international treaties will cover some of them, and if we were to leave the EU we would certainly enter into a treaty with the EU which would cover much of the rest.
That's why I was so impressed by Owen Paterson's speech. He does seem to be taking a serious look at what Brexit might actually mean. If we can get more of a handle on that, we can assess the pros and cons of leaving, but UKIP don't seem interested in that; in fact they don't even seem to understand the question.
Richard, there are several posters on this board that get into the policy detail of what we could and couldn't do if we left the EU, what various treaties require etc. To your credit, you are one of them, but all the rest are UKIP supporters.
Nope - all we have is 'it will be all right on the night' speculation. But on the assumption we want to maintain our high level of inward investment into the EU area - and want to maintain the presence of billions of pounds worth of our car industry - we would still want to be in the single market even if we left the EU. This being so as Mr Nabavi patiently points out, there would be very little difference to our current position. Parliament can be as sovereign as it wants but it being between a rock and a hard place in its choices will not make us better off or less beholden. Sovereignty is not a magic wand. It may well be that being in the EEA suits us, but only a fool would even begin to pretend it would make any real difference. And for this we get UKIP reduced to peddling its racist cant in order to steal votes from the Tory party and let in a Europhile Labour govt.
In Thurrock UKIP are odds on to win, and voting Tory will result in Labour winning a Tory seat, so a two seat swing Tory>Lab
The Tories in the area have been making a lot of the fact that he UKIP candidates name is "Timur", not "Tim", and putting his name next to pictures of muslim terrorists, saying he is not a local.
What do you make of that? You haven't criticised it as far as I have seen on here
It is playing politics with ethnicity and if it works will result in Labour gains, would have thought you would be enraged
The General Secretary using his posh London Metropolitan Elite private club as a honey trap (''he took me down to the snooker room'') for prospective candidates who he has power over is not a 'love life'. Its sleazy UKIP hypocrisy coming on top of other accusations of 'fixing' selection.
Women in the snooker room? Whatever next? Incontrovertible proof that the country has gone to the dogs.
I know Roger Bird, and he's no Lord Reynard. Single, shy, politically obsessive accountant... Disappointing that he defected from the Conservatives, but, sexual harassment? Do me a favour!
I can't believe anyone in the real world is going to care about the general secretary of UKIP's love life.
I think the General Secretary and his alleged lover may. Beyond them there is very little of interest for people with real lives.
The General Secretary using his posh London Metropolitan Elite private club as a honey trap (''he took me down to the snooker room'') for prospective candidates who he has power over is not a 'love life'. Its sleazy UKIP hypocrisy coming on top of other accusations of 'fixing' selection.
Which of course never happens in other parties.
No one says it hasn't happened in other parties.
But one of UKIP's selling points was that 'they're different', when clearly they're not, and possibly worse.
UKIP apparently tried desperatley to stop the lady from resigning before suspending Bird, which lookes pretty reynardesque to me.
Pretty sure that whatever the facts of the situation, you'd have judged it to be "reynardesque". And racist somehow too. Your anti-UKIP prejudice is off the chart.
One mustn't forget that anti-establishment UKIP are different from the other parties.
Except for the fruity office antics, allowance trousering, parachuting in favoured candidates, and wining and dining of the City boys in St James's gentlemen's clubs.
Ah, another independent observer of UKIP! Your objectivity is clearly evidence by the fact that, even though you overall dislike UKIP, you're capable of giving them credit on occasion.
By the way, can you point to a single time you've done that?
Its just this weeks wishful thinking that something will damage the UKIP vote. The usual frothers come up with at least one a week, its doesnt seem to work, and just seems to piss off more waverers and send them to UKIP. Most people seem to have twigged it doesnt work, hell even the Spectator have worked it out
Of course the 'Republican War on Women' strategy didn't work for the Democrats either but I suspect the media will keep on pushing the UKIP hate women meme for a while yet. The general public will bored senseless and will continue to purchase newspapers in every declining numbers.
I am rather surprised that Tories dont see the real opportunities in the Roger Bird situation. Its very unlikely to do significant damage to UKIP as it stands, the accusations are too dull and even Rod Liddle is falling asleep looking at them. If on the other hand it rebounds on Labour because it was for want of a better word, a honey trap, it would be hugely embarrassing and a major scandal. Tories obsessing about UKIP forget that UKIP will get 8 seats on a good day, they should really be obsessing about Labour.
Groping is wrong, but to my mind is not as serious as something involving sexual activity.
One party claims it was consensual, the other denies it happened at all. At worst its a party ethics issue, there is nothing unlawful there. The facts of the matter such as have been disclosed at the moment seem to be he made a couple of rather tasteless passes at her and she turned him down.
Tough choices for the kippers. Who do they believe? The black woman socialist who has accused them of being mysogenistic racists or their highest paid official who just happens to be a posh member of an elite metropolitan club who has nothing more than a PPE from Cambridge?
UKIP apparently tried desperatley to stop the lady from resigning before suspending Bird, which lookes pretty reynardesque to me.
If Nigel Farage ordered a black coffee you'd claim that he was racist.
At least tim when he was here was partially savvy about his smearing. He would be selective, giving credit for some things before really going to town on what he knew was a weak point. People like Flightpath and TheWatcher have just ruined their credibility from being so uniformly anti-UKIP. Their opinion isn't worth anything because you know what judgment it's going to make before you read it.
"London Mayor Boris Johnson has said that breastfeeding mothers should be “discreet” when feeding their babies in public.
Asked during phone-in interview on LBC radio whether he approved of Claridges’ decision to ask a mother breastfeeding her child to cover herself, the Mayor initially responded: “I don’t know about this, I wasn’t there and it wasn’t clear to me how much of her breast was exposed.”
Pushed by interviewer Nick Ferrari, Mr Johnson eventually claimed: “It depends how you do it, in my view. I think you can do it in a sort of discreet way, I think Claridges were a little bit clumsy in the way that they wade in. But what do I know?” "
The General Secretary using his posh London Metropolitan Elite private club as a honey trap (''he took me down to the snooker room'') for prospective candidates who he has power over is not a 'love life'. Its sleazy UKIP hypocrisy coming on top of other accusations of 'fixing' selection.
Women in the snooker room? Whatever next? Incontrovertible proof that the country has gone to the dogs.
And that’s UKIP. Who are supposed to be saving us from that fate!
As the man in Clacton said. “Never saw that Tory MP, so I’m voting UKIP”!
I can't believe anyone in the real world is going to care about the general secretary of UKIP's love life.
I think the General Secretary and his alleged lover may. Beyond them there is very little of interest for people with real lives.
The General Secretary using his posh London Metropolitan Elite private club as a honey trap (''he took me down to the snooker room'') for prospective candidates who he has power over is not a 'love life'. Its sleazy UKIP hypocrisy coming on top of other accusations of 'fixing' selection.
Which of course never happens in other parties.
No one says it hasn't happened in other parties.
But one of UKIP's selling points was that 'they're different', when clearly they're not, and possibly worse.
But you continue to feel their voters care, when they clearly dont. Every time someone is outraged at Farage, faux or otherwise their vote goes up.
Wildly off topic, but every week Populus conduct an illuminating opinion poll on what people have remembered from the news over the last week. Does anyone know whether they are proposing to do something similar for what people remember from the news over 2014?
"London Mayor Boris Johnson has said that breastfeeding mothers should be “discreet” when feeding their babies in public.
Asked during phone-in interview on LBC radio whether he approved of Claridges’ decision to ask a mother breastfeeding her child to cover herself, the Mayor initially responded: “I don’t know about this, I wasn’t there and it wasn’t clear to me how much of her breast was exposed.”
Pushed by interviewer Nick Ferrari, Mr Johnson eventually claimed: “It depends how you do it, in my view. I think you can do it in a sort of discreet way, I think Claridges were a little bit clumsy in the way that they wade in. But what do I know?” "
"London Mayor Boris Johnson has said that breastfeeding mothers should be “discreet” when feeding their babies in public.
Asked during phone-in interview on LBC radio whether he approved of Claridges’ decision to ask a mother breastfeeding her child to cover herself, the Mayor initially responded: “I don’t know about this, I wasn’t there and it wasn’t clear to me how much of her breast was exposed.”
Pushed by interviewer Nick Ferrari, Mr Johnson eventually claimed: “It depends how you do it, in my view. I think you can do it in a sort of discreet way, I think Claridges were a little bit clumsy in the way that they wade in. But what do I know?” "
I am waiting for the shrieks of outrage, pages of condemnation, endless quotes from mumsnet etc from Mr Jessop, Flightpath, TheWatcher and all the usual suspects, but I suspect I might wait in vain, since its not Farage but cuddly old Boris.
Mr. Flightpath, UK VAT has a threshold of £81,000. The new EU insanity has a threshold of £0. There are already stories of people trying to pre-emptively register for VAT in the UK (for the VATMOSS scheme) and finding it less than easy. And there are (apparently) quarterly VAT reports to file.
All if you sell a single $0.99 e-book, for example, directly to someone outside the UK but in the EU. It's bloody ridiculous.
You may be right about this. However the MOSS system is supposed to apply the VAT to the different countries at the different rates. If the MOSS system is indeed difficult then that is another issue. Its been made clear that sellers do not have to apply VAT to domestic customers. I suppose it looks good saying ''if you sell a single $0.99 e-book'' - but is selling a single ebook for 99p a real business proposition? How many real businesses are really affected like that? Clearly there are some small sellers who sell small amounts to the EU area and clearly it is a distraction they could do without. But this is what goes with the territory of e-commerce. I sit at home in the UK and buy something from my PC. Is it asking too much of me to expect to pay UK VAT? If so why should that not apply to a German? Is it not naive to expect ecommerce not to be affected by global never mind EU rules? Eg- http://ptlb.in/ecommerce/ Of course the other issue about books is that a paper book is VAT free. An ebook is classed differently. Both you and I might question why?
If we were out of the EU and in the EEA like Norway we would still be subject to this rule of course. The EU and its rules is not going to go away. And changes in WTO rules on this subject are clearly not going to go away either.
"London Mayor Boris Johnson has said that breastfeeding mothers should be “discreet” when feeding their babies in public.
Asked during phone-in interview on LBC radio whether he approved of Claridges’ decision to ask a mother breastfeeding her child to cover herself, the Mayor initially responded: “I don’t know about this, I wasn’t there and it wasn’t clear to me how much of her breast was exposed.”
Pushed by interviewer Nick Ferrari, Mr Johnson eventually claimed: “It depends how you do it, in my view. I think you can do it in a sort of discreet way, I think Claridges were a little bit clumsy in the way that they wade in. But what do I know?” "
I can't believe anyone in the real world is going to care about the general secretary of UKIP's love life.
I think the General Secretary and his alleged lover may. Beyond them there is very little of interest for people with real lives.
The General Secretary using his posh London Metropolitan Elite private club as a honey trap (''he took me down to the snooker room'') for prospective candidates who he has power over is not a 'love life'. Its sleazy UKIP hypocrisy coming on top of other accusations of 'fixing' selection.
Which of course never happens in other parties.
No one says it hasn't happened in other parties.
But one of UKIP's selling points was that 'they're different', when clearly they're not, and possibly worse.
But you continue to feel their voters care, when they clearly dont. Every time someone is outraged at Farage, faux or otherwise their vote goes up.
Except I don't feel their voters care. It's highly amusing.
"London Mayor Boris Johnson has said that breastfeeding mothers should be “discreet” when feeding their babies in public.
Asked during phone-in interview on LBC radio whether he approved of Claridges’ decision to ask a mother breastfeeding her child to cover herself, the Mayor initially responded: “I don’t know about this, I wasn’t there and it wasn’t clear to me how much of her breast was exposed.”
Pushed by interviewer Nick Ferrari, Mr Johnson eventually claimed: “It depends how you do it, in my view. I think you can do it in a sort of discreet way, I think Claridges were a little bit clumsy in the way that they wade in. But what do I know?” "
I am waiting for the shrieks of outrage, pages of condemnation, endless quotes from mumsnet etc from Mr Jessop, Flightpath, TheWatcher and all the usual suspects, but I suspect I might wait in vain, since its not Farage but cuddly old Boris.
Johnson's as bad as Forage. He'd make an alley cat look like an angel.
Mr. Flightpath, UK VAT has a threshold of £81,000. The new EU insanity has a threshold of £0. There are already stories of people trying to pre-emptively register for VAT in the UK (for the VATMOSS scheme) and finding it less than easy. And there are (apparently) quarterly VAT reports to file.
All if you sell a single $0.99 e-book, for example, directly to someone outside the UK but in the EU. It's bloody ridiculous.
You may be right about this. However the MOSS system is supposed to apply the VAT to the different countries at the different rates. If the MOSS system is indeed difficult then that is another issue. Its been made clear that sellers do not have to apply VAT to domestic customers.
I think MOSS will only let you register at the moment if you are over the UK VAT threshold, which is a trifle annoying if you are a modest trader selling £40K or so of goods a year, a viable business by any stretch and enough to support a family, then you get a sale in Germany and find you need to pay VAT there, but MOSS won't let you register because you are under the threshold, and you have a whole load of new paperwork to prepare and keep up to date which completely swamp the marginal profit you just made.
Mr. Flightpath, my books are, understandably, in English. I've sold perhaps 4-5 e-books in Germany, France and maybe Spain. You think (if I did it directly, rather than via Amazon) it's fair for me to have to jump through costly administrative hoops because of that (total value of said sales was probably around £3)?
Sole traders doing direct sales (ie through their own website) can't opt out of selling to the EU because that's against cross-border rules. They also can't collect the necessary pieces of information or hold them for 10 years, because that contravenes privacy legislation.
The UK would not be subject to it if we left, so if an American sold something to a Briton they wouldn't need to register for VAT in the UK. Under this law, they would.
Also we would not be involved in the sort of idiocy where we are currently subsidising Greek and Bulgarian tobacco farmers, and at the same time paying into EU funds to campaign to reduce the levels of smoking in the EU. Not only that but those products are pretty rough and have next to no export market, so we are in effect handing that money straight to those countries to poison themselves.
IIRC that stopped a few years ago, and there is no subsidy for tobacco farming.
Also we would not be involved in the sort of idiocy where we are currently subsidising Greek and Bulgarian tobacco farmers, and at the same time paying into EU funds to campaign to reduce the levels of smoking in the EU. Not only that but those products are pretty rough and have next to no export market, so we are in effect handing that money straight to those countries to poison themselves.
IIRC that stopped a few years ago, and there is no subsidy for tobacco farming.
Sole traders doing direct sales (ie through their own website) can't opt out of selling to the EU because that's against cross-border rules.
Do you have a link for that? That's what our company is considering doing, but if it's not allowed then I guess we'll have to stop direct sales to consumers in the UK as well.
it's not the cost of food that is expensive about eating well (you can buy calotie packed ready meaks for pennies from icelsmd/farm foods). Its the other stuff like the electricity cost to run your fridge 24/7 or cook with the oven for 45 mins vs 3 mins in the microwave. Putting together a decent set of pots pans knives oven dishes etc is an expensive capital investment for people who are living pay cheque to pay cheque.
Is it time for me to dust down my more efficient vote scenario again? Whilst it may be true that UKIP is currently taking more votes of the Tories than Labour (and the evidence for that seems to be mixed once they get over about 12%) that does not mean that the Tories will be the most damaged in seats.
At the last election the Tory vote of nearly 37% was incredibly inefficient because they built up huge, pointless majorities in most of southern England. If their majority in, say, Kent seats is now halved or more by the UKIP effect but they still manage to win a similar share of the vote nationally then logic indicates that they are winning more votes somewhere else such as the south west, the midlands or even London on recent polling. That effect might well give them seats which were out of reach in 2010, particularly Lib Dem ones.
34% was something of an outlier but if that became a regular thing over this month with UKIP still in the higher teens I would suggest my hypothesis is likely to be tested.
This is plausible, however, some counter-arguments.
In the pre-UKIP days it roughly followed that if the Tory vote was distributed more efficiently then the Labour or Liberal votes had to be distributed less efficiently. However, this no longer applies. Just as the 2010 Lib Dems are the source of new voters for all the other parties, so the vastly increased and [presumably] massively inefficient UKIP vote means that the efficiency of the distribution of the vote for all three of Labour, Liberals and the Conservatives will increase at GE2015.
So the question is not - will the Conservative vote be distributed more efficiently at GE2015, but will the Conservative vote be distributed more efficiently than the Labour [or Lib Dem] vote?
My best guess is that the efficiency of the Liberal vote will increase by more than that of the Conservatives, and that though the gap between the Conservatives and Labour will narrow, vote distribution efficiency will still give Labour a chunky lead on seats on equal national vote shares.
Of course, it's still possible that Cameron and Osborne will surprise us all, and win a majority on 40% of the national vote, rendering such details immaterial - it's still within Professor Fisher's confidence interval...
What seems to be forgotten is that the ordinary public dont judge parties based on scandals occuring from time to time but on how they react to the scandal and deal with the situation
it's not the cost of food that is expensive about eating well (you can buy calotie packed ready meaks for pennies from icelsmd/farm foods). Its the other stuff like the electricity cost to run your fridge 24/7 or cook with the oven for 45 mins vs 3 mins in the microwave. Putting together a decent set of pots pans knives oven dishes etc is an expensive capital investment for people who are living pay cheque to pay cheque.
it's not the cost of food that is expensive about eating well (you can buy calotie packed ready meaks for pennies from icelsmd/farm foods). Its the other stuff like the electricity cost to run your fridge 24/7 or cook with the oven for 45 mins vs 3 mins in the microwave. Putting together a decent set of pots pans knives oven dishes etc is an expensive capital investment for people who are living pay cheque to pay cheque.
Single, middle aged senior executive may or may not have had a relationship with a younger, single, female at work. Is anybody surprised or outraged at this? Honestly?
"London Mayor Boris Johnson has said that breastfeeding mothers should be “discreet” when feeding their babies in public.
Asked during phone-in interview on LBC radio whether he approved of Claridges’ decision to ask a mother breastfeeding her child to cover herself, the Mayor initially responded: “I don’t know about this, I wasn’t there and it wasn’t clear to me how much of her breast was exposed.”
Pushed by interviewer Nick Ferrari, Mr Johnson eventually claimed: “It depends how you do it, in my view. I think you can do it in a sort of discreet way, I think Claridges were a little bit clumsy in the way that they wade in. But what do I know?” "
I am waiting for the shrieks of outrage, pages of condemnation, endless quotes from mumsnet etc from Mr Jessop, Flightpath, TheWatcher and all the usual suspects, but I suspect I might wait in vain, since its not Farage but cuddly old Boris.
Johnson suggested Claridges 'waded in' and were 'clumsy'. Is this what Farage said? He said the opposite he said they were entitled to do what they wanted. Good old Boris says 'what do I know?' ie quite definitely not setting himself up as an arbiter. A sensible political choice.
UKIP's HQ and Admin operation has been chaotically led by Farage for many years. Hence my surprise that this Bird episode did look like a shining example of professionalism from what has initially come out (suspended and investigation underway). Not much point in debating it here until more information/allegations come out. What is true is that none of those involved will emerge as winners. I always wonder why one of the two parties went to the media at this stage, but too late to close the door now.
it's not the cost of food that is expensive about eating well (you can buy calotie packed ready meaks for pennies from icelsmd/farm foods). Its the other stuff like the electricity cost to run your fridge 24/7 or cook with the oven for 45 mins vs 3 mins in the microwave. Putting together a decent set of pots pans knives oven dishes etc is an expensive capital investment for people who are living pay cheque to pay cheque.
What do you think is the cost to run a fridge for a month, out of interest?
"London Mayor Boris Johnson has said that breastfeeding mothers should be “discreet” when feeding their babies in public.
Asked during phone-in interview on LBC radio whether he approved of Claridges’ decision to ask a mother breastfeeding her child to cover herself, the Mayor initially responded: “I don’t know about this, I wasn’t there and it wasn’t clear to me how much of her breast was exposed.”
Pushed by interviewer Nick Ferrari, Mr Johnson eventually claimed: “It depends how you do it, in my view. I think you can do it in a sort of discreet way, I think Claridges were a little bit clumsy in the way that they wade in. But what do I know?” "
I am waiting for the shrieks of outrage, pages of condemnation, endless quotes from mumsnet etc from Mr Jessop, Flightpath, TheWatcher and all the usual suspects, but I suspect I might wait in vain, since its not Farage but cuddly old Boris.
It's disgusting! The Tories hate women breast-feeding! God, they make me sick.
I can't wait until JackW's clever jokes about this though. They're going to be hilarious.
Whatever the truth of the Roger Bird matter, Natasha Bolter is someone who seriously suggested female only tube carriages.. she seems a very odd person if twitter accounts are any measure of someone's personality (assuming it is her real account @bnasa)
Also seems like she just came out of a relationship that she didn't want to be over
The General Secretary using his posh London Metropolitan Elite private club as a honey trap (''he took me down to the snooker room'') for prospective candidates who he has power over is not a 'love life'. Its sleazy UKIP hypocrisy coming on top of other accusations of 'fixing' selection.
Women in the snooker room? Whatever next? Incontrovertible proof that the country has gone to the dogs.
And that’s UKIP. Who are supposed to be saving us from that fate!
As the man in Clacton said. “Never saw that Tory MP, so I’m voting UKIP”!
Its a nice line but surely the man in Clacton never said that did he?
Oh and as for ''Women in the snooker room? Whatever next?'' - well all that shows is that the senior kipper was a member of a posh metrosexual elite private london club.
This month, How To Eat is tackling a quintessentially British snack – toast. Sounds simple, right? But how wrong you are. Do you use a toaster or grill? White sliced or rye, sourdough or seeded multigrain? And that’s just the start of it …
"London Mayor Boris Johnson has said that breastfeeding mothers should be “discreet” when feeding their babies in public.
Asked during phone-in interview on LBC radio whether he approved of Claridges’ decision to ask a mother breastfeeding her child to cover herself, the Mayor initially responded: “I don’t know about this, I wasn’t there and it wasn’t clear to me how much of her breast was exposed.”
Pushed by interviewer Nick Ferrari, Mr Johnson eventually claimed: “It depends how you do it, in my view. I think you can do it in a sort of discreet way, I think Claridges were a little bit clumsy in the way that they wade in. But what do I know?” "
I am waiting for the shrieks of outrage, pages of condemnation, endless quotes from mumsnet etc from Mr Jessop, Flightpath, TheWatcher and all the usual suspects, but I suspect I might wait in vain, since its not Farage but cuddly old Boris.
It's disgusting! The Tories hate women breast-feeding! God, they make me sick.
I can't wait until JackW's clever jokes about this though. They're going to be hilarious.
This month, How To Eat is tackling a quintessentially British snack – toast. Sounds simple, right? But how wrong you are. Do you use a toaster or grill? White sliced or rye, sourdough or seeded multigrain? And that’s just the start of it …
"London Mayor Boris Johnson has said that breastfeeding mothers should be “discreet” when feeding their babies in public.
Asked during phone-in interview on LBC radio whether he approved of Claridges’ decision to ask a mother breastfeeding her child to cover herself, the Mayor initially responded: “I don’t know about this, I wasn’t there and it wasn’t clear to me how much of her breast was exposed.”
Pushed by interviewer Nick Ferrari, Mr Johnson eventually claimed: “It depends how you do it, in my view. I think you can do it in a sort of discreet way, I think Claridges were a little bit clumsy in the way that they wade in. But what do I know?” "
I am waiting for the shrieks of outrage, pages of condemnation, endless quotes from mumsnet etc from Mr Jessop, Flightpath, TheWatcher and all the usual suspects, but I suspect I might wait in vain, since its not Farage but cuddly old Boris.
It's disgusting! The Tories hate women breast-feeding! God, they make me sick.
I can't wait until JackW's clever jokes about this though. They're going to be hilarious.
Michael Crick @MichaelLCrick · 8m8 minutes ago Roger Bird tells me he has emails and texts which show he and Natasha Bolter had a relationship between 18 September and 2 November
Michael Crick @MichaelLCrick · 5m5 minutes ago Roger Bird 1: "Natasha Bolter and I were in a consensual relationship between 18 September and 2 November ...."
Michael Crick @MichaelLCrick · 4m4 minutes ago Roger Bird 2: "... well after her admission to the list of approved candidates, with interest on both sides ....
Michael Crick @MichaelLCrick · 3m3 minutes ago Roger Bird 3: "She was keen on me and I was keen on her. I have got emails and texts to show we had a relationship ...."
Michael Crick @MichaelLCrick · 2m2 minutes ago Roger Bird 4: ".... and I will be presenting these to the inquiry. In any relationship there are some texts of an intimate nature."
On topic, UKIP do appear to hurting the Tories in the marginals as per Lord Ashcroft's poll of the marginals.
That said, I wonder if turnout next year will help reduce the damage for the Blues.
As Mike has pointed out before, UKIP do appear to have significant support from people who didn't vote last time and don't turn out to vote, will we see that phenomenon next May?
Is this the most Guardian article of all time How to eat: toast This month, How To Eat is tackling a quintessentially British snack – toast. Sounds simple, right? But how wrong you are. Do you use a toaster or grill? White sliced or rye, sourdough or seeded multigrain? And that’s just the start of it … http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2014/dec/09/how-to-eat-toast
Is this "How to eat" series designed to address publicity failures by Labour Leaders in social settings?
Golden rule, never poke the payroll, it usually ends up very messy.
For the chaps who are worried they may get sued for sexual harassment. Keep the sexual harassment complaint forms in the bottom drawer. That way, when she goes to get one you'll get a great view of her arse.
Whatever the truth of the Roger Bird matter, Natasha Bolter is someone who seriously suggested female only tube carriages.. she seems a very odd person if twitter accounts are any measure of someone's personality (assuming it is her real account @bnasa)
Also seems like she just came out of a relationship that she didn't want to be over
I can't believe anyone in the real world is going to care about the general secretary of UKIP's love life.
I think the General Secretary and his alleged lover may. Beyond them there is very little of interest for people with real lives.
The General Secretary using his posh London Metropolitan Elite private club as a honey trap (''he took me down to the snooker room'') for prospective candidates who he has power over is not a 'love life'. Its sleazy UKIP hypocrisy coming on top of other accusations of 'fixing' selection.
Which of course never happens in other parties.
No one says it hasn't happened in other parties.
But one of UKIP's selling points was that 'they're different', when clearly they're not, and possibly worse.
But you continue to feel their voters care, when they clearly dont. Every time someone is outraged at Farage, faux or otherwise their vote goes up.
Except I don't feel their voters care. It's highly amusing.
Whatever the truth of the matter, Natasha Bolter seriously suggested female only tube carriages.. she seems a very odd person if twitter accounts are any measure of someone's personality (assuming it is her real account @bnasa
Under the above circumstances what is odd is that you should think it is odd to suggest female only carriages. It may not be the right solution, for the very good reason that men should behave properly towards women, but be honest is it so 'odd'.
It's the pro-EU side that don't want to consider the cost/benefit of EU membership.
You might be right, but the side advocating the status quo always has an easier task.
Look, I have an open mind. I'm one of the voters the BOOers might be able to persuade. But I won't be persuaded by Alex Salmond-style fantasies where the rest of the world, and in particular our EU friends, give us everything we want for nothing in return, and where we get all the advantages of international treaties without any corresponding obligations.
"In September 2014, Parliamentary Under Secretary for transport Claire Perry MP mentioned a possible revival of the women-only carriages idea during a speech to a fringe event at the Conservative Party conference. [26]"
Whatever the truth of the Roger Bird matter, Natasha Bolter is someone who seriously suggested female only tube carriages.. she seems a very odd person if twitter accounts are any measure of someone's personality (assuming it is her real account @bnasa)
Also seems like she just came out of a relationship that she didn't want to be over
When he took over the leadership of Labour four years ago, Ed Miliband decreed that the revival of the party begins in Scotland.” It has actually gone into reverse since then. The new leader of the Scottish Labour party has a little more than 20 weeks from Saturday to turn that around and the stakes could not be higher.
Whatever the truth of the Roger Bird matter, Natasha Bolter is someone who seriously suggested female only tube carriages.. she seems a very odd person if twitter accounts are any measure of someone's personality (assuming it is her real account @bnasa)
Also seems like she just came out of a relationship that she didn't want to be over
This twitter account presents itself as an impartial political geek resource, but is a Labour party strategist I believe
@election_data @election_data · 6m6 minutes ago Some interesting thoughts in the @BESResearch study on UKIP-Labour but mostly useless, in a literal sense. There, I've said it.
On topic, UKIP do appear to hurting the Tories in the marginals as per Lord Ashcroft's poll of the marginals. That said, I wonder if turnout next year will help reduce the damage for the Blues. As Mike has pointed out before, UKIP do appear to have significant support from people who didn't vote last time and don't turn out to vote, will we see that phenomenon next May?
The BES findings are:- 1. UKIP will not do much damage to the Tories in marginals (I disagree). 2. UKIP get a similar % of DNV people as other parties.
Whatever the truth of the matter, Natasha Bolter seriously suggested female only tube carriages.. she seems a very odd person if twitter accounts are any measure of someone's personality (assuming it is her real account @bnasa
Its self evident she is a vert odd person. She joined UKIP.
You will feel a bit stupid when she is burned alive at the party spring conference and recants at the stake.
This twitter account presents itself as an impartial political geek resource, but is a Labour party strategist I believe
@election_data @election_data · 6m6 minutes ago Some interesting thoughts in the @BESResearch study on UKIP-Labour but mostly useless, in a literal sense. There, I've said it.
Ian Warren who runs election data, is an impartial political geek, his data analysis led to both UKIP and Labour trying to hire him.
He chose Labour.
He's less of a strategist, more the British Nate Silver.
Alex Salmond has refused to hand back a £65,000 ‘golden goodbye’ he claimed from the taxpayer when he stood down as an MP despite confirming he wants to return to Westminster.
Resettlement grants are supposed to provide financial assistance to MPs leaving politics but Mr Salmond controversially accepted the money from the Commons authorities when he gave up his Banff and Buchan seat at the 2010 general election.
The decision provoked widespread criticism because at the time he was also earning around £57,000 per year as an MSP at the Scottish Parliament and a further £80,000 as Scotland’s First Minister.
Opposition parties last night urged him repay the cash after he confirmed at the weekend that he intends to contest the Gordon seat at Westminster in next May’s general election.
The SNP issued a statement saying Mr Salmond donated half the £50,000 he received after tax to a charity he set up in his mother’s name. A party spokesman said that if elected next year he would also donate either his MP or MSP salary to the Mary Salmond Trust. Related Articles
Alex Salmond has pocketed £25,000 of a pay-off he received after standing down as an MP However, there was no mention of the remaining £25,000 or what he did with the money given he has remained in front-line politics ever since.
Whatever the truth of the matter, Natasha Bolter seriously suggested female only tube carriages.. she seems a very odd person if twitter accounts are any measure of someone's personality (assuming it is her real account @bnasa
Under the above circumstances what is odd is that you should think it is odd to suggest female only carriages. It may not be the right solution, for the very good reason that men should behave properly towards women, but be honest is it so 'odd'.
Nice try but I didn't say she was odd for suggesting that, although I don't think it is a good idea. The account on the whole has a lot of mixed messages which read as rather odd
What do you make of the Tories ethnic politicking against UKIP's candidate in Thurrock which may well result in a Lab gain from the Tories?
On topic, UKIP do appear to hurting the Tories in the marginals as per Lord Ashcroft's poll of the marginals. That said, I wonder if turnout next year will help reduce the damage for the Blues. As Mike has pointed out before, UKIP do appear to have significant support from people who didn't vote last time and don't turn out to vote, will we see that phenomenon next May?
The BES findings are:- 1. UKIP will not do much damage to the Tories in marginals (I disagree). 2. UKIP get a similar % of DNV people as other parties.
Cheers, I have the lurgy, so I don't have the energy to wade through the report.
On topic, UKIP do appear to hurting the Tories in the marginals as per Lord Ashcroft's poll of the marginals.
That said, I wonder if turnout next year will help reduce the damage for the Blues.
As Mike has pointed out before, UKIP do appear to have significant support from people who didn't vote last time and don't turn out to vote, will we see that phenomenon next May?
The BES people said that UKIP's non-voter share is no more than other parties. The standouts in this area are the Greens, who do bring in previous non-participants.
"UKIP is picking up support from those who distrust politicians, but crucially, this support is significantly higher among those distrusting of MPs and who tend to vote in general elections."
Whatever the truth of the Roger Bird matter, Natasha Bolter is someone who seriously suggested female only tube carriages.. she seems a very odd person if twitter accounts are any measure of someone's personality (assuming it is her real account @bnasa)
Also seems like she just came out of a relationship that she didn't want to be over
Mr. Financier, one more reason, not that it were needed, to dislike Salmond.
Mr. Flightpath, UK VAT has a threshold of £81,000. The new EU insanity has a threshold of £0. There are already stories of people trying to pre-emptively register for VAT in the UK (for the VATMOSS scheme) and finding it less than easy. And there are (apparently) quarterly VAT reports to file.
All if you sell a single $0.99 e-book, for example, directly to someone outside the UK but in the EU. It's bloody ridiculous.
There is very significant anger about this. Sole traders and small companies didn't realise this was coming in until a couple of months ago. Communication from the Government (both of them, Cable claims this was agreed in 2008) has been utterly lacking.
The whole point was to cut Amazon et al. down to size, and the impact is to entrench the position of internet portals/marketplaces (like, er, Amazon) which can afford to handle the tax nonsense.
Politically, the problem for the Government will be this: those unaffected entirely will be vaguely in favour, at best. Those nearly affected (like me, hopefully) will be very worried this'll be extended or new insanity *will* affect them in the future. Those who are affected will be very, very unhappy indeed.
MD , you elect these no hopers and love them whilst venting your rage at Alex Salmond who does you no harm. I have to say hoist by your own petard comes to mind. Once again they show their regard for your vote.
"London Mayor Boris Johnson has said that breastfeeding mothers should be “discreet” when feeding their babies in public.
Asked during phone-in interview on LBC radio whether he approved of Claridges’ decision to ask a mother breastfeeding her child to cover herself, the Mayor initially responded: “I don’t know about this, I wasn’t there and it wasn’t clear to me how much of her breast was exposed.”
Pushed by interviewer Nick Ferrari, Mr Johnson eventually claimed: “It depends how you do it, in my view. I think you can do it in a sort of discreet way, I think Claridges were a little bit clumsy in the way that they wade in. But what do I know?” "
I am waiting for the shrieks of outrage, pages of condemnation, endless quotes from mumsnet etc from Mr Jessop, Flightpath, TheWatcher and all the usual suspects, but I suspect I might wait in vain, since its not Farage but cuddly old Boris.
Before you embarrass yourself further, may I suggest you go back and read my first comment about Farage's comments, which were more balanced than you seem to realise. The people I were complaining about on those threads were the Neanderthals on here who seemed to want breastfeeding women not to play a part in society. You know, because they have those awful womanly bits.
This twitter account presents itself as an impartial political geek resource, but is a Labour party strategist I believe
@election_data @election_data · 6m6 minutes ago Some interesting thoughts in the @BESResearch study on UKIP-Labour but mostly useless, in a literal sense. There, I've said it.
Ian Warren who runs election data, is an impartial political geek, his data analysis led to both UKIP and Labour trying to hire him.
He chose Labour.
He's less of a strategist, more the British Nate Silver.
Really? His tweets don't seem very impartial, although his account looks like he is trying to seem so
Any intel on this? It's been an interesting to have a political market without a betfair market alongside. Once the 3 candidates were known the prices basically settled down [Murphy crunched in from 4/7 to 1/4, Boyack drifted from 10/1 to 25/1] and have then remained fairly static over the past fortnight or so.
It does seem like a David v Ed situation all over again with the MPs/MSPs favouring Murphy and the unions favouring Findlay.
This twitter account presents itself as an impartial political geek resource, but is a Labour party strategist I believe
@election_data @election_data · 6m6 minutes ago Some interesting thoughts in the @BESResearch study on UKIP-Labour but mostly useless, in a literal sense. There, I've said it.
Ian Warren who runs election data, is an impartial political geek, his data analysis led to both UKIP and Labour trying to hire him.
He chose Labour.
He's less of a strategist, more the British Nate Silver.
Really? His tweets don't seem very impartial, although his account looks like he is trying to seem so
Yes really.
He's always been Labour inclined but more so after Labour hired him, but he's gives his honest opinion on the data, hence why UKIP offered him silly money to work for them.
Is it time for me to dust down my more efficient vote scenario again? Whilst it may be true that UKIP is currently taking more votes of the Tories than Labour (and the evidence for that seems to be mixed once they get over about 12%) that does not mean that the Tories will be the most damaged in seats.
At the last election the Tory vote of nearly 37% was incredibly inefficient because they built up huge, pointless majorities in most of southern England. If their majority in, say, Kent seats is now halved or more by the UKIP effect but they still manage to win a similar share of the vote nationally then logic indicates that they are winning more votes somewhere else such as the south west, the midlands or even London on recent polling. That effect might well give them seats which were out of reach in 2010, particularly Lib Dem ones.
34% was something of an outlier but if that became a regular thing over this month with UKIP still in the higher teens I would suggest my hypothesis is likely to be tested.
No report on your lunch David, did you get to genuflect at the feet of your revered leader of the sub regional puppet division.
The turkey was excellent thanks Malcolm, even although it did remind one of Nicola Sturgeon in some metaphysical way.
Ruth Davidson was in good form explaining that there is no nativity scene at the Parliament building this year because Nicola just couldn't find 3 wise men anywhere.
Attendance was apparently at a record high although it was my first visit so I could not comment.
Lots of turkeys voting for Christmas then. At least you enjoyed the food. Pity Ruth is not as good at politics as she is at stand up comedy.
On topic, UKIP do appear to hurting the Tories in the marginals as per Lord Ashcroft's poll of the marginals. That said, I wonder if turnout next year will help reduce the damage for the Blues. As Mike has pointed out before, UKIP do appear to have significant support from people who didn't vote last time and don't turn out to vote, will we see that phenomenon next May?
The BES findings are:- 1. UKIP will not do much damage to the Tories in marginals (I disagree). 2. UKIP get a similar % of DNV people as other parties.
Cheers, I have the lurgy, so I don't have the energy to wade through the report.
TSE - Just play the BES bit from Westminster Hour.
This twitter account presents itself as an impartial political geek resource, but is a Labour party strategist I believe
@election_data @election_data · 6m6 minutes ago Some interesting thoughts in the @BESResearch study on UKIP-Labour but mostly useless, in a literal sense. There, I've said it.
Ian Warren who runs election data, is an impartial political geek, his data analysis led to both UKIP and Labour trying to hire him.
He chose Labour.
He's less of a strategist, more the British Nate Silver.
Really? His tweets don't seem very impartial, although his account looks like he is trying to seem so
Yes really.
He's always been Labour inclined, but he's gives his honest opinion on the data, hence why UKIP offered him silly money to work for them.
Well if you read his tweets and think he is impartial you have even less insight than I thought
Although I see you and he both fell for the Labour North London anti semitic tweet, which explains a lot
Any intel on this? It's been an interesting to have a political market without a betfair market alongside. Once the 3 candidates were known the prices basically settled down [Murphy crunched in from 4/7 to 1/4, Boyack drifted from 10/1 to 25/1] and have then remained fairly static over the past fortnight or so.
It does seem like a David v Ed situation all over again with the MPs/MSPs favouring Murphy and the unions favouring Findlay.
Comments
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2012/feb/03/eu-farmers-plough-grasslands
Except for the fruity office antics, allowance trousering, parachuting in favoured candidates, and wining and dining of the City boys in St James's gentlemen's clubs.
For those that don't understand, here's a more detailed blog about the problems...
http://pennygrubb.blogspot.co.uk/2014/12/government-minister-advocates-law.html
By the way, can you point to a single time you've done that?
This being so as Mr Nabavi patiently points out, there would be very little difference to our current position. Parliament can be as sovereign as it wants but it being between a rock and a hard place in its choices will not make us better off or less beholden. Sovereignty is not a magic wand.
It may well be that being in the EEA suits us, but only a fool would even begin to pretend it would make any real difference. And for this we get UKIP reduced to peddling its racist cant in order to steal votes from the Tory party and let in a Europhile Labour govt.
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2014/12/nick-clegg-and-nigel-farage-are-pursuing-the-same-electoral-strategy/
Even Liddle thinks its going no where
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2014/12/as-political-scandals-go-ukips-latest-is-hardly-a-knee-trembler/
Nobody is suggesting that the changes to VAT are new or sudden. They may be old news to you. We are simply pointing out that you forget to tell us. If you feel you have done a lot to communicate it to business, can I suggest you take a long hard look at your communications channels? They are clearly ineffective.
So, if I trade only in the UK, I don’t have to do anything. You do realise the Internet is a global marketplace, yes? Did I mention that there may be legal ramifications for avoiding sales to the EU? That big, happy, single market we all trade in.
If I sell through a marketplace [e.g. Amazon], I don’t have to do anything. So you are quite happy for us to feed the profits of global organisations - those that have manipulated their tax liability prior to these changes which, if rumours are true, forced this legislative change in the first place. Interesting that I will be worse off because I can’t afford to pay accountants to find loopholes for me. The global organisations will be better off because they can afford to pay accountants - and will continue to do so - and they will now benefit from a cut of my below-VAT-threshold turnover.
And, as a one-person, sole-trader operation, I should just register and administer VAT, keep records securely for 10 years (on a European server, no less), produce multi-currency invoices, and collect and verify instantly 2 pieces of place-of-supply evidence (and if these don’t match, one more for luck)? Evidence, I might add, that is not available to individuals to collect (and quite rightly so) - a point that has been verified by payment processors.
Yes, that clears up the change for me.
And, it clears up any doubts I had about the Government’s interest, or even knowledge of, the burgeoning and innovative micro-business sector in the UK
1970s yearning, 2009 trolling.
He is easy enough to find on twitter if you are missing him.. his comments/views have not changed
I don't mean anything personal to you, just that you keep making big statements that turn out to be wrong
The Tories in the area have been making a lot of the fact that he UKIP candidates name is "Timur", not "Tim", and putting his name next to pictures of muslim terrorists, saying he is not a local.
What do you make of that? You haven't criticised it as far as I have seen on here
It is playing politics with ethnicity and if it works will result in Labour gains, would have thought you would be enraged
Single, shy, politically obsessive accountant...
Disappointing that he defected from the Conservatives, but, sexual harassment? Do me a favour!
But one of UKIP's selling points was that 'they're different', when clearly they're not, and possibly worse.
http://www.unz.com/isteve/the-democrats-war-on-married-women/
"London Mayor Boris Johnson has said that breastfeeding mothers should be “discreet” when feeding their babies in public.
Asked during phone-in interview on LBC radio whether he approved of Claridges’ decision to ask a mother breastfeeding her child to cover herself, the Mayor initially responded: “I don’t know about this, I wasn’t there and it wasn’t clear to me how much of her breast was exposed.”
Pushed by interviewer Nick Ferrari, Mr Johnson eventually claimed: “It depends how you do it, in my view. I think you can do it in a sort of discreet way, I think Claridges were a little bit clumsy in the way that they wade in. But what do I know?” "
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/boris-johnson-says-that-breastfeeding-mothers-should-be-discreet-9910491.html
As the man in Clacton said. “Never saw that Tory MP, so I’m voting UKIP”!
I suppose it looks good saying ''if you sell a single $0.99 e-book'' - but is selling a single ebook for 99p a real business proposition? How many real businesses are really affected like that? Clearly there are some small sellers who sell small amounts to the EU area and clearly it is a distraction they could do without.
But this is what goes with the territory of e-commerce. I sit at home in the UK and buy something from my PC. Is it asking too much of me to expect to pay UK VAT? If so why should that not apply to a German?
Is it not naive to expect ecommerce not to be affected by global never mind EU rules? Eg-
http://ptlb.in/ecommerce/
Of course the other issue about books is that a paper book is VAT free. An ebook is classed differently. Both you and I might question why?
If we were out of the EU and in the EEA like Norway we would still be subject to this rule of course. The EU and its rules is not going to go away. And changes in WTO rules on this subject are clearly not going to go away either.
"If on the other hand it rebounds on Labour because it was for want of a better word, a honey trap,"
You're Tapestry and I claim my five free tickets to Rudolph Hess's Xmas bash
Sole traders doing direct sales (ie through their own website) can't opt out of selling to the EU because that's against cross-border rules. They also can't collect the necessary pieces of information or hold them for 10 years, because that contravenes privacy legislation.
The UK would not be subject to it if we left, so if an American sold something to a Briton they wouldn't need to register for VAT in the UK. Under this law, they would.
This law is indefensibly badly written.
Edited extra bit: Mr. Indigo, a sound point.
Makes it sound like its back again, unless I misread the article.
it's not the cost of food that is expensive about eating well (you can buy calotie packed ready meaks for pennies from icelsmd/farm foods). Its the other stuff like the electricity cost to run your fridge 24/7 or cook with the oven for 45 mins vs 3 mins in the microwave. Putting together a decent set of pots pans knives oven dishes etc is an expensive capital investment for people who are living pay cheque to pay cheque.
In the pre-UKIP days it roughly followed that if the Tory vote was distributed more efficiently then the Labour or Liberal votes had to be distributed less efficiently. However, this no longer applies. Just as the 2010 Lib Dems are the source of new voters for all the other parties, so the vastly increased and [presumably] massively inefficient UKIP vote means that the efficiency of the distribution of the vote for all three of Labour, Liberals and the Conservatives will increase at GE2015.
So the question is not - will the Conservative vote be distributed more efficiently at GE2015, but will the Conservative vote be distributed more efficiently than the Labour [or Lib Dem] vote?
My best guess is that the efficiency of the Liberal vote will increase by more than that of the Conservatives, and that though the gap between the Conservatives and Labour will narrow, vote distribution efficiency will still give Labour a chunky lead on seats on equal national vote shares.
Of course, it's still possible that Cameron and Osborne will surprise us all, and win a majority on 40% of the national vote, rendering such details immaterial - it's still within Professor Fisher's confidence interval...
I can't wait until JackW's clever jokes about this though. They're going to be hilarious.
Also seems like she just came out of a relationship that she didn't want to be over
Maybe with the Labour party?!
Oh and as for ''Women in the snooker room? Whatever next?'' - well all that shows is that the senior kipper was a member of a posh metrosexual elite private london club.
How to eat: toast
This month, How To Eat is tackling a quintessentially British snack – toast. Sounds simple, right? But how wrong you are. Do you use a toaster or grill? White sliced or rye, sourdough or seeded multigrain? And that’s just the start of it …
http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2014/dec/09/how-to-eat-toast
Roger Bird tells me he has emails and texts which show he and Natasha Bolter had a relationship between 18 September and 2 November
Michael Crick @MichaelLCrick · 5m5 minutes ago
Roger Bird 1: "Natasha Bolter and I were in a consensual relationship between 18 September and 2 November ...."
Michael Crick @MichaelLCrick · 4m4 minutes ago
Roger Bird 2: "... well after her admission to the list of approved candidates, with interest on both sides ....
Michael Crick @MichaelLCrick · 3m3 minutes ago
Roger Bird 3: "She was keen on me and I was keen on her. I have got emails and texts to show we had a relationship ...."
Michael Crick @MichaelLCrick · 2m2 minutes ago
Roger Bird 4: ".... and I will be presenting these to the inquiry. In any relationship there are some texts of an intimate nature."
That said, I wonder if turnout next year will help reduce the damage for the Blues.
As Mike has pointed out before, UKIP do appear to have significant support from people who didn't vote last time and don't turn out to vote, will we see that phenomenon next May?
Golden rule, never poke the payroll, it usually ends up very messy.
For the chaps who are worried they may get sued for sexual harassment. Keep the sexual harassment complaint forms in the bottom drawer. That way, when she goes to get one you'll get a great view of her arse.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women-only_passenger_car#mediaviewer/File:Men_not_allowed.jpg
She will not have been the first to suggest the female only tube carriages.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2008/feb/14/brianpaddick.transport
Its a current topic. With some justification
''The number of sex crime incidents against women on the London underground and DLR increased by 31 per cent during the past year. Sexual offences on UK mainline railways rose by 21 per cent between March 2013 and March this year.''
http://thehoneyballbuzz.com/2014/10/01/no-to-women-only-carriages-on-our-railways/
Under the above circumstances what is odd is that you should think it is odd to suggest female only carriages. It may not be the right solution, for the very good reason that men should behave properly towards women, but be honest is it so 'odd'.
When he took over the leadership of Labour four years ago, Ed Miliband decreed that the revival of the party begins in Scotland.” It has actually gone into reverse since then. The new leader of the Scottish Labour party has a little more than 20 weeks from Saturday to turn that around and the stakes could not be higher.
http://blogs.channel4.com/gary-gibbon-on-politics/scottish-labour-leadership-contest-general-election/29853
@election_data @election_data · 6m6 minutes ago
Some interesting thoughts in the @BESResearch study on UKIP-Labour but mostly useless, in a literal sense. There, I've said it.
1. UKIP will not do much damage to the Tories in marginals (I disagree).
2. UKIP get a similar % of DNV people as other parties.
He chose Labour.
He's less of a strategist, more the British Nate Silver.
What do you make of the Tories ethnic politicking against UKIP's candidate in Thurrock which may well result in a Lab gain from the Tories?
"UKIP is picking up support from those who distrust politicians, but crucially, this support is significantly higher among those distrusting of MPs and who tend to vote in general elections."
http://www.britishelectionstudy.com/bes-resources/is-nigel-farage-the-heineken-politician-is-ukip-reaching-the-parts-of-the-electorate-other-parties-cannot-reach/
Yorkshire First is planning to stand candidates across the county at the 2015 general election.
If it’s good enough for Scotland, why not Yorkshire?
http://www.buzzfeed.com/jimwaterson/campaign-for-a-yorkshire-parliament
http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/british-politics/next-scottish-labour-leader
Any intel on this? It's been an interesting to have a political market without a betfair market alongside. Once the 3 candidates were known the prices basically settled down [Murphy crunched in from 4/7 to 1/4, Boyack drifted from 10/1 to 25/1] and have then remained fairly static over the past fortnight or so.
It does seem like a David v Ed situation all over again with the MPs/MSPs favouring Murphy and the unions favouring Findlay.
He's always been Labour inclined but more so after Labour hired him, but he's gives his honest opinion on the data, hence why UKIP offered him silly money to work for them.
Although I see you and he both fell for the Labour North London anti semitic tweet, which explains a lot