Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Blow for Jim Murphy as first Scottish poll following his el

SystemSystem Posts: 12,214
edited December 2014 in General

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Blow for Jim Murphy as first Scottish poll following his election has LAB trailing by 24 points

New Scottish poll for D Record has SNP with a commanding lead
SNP 48% 
LAB 24% 
CON 16%
LD 5%
UKIP 4% 
GRN 1%
http://t.co/y4VurJDCBG

Read the full story here


«134

Comments

  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    Theresa May quietly and competently getting on with the job:

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/uks-immigration-system-now-in-intensive-care-theresa-may-is-warned-9936921.html

    Britain’s immigration system is now in “intensive care”, MPs have warned, painting a damning picture of multiple blunders by the Home Office.

    Disclosing that nearly 400,000 immigration cases were unresolved, the Commons home affairs select committee warned that the Government's broken promise to slash migration levels had undermined public confidence in the system.

    It condemned the Home Office’s “inexcusable” failure to deport more foreign prisoners and expressed “serious doubts” over whether it would hit its target to introduce full exit checks at ports and airports by April.

    The Home Secretary’s frequent delays in releasing reports by the independent Chief Inspector of Immigration – highlighted by the Independent last month – was also attacked as “unacceptable”.

    The MPs said the number of missing migrants had reached 89,000 while the Home Office faced a separate backlog of 304,222 visa applications.
  • Murphy will have to demonstrate a clear change and bury the 'London Branch Office' meme if he is to make headway......tho if Miliband gets in on the back of SNP support and is seen to be over-generous to the Scots in devolution, he too could be in for one term.....
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Wind and nuclear power are currently providing 52% of the UK's energy.

    Nuclear 33.09%
    Wind 19.28%

    Coal 19.89%
    CCGT 10.31%
    Biomass 4.65%
    Hydro 3.02%

    http://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/
  • JamesMoJamesMo Posts: 35
    edited December 2014
    "53% remembered voting yes"

    Where is that coming from?

    The Survation datasets for all respondents show 438 yes, 482 no unweighted (47.6% yes). The weighted totals are 411 yes, 509 no (44.7% yes). So the respondents were slightly biased towards yes, but Survation have adjusted the poll for that.

    http://survation.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/December-Scotland-Daily-Record-Scottish-Voting-Intention-ONE.pdf
  • A problem for all of the unionist parties is that no voters are much more likely to say that they are "undecided". I would suspect that most of those "undecided" nos are disgruntled Labour voters. Murphy should get some uptick in the polls by drawing them back, but it would only close the gap a bit, not overhaul it.

    His more difficult problem is appealing to yes voters who have previously voted Labour (or Lib Dem). This group appear to have largely moved to the SNP. Appointing someone as leader who was closely associated with Better Together would not superficially appear to be the best way of doing this. He has to find some way of disassociating yes support from SNP support.
  • A terrible poll for Scottish Labour, but no great surprise. Murphy has an incredibly hard task ahead of him. And one that will take years, not months.

    However on these figures, if Labour loses in Scotland but wins most seats in 2015, it will have won in England. On that basis we will have a Labour government. The SNP will never vote with the Tories to bring it down and the chances of them abstaining on votes that could bring a Labour government down are also vanishingly small - they will never help the Tories as the damage it will do them in Scotland would be too great. For the SNP to have any leverage in the next Parliament - however many MPs they have - the Tories have to win most seats. Things will get interesting then. Could Cameron actually deliver on an EU referendum?

    Thus, Labour winning most seats in 2015 safeguards the Union. A Tory minority puts it in doubt. A Tory majority ends it. As a unionist, it seems I have only one choice next year, after all. Reluctantly, I shall exercise it - though ceaseless Tory pandering to UKIP does make it easier than it would have been.
  • Murphy will have to demonstrate a clear change and bury the 'London Branch Office' meme if he is to make headway......tho if Miliband gets in on the back of SNP support and is seen to be over-generous to the Scots in devolution, he too could be in for one term.....

    Labour will not need active SNP support if it wins after losing in Scotland as English votes will have delivered it most seats.

  • JamesMo said:

    A problem for all of the unionist parties is that no voters are much more likely to say that they are "undecided". I would suspect that most of those "undecided" nos are disgruntled Labour voters. Murphy should get some uptick in the polls by drawing them back, but it would only close the gap a bit, not overhaul it.

    His more difficult problem is appealing to yes voters who have previously voted Labour (or Lib Dem). This group appear to have largely moved to the SNP. Appointing someone as leader who was closely associated with Better Together would not superficially appear to be the best way of doing this. He has to find some way of disassociating yes support from SNP support.

    It will only happen once the conversation changes in Scotland and is not defined by the referendum. That will take time.

  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,514

    JamesMo said:

    A problem for all of the unionist parties is that no voters are much more likely to say that they are "undecided". I would suspect that most of those "undecided" nos are disgruntled Labour voters. Murphy should get some uptick in the polls by drawing them back, but it would only close the gap a bit, not overhaul it.

    His more difficult problem is appealing to yes voters who have previously voted Labour (or Lib Dem). This group appear to have largely moved to the SNP. Appointing someone as leader who was closely associated with Better Together would not superficially appear to be the best way of doing this. He has to find some way of disassociating yes support from SNP support.

    It will only happen once the conversation changes in Scotland and is not defined by the referendum. That will take time.

    Yup. currently the Nats are buoyant despite having lost Indyref and an economic storm brewing on their doorstep. They need to keep the story on constitutional issues however whether real life will let them do so remains to be seen. At some point the bread and butter issues will return with a vengeance.
  • JamesMo said:

    A problem for all of the unionist parties is that no voters are much more likely to say that they are "undecided". I would suspect that most of those "undecided" nos are disgruntled Labour voters. Murphy should get some uptick in the polls by drawing them back, but it would only close the gap a bit, not overhaul it.

    His more difficult problem is appealing to yes voters who have previously voted Labour (or Lib Dem). This group appear to have largely moved to the SNP. Appointing someone as leader who was closely associated with Better Together would not superficially appear to be the best way of doing this. He has to find some way of disassociating yes support from SNP support.

    It will only happen once the conversation changes in Scotland and is not defined by the referendum. That will take time.

    Yup. currently the Nats are buoyant despite having lost Indyref and an economic storm brewing on their doorstep. They need to keep the story on constitutional issues however whether real life will let them do so remains to be seen. At some point the bread and butter issues will return with a vengeance.

    It will for a while yet. But it won't last forever. The key to future SNP success now is a Tory government in Westminster.

  • felixfelix Posts: 15,173

    A terrible poll for Scottish Labour, but no great surprise. Murphy has an incredibly hard task ahead of him. And one that will take years, not months.

    However on these figures, if Labour loses in Scotland but wins most seats in 2015, it will have won in England. On that basis we will have a Labour government. The SNP will never vote with the Tories to bring it down and the chances of them abstaining on votes that could bring a Labour government down are also vanishingly small - they will never help the Tories as the damage it will do them in Scotland would be too great. For the SNP to have any leverage in the next Parliament - however many MPs they have - the Tories have to win most seats. Things will get interesting then. Could Cameron actually deliver on an EU referendum?

    Thus, Labour winning most seats in 2015 safeguards the Union. A Tory minority puts it in doubt. A Tory majority ends it. As a unionist, it seems I have only one choice next year, after all. Reluctantly, I shall exercise it - though ceaseless Tory pandering to UKIP does make it easier than it would have been.

    lol - A Labour govt propped up in any way by the SNP is more likely to destroy the Union - England will simply not tolerate ever greater subsidies to the fringes which they have to pay for in order to sustain something which is increasingly meaningless.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,514

    JamesMo said:

    A problem for all of the unionist parties is that no voters are much more likely to say that they are "undecided". I would suspect that most of those "undecided" nos are disgruntled Labour voters. Murphy should get some uptick in the polls by drawing them back, but it would only close the gap a bit, not overhaul it.

    His more difficult problem is appealing to yes voters who have previously voted Labour (or Lib Dem). This group appear to have largely moved to the SNP. Appointing someone as leader who was closely associated with Better Together would not superficially appear to be the best way of doing this. He has to find some way of disassociating yes support from SNP support.

    It will only happen once the conversation changes in Scotland and is not defined by the referendum. That will take time.

    Yup. currently the Nats are buoyant despite having lost Indyref and an economic storm brewing on their doorstep. They need to keep the story on constitutional issues however whether real life will let them do so remains to be seen. At some point the bread and butter issues will return with a vengeance.

    It will for a while yet. But it won't last forever. The key to future SNP success now is a Tory government in Westminster.

    That only holds true if they replace Labour, in a three\four way split it becomes more complicated. Scot Lab's problem is they played the same anti-tory card for three decades and now the Nats have nicked their clothes. I'd suggest Labour will have to change the tune firstly as anti Westminster means anti Union and secondly they need to start shooting at todays enemy rather than yesterdays.


  • Yup. currently the Nats are buoyant despite having lost Indyref and an economic storm brewing on their doorstep. They need to keep the story on constitutional issues however whether real life will let them do so remains to be seen. At some point the bread and butter issues will return with a vengeance.

    CBI survey says that Scottish employers are the most optimistic in the UK about additional hiring in 2015. In fact they're more concerned about shortages of skilled labour.

    http://news.stv.tv/scotland/304336-half-of-businesses-plan-to-hire-more-workers-in-2015-cbi-study-finds/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,709
    felix said:

    A terrible poll for Scottish Labour, but no great surprise. Murphy has an incredibly hard task ahead of him. And one that will take years, not months.

    However on these figures, if Labour loses in Scotland but wins most seats in 2015, it will have won in England. On that basis we will have a Labour government. The SNP will never vote with the Tories to bring it down and the chances of them abstaining on votes that could bring a Labour government down are also vanishingly small - they will never help the Tories as the damage it will do them in Scotland would be too great. For the SNP to have any leverage in the next Parliament - however many MPs they have - the Tories have to win most seats. Things will get interesting then. Could Cameron actually deliver on an EU referendum?

    Thus, Labour winning most seats in 2015 safeguards the Union. A Tory minority puts it in doubt. A Tory majority ends it. As a unionist, it seems I have only one choice next year, after all. Reluctantly, I shall exercise it - though ceaseless Tory pandering to UKIP does make it easier than it would have been.

    lol - A Labour govt propped up in any way by the SNP is more likely to destroy the Union - England will simply not tolerate ever greater subsidies to the fringes which they have to pay for in order to sustain something which is increasingly meaningless.
    By “England” do you mean the Daily Heil?
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,514
    edited December 2014
    JamesMo said:



    Yup. currently the Nats are buoyant despite having lost Indyref and an economic storm brewing on their doorstep. They need to keep the story on constitutional issues however whether real life will let them do so remains to be seen. At some point the bread and butter issues will return with a vengeance.

    CBI survey says that Scottish employers are the most optimistic in the UK about additional hiring in 2015. In fact they're more concerned about shortages of skilled labour.

    http://news.stv.tv/scotland/304336-half-of-businesses-plan-to-hire-more-workers-in-2015-cbi-study-finds/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
    well let's see how that pans out. With oil hitting the skids and clouds looming over Europe I suspect optimism might not turn in to as many jobs as people think. At some point the electorate are going to get fed up with more low paid jobs and want to see higher wages which demands productivity soemthing we haven't been that good at creating.
  • JamesMo said:



    Yup. currently the Nats are buoyant despite having lost Indyref and an economic storm brewing on their doorstep. They need to keep the story on constitutional issues however whether real life will let them do so remains to be seen. At some point the bread and butter issues will return with a vengeance.

    CBI survey says that Scottish employers are the most optimistic in the UK about additional hiring in 2015. In fact they're more concerned about shortages of skilled labour.

    http://news.stv.tv/scotland/304336-half-of-businesses-plan-to-hire-more-workers-in-2015-cbi-study-finds/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
    Encouraging - lets hope it more than offsets the 15,000 the North Sea could lose:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/oilandgas/11303986/North-Sea-could-lose-15000-jobs-if-oil-continues-to-fall-warns-Sir-Ian-Wood.html


  • JamesMo said:



    Yup. currently the Nats are buoyant despite having lost Indyref and an economic storm brewing on their doorstep. They need to keep the story on constitutional issues however whether real life will let them do so remains to be seen. At some point the bread and butter issues will return with a vengeance.

    CBI survey says that Scottish employers are the most optimistic in the UK about additional hiring in 2015. In fact they're more concerned about shortages of skilled labour.

    http://news.stv.tv/scotland/304336-half-of-businesses-plan-to-hire-more-workers-in-2015-cbi-study-finds/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
    well let's see how that pans out. With oil hitting the skids and clouds looming over Europe I suspect optimism might not turn in to as many jobs as people think. At some point the electorate are going to get fed up with more low paid jobs and want to see higher wages which demands productivity soemthing we haven't been that good at creating.
    Perhaps the uncertainty over the referendum is unwinding.....oh, wait......
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,173

    felix said:

    A terrible poll for Scottish Labour, but no great surprise. Murphy has an incredibly hard task ahead of him. And one that will take years, not months.

    However on these figures, if Labour loses in Scotland but wins most seats in 2015, it will have won in England. On that basis we will have a Labour government. The SNP will never vote with the Tories to bring it down and the chances of them abstaining on votes that could bring a Labour government down are also vanishingly small - they will never help the Tories as the damage it will do them in Scotland would be too great. For the SNP to have any leverage in the next Parliament - however many MPs they have - the Tories have to win most seats. Things will get interesting then. Could Cameron actually deliver on an EU referendum?

    Thus, Labour winning most seats in 2015 safeguards the Union. A Tory minority puts it in doubt. A Tory majority ends it. As a unionist, it seems I have only one choice next year, after all. Reluctantly, I shall exercise it - though ceaseless Tory pandering to UKIP does make it easier than it would have been.

    lol - A Labour govt propped up in any way by the SNP is more likely to destroy the Union - England will simply not tolerate ever greater subsidies to the fringes which they have to pay for in order to sustain something which is increasingly meaningless.
    By “England” do you mean the Daily Heil?
    No - I don't mean the most widely read News/on-line outlet in the country. However, I guess that must really irk you:)
  • felix said:

    A terrible poll for Scottish Labour, but no great surprise. Murphy has an incredibly hard task ahead of him. And one that will take years, not months.

    However on these figures, if Labour loses in Scotland but wins most seats in 2015, it will have won in England. On that basis we will have a Labour government. The SNP will never vote with the Tories to bring it down and the chances of them abstaining on votes that could bring a Labour government down are also vanishingly small - they will never help the Tories as the damage it will do them in Scotland would be too great. For the SNP to have any leverage in the next Parliament - however many MPs they have - the Tories have to win most seats. Things will get interesting then. Could Cameron actually deliver on an EU referendum?

    Thus, Labour winning most seats in 2015 safeguards the Union. A Tory minority puts it in doubt. A Tory majority ends it. As a unionist, it seems I have only one choice next year, after all. Reluctantly, I shall exercise it - though ceaseless Tory pandering to UKIP does make it easier than it would have been.

    lol - A Labour govt propped up in any way by the SNP is more likely to destroy the Union - England will simply not tolerate ever greater subsidies to the fringes which they have to pay for in order to sustain something which is increasingly meaningless.
    By “England” do you mean the Daily Heil?
    No.

    'England':

    the survey also shows that English people would be in favour of the UK Government taking a much tougher stance on Scotland if it decides to say in the Union.

    Most of those polled (56 per cent) agreed that public spending in Scotland should be reduced to the UK average following a No vote, while the vast majority (63 per cent) believe that Scottish MPs should be prevented from voting on English laws in the future.


    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/scottish-independence/scottish-independence-english-people-overwhelmingly-want-scotland-to-stay-in-the-uk-9679439.html
  • fitalassfitalass Posts: 4,320
    This is a looming concern where most SNP/Yes voters appear to be completely in denial.

    JamesMo said:



    Yup. currently the Nats are buoyant despite having lost Indyref and an economic storm brewing on their doorstep. They need to keep the story on constitutional issues however whether real life will let them do so remains to be seen. At some point the bread and butter issues will return with a vengeance.

    CBI survey says that Scottish employers are the most optimistic in the UK about additional hiring in 2015. In fact they're more concerned about shortages of skilled labour.

    http://news.stv.tv/scotland/304336-half-of-businesses-plan-to-hire-more-workers-in-2015-cbi-study-finds/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
    Encouraging - lets hope it more than offsets the 15,000 the North Sea could lose:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/oilandgas/11303986/North-Sea-could-lose-15000-jobs-if-oil-continues-to-fall-warns-Sir-Ian-Wood.html
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,709
    edited December 2014
    felix said:

    felix said:

    A terrible poll for Scottish Labour, but no great surprise. Murphy has an incredibly hard task ahead of him. And one that will take years, not months.

    However on these figures, if Labour loses in Scotland but wins most seats in 2015, it will have won in England. On that basis we will have a Labour government. The SNP will never vote with the Tories to bring it down and the chances of them abstaining on votes that could bring a Labour government down are also vanishingly small - they will never help the Tories as the damage it will do them in Scotland would be too great. For the SNP to have any leverage in the next Parliament - however many MPs they have - the Tories have to win most seats. Things will get interesting then. Could Cameron actually deliver on an EU referendum?

    Thus, Labour winning most seats in 2015 safeguards the Union. A Tory minority puts it in doubt. A Tory majority ends it. As a unionist, it seems I have only one choice next year, after all. Reluctantly, I shall exercise it - though ceaseless Tory pandering to UKIP does make it easier than it would have been.

    lol - A Labour govt propped up in any way by the SNP is more likely to destroy the Union - England will simply not tolerate ever greater subsidies to the fringes which they have to pay for in order to sustain something which is increasingly meaningless.
    By “England” do you mean the Daily Heil?
    No - I don't mean the most widely read News/on-line outlet in the country. However, I guess that must really irk you:)
    Saddens me, yes, doesn’t “irk" me. To be fair to the Heil some of it’s lifestyle features seem very good, although my wife and I will never buy anything through the “Ideal Home” exhibition again, after our last experiences.

    I regard most at any rate, of those from whom my opinions differ as mistaken, not malevolent!
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,173

    felix said:

    A terrible poll for Scottish Labour, but no great surprise. Murphy has an incredibly hard task ahead of him. And one that will take years, not months.

    However on these figures, if Labour loses in Scotland but wins most seats in 2015, it will have won in England. On that basis we will have a Labour government. The SNP will never vote with the Tories to bring it down and the chances of them abstaining on votes that could bring a Labour government down are also vanishingly small - they will never help the Tories as the damage it will do them in Scotland would be too great. For the SNP to have any leverage in the next Parliament - however many MPs they have - the Tories have to win most seats. Things will get interesting then. Could Cameron actually deliver on an EU referendum?

    Thus, Labour winning most seats in 2015 safeguards the Union. A Tory minority puts it in doubt. A Tory majority ends it. As a unionist, it seems I have only one choice next year, after all. Reluctantly, I shall exercise it - though ceaseless Tory pandering to UKIP does make it easier than it would have been.

    lol - A Labour govt propped up in any way by the SNP is more likely to destroy the Union - England will simply not tolerate ever greater subsidies to the fringes which they have to pay for in order to sustain something which is increasingly meaningless.
    By “England” do you mean the Daily Heil?
    No.

    'England':

    the survey also shows that English people would be in favour of the UK Government taking a much tougher stance on Scotland if it decides to say in the Union.

    Most of those polled (56 per cent) agreed that public spending in Scotland should be reduced to the UK average following a No vote, while the vast majority (63 per cent) believe that Scottish MPs should be prevented from voting on English laws in the future.


    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/scottish-independence/scottish-independence-english-people-overwhelmingly-want-scotland-to-stay-in-the-uk-9679439.html
    Lol - I like the idea of the Independent as OKC's 'Daily Heil'
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,709

    felix said:

    A terrible poll for Scottish Labour, but no great surprise. Murphy has an incredibly hard task ahead of him. And one that will take years, not months.

    However on these figures, if Labour loses in Scotland but wins most seats in 2015, it will have won in England. On that basis we will have a Labour government. The SNP will never vote with the Tories to bring it down and the chances of them abstaining on votes that could bring a Labour government down are also vanishingly small - they will never help the Tories as the damage it will do them in Scotland would be too great. For the SNP to have any leverage in the next Parliament - however many MPs they have - the Tories have to win most seats. Things will get interesting then. Could Cameron actually deliver on an EU referendum?

    Thus, Labour winning most seats in 2015 safeguards the Union. A Tory minority puts it in doubt. A Tory majority ends it. As a unionist, it seems I have only one choice next year, after all. Reluctantly, I shall exercise it - though ceaseless Tory pandering to UKIP does make it easier than it would have been.

    lol - A Labour govt propped up in any way by the SNP is more likely to destroy the Union - England will simply not tolerate ever greater subsidies to the fringes which they have to pay for in order to sustain something which is increasingly meaningless.
    By “England” do you mean the Daily Heil?
    No.

    'England':

    the survey also shows that English people would be in favour of the UK Government taking a much tougher stance on Scotland if it decides to say in the Union.

    Most of those polled (56 per cent) agreed that public spending in Scotland should be reduced to the UK average following a No vote, while the vast majority (63 per cent) believe that Scottish MPs should be prevented from voting on English laws in the future.


    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/scottish-independence/scottish-independence-english-people-overwhelmingly-want-scotland-to-stay-in-the-uk-9679439.html
    Point taken, Ms Vance. Thank you.
  • fitalassfitalass Posts: 4,320
    Despite all the recent Scottish polls, I have to say that this huge SNP surge has completely passed me by on the ground. Yes, the Indy Ref result really angered Yes/SNP voters, and as a result it really fired them all up to join the SNP in the aftermath of the Referendum in much the same way the 1997 GE result finally pushed me to officially join the Conservative party. But I have yet to meet anyone who has now switched to voting SNP who wasn't already going to do so before the Referendum. Go figure.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,709
    felix said:

    felix said:

    A terrible poll for Scottish Labour, but no great surprise. Murphy has an incredibly hard task ahead of him. And one that will take years, not months.

    However on these figures, if Labour loses in Scotland but wins most seats in 2015, it will have won in England. On that basis we will have a Labour government. The SNP will never vote with the Tories to bring it down and the chances of them abstaining on votes that could bring a Labour government down are also vanishingly small - they will never help the Tories as the damage it will do them in Scotland would be too great. For the SNP to have any leverage in the next Parliament - however many MPs they have - the Tories have to win most seats. Things will get interesting then. Could Cameron actually deliver on an EU referendum?

    Thus, Labour winning most seats in 2015 safeguards the Union. A Tory minority puts it in doubt. A Tory majority ends it. As a unionist, it seems I have only one choice next year, after all. Reluctantly, I shall exercise it - though ceaseless Tory pandering to UKIP does make it easier than it would have been.

    lol - A Labour govt propped up in any way by the SNP is more likely to destroy the Union - England will simply not tolerate ever greater subsidies to the fringes which they have to pay for in order to sustain something which is increasingly meaningless.
    By “England” do you mean the Daily Heil?
    No.

    'England':

    the survey also shows that English people would be in favour of the UK Government taking a much tougher stance on Scotland if it decides to say in the Union.

    Most of those polled (56 per cent) agreed that public spending in Scotland should be reduced to the UK average following a No vote, while the vast majority (63 per cent) believe that Scottish MPs should be prevented from voting on English laws in the future.


    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/scottish-independence/scottish-independence-english-people-overwhelmingly-want-scotland-to-stay-in-the-uk-9679439.html
    Lol - I like the idea of the Independent as OKC's 'Daily Heil'
    LOL myself; it’s not as far to the right of course, as I see the world!
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,514
    edited December 2014



    JamesMo said:



    Yup. currently the Nats are buoyant despite having lost Indyref and an economic storm brewing on their doorstep. They need to keep the story on constitutional issues however whether real life will let them do so remains to be seen. At some point the bread and butter issues will return with a vengeance.

    CBI survey says that Scottish employers are the most optimistic in the UK about additional hiring in 2015. In fact they're more concerned about shortages of skilled labour.

    http://news.stv.tv/scotland/304336-half-of-businesses-plan-to-hire-more-workers-in-2015-cbi-study-finds/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
    well let's see how that pans out. With oil hitting the skids and clouds looming over Europe I suspect optimism might not turn in to as many jobs as people think. At some point the electorate are going to get fed up with more low paid jobs and want to see higher wages which demands productivity soemthing we haven't been that good at creating.
    Perhaps the uncertainty over the referendum is unwinding.....oh, wait......
    I think the problem for Scotland now is the Indyref hasn't gone away, so for foreign investors it now has an extra level of uncertainty as a place to invest.

    This is bad news for Nats as investment will in all likelihood be lower than if the Indyref had settled the matter so Scots will have fewer jobs.

    It's also bad news for Unionists as a sub optimum Scotland will only feed the Nat narrative of we'd do a better job alone.

    A vicious circle.
  • felix said:

    A terrible poll for Scottish Labour, but no great surprise. Murphy has an incredibly hard task ahead of him. And one that will take years, not months.

    However on these figures, if Labour loses in Scotland but wins most seats in 2015, it will have won in England. On that basis we will have a Labour government. The SNP will never vote with the Tories to bring it down and the chances of them abstaining on votes that could bring a Labour government down are also vanishingly small - they will never help the Tories as the damage it will do them in Scotland would be too great. For the SNP to have any leverage in the next Parliament - however many MPs they have - the Tories have to win most seats. Things will get interesting then. Could Cameron actually deliver on an EU referendum?

    Thus, Labour winning most seats in 2015 safeguards the Union. A Tory minority puts it in doubt. A Tory majority ends it. As a unionist, it seems I have only one choice next year, after all. Reluctantly, I shall exercise it - though ceaseless Tory pandering to UKIP does make it easier than it would have been.

    lol - A Labour govt propped up in any way by the SNP is more likely to destroy the Union - England will simply not tolerate ever greater subsidies to the fringes which they have to pay for in order to sustain something which is increasingly meaningless.
    By “England” do you mean the Daily Heil?
    No.

    'England':

    the survey also shows that English people would be in favour of the UK Government taking a much tougher stance on Scotland if it decides to say in the Union.

    Most of those polled (56 per cent) agreed that public spending in Scotland should be reduced to the UK average following a No vote, while the vast majority (63 per cent) believe that Scottish MPs should be prevented from voting on English laws in the future.


    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/scottish-independence/scottish-independence-english-people-overwhelmingly-want-scotland-to-stay-in-the-uk-9679439.html
    Point taken, Ms Vance. Thank you.
    The prospect of Scottish MPs voting on increasing taxes in England to pay for spending in Scotland (probably 'across the UK' in both cases, but thats not how it would be presented) should be giving those contemplating deals with the SNP pause for thought.....
  • felix said:

    A terrible poll for Scottish Labour, but no great surprise. Murphy has an incredibly hard task ahead of him. And one that will take years, not months.

    However on these figures, if Labour loses in Scotland but wins most seats in 2015, it will have won in England. On that basis we will have a Labour government. The SNP will never vote with the Tories to bring it down and the chances of them abstaining on votes that could bring a Labour government down are also vanishingly small - they will never help the Tories as the damage it will do them in Scotland would be too great. For the SNP to have any leverage in the next Parliament - however many MPs they have - the Tories have to win most seats. Things will get interesting then. Could Cameron actually deliver on an EU referendum?

    Thus, Labour winning most seats in 2015 safeguards the Union. A Tory minority puts it in doubt. A Tory majority ends it. As a unionist, it seems I have only one choice next year, after all. Reluctantly, I shall exercise it - though ceaseless Tory pandering to UKIP does make it easier than it would have been.

    lol - A Labour govt propped up in any way by the SNP is more likely to destroy the Union - England will simply not tolerate ever greater subsidies to the fringes which they have to pay for in order to sustain something which is increasingly meaningless.
    By “England” do you mean the Daily Heil?
    No.

    'England':

    the survey also shows that English people would be in favour of the UK Government taking a much tougher stance on Scotland if it decides to say in the Union.

    Most of those polled (56 per cent) agreed that public spending in Scotland should be reduced to the UK average following a No vote, while the vast majority (63 per cent) believe that Scottish MPs should be prevented from voting on English laws in the future.


    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/scottish-independence/scottish-independence-english-people-overwhelmingly-want-scotland-to-stay-in-the-uk-9679439.html
    Point taken, Ms Vance. Thank you.
    The prospect of Scottish MPs voting on increasing taxes in England to pay for spending in Scotland (probably 'across the UK' in both cases, but thats not how it would be presented) should be giving those contemplating deals with the SNP pause for thought.....

    If Labour loses in Scotland, but has most seats in the Commons it will have won in England. Labour will not need a deal with the SNP.

  • felix said:

    A terrible poll for Scottish Labour, but no great surprise. Murphy has an incredibly hard task ahead of him. And one that will take years, not months.

    However on these figures, if Labour loses in Scotland but wins most seats in 2015, it will have won in England. On that basis we will have a Labour government. The SNP will never vote with the Tories to bring it down and the chances of them abstaining on votes that could bring a Labour government down are also vanishingly small - they will never help the Tories as the damage it will do them in Scotland would be too great. For the SNP to have any leverage in the next Parliament - however many MPs they have - the Tories have to win most seats. Things will get interesting then. Could Cameron actually deliver on an EU referendum?

    Thus, Labour winning most seats in 2015 safeguards the Union. A Tory minority puts it in doubt. A Tory majority ends it. As a unionist, it seems I have only one choice next year, after all. Reluctantly, I shall exercise it - though ceaseless Tory pandering to UKIP does make it easier than it would have been.

    lol - A Labour govt propped up in any way by the SNP is more likely to destroy the Union - England will simply not tolerate ever greater subsidies to the fringes which they have to pay for in order to sustain something which is increasingly meaningless.
    By “England” do you mean the Daily Heil?
    No.

    'England':

    the survey also shows that English people would be in favour of the UK Government taking a much tougher stance on Scotland if it decides to say in the Union.

    ge following a No vote, while the vast majority (63 per cent) believe that Scottish MPs should be prevented from voting on English laws in the future.


    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/scottish-independence/scottish-independence-english-people-overwhelmingly-want-scotland-to-stay-in-the-uk-9679439.html
    Point taken, Ms Vance. Thank you.
    The prospect of Scottish MPs voting on increasing taxes in England to pay for spending in Scotland (probably 'across the UK' in both cases, but thats not how it would be presented) should be giving those contemplating deals with the SNP pause for thought.....

    If Labour loses in Scotland, but has most seats in the Commons it will have won in England. Labour will not need a deal with the SNP.

    So a Labour minority government will not need support outside its own party?

    I wonder if Labour are saving to fight two GEs like the Tories?

  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,709
    Seriously, I think that Ms Vance is right, although I think there is a danger that mischief-makers will skew the presentation to make it seem worse.

    In the event of a hung Parliament the political classes will have to think outside the conventional box. Running a second election “because the electorate didn’t get it right first time" is rarely a good idea. Didn’t work 100 years ago, nor in 1951, nor really in 1974. Did in 1966, because the initiative was with the then Government. After Oct 1974 the Government clung on for 5 years but largely due to alliances, overt or covert, with minor parties, and initially a somewhat demoralised opposition.
  • Morning all. My post yesterday on the SNP/Labour battleground is on topic:

    http://newstonoone.blogspot.co.uk/2014/12/testing-boundaries-2-labour-vs-snp.html
  • In the event of a hung Parliament the political classes will have to think outside the conventional box. Running a second election “because the electorate didn’t get it right first time" is rarely a good idea. Didn’t work 100 years ago, nor in 1951, nor really in 1974. Did in 1966, because the initiative was with the then Government. After Oct 1974 the Government clung on for 5 years but largely due to alliances, overt or covert, with minor parties, and initially a somewhat demoralised opposition.

    Labour's first budget is likely to be a serious disappointment to their supporters who are wishing for 'an end to austerity'

    The SNP are campaigning for 'an end to Tory cuts' - how could they support Labour ones? (tho what we'll see post 2015 is nothing compared to what an independent Scotland would be facing - but facts rarely detain our nationalist friends).

    So, if Labour are not in a majority, who is going to vote through their first budget?

  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    All Murphy has to do is get a 5% swing to Labour from these stratosperic SNP numbers and the seats split changes dramatically.

    The SNP / Holyrood government has one great advantage. It only spends money. For the time being, it does not collect any. Therefore, it can be Santa Klaus all year round. Where it can't do, it just blames the "aenglish" for the austerity budget.

    Of course, the concept of a nationhood is also a huge plus psychologically.

    What does a patriotic Glasgow council estate dweller do now ?
  • Murphy has perceived three weaknesses in the SNP offer and will work hard over the next few months to attract back the 21% who would consider voting Labour. One of the weak points is based upon economic assumptions based upon the price of oil.Recent fluctuations have shown that this can't be relied upon.The sea change to the SNP happened suddenly and the swingback could happen in the same way, the details of this poll gives hope to those who want a balanced representation of Scottish MPs.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,736
    felix said:

    felix said:

    A terrible poll for Scottish Labour, but no great surprise. Murphy has an incredibly hard task ahead of him. And one that will take years, not months.

    However on these figures, if Labour loses in Scotland but wins most seats in 2015, it will have won in England. On that basis we will have a Labour government. The SNP will never vote with the Tories to bring it down and the chances of them abstaining on votes that could bring a Labour government down are also vanishingly small - they will never help the Tories as the damage it will do them in Scotland would be too great. For the SNP to have any leverage in the next Parliament - however many MPs they have - the Tories have to win most seats. Things will get interesting then. Could Cameron actually deliver on an EU referendum?

    Thus, Labour winning most seats in 2015 safeguards the Union. A Tory minority puts it in doubt. A Tory majority ends it. As a unionist, it seems I have only one choice next year, after all. Reluctantly, I shall exercise it - though ceaseless Tory pandering to UKIP does make it easier than it would have been.

    lol - A Labour govt propped up in any way by the SNP is more likely to destroy the Union - England will simply not tolerate ever greater subsidies to the fringes which they have to pay for in order to sustain something which is increasingly meaningless.
    By “England” do you mean the Daily Heil?
    No - I don't mean the most widely read News/on-line outlet in the country. However, I guess that must really irk you:)
    The BBC??
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549

    felix said:

    A terrible poll for Scottish Labour, but no great surprise. Murphy has an incredibly hard task ahead of him. And one that will take years, not months.


    Thus, Labour winning most seats in 2015 safeguards the Union. A Tory minority puts it in doubt. A Tory majority ends it. As a unionist, it seems I have only one choice next year, after all. Reluctantly, I shall exercise it - though ceaseless Tory pandering to UKIP does make it easier than it would have been.

    lol - A Labour govt propped up in any way by the SNP is more likely to destroy the Union - England will simply not tolerate ever greater subsidies to the fringes which they have to pay for in order to sustain something which is increasingly meaningless.
    By “England” do you mean the Daily Heil?
    No.

    'England':

    the survey also shows that English people would be in favour of the UK Government taking a much tougher stance on Scotland if it decides to say in the Union.

    ge following a No vote, while the vast majority (63 per cent) believe that Scottish MPs should be prevented from voting on English laws in the future.


    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/scottish-independence/scottish-independence-english-people-overwhelmingly-want-scotland-to-stay-in-the-uk-9679439.html
    Point taken, Ms Vance. Thank you.
    The prospect of Scottish MPs voting on increasing taxes in England to pay for spending in Scotland (probably 'across the UK' in both cases, but thats not how it would be presented) should be giving those contemplating deals with the SNP pause for thought.....

    If Labour loses in Scotland, but has most seats in the Commons it will have won in England. Labour will not need a deal with the SNP.

    So a Labour minority government will not need support outside its own party?

    I wonder if Labour are saving to fight two GEs like the Tories?

    If Labour wins England with a comfortable majority in seats, it governs for 5 years. The SNP has said it will not get into an alliance with the Tories. We will see.
  • fitalass said:

    Despite all the recent Scottish polls, I have to say that this huge SNP surge has completely passed me by on the ground. Yes, the Indy Ref result really angered Yes/SNP voters, and as a result it really fired them all up to join the SNP in the aftermath of the Referendum in much the same way the 1997 GE result finally pushed me to officially join the Conservative party. But I have yet to meet anyone who has now switched to voting SNP who wasn't already going to do so before the Referendum. Go figure.

    That would be consistent with the polls if the SNP upswing was primarily taking place in the central belt and particularly Glasgow.
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549



    JamesMo said:



    Yup. currently the Nats are buoyant despite having lost Indyref and an economic storm brewing on their doorstep. They need to keep the story on constitutional issues however whether real life will let them do so remains to be seen. At some point the bread and butter issues will return with a vengeance.

    CBI survey says that Scottish employers are the most optimistic in the UK about additional hiring in 2015. In fact they're more concerned about shortages of skilled labour.

    http://news.stv.tv/scotland/304336-half-of-businesses-plan-to-hire-more-workers-in-2015-cbi-study-finds/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
    well let's see how that pans out. With oil hitting the skids and clouds looming over Europe I suspect optimism might not turn in to as many jobs as people think. At some point the electorate are going to get fed up with more low paid jobs and want to see higher wages which demands productivity soemthing we haven't been that good at creating.
    Perhaps the uncertainty over the referendum is unwinding.....oh, wait......
    I think the problem for Scotland now is the Indyref hasn't gone away, so for foreign investors it now has an extra level of uncertainty as a place to invest.

    This is bad news for Nats as investment will in all likelihood be lower than if the Indyref had settled the matter so Scots will have fewer jobs.

    It's also bad news for Unionists as a sub optimum Scotland will only feed the Nat narrative of we'd do a better job alone.

    A vicious circle.
    Yes, new investment is dead until Scotland has independence or the prospect of a SNP government vanishes. Neither will occur in the short term. So Scotland suffers in the meantime.
  • surbiton said:

    felix said:

    A terrible poll for Scottish Labour, but no great surprise. Murphy has an incredibly hard task ahead of him. And one that will take years, not months.


    Thus, Labour winning most seats in 2015 safeguards the Union. A Tory minority puts it in doubt. A Tory majority ends it. As a unionist, it seems I have only one choice next year, after all. Reluctantly, I shall exercise it - though ceaseless Tory pandering to UKIP does make it easier than it would have been.

    lol - A Labour govt propped up in any way by the SNP is more likely to destroy the Union - England will simply not tolerate ever greater subsidies to the fringes which they have to pay for in order to sustain something which is increasingly meaningless.
    By “England” do you mean the Daily Heil?
    No.

    'England':

    the survey also shows that English people would be in favour of the UK Government taking a much tougher stance on Scotland if it decides to say in the Union.

    ge following a No vote, while the vast majority (63 per cent) believe that Scottish MPs should be prevented from voting on English laws in the future.


    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/scottish-independence/scottish-independence-english-people-overwhelmingly-want-scotland-to-stay-in-the-uk-9679439.html
    Point taken, Ms Vance. Thank you.
    The prospect of Scottish MPs voting on increasing taxes in England to pay for spending in Scotland (probably 'across the UK' in both cases, but thats not how it would be presented) should be giving those contemplating deals with the SNP pause for thought.....

    If Labour loses in Scotland, but has most seats in the Commons it will have won in England. Labour will not need a deal with the SNP.

    So a Labour minority government will not need support outside its own party?

    I wonder if Labour are saving to fight two GEs like the Tories?

    If Labour wins England with a comfortable majority in seats, it governs for 5 years. The SNP has said it will not get into an alliance with the Tories. We will see.
    The interesting permutation comes when Labour are behind the Conservatives in seats but ahead if you add in the SNP. What would the Lib Dems do then? Might the triple lock for approving any coalition paralyse them?
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,566
    Looking at the entrails in

    http://survation.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/December-Scotland-Daily-Record-Scottish-Voting-Intention-ONE.pdf

    doesn't at first sight bear out JamesMo' comment that there are lots of doubtful voters - it's only 14%, not unusually high. But it's noticeable that nearly all of them (9 out of 10) were "no" voters, so presumably more open to Murphy (though note that a sixth of the SNP voters were "no" voters too). If, say, half were to vote Labour, a tenth SNP and the rest didn't vote, it would reduce the SNP lead by 5.5%, which would save some seats but still leave the SNP well ahead.
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    antifrank said:

    Morning all. My post yesterday on the SNP/Labour battleground is on topic:

    http://newstonoone.blogspot.co.uk/2014/12/testing-boundaries-2-labour-vs-snp.html

    "Ladbrokes price the SNP as favourites to get most seats in Scotland at 8/15, and Labour at 11/8. However, when you look at the individual constituency markets, the SNP are favourites to win only 16 of the 59 Scottish seats (and only three Labour-held seats), and they will probably need at least 25 to take most seats. Both Paddy Power and Ladbrokes have set an over/under market on SNP seats at 24.5, priced at 5/6 each side of the line. There must be value here somewhere, so where is it?"

    Antifrank: This is the conundrum. If one follows Survation, Labour could end up with single figure seats. But why doesn't the canny Scot punters "on the ground" follow that logic ?

    Labour losing only 3 seats ? Huh ?
  • Good morning, everyone.

    Agree entirely on the Scottish business comments. Uncertainty is bad for business. The question mark should've disappeared now but a combination of the ill-advised Vow nonsense and the SNP deciding that 'once in a generation' could mean 'once every few years' means that the question mark remains.
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    edited December 2014
    antifrank said:

    surbiton said:

    felix said:

    A terrible poll for Scottish Labour, but no great surprise. Murphy has an incredibly hard task ahead of him. And one that will take years, not months.


    Reluctantly, I shall exercise it - though ceaseless Tory pandering to UKIP does make it easier than it would have been.

    lol - A Labour govt propped up in any way by the SNP is more likely to destroy the Union - England will simply not tolerate ever greater subsidies to the fringes which they have to pay for in order to sustain something which is increasingly meaningless.
    By “England” do you mean the Daily Heil?
    No.

    'England':

    .

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/scottish-independence/scottish-independence-english-people-overwhelmingly-want-scotland-to-stay-in-the-uk-9679439.html
    Point taken, Ms Vance. Thank you.
    The prospect of Scottish MPs voting on increasing taxes in England to pay for spending in Scotland (probably 'across the UK' in both cases, but thats not how it would be presented) should be giving those contemplating deals with the SNP pause for thought.....

    If Labour loses in Scotland, but has most seats in the Commons it will have won in England. Labour will not need a deal with the SNP.

    So a Labour minority government will not need support outside its own party?

    I wonder if Labour are saving to fight two GEs like the Tories?

    If Labour wins England with a comfortable majority in seats, it governs for 5 years. The SNP has said it will not get into an alliance with the Tories. We will see.
    The interesting permutation comes when Labour are behind the Conservatives in seats but ahead if you add in the SNP. What would the Lib Dems do then? Might the triple lock for approving any coalition paralyse them?
    The Liberal Democrats will end up with just 2 seats if these numbers remain no matter what people think of Danny Alexander's position. Portillo also lost on a 17% swing. These things happen. The Yellows will win Orkney and Charlie Kennedy will win. That's it. The Tories might win a second seat on the churn.

    So, if the two "English" parties work together, then bye bye Scotland. Even the SNP will not need to do anything.

  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,536
    Socrates said:

    Theresa May quietly and competently getting on with the job:

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/uks-immigration-system-now-in-intensive-care-theresa-may-is-warned-9936921.html

    Britain’s immigration system is now in “intensive care”, MPs have warned, painting a damning picture of multiple blunders by the Home Office.

    Disclosing that nearly 400,000 immigration cases were unresolved, the Commons home affairs select committee warned that the Government's broken promise to slash migration levels had undermined public confidence in the system.

    It condemned the Home Office’s “inexcusable” failure to deport more foreign prisoners and expressed “serious doubts” over whether it would hit its target to introduce full exit checks at ports and airports by April.

    The Home Secretary’s frequent delays in releasing reports by the independent Chief Inspector of Immigration – highlighted by the Independent last month – was also attacked as “unacceptable”.

    The MPs said the number of missing migrants had reached 89,000 while the Home Office faced a separate backlog of 304,222 visa applications.

    If a Chief Executive had failed to turn round a failing company after 5 years, it would be fair to conclude she wasn't up to the job.

  • surbiton said:

    antifrank said:

    surbiton said:

    felix said:

    A terrible poll for Scottish Labour, but no great surprise. Murphy has an incredibly hard task ahead of him. And one that will take years, not months.


    Reluctantly, I shall exercise it - though ceaseless Tory pandering to UKIP does make it easier than it would have been.

    lol - A Labour govt propped up in any way by the SNP is more likely to destroy the Union - England will simply not tolerate ever greater subsidies to the fringes which they have to pay for in order to sustain something which is increasingly meaningless.
    By “England” do you mean the Daily Heil?
    No.

    'England':

    .

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/scottish-independence/scottish-independence-english-people-overwhelmingly-want-scotland-to-stay-in-the-uk-9679439.html
    Point taken, Ms Vance. Thank you.
    The prospect of Scottish MPs voting on increasing taxes in England to pay for spending in Scotland (probably 'across the UK' in both cases, but thats not how it would be presented) should be giving those contemplating deals with the SNP pause for thought.....

    If Labour loses in Scotland, but has most seats in the Commons it will have won in England. Labour will not need a deal with the SNP.

    So a Labour minority government will not need support outside its own party?

    I wonder if Labour are saving to fight two GEs like the Tories?

    If Labour wins England with a comfortable majority in seats, it governs for 5 years. The SNP has said it will not get into an alliance with the Tories. We will see.
    The interesting permutation comes when Labour are behind the Conservatives in seats but ahead if you add in the SNP. What would the Lib Dems do then? Might the triple lock for approving any coalition paralyse them?
    The Liberal Democrats will end up with just 2 seats if these numbers remain no matter what people think of Danny Alexander's position. Portillo also lost on a 17% swing. These things happen. The Yellows will win Orkney and Charlie Kennedy will win. That's it. The Tories might win a second seat on the churn.

    So, if the two "English" parties work together, then bye bye Scotland. Even the SNP will not need to do anything.

    Judging by this poll Labour is in danger of becoming an "English" party.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,536
    surbiton said:

    felix said:

    A terrible poll for Scottish Labour, but no great surprise. Murphy has an incredibly hard task ahead of him. And one that will take years, not months.


    Thus, Labour winning most seats in 2015 safeguards the Union. A Tory minority puts it in doubt. A Tory majority ends it. As a unionist, it seems I have only one choice next year, after all. Reluctantly, I shall exercise it - though ceaseless Tory pandering to UKIP does make it easier than it would have been.

    lol - A Labour govt propped up in any way by the SNP is more likely to destroy the Union - England will simply not tolerate ever greater subsidies to the fringes which they have to pay for in order to sustain something which is increasingly meaningless.
    By “England” do you mean the Daily Heil?
    No.

    'England':

    the survey also shows that English people would be in favour of the UK Government taking a much tougher stance on Scotland if it decides to say in the Union.

    ge following a No vote, while the vast majority (63 per cent) believe that Scottish MPs should be prevented from voting on English laws in the future.


    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/scottish-independence/scottish-independence-english-people-overwhelmingly-want-scotland-to-stay-in-the-uk-9679439.html
    Point taken, Ms Vance. Thank you.
    The prospect of Scottish MPs voting on increasing taxes in England to pay for spending in Scotland (probably 'across the UK' in both cases, but thats not how it would be presented) should be giving those contemplating deals with the SNP pause for thought.....

    If Labour loses in Scotland, but has most seats in the Commons it will have won in England. Labour will not need a deal with the SNP.

    So a Labour minority government will not need support outside its own party?

    I wonder if Labour are saving to fight two GEs like the Tories?

    If Labour wins England with a comfortable majority in seats, it governs for 5 years. The SNP has said it will not get into an alliance with the Tories. We will see.
    Current polling tends to give the Conservatives a marginal lead in England, but Labour would probably edge it in terms of seats.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,730
    @OldKingCole‌ and @CarlottaVance‌

    I suggested on here a few months ago that it was possible that the result of the next election would be a grand coalition of Conservative and Labour, because the mathematics of any other combination would not work. Nobody was very keen on the idea (frankly, I'm not keen on it myself). But right here, right now, can anyone see a plausible government that doesn't involve both of the main parties?

    Labour - sinking in the polls. Handicapped by their leader's personal unpopularity. Under threat in Scotland. Need to make a net gain of 70 seats to win office on their own.

    Conservatives: not doing well in the polls. While they might tick up, it seems unlikely they will tick up far enough. Need to win another 20-25 seats to gain power, something no governing party has managed in 32 years. Their leader isn't a liability, but he isn't exactly an asset. Haemorrhaging support to UKIP, especially that all-important lower-middle-class support in the Midlands and South.

    Liberal Democrats - almost bound to lose seats, even if not as many as predicted. If they have under 30, it's hard to see how they can form a two-party coalition.

    SNP - unlikely to have enough seats to prop up Labour alone, on current figures. Even if they do, it's hard to see how they would either (a) support nationwide cuts that will undoubtedly negatively affect their popularity in Scotland, or (b) be able to force advantageous pro-Scottish legislation through without provoking actual rioting south of the border, which might cause the government and even the UK to collapse.

    Democratic Unionists - unlikely that their 8-10 seats could prop up the Conservatives.

    Other NI - as above.

    Plaid Cymru, Greens, UKIP - might have 10 seats between them.

    That doesn't leave many options. It would however leave an enormous amount of uncertainty, which wouldn't be good for anybody. Realistically, a grand coalition along the lines of 1931 might be the only option to prevent a crisis.

    But - would the supporters take it (let's ignore the politicians, we all know that they would be willing to deal with each other)? My guess is the Conservatives would, on the basis that they will be willing to hang on to power at any price after so many years in the wilderness, but not Labour and particularly not in Scotland and Wales. It would be seen as a terrible betrayal and would lead to political annihilation at the general election following.

    So maybe we should think about, in that case, what becomes of (a) the UK, bearing in mind Labour are the last truly national party and (b) what might replace Labour if they were smashed - if anybody could, at once?

    Feel free to disagree - but if Scotland goes SNP, that's the can of worms that I can see being opened in Westminster.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,709
    Sean_F said:

    surbiton said:

    felix said:

    A terrible poll for Scottish Labour, but no great surprise. Murphy has an incredibly hard task ahead of him. And one that will take years, not months.


    Thus, Labour winning most seats in 2015 safeguards the Union. A Tory minority puts it in doubt. A Tory majority ends it. As a unionist, it seems I have only one choice next year, after all. Reluctantly, I shall exercise it - though ceaseless Tory pandering to UKIP does make it easier than it would have been.

    lol - A Labour govt propped up in any way by the SNP is more likely to destroy the Union - England will simply not tolerate ever greater subsidies to the fringes which they have to pay for in order to sustain something which is increasingly meaningless.
    By “England” do you mean the Daily Heil?
    No.

    'England':

    the survey also shows that English people would be in favour of the UK Government taking a much tougher stance on Scotland if it decides to say in the Union.

    ge following a No vote, while the vast majority (63 per cent) believe that Scottish MPs should be prevented from voting on English laws in the future.


    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/scottish-independence/scottish-independence-english-people-overwhelmingly-want-scotland-to-stay-in-the-uk-9679439.html
    Point taken, Ms Vance. Thank you.
    The prospect of Scottish MPs voting on increasing taxes in England to pay for spending in Scotland (probably 'across the UK' in both cases, but thats not how it would be presented) should be giving those contemplating deals with the SNP pause for thought.....

    If Labour loses in Scotland, but has most seats in the Commons it will have won in England. Labour will not need a deal with the SNP.

    So a Labour minority government will not need support outside its own party?

    I wonder if Labour are saving to fight two GEs like the Tories?

    If Labour wins England with a comfortable majority in seats, it governs for 5 years. The SNP has said it will not get into an alliance with the Tories. We will see.
    Current polling tends to give the Conservatives a marginal lead in England, but Labour would probably edge it in terms of seats.
    Edging it seats won’t be enough for a majority if it gets hammered in Scotland. Coulkd lose 1-2 in Wales, too. Eg Ynys Mon.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,536

    A terrible poll for Scottish Labour, but no great surprise. Murphy has an incredibly hard task ahead of him. And one that will take years, not months.

    However on these figures, if Labour loses in Scotland but wins most seats in 2015, it will have won in England. On that basis we will have a Labour government. The SNP will never vote with the Tories to bring it down and the chances of them abstaining on votes that could bring a Labour government down are also vanishingly small - they will never help the Tories as the damage it will do them in Scotland would be too great. For the SNP to have any leverage in the next Parliament - however many MPs they have - the Tories have to win most seats. Things will get interesting then. Could Cameron actually deliver on an EU referendum?

    Thus, Labour winning most seats in 2015 safeguards the Union. A Tory minority puts it in doubt. A Tory majority ends it. As a unionist, it seems I have only one choice next year, after all. Reluctantly, I shall exercise it - though ceaseless Tory pandering to UKIP does make it easier than it would have been.

    Labour winning fewer seats than the Conservatives, but taking office with SNP backing, kills the Union.

    The Conservatives winning 326 seats makes the SNP irrelevant.

  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,016
    edited December 2014
    It looks as if tax from the north sea is going to have to be halved at the next budget. Not exactly what Osborne would have been wanting to spend his few sweeties on immediately before the election but the scale of cancelled investment in the north sea is such that it has macro implications for the whole country.

    In round terms the tax will fall from about £5bn to maybe £2.5bn. To put it into perspective that is roughly £500 a head for every man, woman and child in Scotland. Or to put it another way this alone would have been enough to bring average public spending in Scotland from comfortably above England to something below it.

    In most other political matters a party that was so rapidly demonstrated to have been so stunningly incompetent and dishonest would have something of a problem. But not here, apparently. It was always obvious that those voting yes were not much interested in the subject of economics. That apparent indifference is reaching new levels. Sad and dangerous.
  • Mr. Surbiton, that's an interesting angle I hadn't considered. But it may be Catch-22.

    If the SNP sweeps the board in Scotland it's hard to see Labour getting an outright majority. Which means [assuming no second election]:
    Lab-SNP
    Lab-Lib
    Con-Lib

    The first of those would mean we'd have not only Scottish MPs but an avowedly separatist party imposing their will on English matters, when said matters are devolved to Scotland. It's hard to think of anything that would antagonise the English more [joining the euro, perhaps].

    The second two would both be English (and Welsh) coalitions. That may, as you suggest, not go down well in a Scotland which has voted overwhelmingly for the SNP.
  • If Labour win despite losing Scotland their seats-lead will mostly be based on the failed principality of Wales. Given past ramblings no-one should be surprised that this obvious fact has been unobserved by SoWo....

    :tumbleweed:
  • Morning all,

    As far as I can see from the poll details, the Scottish Greens are on 1%. This seems very very low considering the surge going on elsewhere in UK.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,704
    edited December 2014
    Sean_F said:

    A terrible poll for Scottish Labour, but no great surprise. Murphy has an incredibly hard task ahead of him. And one that will take years, not months.

    However on these figures, if Labour loses in Scotland but wins most seats in 2015, it will have won in England. On that basis we will have a Labour government. The SNP will never vote with the Tories to bring it down and the chances of them abstaining on votes that could bring a Labour government down are also vanishingly small - they will never help the Tories as the damage it will do them in Scotland would be too great. For the SNP to have any leverage in the next Parliament - however many MPs they have - the Tories have to win most seats. Things will get interesting then. Could Cameron actually deliver on an EU referendum?

    Thus, Labour winning most seats in 2015 safeguards the Union. A Tory minority puts it in doubt. A Tory majority ends it. As a unionist, it seems I have only one choice next year, after all. Reluctantly, I shall exercise it - though ceaseless Tory pandering to UKIP does make it easier than it would have been.

    Labour winning fewer seats than the Conservatives, but taking office with SNP backing, kills the Union.

    The Conservatives winning 326 seats makes the SNP irrelevant.

    How come. Your argument seems a bit asymmetrical.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,709
    Ydoethur is assuming that in the event of a situation where no two parties (of the obvious) are able to form a government, the there might be a grand coalition, but In reality I don’t think that Milliband could sell that to his Parliamentary party, let alone the party in the country as a whole. Memories of the effect of 1931 are still there .... race memory, legends, folklore, call them what you will, are powerful things.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,730

    If Labour win despite losing Scotland their seats-lead will mostly be based on the failed principality of Wales. Given past ramblings no-one should be surprised that this obvious fact has been unobserved by SoWo....

    :tumbleweed:

    Don't assume that Labour are necessarily going to do well in Wales. Remember, uniquely in the UK, they are in government there and they are not popular (google 'Alun Davies' for one reason why). Some Wales-only polling would be very helpful to see the current position - does anyone know of any?

    Must dash - have got an inset.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,704
    Very quiet commute this morning, is anything going on?
  • Mr. Jonathan, surely lots of people will have this week off work?
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,704

    Mr. Jonathan, surely lots of people will have this week off work?

    Slackers.
  • eekeek Posts: 28,590

    Morning all,

    As far as I can see from the poll details, the Scottish Greens are on 1%. This seems very very low considering the surge going on elsewhere in UK.

    Why? Its been argued that the Greens are the left's anti-establishment party of protest as UKIP is still tainted with racism. The SNP being anti-Westminster and left wing acts as a sensible rallying point for those voters north of the border...

    Things are clearly different north of the border. I don't think its wise to look at them from a southern viewpoint and claim that the figures make no sense. A large anti-Westminster vote focussed on the SNP seems perfectly rational to me and as I stated before the continual announcements that the SNP won't work with the Conservatives makes Scottish Labour's election task all the harder.
  • chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341
    ydoethur said:


    Don't assume that Labour are necessarily going to do well in Wales. Remember, uniquely in the UK, they are in government there and they are not popular (google 'Alun Davies' for one reason why). Some Wales-only polling would be very helpful to see the current position - does anyone know of any?

    Must dash - have got an inset.

    Last poll in early December had Lab 36 (same as 2010, down two on two months earlier) and Tory 23 (down three on 2010)

    Lab down 10 over the year.

    http://blogs.cardiff.ac.uk/electionsinwales/2014/12/15/happy-birthday-to-us/
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,498

    JamesMo said:

    A problem for all of the unionist parties is that no voters are much more likely to say that they are "undecided". I would suspect that most of those "undecided" nos are disgruntled Labour voters. Murphy should get some uptick in the polls by drawing them back, but it would only close the gap a bit, not overhaul it.

    His more difficult problem is appealing to yes voters who have previously voted Labour (or Lib Dem). This group appear to have largely moved to the SNP. Appointing someone as leader who was closely associated with Better Together would not superficially appear to be the best way of doing this. He has to find some way of disassociating yes support from SNP support.

    It will only happen once the conversation changes in Scotland and is not defined by the referendum. That will take time.

    Yup. currently the Nats are buoyant despite having lost Indyref and an economic storm brewing on their doorstep. They need to keep the story on constitutional issues however whether real life will let them do so remains to be seen. At some point the bread and butter issues will return with a vengeance.
    Alan, I think though that it will be London parties that get the blame for the massive cuts that are coming. People will be looking for the great "pooling and sharing" rhetoric to be real and be very disappointed. Labour or Tory at Westminster will make no difference as they are cheeks of the same arse.
  • ydoethur said:

    @OldKingCole‌ and @CarlottaVance‌

    [snip]

    Liberal Democrats - almost bound to lose seats, even if not as many as predicted. If they have under 30, it's hard to see how they can form a two-party coalition.

    SNP - unlikely to have enough seats to prop up Labour alone, on current figures. Even if they do, it's hard to see how they would either (a) support nationwide cuts that will undoubtedly negatively affect their popularity in Scotland, or (b) be able to force advantageous pro-Scottish legislation through without provoking actual rioting south of the border, which might cause the government and even the UK to collapse.

    Democratic Unionists - unlikely that their 8-10 seats could prop up the Conservatives.

    Other NI - as above.

    Plaid Cymru, Greens, UKIP - might have 10 seats between them.

    That doesn't leave many options. It would however leave an enormous amount of uncertainty, which wouldn't be good for anybody. Realistically, a grand coalition along the lines of 1931 might be the only option to prevent a crisis.

    But - would the supporters take it (let's ignore the politicians, we all know that they would be willing to deal with each other)? My guess is the Conservatives would, on the basis that they will be willing to hang on to power at any price after so many years in the wilderness, but not Labour and particularly not in Scotland and Wales. It would be seen as a terrible betrayal and would lead to political annihilation at the general election following.

    So maybe we should think about, in that case, what becomes of (a) the UK, bearing in mind Labour are the last truly national party and (b) what might replace Labour if they were smashed - if anybody could, at once?

    Feel free to disagree - but if Scotland goes SNP, that's the can of worms that I can see being opened in Westminster.

    Interesting, but I think you are wrong in assuming a "crisis" if, as expected FPTP does not deliver a clear result. Cameron, as existing PM, would get the right to have first go at governing - either as a minority or with Liberals and perhaps DUP again. He might be able to do this for a few months or longer and then call another election.

    There is only really a crisis if budgetary bills can't be passed which seems unlikely. Other legislation can wait (and indeed IMHO most of it these days is nonsense designed to make it appear that the governing party is doing something about some issue or other).
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,498

    felix said:

    A terrible poll for Scottish Labour, but no great surprise. Murphy has an incredibly hard task ahead of him. And one that will take years, not months.

    However on these figures, if Labour loses in Scotland but wins most seats in 2015, it will have won in England. On that basis we will have a Labour government. The SNP will never vote with the Tories to bring it down and the chances of them abstaining on votes that could bring a Labour government down are also vanishingly small - they will never help the Tories as the damage it will do them in Scotland would be too great. For the SNP to have any leverage in the next Parliament - however many MPs they have - the Tories have to win most seats. Things will get interesting then. Could Cameron actually deliver on an EU referendum?

    Thus, Labour winning most seats in 2015 safeguards the Union. A Tory minority puts it in doubt. A Tory majority ends it. As a unionist, it seems I have only one choice next year, after all. Reluctantly, I shall exercise it - though ceaseless Tory pandering to UKIP does make it easier than it would have been.

    lol - A Labour govt propped up in any way by the SNP is more likely to destroy the Union - England will simply not tolerate ever greater subsidies to the fringes which they have to pay for in order to sustain something which is increasingly meaningless.
    By “England” do you mean the Daily Heil?
    LOL
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,498
    fitalass said:

    This is a looming concern where most SNP/Yes voters appear to be completely in denial.

    JamesMo said:



    Yup. currently the Nats are buoyant despite having lost Indyref and an economic storm brewing on their doorstep. They need to keep the story on constitutional issues however whether real life will let them do so remains to be seen. At some point the bread and butter issues will return with a vengeance.

    CBI survey says that Scottish employers are the most optimistic in the UK about additional hiring in 2015. In fact they're more concerned about shortages of skilled labour.

    http://news.stv.tv/scotland/304336-half-of-businesses-plan-to-hire-more-workers-in-2015-cbi-study-finds/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
    Encouraging - lets hope it more than offsets the 15,000 the North Sea could lose:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/oilandgas/11303986/North-Sea-could-lose-15000-jobs-if-oil-continues-to-fall-warns-Sir-Ian-Wood.html
    LOL, unionists now trying to say it is the SNP that is causing the oil price drop. Just how stupid can Tories get.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,498
    fitalass said:

    Despite all the recent Scottish polls, I have to say that this huge SNP surge has completely passed me by on the ground. Yes, the Indy Ref result really angered Yes/SNP voters, and as a result it really fired them all up to join the SNP in the aftermath of the Referendum in much the same way the 1997 GE result finally pushed me to officially join the Conservative party. But I have yet to meet anyone who has now switched to voting SNP who wasn't already going to do so before the Referendum. Go figure.

    Next you will be telling us everybody you speak to is voting Tory.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,498



    JamesMo said:



    Yup. currently the Nats are buoyant despite having lost Indyref and an economic storm brewing on their doorstep. They need to keep the story on constitutional issues however whether real life will let them do so remains to be seen. At some point the bread and butter issues will return with a vengeance.

    CBI survey says that Scottish employers are the most optimistic in the UK about additional hiring in 2015. In fact they're more concerned about shortages of skilled labour.

    http://news.stv.tv/scotland/304336-half-of-businesses-plan-to-hire-more-workers-in-2015-cbi-study-finds/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
    well let's see how that pans out. With oil hitting the skids and clouds looming over Europe I suspect optimism might not turn in to as many jobs as people think. At some point the electorate are going to get fed up with more low paid jobs and want to see higher wages which demands productivity soemthing we haven't been that good at creating.
    Perhaps the uncertainty over the referendum is unwinding.....oh, wait......
    I think the problem for Scotland now is the Indyref hasn't gone away, so for foreign investors it now has an extra level of uncertainty as a place to invest.

    This is bad news for Nats as investment will in all likelihood be lower than if the Indyref had settled the matter so Scots will have fewer jobs.

    It's also bad news for Unionists as a sub optimum Scotland will only feed the Nat narrative of we'd do a better job alone.

    A vicious circle.
    Alan , did you not mean "virtuous"
  • Mr. G, my reading of the oil reference was that the drop in price and its impact on Scotland is simply being ignored by the SNP, rather than suggesting the SNP are to blame for the recent decline in the oil price.
  • felix said:

    felix said:

    A terrible poll for Scottish Labour, but no great surprise. Murphy has an incredibly hard task ahead of him. And one that will take years, not months.

    However on these figures, if Labour loses in Scotland but wins most seats in 2015, it will have won in England. On that basis we will have a Labour government. The SNP will never vote with the Tories to bring it down and the chances of them abstaining on votes that could bring a Labour government down are also vanishingly small - they will never help the Tories as the damage it will do them in Scotland would be too great. For the SNP to have any leverage in the next Parliament - however many MPs they have - the Tories have to win most seats. Things will get interesting then. Could Cameron actually deliver on an EU referendum?

    Thus, Labour winning most seats in 2015 safeguards the Union. A Tory minority puts it in doubt. A Tory majority ends it. As a unionist, it seems I have only one choice next year, after all. Reluctantly, I shall exercise it - though ceaseless Tory pandering to UKIP does make it easier than it would have been.

    lol - A Labour govt propped up in any way by the SNP is more likely to destroy the Union - England will simply not tolerate ever greater subsidies to the fringes which they have to pay for in order to sustain something which is increasingly meaningless.
    By “England” do you mean the Daily Heil?
    No - I don't mean the most widely read News/on-line outlet in the country. However, I guess that must really irk you:)
    The BBC??
    Morning John,

    Much as we fall out over your love of the NHS, and while it may seem that I don't care for it nothing could be further from the truth, I am really excited about this:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-30558112

    The short term costs in terms of R&D will be huge but long term it will be both a massive benefit and saving.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,536
    Jonathan said:

    Sean_F said:

    A terrible poll for Scottish Labour, but no great surprise. Murphy has an incredibly hard task ahead of him. And one that will take years, not months.

    However on these figures, if Labour loses in Scotland but wins most seats in 2015, it will have won in England. On that basis we will have a Labour government. The SNP will never vote with the Tories to bring it down and the chances of them abstaining on votes that could bring a Labour government down are also vanishingly small - they will never help the Tories as the damage it will do them in Scotland would be too great. For the SNP to have any leverage in the next Parliament - however many MPs they have - the Tories have to win most seats. Things will get interesting then. Could Cameron actually deliver on an EU referendum?

    Thus, Labour winning most seats in 2015 safeguards the Union. A Tory minority puts it in doubt. A Tory majority ends it. As a unionist, it seems I have only one choice next year, after all. Reluctantly, I shall exercise it - though ceaseless Tory pandering to UKIP does make it easier than it would have been.

    Labour winning fewer seats than the Conservatives, but taking office with SNP backing, kills the Union.

    The Conservatives winning 326 seats makes the SNP irrelevant.

    How come. Your argument seems a bit asymmetrical.
    A party that clearly lost the election South of the Border, taking office with the backing of a party that's committed to the break-up of the UK, and which demands various forms of special treatment for Scotland, would convince voters in England and Wales that the Union with Scotland was not worth preserving.

  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,498

    Murphy has perceived three weaknesses in the SNP offer and will work hard over the next few months to attract back the 21% who would consider voting Labour. One of the weak points is based upon economic assumptions based upon the price of oil.Recent fluctuations have shown that this can't be relied upon.The sea change to the SNP happened suddenly and the swingback could happen in the same way, the details of this poll gives hope to those who want a balanced representation of Scottish MPs.

    LOL, breaking news , "bears sh** in the woods" , Murphy makes startling discovery.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,498
    surbiton said:



    JamesMo said:



    Yup. currently the Nats are buoyant despite having lost Indyref and an economic storm brewing on their doorstep. They need to keep the story on constitutional issues however whether real life will let them do so remains to be seen. At some point the bread and butter issues will return with a vengeance.

    CBI survey says that Scottish employers are the most optimistic in the UK about additional hiring in 2015. In fact they're more concerned about shortages of skilled labour.

    http://news.stv.tv/scotland/304336-half-of-businesses-plan-to-hire-more-workers-in-2015-cbi-study-finds/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
    well let's see how that pans out. With oil hitting the skids and clouds looming over Europe I suspect optimism might not turn in to as many jobs as people think. At some point the electorate are going to get fed up with more low paid jobs and want to see higher wages which demands productivity soemthing we haven't been that good at creating.
    Perhaps the uncertainty over the referendum is unwinding.....oh, wait......
    I think the problem for Scotland now is the Indyref hasn't gone away, so for foreign investors it now has an extra level of uncertainty as a place to invest.

    This is bad news for Nats as investment will in all likelihood be lower than if the Indyref had settled the matter so Scots will have fewer jobs.

    It's also bad news for Unionists as a sub optimum Scotland will only feed the Nat narrative of we'd do a better job alone.

    A vicious circle.
    Yes, new investment is dead until Scotland has independence or the prospect of a SNP government vanishes. Neither will occur in the short term. So Scotland suffers in the meantime.
    What planet do you live on, inward investment in recent years has risen significantly. You need to get out of the house more.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,498

    surbiton said:

    antifrank said:

    surbiton said:

    felix said:

    A terrible poll for Scottish Labour, but no great surprise. Murphy has an incredibly hard task ahead of him. And one that will take years, not months.


    Reluctantly, I shall exercise it - though ceaseless Tory pandering to UKIP does make it easier than it would have been.

    lol - A Labour govt propped up in any way by the SNP is more likely to destroy the Union - England will simply not tolerate ever greater subsidies to the fringes which they have to pay for in order to sustain something which is increasingly meaningless.
    By “England” do you mean the Daily Heil?
    No.

    'England':

    .

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/scottish-independence/scottish-independence-english-people-overwhelmingly-want-scotland-to-stay-in-the-uk-9679439.html
    Point taken, Ms Vance. Thank you.
    The prospect of Scottish MPs voting on increasing taxes in England to pay for spending in Scotland (probably 'across the UK' in both cases, but thats not how it would be presented) should be giving those contemplating deals with the SNP pause for thought.....

    If Labour loses in Scotland, but has most seats in the Commons it will have won in England. Labour will not need a deal with the SNP.

    So a Labour minority government will not need support outside its own party?

    I wonder if Labour are saving to fight two GEs like the Tories?

    If Labour wins England with a comfortable majority in seats, it governs for 5 years. The SNP has said it will not get into an alliance with the Tories. We will see.
    The interesting permutation comes when Labour are behind the Conservatives in seats but ahead if you add in the SNP. What would the Lib Dems do then? Might the triple lock for approving any coalition paralyse them?
    Judging by this poll Labour is in danger of becoming an "English" party.
    You think they are not at present , the sub region office is full of sock puppets who do as they are told for access to the trough.
  • Interesting, but I think you are wrong in assuming a "crisis" if, as expected FPTP does not deliver a clear result. Cameron, as existing PM, would get the right to have first go at governing - either as a minority or with Liberals and perhaps DUP again. He might be able to do this for a few months or longer and then call another election.

    He can't unilaterally call an election any more because of the Fixed Terms Act. He'd have to either get Labour to agree to a new election or give them a chance to form a government, then get his election if they failed.

    At this point I wonder if Lab and Con wouldn't be too scared of UKIP to call a new election. The next election will probably be a bit of a tactical mess, because nobody will know how high their waterline will be, and the voters won't be able to work out which seats they're in contention in. But once you have an election the tactical situation becomes much clearer, and quite a few incumbents in what they'd always thought would be safe seats will be scared of losing them.

    The way for Lab and Con to avoid this fate would be a Grand Coalition, although it potentially gives them an even worse problem five years down the road.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,498
    DavidL said:

    It looks as if tax from the north sea is going to have to be halved at the next budget. Not exactly what Osborne would have been wanting to spend his few sweeties on immediately before the election but the scale of cancelled investment in the north sea is such that it has macro implications for the whole country.

    In round terms the tax will fall from about £5bn to maybe £2.5bn. To put it into perspective that is roughly £500 a head for every man, woman and child in Scotland. Or to put it another way this alone would have been enough to bring average public spending in Scotland from comfortably above England to something below it.

    In most other political matters a party that was so rapidly demonstrated to have been so stunningly incompetent and dishonest would have something of a problem. But not here, apparently. It was always obvious that those voting yes were not much interested in the subject of economics. That apparent indifference is reaching new levels. Sad and dangerous.

    Tories will laugh off their incompetence and dishonesty though.
  • Mr. Tokyo, hard to imagine either blues or reds accepting a Grand Coalition.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,704
    Sean_F said:

    Jonathan said:

    Sean_F said:

    A terrible poll for Scottish Labour, but no great surprise. Murphy has an incredibly hard task ahead of him. And one that will take years, not months.

    However on these figures, if Labour loses in Scotland but wins most seats in 2015, it will have won in England. On that basis we will have a Labour government. The SNP will never vote with the Tories to bring it down and the chances of them abstaining on votes that could bring a Labour government down are also vanishingly small - they will never help the Tories as the damage it will do them in Scotland would be too great. For the SNP to have any leverage in the next Parliament - however many MPs they have - the Tories have to win most seats. Things will get interesting then. Could Cameron actually deliver on an EU referendum?

    Thus, Labour winning most seats in 2015 safeguards the Union. A Tory minority puts it in doubt. A Tory majority ends it. As a unionist, it seems I have only one choice next year, after all. Reluctantly, I shall exercise it - though ceaseless Tory pandering to UKIP does make it easier than it would have been.

    Labour winning fewer seats than the Conservatives, but taking office with SNP backing, kills the Union.

    The Conservatives winning 326 seats makes the SNP irrelevant.

    How come. Your argument seems a bit asymmetrical.
    A party that clearly lost the election South of the Border, taking office with the backing of a party that's committed to the break-up of the UK, and which demands various forms of special treatment for Scotland, would convince voters in England and Wales that the Union with Scotland was not worth preserving.

    If no other majority exists in the HoC, I don't see what choice there will be. No worse than a minority Tory administration propped up by irish nationalists or UKIP and with virtually no representation outside England.
  • saddenedsaddened Posts: 2,245
    Jonathan said:

    Sean_F said:

    Jonathan said:

    Sean_F said:

    A terrible poll for Scottish Labour, but no great surprise. Murphy has an incredibly hard task ahead of him. And one that will take years, not months.

    However on these figures, if Labour loses in Scotland but wins most seats in 2015, it will have won in England. On that basis we will have a Labour government. The SNP will never vote with the Tories to bring it down and the chances of them abstaining on votes that could bring a Labour government down are also vanishingly small - they will never help the Tories as the damage it will do them in Scotland would be too great. For the SNP to have any leverage in the next Parliament - however many MPs they have - the Tories have to win most seats. Things will get interesting then. Could Cameron actually deliver on an EU referendum?

    Thus, Labour winning most seats in 2015 safeguards the Union. A Tory minority puts it in doubt. A Tory majority ends it. As a unionist, it seems I have only one choice next year, after all. Reluctantly, I shall exercise it - though ceaseless Tory pandering to UKIP does make it easier than it would have been.

    Labour winning fewer seats than the Conservatives, but taking office with SNP backing, kills the Union.

    The Conservatives winning 326 seats makes the SNP irrelevant.

    How come. Your argument seems a bit asymmetrical.
    A party that clearly lost the election South of the Border, taking office with the backing of a party that's committed to the break-up of the UK, and which demands various forms of special treatment for Scotland, would convince voters in England and Wales that the Union with Scotland was not worth preserving.

    If no other majority exists in the HoC, I don't see what choice there will be. No worse than a minority Tory administration propped up by irish nationalists or UKIP and with virtually no representation outside England.
    Except in your case case the parties forming the coalition are avowedly unionist and don't have a primary aim of breaking apart the union. So it would in fact not be worse.
  • Mr. Jonathan, surely 'Irish unionists'?

    A Con-Sinn Fein coalition would be a surprise.

    I think you're being complacent regarding how a Lab-SNP coalition would go down in England, particularly if Labour decides to bugger up English devolution with regional nonsense.

    Labour wants a tax rise and spending cut mix to reduce the deficit. Tax rises in England will be voted through thanks to Scottish votes. Not sure that'll go down terribly well.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    Are there odds available on the SNP winning Scotland and Labour getting most seats overall? Must be a big price
  • ArtistArtist Posts: 1,893
    edited December 2014
    saddened said:

    Jonathan said:

    Sean_F said:

    Jonathan said:

    Sean_F said:

    A terrible poll for Scottish Labour, but no great surprise. Murphy has an incredibly hard task ahead of him. And one that will take years, not months.

    However on these figures, if Labour loses in Scotland but wins most seats in 2015, it will have won in England. On that basis we will have a Labour government. The SNP will never vote with the Tories to bring it down and the chances of them abstaining on votes that could bring a Labour government down are also vanishingly small - they will never help the Tories as the damage it will do them in Scotland would be too great. For the SNP to have any leverage in the next Parliament - however many MPs they have - the Tories have to win most seats. Things will get interesting then. Could Cameron actually deliver on an EU referendum?

    Thus, Labour winning most seats in 2015 safeguards the Union. A Tory minority puts it in doubt. A Tory majority ends it. As a unionist, it seems I have only one choice next year, after all. Reluctantly, I shall exercise it - though ceaseless Tory pandering to UKIP does make it easier than it would have been.

    Labour winning fewer seats than the Conservatives, but taking office with SNP backing, kills the Union.

    The Conservatives winning 326 seats makes the SNP irrelevant.

    How come. Your argument seems a bit asymmetrical.
    A party that clearly lost the election South of the Border, taking office with the backing of a party that's committed to the break-up of the UK, and which demands various forms of special treatment for Scotland, would convince voters in England and Wales that the Union with Scotland was not worth preserving.

    If no other majority exists in the HoC, I don't see what choice there will be. No worse than a minority Tory administration propped up by irish nationalists or UKIP and with virtually no representation outside England.
    Except in your case case the parties forming the coalition are avowedly unionist and don't have a primary aim of breaking apart the union. So it would in fact not be worse.
    There's nothing stopping Labour working with the Northern Irish parties. Labour's stance on welfare and the public sector would appeal to the DUP and the SDLP and Lady Hermon would also prop up a Labour government. That'd be 14 seats.
  • Mr. Tokyo, hard to imagine either blues or reds accepting a Grand Coalition.

    People found it hard to imagine the blues and the yellows going into coalition, until they did. As then, if they need to do it to prevent a financial market freakout, or to prevent themselves from both immediately losing seats to another party, they'll do it.

    That said their respective bases wouldn't be happy, and it would be much easier to explain to them if they'd already had a second election resulting in the same stalemate as the first.
  • philiphphiliph Posts: 4,704
    It is really hard to get your head around the logic of politics sometimes. I'm sure I've heard both of these possibilities of how parties may support each other:

    SNP will form a coalition / support Labour: the party that is least willing to give meaningful devolution.

    UKIP may support Labour: the party that is least likely to offer an in out referendum.

    Makes you wonder what the real motives of all these charlatans are.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,704

    Mr. Jonathan, surely 'Irish unionists'?

    A Con-Sinn Fein coalition would be a surprise.

    I think you're being complacent regarding how a Lab-SNP coalition would go down in England, particularly if Labour decides to bugger up English devolution with regional nonsense.

    Labour wants a tax rise and spending cut mix to reduce the deficit. Tax rises in England will be voted through thanks to Scottish votes. Not sure that'll go down terribly well.

    I doubt there will be uproar in England. The Tories currently only have 39% of the English vote. Hardly a majority, but they act if as if they own the place.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,624

    Mr. Tokyo, hard to imagine either blues or reds accepting a Grand Coalition.

    I think it would only happen if it was clear that an immediate election would lead to losses for both parties, or if there was a major international crisis
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    chestnut said:

    ydoethur said:


    Don't assume that Labour are necessarily going to do well in Wales. Remember, uniquely in the UK, they are in government there and they are not popular (google 'Alun Davies' for one reason why). Some Wales-only polling would be very helpful to see the current position - does anyone know of any?

    Must dash - have got an inset.

    Last poll in early December had Lab 36 (same as 2010, down two on two months earlier) and Tory 23 (down three on 2010)

    Lab down 10 over the year.

    http://blogs.cardiff.ac.uk/electionsinwales/2014/12/15/happy-birthday-to-us/
    Somewhere on that site is the list of opinion polls post GE 2010

    It shows a massive boost to labour early in, all from the lib dems... In the following three years Ukip have taken almost all those votes leaving labour back where they started and the lib dems nowhere
  • chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341
    It's this kind of polling that makes the recent national polling for Labour look completely incoherent.

    * Scotland only polls consistently show SNP heading for a landslide, as do the subsamples of many UK polls;

    * Wales only polls show Labour no better placed than 2010;

    * Ashcroft marginals show the Con-Lab swing down to 3%, with the majority of seats recently polled showing a decline in Labour's 2010 vote;

    * Repeat constituency polls in Grimsby, Dudley, Brighton, Stockton have all shown 10 point lead reductions (or seat losses) for Labour in just over six months

    * By election and PCC results have seen Labour struggle to hold their vote in Yorkshire and Lancashire, whilst wiped out of the contests in Newark, Rochester, Clacton.

    It's only culturally diverse London that seems to buck the trend.

    How they are meant to be 5-7 points up nationally is a mystery.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,624

    Mr. Jonathan, surely 'Irish unionists'?

    A Con-Sinn Fein coalition would be a surprise.

    I think you're being complacent regarding how a Lab-SNP coalition would go down in England, particularly if Labour decides to bugger up English devolution with regional nonsense.

    Labour wants a tax rise and spending cut mix to reduce the deficit. Tax rises in England will be voted through thanks to Scottish votes. Not sure that'll go down terribly well.

    Of course, it is worth remembering that any potential junior partner will look at the LibDems destruction, and that might discourage them from entering into a deal. Supply and confidence from the nats looks more likely than outright coalition. (And they might even accept that with the Conservatives.)
  • Mr. Jonathan, no, they don't. It's Labour that perversely thinks England is Toryland, given the bleating of an English Parliament being all about the Conservatives trying to get themselves a fiefdom.

    I think you're entirely wrong. If we end up with a Lab-SNP Coalition then we'll see how things play out. [NB, I'm not expecting immediate uproar, but a gradually rising sense of resentment and bitterness, with various flashpoints].

    Mind you, supply and confidence may be more likely than formal coalition.
  • Tax rises in England will be voted through thanks to Scottish votes. Not sure that'll go down terribly well.

    Especially if it is for sweeties for Scotland......
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,704
    edited December 2014

    I think you're entirely wrong.

    Get off the fence MD, say what you really think.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,536
    Jonathan said:

    Sean_F said:

    Jonathan said:

    Sean_F said:

    A terrible poll for Scottish Labour, but no great surprise. Murphy has an incredibly hard task ahead of him. And one that will take years, not months.

    However on these figures, if Labour loses in Scotland but wins most seats in 2015, it will have won in England. On that basis we will have a Labour government. The SNP will never vote with the Tories to bring it down and the chances of them abstaining on votes that could bring a Labour government down are also vanishingly small - they will never help the Tories as the damage it will do them in Scotland would be too great. For the SNP to have any leverage in the next Parliament - however many MPs they have - the Tories have to win most seats. Things will get interesting then. Could Cameron actually deliver on an EU referendum?

    Thus, Labour winning most seats in 2015 safeguards the Union. A Tory minority puts it in doubt. A Tory majority ends it. As a unionist, it seems I have only one choice next year, after all. Reluctantly, I shall exercise it - though ceaseless Tory pandering to UKIP does make it easier than it would have been.

    Labour winning fewer seats than the Conservatives, but taking office with SNP backing, kills the Union.

    The Conservatives winning 326 seats makes the SNP irrelevant.

    How come. Your argument seems a bit asymmetrical.
    A party that clearly lost the election South of the Border, taking office with the backing of a party that's committed to the break-up of the UK, and which demands various forms of special treatment for Scotland, would convince voters in England and Wales that the Union with Scotland was not worth preserving.

    If no other majority exists in the HoC, I don't see what choice there will be. No worse than a minority Tory administration propped up by irish nationalists or UKIP and with virtually no representation outside England.
    Do you mean "Unionists"? Tories backed up by Unionists or UKIP is no problem, as neither group is seeking to break up the UK.

  • Mr. Jonathan, no, they don't. It's Labour that perversely thinks England is Toryland, given the bleating of an English Parliament being all about the Conservatives trying to get themselves a fiefdom.

    I think you're entirely wrong. If we end up with a Lab-SNP Coalition then we'll see how things play out. [NB, I'm not expecting immediate uproar, but a gradually rising sense of resentment and bitterness, with various flashpoints].

    Mind you, supply and confidence may be more likely than formal coalition.

    The SNP will deliberately run a Lab/SNP coalition or even a support agreement to maximise the English annoyance/bitterness etc...

    After all, if they fail to win a Yes vote in Scotland, next try is a Yes vote in England (on a motion to throw the Scots out).

    I reckon that is how Salmond is thinking.
  • Mr. Jonathan, hope you're not irked, but that's my view. Besides, if we do have such a coalition then we'll get to find out who's right.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,183
    Three random thoughts:

    1) To those who think a Grand Coalition is out of the question, who would have expected to see a coalition of Newcastle and Sunderland supporters uniting yesterday for the MH17 victims? Circumstances can lead to unexpected outcomes.

    2) Just had the thought of Lib Dems and DUP in the same coalition. Never! Never! Never!

    3) Why does Mrs May get away with shambles after shambles at the Home Office? Any other Home Sec would have resigned five times over since 2010.
  • Mr. Fish, I agree [mostly]. There won't be a Bugger Off Scotland Act, but they could build up English resentment and that'll be the SNP's aim.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,708
    edited December 2014
    chestnut said:

    It's this kind of polling that makes the recent national polling for Labour look completely incoherent.

    * Scotland only polls consistently show SNP heading for a landslide, as do the subsamples of many UK polls;

    * Wales only polls show Labour no better placed than 2010;

    * Ashcroft marginals show the Con-Lab swing down to 3%, with the majority of seats recently polled showing a decline in Labour's 2010 vote;

    * Repeat constituency polls in Grimsby, Dudley, Brighton, Stockton have all shown 10 point lead reductions (or seat losses) for Labour in just over six months

    * By election and PCC results have seen Labour struggle to hold their vote in Yorkshire and Lancashire, whilst wiped out of the contests in Newark, Rochester, Clacton.

    It's only culturally diverse London that seems to buck the trend.

    How they are meant to be 5-7 points up nationally is a mystery.

    It's only a few very recent polls that have shown Labour 5-7 points up nationally, and there have been some data points in the other direction, too. Overall the lead's looking more like 2 or 3, and when Ashcroft was doing his last bit of constituency polling it was closer to 0 or 1.

    I don't think this will happen, but if the national polls settle back to leads of 5 to 7 I'm sure we'll see something similar in other constituency polls, at least in England. England is very big, so you don't need a humungous swing to cancel out serious losses in Scotland.
  • GadflyGadfly Posts: 1,191
    AndyJS said:

    Wind and nuclear power are currently providing 52% of the UK's energy.

    I am afraid that they are not. They are providing 52% of our electricity.

    Electricity represents just 15% of the UK's energy consumption, therefore wind and nuclear are providing around 8% of our energy.
  • From the FT:

    Oil rout would have wrecked an independent Scotland’s finance

    Scotland’s North Sea revenues would have slumped to one fifth of Holyrood’s preferred forecasts in its first year of independence if Scots had voted Yes in September, according to an Office for Budget Responsibility simulation using current oil prices.

    Had Scotland voted Yes to independence, it would now be looking at oil revenues of £1.25bn instead of £6.9bn in 2016-17 — its first year as a new country — while facing a deficit of close to 6 per cent of national income, compared with a UK forecast of 2.1 per cent.


    http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/d97d49ce-877d-11e4-bc7c-00144feabdc0.html?siteedition=uk#axzz3McMWWNIm

  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,536
    If the Parliamentary arithmetic supported Con/DUP/UKIP, then in all likelihood the three parties would have won c.50% of the vote outside Scotland.
This discussion has been closed.