On topic, it's incredible that we can talk about Labour 'winning' the next election when they are facing near obliteration in Scotland, and will be well behind in votes in England.
Yet they could supply the next PM of the United Kingdom. How perverse is that?
They could be well behind in votes and seats, and supply the next Prime Minister of the United Kingdom.
eg
Con 285 Lab 270 LD 30 SNP 40
Those are entirely plausible numbers, but the most stable combination (apart from a grand coalition, which I put in the category of Not Going To Happen) is Labour + LD + SNP.
I put any coalition involving the SNP in the not going to happen category. On the numbers you cite we'd either have Con Minority, with temporary time-limited LD acquiescence, or some sort of very loose (confidence and supply) or a short-term loose coalition. Both give an absolute majority sans Sinn Fein. 2nd election inside 18-24 months perfectly possible.
The Lib Dems are simply not going to hop out of bed with the Tories and straight into bed with Labour when they've been wiped out in Scotland, lost every national vote, apart from Wales, and are clearly behind in seats.
Not. Going. To. Happen.
After Antifrank's Scottish record I'd hate to lay any of his bets.
He doesn't always get it righ (UKIP By Elections...) but Labour Minority looks most likely.
On topic, it's incredible that we can talk about Labour 'winning' the next election when they are facing near obliteration in Scotland, and will be well behind in votes in England.
Yet they could supply the next PM of the United Kingdom. How perverse is that?
They could be well behind in votes and seats, and supply the next Prime Minister of the United Kingdom.
eg
Con 285 Lab 270 LD 30 SNP 40
Those are entirely plausible numbers, but the most stable combination (apart from a grand coalition, which I put in the category of Not Going To Happen) is Labour + LD + SNP.
I put any coalition involving the SNP in the not going to happen category. On the numbers you cite we'd either have Con Minority, with temporary time-limited LD acquiescence, or some sort of very loose (confidence and supply) or a short-term loose coalition. Both give an absolute majority sans Sinn Fein. 2nd election inside 18-24 months perfectly possible.
The Lib Dems are simply not going to hop out of bed with the Tories and straight into bed with Labour when they've been wiped out in Scotland, lost every national vote, apart from Wales, and are clearly behind in seats.
Not. Going. To. Happen.
I'm not suggesting a coalition. I expect a Labour minority government in those circumstances, with confidence and supply from the Lib Dems and the SNP. It would be grisly for all concerned, of course.
Thanks for the clarification. Cameron will only resign his office and his government (the incumbents hold the cards) if he is certain he can't command the House. IMHO that could only happen if there was a written agreement between all three parties delivered to the press by Ed Miliband.
Otherwise, Cameron would be perfectly within his rights to sit tight (as the winner of most seats and most votes) and challenge all the other parties to vote down his first Queen's speech.
What could happen is analogous to Canada in 2006; a very weak Con Minority that barely lasts 18 months. Labour fail to cobble together an agreement. The Lib Dems return to the backbenches and open the popcorn.
Cameron stays in office and makes his first Queen's speech a vote of confidence. All the opposition parties have to put up or shut up. Either the Lib Dems/SNP abstain (depending on the polls/national mood) or bring him down in conjunction with Labour and force a 2nd election.
Hello, PtP - I'm not sure this Forum does sensible at the moment and we've got three more months of this drivel.
Cheltenham - never been and not that interested to be honest. If I want to stand in a crowded place for a long period, I can use the Central Line - cheaper and far more convenient. I have been to the Hunter chase evening in May though it's usually the night before a round of elections! I am hoping the weather will relent for a trip to Kempton tomorrow. Nice to see four spring jump meetings at Sunbury - probably to make up for the fixture losses to Chelmsford.
Anybody betting on Labour most seats Should wait for the first YouGov poll with a Tory lead of 3%.
And hope it really is an outlier.
They should also take a long hard look at Ed Miliband and ask themselves "is this guy REALLY going to have people take the risk of giving him their X against a Govt. that has, by any objective measure, turned things around?"
How social care in old age is paid for is a tricky question. But the way this is presented it looks as if Labour want to tax your house when you're alive and working, tax it when you're a pensioner and not working and tax it again when you're dead - assuming there's anything left.
Labour do give the impression that all they are interested in doing is taking as much of your earnings and savings as they can lay their hands on.
Its disingenuous cant anyway. The children didn't hit the jackpot, their parents invested large amounts of money in the jackpot, just as if they had put money in a savings account or trust fund for their offspring, and with a little tax planning the latter would have been completely tax free. Northern Children could inherit just as much if their parents decided to buy a bigger house, or invest in other types of assets.
The Economist showed recently that if Labour's London Semi Tax were to be applied on the top 2.5% of properties by value in all regions, rather than just in Tory-voting ones as is planned, there would be houses worth about £344,000 liable to it in the north-east. Why Labour thinks the state has more right to your house than you children I don't really know. You can leave your whole house to you children in the north but if in the south you wanted to hold on to the house you grew up you are screwed.
Personally I think there is a case for a reduction in council tax based on square footage per occupant. A 1500 square foot house occupied by 1 person should be taxed less than a 3000 square foot house occupied by one person, regardless of where.
SDLT should also be levied on the net, so if you downsize from a £600k house to a £300k one you shouldn't pay any tax at all.
The colossal level of stamp duty has taken us to the point in the south east where you don't move house to gain space any more. You extend and / or you convert the attic, because you can do both for less than the stamp duty involved in moving to gain equivalent space, never mind the price of the house.
In Finchley 3 beds are about a million quid and four are about a third as much again. The stamp duty alone on the latter would be nearly eighty thousand quid, for which sum you could have a new attic conversion, and an extension, and a garden makeover, and a new kitchen, and a new bathroom. You've then pretty much got your 4-bedroom but you've saved a third of a million and contributed to the housing shortage by not selling.
Anybody betting on Labour most seats Should wait for the first YouGov poll with a Tory lead of 3%.
And hope it really is an outlier.
They should also take a long hard look at Ed Miliband and ask themselves "is this guy REALLY going to have people take the risk of giving him their X against a Govt. that has, by any objective measure, turned things around?"
The Tories need an 11.4% lead in England before they stop shedding seats to LAB.
@michaelsavage: The fact Bill Thomas lives in a bona fide mansion somehow puts him in the centre of a bizarre Labour Venn diagram: http://t.co/UvCYmENW3D
The Lib Dems are already going to lose their constituencies that really don't like the Tories, what would they have to lose from propping them up again? The seats they will retain in 2015 presumably don't mind them being in a coalition with the Tories. Some people were surprised at what happened in 2010 because after decades of talk about LIB-LAB pacts they had forgotten that most Lib Dem seats are in places that would be Conservative if the Lib Dems didn't exist, Bath, Cheltenham, North Norfolk, Westmorland, Eastleigh etc etc. The question to my mind is whether CON+LD will be able to get enough seats between them.
The point though is that the LDs are able to win these seats partly by picking up anti-Conservative tactical voters who would normally vote Labour. Said voters would be more likely to endorse a Lib-Lab arrangement.
I think the "surprise" about 2010 was Cameron's willingness on the Friday afternoon to initiate talks. He could (and I remain convinced of this) have waited and formed a minority Government safe in the knowledge neither Labour nor the LDs would have wanted to vote him down.
Unfortunately, the sentiment among some Conservatives is the only route to a majority lies over the broken bodies of LD MPs. Probably but it's not going to create a constructive post-election atmosphere. I certainly don't see the party supporting Labour in a Coalition - I suspect we will be relieved to pass the problem over to Nicola.
Anybody betting on Labour most seats Should wait for the first YouGov poll with a Tory lead of 3%.
And hope it really is an outlier.
They should also take a long hard look at Ed Miliband and ask themselves "is this guy REALLY going to have people take the risk of giving him their X against a Govt. that has, by any objective measure, turned things around?"
The Tories need an 11.4% lead in England before they stop shedding seats to LAB.
"Did you hear about the gangs of white taxi drivers in the market towns of Southern England who over a period of decades have been grooming, drugging and serially raping under-age girls of Pakistani Kashmiri heritage?
No of course not. It hasn’t happened and it couldn’t happen for any number of cultural reasons, the main one being this: the very second that the social services or the police or the victims’ community got even a whiff of what was going on there would be all hell to pay."
The whole point of html, and hence the web, is that you can easily make links to other webpages, thus making it easy for people to find the information they are interested in.
It is now so much easier to register to vote then with the old paper system, provided that you know how to use Google (this may sadly rule out a lot of people eligible to vote) and have an internet connection (available in public libraries).
How social care in old age is paid for is a tricky question. But the way this is presented it looks as if Labour want to tax your house when you're alive and working, tax it when you're a pensioner and not working and tax it again when you're dead - assuming there's anything left.
Blunkett asks a reasonable question when he says why should the children of homeowners in the South East win the lottery when their parent die. But the answer is not that they are winning the lottery but rather that any inheritance - and remember that 40% of it will be taxed before they get it anyway (the income to buy it also having been taxed and any improvements having paid VAT as well) - is probably the only way any of those children will be able to buy their own homes or, even, at this rate find somewhere to rent.
Labour do give the impression that all they are interested in doing is taking as much of your earnings and savings as they can lay their hands on.
Its disingenuous cant anyway. The children didn't hit the jackpot, their parents invested large amounts of money in the jackpot, just as if they had put money in a savings account or trust fund for their offspring, and with a little tax planning the latter would have been completely tax free. Northern Children could inherit just as much if their parents decided to buy a bigger house, or invest in other types of assets.
What irks me about it is the underlying assumption that doing the best for your family and making provision for them is somehow a bad thing, which must be punished by the state taking a chunk of it away.
If more people saw it as their responsibility to make provision for themselves and their family and the state tried to help such people do that rather than seeing them as a class to be fleeced, we could then focus money raised in taxation on helping those who aren't in a position to help themselves.
I also object to the idea of taxing inflation when that arises purely and simply as a result of a failure of government policy. I would much rather that my house was worth exactly the same as I paid for it rather than having this ludicrous house price inflation. A government which gets revenue from such inflation has no incentive to deal with the causes.
There has been a lot of discussion on here about what happens in the event of a narrow LAB win (most seats) but not so much a narrow CON win. They would presumably seek a continuation of the coalition, given the effect of the last one I'm sure the Lib Dems would extract a high price, namely
-abolition of the Bedroom Tax -Some form of wealth or property taxation, perhaps via extra council tax bands - House of Lords reform (as a proxy for electoral reform)
I'm not sure the Tory backwoodsmen would wear that. Tory minority government, economic ruin for a few months, vote of no confidence?
If it is a narrow CON win then the Lib Dems won't have enough to give them a majority, even combined.
Unless the Lib Dems beat the SNP - which I'm on at a crazy 10-1 now thanks to Coral.
But how about this, Pulpy. Con = 295, LD = 30, various motley Northern Irish Mps = say 10.
Does that work?
Barely and highly vulnerable to any backbench oddball and malcontent. Plus all those who want more money for their constituency / region / issue of interest.
And what would the LibDems gain by supporting the Conservatives in that scenario ?
A seemingly rather attractive prospect called government. Lib Dems sold their flagship tuition fees policy down the river for it in 2010.....
The joys of being in government haven't turned out to be as great as the LibDems expected.
And if they prop up the Conservatives again they'll look dangerously like the lentil casserole wing of the Conservative party.
But hang on a sec, with the fixed term parliaments act we can't have a new election unless two-thirds of the house vote for a dissolution. If Cameron loses a vote of confidence then surely Miliband (or his successor) gets a go at forming a government. Of course if Labour then also can't win a vote of confidence it gets very messy indeed.
Thanks for the clarification. Cameron will only resign his office and his government (the incumbents hold the cards) if he is certain he can't command the House. IMHO that could only happen if there was a written agreement between all three parties delivered to the press by Ed Miliband.
Otherwise, Cameron would be perfectly within his rights to sit tight (as the winner of most seats and most votes) and challenge all the other parties to vote down his first Queen's speech.
What could happen is analogous to Canada in 2006; a very weak Con Minority that barely lasts 18 months. Labour fail to cobble together an agreement. The Lib Dems return to the backbenches and open the popcorn.
Cameron stays in office and makes his first Queen's speech a vote of confidence. All the opposition parties have to put up or shut up. Either the Lib Dems/SNP abstain (depending on the polls/national mood) or bring him down in conjunction with Labour and force a 2nd elec
Anybody betting on Labour most seats Should wait for the first YouGov poll with a Tory lead of 3%.
And hope it really is an outlier.
They should also take a long hard look at Ed Miliband and ask themselves "is this guy REALLY going to have people take the risk of giving him their X against a Govt. that has, by any objective measure, turned things around?"
The Tories need an 11.4% lead in England before they stop shedding seats to LAB.
Not necessarily. If they're losing chunks to UKIP in the shires, but without losing a commensurate number of seats, their vote will be more efficient.
"Did you hear about the gangs of white taxi drivers in the market towns of Southern England who over a period of decades have been grooming, drugging and serially raping under-age girls of Pakistani Kashmiri heritage?
No of course not. It hasn’t happened and it couldn’t happen for any number of cultural reasons, the main one being this: the very second that the social services or the police or the victims’ community got even a whiff of what was going on there would be all hell to pay."
Regarding finchley 1) Remember how bad the polls were in the London Mayor election. 2) Barnet Council are not popular and there is anti-Tory sentiment in the area. 3) In 2010, Tories had a grade A candidate, Labour didn't even try to compete. 4) Why would Labour put a prominent candidate who has been active on host of issues be placed here when there are better options?
3/1 is a good value bet for me. If labour are active here and putting resources, knocking doors, phone banking people more than they did in 2010, then I'm going to take the price. As I know many marginals where Labour are doing nothing.
Scottish polls Lord Ashcroft polls are deeply unreliable. For someone experienced in market research and sampling. I think its almost impossible to do telephone interviews in a city as big as Glasgow to identify what constituency people are in.
On Loughborough leaflets through my letterbox since january 1st 2015. Conservative = 5 (2 national leaflets, 1 letter from cameron, 1 morgan leaflet/ 1newsletter) Labour = 2 (one national attacking ukips nhs policy another targeting lib dem voters) Liberal Democrat = 0 UKIP = 0
It's february the 5th and I think 5 leaflets from the conservative party in 5 weeks is not necessary.
You're not saying Mike Freer is a grade A candidate surely? He is a cardboard cut out. Just ghastly.
"Did you hear about the gangs of white taxi drivers in the market towns of Southern England who over a period of decades have been grooming, drugging and serially raping under-age girls of Pakistani Kashmiri heritage?
No of course not. It hasn’t happened and it couldn’t happen for any number of cultural reasons, the main one being this: the very second that the social services or the police or the victims’ community got even a whiff of what was going on there would be all hell to pay."
For those interested, and those who criticised our genial host for writing about a slightly out of date version, the Wikipedia polling graph has been updated.
Curiously, it does not show us the recent surge in Tory fortunes that some posters were so sure they had discerned in the opinion polls.
Corals were offering some nice anti SNP swingback insurance yesterday:
To Win £ 25.00 Liberal Democrats - General Election 2015 - Match Bets - Win Most Seats - SNP v Liberal Democrats @ 10/1
To Win £ 20.00 Labour - General Election 2015 - Scotland - Most UK Parliament Seats in Scotland @ 5/1
To Win £ 10.00 Number of Constituencies won in Scotland by the Conservatives - General Election 2015 - Scotland - Scottish Conservative MPs v Pandas @ 25/1
To Win £ 10.00 Tie - General Election 2015 - Scotland - Scottish Conservative MPs v Pandas @ 10/1
To Win £ 20.00 Labour - Constituency Betting 2015 - Glasgow Central @ 3/1
To Win £ 40.00 Labour - Constituency Betting 2015 - Glasgow North West @ 9/4
To Win £ 5.00 Labour - Constituency Betting 2015 - Dundee West @ 33/1
To Win £ 40.00 Labour - Constituency Betting 2015 - Motherwell and Wishaw @ 3/1
To Win £ 5.00 Liberal Democrat - Constituency Betting 2015 - Gordon @ 16/1
To Win £ 5.00 Liberal Democrat - Constituency Betting 2015 - Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch and Strathspey @ 25/1
But hang on a sec, with the fixed term parliaments act we can't have a new election unless two-thirds of the house vote for a dissolution. If Cameron loses a vote of confidence then surely Miliband (or his successor) gets a go at forming a government. Of course if Labour then also can't win a vote of confidence it gets very messy indeed.
Not true: there is another election if no one can command the confidence of the house.
Corals were offering some nice anti SNP swingback insurance yesterday:
To Win £ 25.00 Liberal Democrats - General Election 2015 - Match Bets - Win Most Seats - SNP v Liberal Democrats @ 10/1
To Win £ 20.00 Labour - General Election 2015 - Scotland - Most UK Parliament Seats in Scotland @ 5/1
To Win £ 10.00 Number of Constituencies won in Scotland by the Conservatives - General Election 2015 - Scotland - Scottish Conservative MPs v Pandas @ 25/1
To Win £ 10.00 Tie - General Election 2015 - Scotland - Scottish Conservative MPs v Pandas @ 10/1
To Win £ 20.00 Labour - Constituency Betting 2015 - Glasgow Central @ 3/1
To Win £ 40.00 Labour - Constituency Betting 2015 - Glasgow North West @ 9/4
To Win £ 5.00 Labour - Constituency Betting 2015 - Dundee West @ 33/1
To Win £ 40.00 Labour - Constituency Betting 2015 - Motherwell and Wishaw @ 3/1
To Win £ 5.00 Liberal Democrat - Constituency Betting 2015 - Gordon @ 16/1
To Win £ 5.00 Liberal Democrat - Constituency Betting 2015 - Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch and Strathspey @ 25/1
Corals were offering some nice anti SNP swingback insurance yesterday:
To Win £ 25.00 Liberal Democrats - General Election 2015 - Match Bets - Win Most Seats - SNP v Liberal Democrats @ 10/1
To Win £ 20.00 Labour - General Election 2015 - Scotland - Most UK Parliament Seats in Scotland @ 5/1
To Win £ 10.00 Number of Constituencies won in Scotland by the Conservatives - General Election 2015 - Scotland - Scottish Conservative MPs v Pandas @ 25/1
To Win £ 10.00 Tie - General Election 2015 - Scotland - Scottish Conservative MPs v Pandas @ 10/1
To Win £ 20.00 Labour - Constituency Betting 2015 - Glasgow Central @ 3/1
To Win £ 40.00 Labour - Constituency Betting 2015 - Glasgow North West @ 9/4
To Win £ 5.00 Labour - Constituency Betting 2015 - Dundee West @ 33/1
To Win £ 40.00 Labour - Constituency Betting 2015 - Motherwell and Wishaw @ 3/1
To Win £ 5.00 Liberal Democrat - Constituency Betting 2015 - Gordon @ 16/1
To Win £ 5.00 Liberal Democrat - Constituency Betting 2015 - Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch and Strathspey @ 25/1
The 25-1 on Danny Alexander sounds like a decent bet on either anti-SNP tactical voting or any swingback. I'd take anything over 12-1, tbh.
Robert Kimbell @RedHotSquirrel 5m5 minutes ago 583,000 people immigrated to the #UK in the year ending June 2014. It was 502,000 the year before. ONS.
How many were impoverished ex-pats scuttling back from the Dordogne and Costa Brava?
Corals were offering some nice anti SNP swingback insurance yesterday:
To Win £ 25.00 Liberal Democrats - General Election 2015 - Match Bets - Win Most Seats - SNP v Liberal Democrats @ 10/1
To Win £ 20.00 Labour - General Election 2015 - Scotland - Most UK Parliament Seats in Scotland @ 5/1
To Win £ 10.00 Number of Constituencies won in Scotland by the Conservatives - General Election 2015 - Scotland - Scottish Conservative MPs v Pandas @ 25/1
To Win £ 10.00 Tie - General Election 2015 - Scotland - Scottish Conservative MPs v Pandas @ 10/1
To Win £ 20.00 Labour - Constituency Betting 2015 - Glasgow Central @ 3/1
To Win £ 40.00 Labour - Constituency Betting 2015 - Glasgow North West @ 9/4
To Win £ 5.00 Labour - Constituency Betting 2015 - Dundee West @ 33/1
To Win £ 40.00 Labour - Constituency Betting 2015 - Motherwell and Wishaw @ 3/1
To Win £ 5.00 Liberal Democrat - Constituency Betting 2015 - Gordon @ 16/1
To Win £ 5.00 Liberal Democrat - Constituency Betting 2015 - Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch and Strathspey @ 25/1
I'm green with envy that I missed those.
I'm green with envy I missed some of the ricks Nabavi got onto - it was the maddest political book ever tbh.
For those interested, and those who criticised our genial host for writing about a slightly out of date version, the Wikipedia polling graph has been updated.
Curiously, it does not show us the recent surge in Tory fortunes that some posters were so sure they had discerned in the opinion polls.
Startling Kipper outlier dots
They do seem to have arrested their decline and are now just flatlining - bravo.
On topic, it's incredible that we can talk about Labour 'winning' the next election when they are facing near obliteration in Scotland, and will be well behind in votes in England.
Yet they could supply the next PM of the United Kingdom. How perverse is that?
They could be well behind in votes and seats, and supply the next Prime Minister of the United Kingdom.
eg
Con 285 Lab 270 LD 30 SNP 40
Those are entirely plausible numbers, but the most stable combination (apart from a grand coalition, which I put in the category of Not Going To Happen) is Labour + LD + SNP.
I put any coalition involving the SNP in the not going to happen category. On the numbers you cite we'd either have Con Minority, with temporary time-limited LD acquiescence, or some sort of very loose (confidence and supply) or a short-term loose coalition. Both give an absolute majority sans Sinn Fein. 2nd election inside 18-24 months perfectly possible.
The Lib Dems are simply not going to hop out of bed with the Tories and straight into bed with Labour when they've been wiped out in Scotland, lost every national vote, apart from Wales, and are clearly behind in seats.
Not. Going. To. Happen.
I'm not suggesting a coalition. I expect a Labour minority government in those circumstances, with confidence and supply from the Lib Dems and the SNP. It would be grisly for all concerned, of course.
Thanks for the clarification. Cameron will only resign his office and his government (the incumbents hold the cards) if he is certain he can't command the House. IMHO that could only happen if there was a written agreement between all three parties delivered to the press by Ed Miliband.
Otherwise, Cameron would be perfectly within his rights to sit tight (as the winner of most seats and most votes) and challenge all the other parties to vote down his first Queen's speech.
What could happen is analogous to Canada in 2006; a very weak Con Minority that barely lasts 18 months. Labour fail to cobble together an agreement. The Lib Dems return to the backbenches and open the popcorn.
Cameron stays in office and makes his first Queen's speech a vote of confidence. All the opposition parties have to put up or shut up. Either the Lib Dems/SNP abstain (depending on the polls/national mood) or bring him down in conjunction with Labour and force a 2nd election.
Cameron losing a vote of confidence wouldn't mean an automatic general election, it would give Ed Miliband the chance to try to form a government.
Given the ridiculousness of a situation where no leader could command a majority but no 2/3rds of the house want to have another election (entirely possible, given the state of Lab/LD finances), would it in fact be both democratically and politically sensible for the coalition (as its last act) to abolish the FTPA?
Edit: Just read the provisions, it seems after a failed confidence motion only 14 days could pass before an automatic election call. Makes sense.
Corals were offering some nice anti SNP swingback insurance yesterday:
To Win £ 25.00 Liberal Democrats - General Election 2015 - Match Bets - Win Most Seats - SNP v Liberal Democrats @ 10/1
To Win £ 20.00 Labour - General Election 2015 - Scotland - Most UK Parliament Seats in Scotland @ 5/1
To Win £ 10.00 Number of Constituencies won in Scotland by the Conservatives - General Election 2015 - Scotland - Scottish Conservative MPs v Pandas @ 25/1
To Win £ 10.00 Tie - General Election 2015 - Scotland - Scottish Conservative MPs v Pandas @ 10/1
To Win £ 20.00 Labour - Constituency Betting 2015 - Glasgow Central @ 3/1
To Win £ 40.00 Labour - Constituency Betting 2015 - Glasgow North West @ 9/4
To Win £ 5.00 Labour - Constituency Betting 2015 - Dundee West @ 33/1
To Win £ 40.00 Labour - Constituency Betting 2015 - Motherwell and Wishaw @ 3/1
To Win £ 5.00 Liberal Democrat - Constituency Betting 2015 - Gordon @ 16/1
To Win £ 5.00 Liberal Democrat - Constituency Betting 2015 - Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch and Strathspey @ 25/1
WTF? Pandas?
10/1 on 2 & 25/1 on more than 2 scots tories? That's crazy.
Robert Kimbell @RedHotSquirrel 5m5 minutes ago 583,000 people immigrated to the #UK in the year ending June 2014. It was 502,000 the year before. ONS.
How many were impoverished ex-pats scuttling back from the Dordogne and Costa Brava?
Shouldn't we treat them the same way we treat people who go to fight for ISIS?
Corals were offering some nice anti SNP swingback insurance yesterday:
To Win £ 25.00 Liberal Democrats - General Election 2015 - Match Bets - Win Most Seats - SNP v Liberal Democrats @ 10/1
To Win £ 20.00 Labour - General Election 2015 - Scotland - Most UK Parliament Seats in Scotland @ 5/1
To Win £ 10.00 Number of Constituencies won in Scotland by the Conservatives - General Election 2015 - Scotland - Scottish Conservative MPs v Pandas @ 25/1
To Win £ 10.00 Tie - General Election 2015 - Scotland - Scottish Conservative MPs v Pandas @ 10/1
To Win £ 20.00 Labour - Constituency Betting 2015 - Glasgow Central @ 3/1
To Win £ 40.00 Labour - Constituency Betting 2015 - Glasgow North West @ 9/4
To Win £ 5.00 Labour - Constituency Betting 2015 - Dundee West @ 33/1
To Win £ 40.00 Labour - Constituency Betting 2015 - Motherwell and Wishaw @ 3/1
To Win £ 5.00 Liberal Democrat - Constituency Betting 2015 - Gordon @ 16/1
To Win £ 5.00 Liberal Democrat - Constituency Betting 2015 - Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch and Strathspey @ 25/1
WTF? Pandas?
10/1 on 2 & 25/1 on more than 2 scots tories? That's crazy.
"Did you hear about the gangs of white taxi drivers in the market towns of Southern England who over a period of decades have been grooming, drugging and serially raping under-age girls of Pakistani Kashmiri heritage?
No of course not. It hasn’t happened and it couldn’t happen for any number of cultural reasons, the main one being this: the very second that the social services or the police or the victims’ community got even a whiff of what was going on there would be all hell to pay."
"Did you hear about the gangs of white taxi drivers in the market towns of Southern England who over a period of decades have been grooming, drugging and serially raping under-age girls of Pakistani Kashmiri heritage?
No of course not. It hasn’t happened and it couldn’t happen for any number of cultural reasons, the main one being this: the very second that the social services or the police or the victims’ community got even a whiff of what was going on there would be all hell to pay."
A few years ago, though I can't now find a link, there was some Euro report of an investigation looking into a rise in anti-Semitic incidents: desecration of Jewish cemeteries, vandalism of synagogues, stuff like that; not just in UK, across Europe more generally.
The analysis showed that it was being done by Muslims. This was politically unacceptable so the management summary was rewritten* to say that it was all being done by right wing white skinheads. A lie was fabricated to suit the agenda of the left.
You say that "It hasn’t happened and it couldn’t happen" but this does not mean it will not be said to have happened.
* when I used to do expert witness stuff, this kind of thing was something you used to rip into if the other side's expert did it. If the summary was not supported by or reflective of the analysis it was your first step to showing that the other side's expert had decided on his conclusion in advance of looking at the evidence.
For those interested, and those who criticised our genial host for writing about a slightly out of date version, the Wikipedia polling graph has been updated.
Curiously, it does not show us the recent surge in Tory fortunes that some posters were so sure they had discerned in the opinion polls.
I would note that the graph also includes the Labour 39% from the non politically-weighted poll that shouldn't be on Wikipedia.
Anybody betting on Labour most seats Should wait for the first YouGov poll with a Tory lead of 3%.
And hope it really is an outlier.
They should also take a long hard look at Ed Miliband and ask themselves "is this guy REALLY going to have people take the risk of giving him their X against a Govt. that has, by any objective measure, turned things around?"
The Tories need an 11.4% lead in England before they stop shedding seats to LAB.
If Labour are nearly wiped out in Scotland, and the Labour and Tory gains from the Liberals are roughly evenly spread, then Labour will start about 90 seats behind the Tories, thus requiring about 45 gains from the Tories to have most seats.
That's roughly the number of seats that Kinnock gained from the Tories in 1992.
The SNP are now odds on in 39 seats and favourites in one more. The previous night the SNP were odds on in 25 seats and favourites in two more. I'll do an analysis in the next day or so on my latest thoughts on Scotland.
For those interested, and those who criticised our genial host for writing about a slightly out of date version, the Wikipedia polling graph has been updated.
Curiously, it does not show us the recent surge in Tory fortunes that some posters were so sure they had discerned in the opinion polls.
Startling Kipper outlier dots
They do seem to have arrested their decline and are now just flatlining - bravo.
I don't think there will be much movement for all the parties until the ides of March.
"Did you hear about the gangs of white taxi drivers in the market towns of Southern England who over a period of decades have been grooming, drugging and serially raping under-age girls of Pakistani Kashmiri heritage?
No of course not. It hasn’t happened and it couldn’t happen for any number of cultural reasons, the main one being this: the very second that the social services or the police or the victims’ community got even a whiff of what was going on there would be all hell to pay."
So all those high profile, rich, white, middle class entertainers and media figures got away with child abuse for decades due to cultural reasons did they?
"Did you hear about the gangs of white taxi drivers in the market towns of Southern England who over a period of decades have been grooming, drugging and serially raping under-age girls of Pakistani Kashmiri heritage?
No of course not. It hasn’t happened and it couldn’t happen for any number of cultural reasons, the main one being this: the very second that the social services or the police or the victims’ community got even a whiff of what was going on there would be all hell to pay."
Did you hear the one about white, posh, publicly school educated politicians of all hues who raped and abused young children?
I've also noticed that all the dodgy Romanist priests are white and catholic.
There is a common factor between the politicians, the priests and the Pakistani Muslim taxi drivers. Not much normal mixing between the sexes, and - in particular - a lot of single sex education.
On topic, it's incredible that we can talk about Labour 'winning' the next election when they are facing near obliteration in Scotland, and will be well behind in votes in England.
Yet they could supply the next PM of the United Kingdom. How perverse is that?
They could be well behind in votes and seats, and supply the next Prime Minister
Those are entirely plausible numbers, but the most stable combination (apart from a grand coalition, which I put in the category of Not Going To Happen) is Labour + LD + SNP.
I put any coalition involving the SNP in the not going to happen category. On the numbers you cite we'd either have Con Minority, with temporary time-limited LD acquiescence, or some sort of very loose (confidence and supply) or a short-term loose coalition. Both give an absolute majority sans Sinn Fein. 2nd election inside 18-24 months perfectly possible.
The Lib Dems are simply not going to hop out of bed with the Tories and straight into bed with Labour when they've been wiped out in Scotland, lost every national vote, apart from Wales, and are clearly behind in seats.
Not. Going. To. Happen.
I'm not suggesting a coalition. I expect a Labour minority government in those circumstances, with confidence and supply from the Lib Dems and the SNP. It would be grisly for all concerned, of course.
Thanks for the clarification. Cameron will only resign his office and his government (the incumbents hold the cards) if he is certain he can't command the House. IMHO that could only happen if there was a written agreement between all three parties delivered to the press by Ed Miliband.
Otherwise, Cameron would be perfectly within his rights to sit tight (as the winner of most seats and most votes) and challenge all the other parties to vote down his first Queen's speech.
What could happen is analogous to Canada in 2006; a very weak Con Minority that barely lasts 18 months. Labour fail to cobble together an agreement. The Lib Dems return to the backbenches and open the popcorn.
Cameron stays in office and makes his first Queen's speech a vote of confidence. All the opposition parties have to put up or shut up. Either the Lib Dems/SNP abstain (depending on the polls/national mood) or bring him down in conjunction with Labour and force a 2nd election.
Cameron losing a vote of confidence wouldn't mean an automatic general election, it would give Ed Miliband the chance to try to form a government.
Fair point. But he would have difficulty doing that for the reasons outlined above. And if that couldn't be done in the requisite timetable, a 2nd election would follow.
Is there a specific security issue you're concerned about or do you just not like people voting?
Can't honestly see the issue with it myself. As long as the person has some legitimate identification then it should be fine. The only issue perhaps would be the ability to register at multiple polling stations but I am sure there would be some way to prevent this.
Anybody betting on Labour most seats Should wait for the first YouGov poll with a Tory lead of 3%.
And hope it really is an outlier.
They should also take a long hard look at Ed Miliband and ask themselves "is this guy REALLY going to have people take the risk of giving him their X against a Govt. that has, by any objective measure, turned things around?"
The Tories need an 11.4% lead in England before they stop shedding seats to LAB.
If the Tories had that sort of lead on England this time they'd be close to an overall majority.
Robert Kimbell @RedHotSquirrel 5m5 minutes ago 583,000 people immigrated to the #UK in the year ending June 2014. It was 502,000 the year before. ONS.
How many were impoverished ex-pats scuttling back from the Dordogne and Costa Brava?
Shouldn't we treat them the same way we treat people who go to fight for ISIS?
Good idea. That'll stop them clogging up the motorways with their clapped out left hand drive Seats and Renaults
On topic, it's incredible that we can talk about Labour 'winning' the next election when they are facing near obliteration in Scotland, and will be well behind in votes in England.
Yet they could supply the next PM of the United Kingdom. How perverse is that?
They could be well behind in votes and seats, and supply the next Prime Minister of the United Kingdom.
eg
Con 285 Lab 270 LD 30 SNP 40
Those are entirely plausible numbers, but the most stable combination (apart from a grand coalition, which I put in the category of Not Going To Happen) is Labour + LD + SNP.
I put any coalition involving the SNP in the not going to happen category. On the numbers you cite we'd either have Con Minority, with temporary time-limited LD acquiescence, or some sort of very loose (confidence and supply) or a short-term loose coalition. Both give an absolute majority sans Sinn Fein. 2nd election inside 18-24 months perfectly possible.
The Lib Dems are simply not going to hop out of bed with the Tories and straight into bed with Labour when they've been wiped out in Scotland, lost every national vote, apart from Wales, and are clearly behind in seats.
Not. Going. To. Happen.
I'm not suggesting a coalition. I expect a Labour minority government in those circumstances, with confidence and supply from the Lib Dems and the SNP. It would be grisly for all concerned, of course.
Thanks for the clarification. Cameron will only resign his office and his government (the incumbents hold the cards) if he is certain he can't command the House. IMHO that could only happen if there was a written agreement between all three parties delivered to the press by Ed Miliband.
Otherwise, Cameron would be perfectly within his rights to sit tight (as the winner of most seats and most votes) and challenge all the other parties to vote down his first Queen's speech.
What could happen is analogous to Canada in 2006; a very weak Con Minority that barely lasts 18 months. Labour fail to cobble together an agreement. The Lib Dems return to the backbenches and open the popcorn.
Cameron stays in office and makes his first Queen's speech a vote of confidence. All the opposition parties have to put up or shut up. Either the Lib Dems/SNP abstain (depending on the polls/national mood) or bring him down in conjunction with Labour and force a 2nd election.
Cameron losing a vote of confidence wouldn't mean an automatic general election, it would give Ed Miliband the chance to try to form a government.
Then if Labour fail, do the SNP have a go? It could all get very Borgen-esque.
Is there a specific security issue you're concerned about or do you just not like people voting?
Can't honestly see the issue with it myself. As long as the person has some legitimate identification then it should be fine. The only issue perhaps would be the ability to register at multiple polling stations but I am sure there would be some way to prevent this.
Yup, even if the polling stations are unable to adopt some kind of advanced communication system like the telegram to coordinate with each other, a fairly minimal attempt at identification should be enough to allow you to identify people who do this after the fact and go around to their houses and arrest them.
On topic, it's incredible that we can talk about Labour 'winning' the next election when they are facing near obliteration in Scotland, and will be well behind in votes in England.
Yet they could supply the next PM of the United Kingdom. How perverse is that?
They could be well behind in votes and seats, and supply the next Prime Minister of the United Kingdom.
eg
Con 285 Lab 270 LD 30 SNP 40
Those are entirely plausible numbers, but the most stable combination (apart from a grand coalition, which I put in the category of Not Going To Happen) is Labour + LD + SNP.
I put any coalition involving the SNP in the not going to happen category. On the numbers you cite we'd either have Con Minority, with temporary time-limited LD acquiescence, or some sort of very loose (confidence and supply) or a short-term loose coalition. Both give an absolute majority sans Sinn Fein. 2nd election inside 18-24 months perfectly possible.
The Lib Dems are simply not going to hop out of bed with the Tories and straight into bed with Labour when they've been wiped out in Scotland, lost every national vote, apart from Wales, and are clearly behind in seats.
Not. Going. To. Happen.
After Antifrank's Scottish record I'd hate to lay any of his bets.
He doesn't always get it righ (UKIP By Elections...) but Labour Minority looks most likely.
Antifrank is a very smart guy. And good punters always detach themselves and perform their only analysis.
I used to follow everything our OGH did, such was his record. I got stung on a couple of pro-Lib Dem bets and learnt my lesson. I would have lost even more had I followed his lead on an Indy ref Yes vote.
Now, I respectfully listen to everyone but DMOR. But, of course, I could get it badly wrong too. But I am putting my own money on it.
"Did you hear about the gangs of white taxi drivers in the market towns of Southern England who over a period of decades have been grooming, drugging and serially raping under-age girls of Pakistani Kashmiri heritage?
No of course not. It hasn’t happened and it couldn’t happen for any number of cultural reasons, the main one being this: the very second that the social services or the police or the victims’ community got even a whiff of what was going on there would be all hell to pay."
A few years ago, though I can't now find a link, there was some Euro report of an investigation looking into a rise in anti-Semitic incidents: desecration of Jewish cemeteries, vandalism of synagogues, stuff like that; not just in UK, across Europe more generally.
The analysis showed that it was being done by Muslims. This was politically unacceptable so the management summary was rewritten* to say that it was all being done by right wing white skinheads. A lie was fabricated to suit the agenda of the left.
You say that "It hasn’t happened and it couldn’t happen" but this does not mean it will not be said to have happened.
* when I used to do expert witness stuff, this kind of thing was something you used to rip into if the other side's expert did it. If the summary was not supported by or reflective of the analysis it was your first step to showing that the other side's expert had decided on his conclusion in advance of looking at the evidence.
Yes - I recall that too. It was very embarrassing for the authorities to realise that the virus of anti-Semitism had been reimported as a result of Muslim immigration, particularly from certain countries. Andrew Hussey has written recently about the specific Algerian antecedents to the anti-semitism displayed by many of the Algerian-descended youth in the banlieues. So - like authorities everywhere - they ignored or downplayed inconvenient facts.
But as RCS and others have pointed out, child abuse happens when groups of people have power over children and a sense of immunity. In Rotherham PC culture gave that sense of immunity; a mysogynistic culture provided the breeding ground for the crimes. In the Catholic church, the sense of immunity came from a widespread feeling that one did not criticise a priest - and this was reinforced by the church hierarchy. I do not know why priests abused children but I feel that an enforced celibacy must have something to do with it. There have been plenty of cases of priests having affairs with women and fathering children as well.
It is depressing to realise how widespread child abuse is. We urgently need to recalibrate how we view children and how we treat them.
One or two people have pointed out the truth that Labour vote shares fell in the election at the end of the first Conservative term - 1955, Feb 1974 and 1983 are all cited as examples.
I remember mentioning this soon after 2010 but the other part of that truth is that in losing power in the first place the Labour share didn't fall that much. In 1951, Labour actually got more votes than the Conservatives - in 1970, the Conservative share of 46% was mainly on the back of a collapse in the Liberal vote as was the case in 1979.
2010 was different in that the Labour vote fell sharply (while the LD vote didn't change much). Indeed, Labour's 2010 vote tested its 1983 nadir and it's hard to see them going lower. A 1987 scenario (Tories little changed, Labour up a little) is entirely plausible but the political world is very different.
"Did you hear about the gangs of white taxi drivers in the market towns of Southern England who over a period of decades have been grooming, drugging and serially raping under-age girls of Pakistani Kashmiri heritage?
No of course not. It hasn’t happened and it couldn’t happen for any number of cultural reasons, the main one being this: the very second that the social services or the police or the victims’ community got even a whiff of what was going on there would be all hell to pay."
So all those high profile, rich, white, middle class entertainers and media figures got away with child abuse for decades due to cultural reasons did they?
AIUI, they got away with it largely because a lot of it wasn't reported until relatively recently. The police were aware of Savile's activities, and he was interviewed several times, but they didn't think they had much of a case against him. There weren't enough credible accusers, and they could easily be discredited as being disturbed (as Margaret Hodge actually did, when similarly incompetent neglect by the council she led emerged a few years ago). As a celeb, he had a huge and visible track record of charitable activity that he could point to in order to evidence his good character.
Only after his death did 600+ offences come to light.
The Rotherham situation was different in that it was reported to the police and known about for decades. Instead of prosecuting the offenders, the police and the council implemented a racist agenda and sided with the offenders against their victims, because the offenders were all Asians and the victims were mostly only white.
Rotherham will still return a Labour MP at the GE. If Labour councillors don't care about children being raped, why would Labour voters?
The point though is that the LDs are able to win these seats partly by picking up anti-Conservative tactical voters who would normally vote Labour. Said voters would be more likely to endorse a Lib-Lab arrangement.
I think the "surprise" about 2010 was Cameron's willingness on the Friday afternoon to initiate talks. He could (and I remain convinced of this) have waited and formed a minority Government safe in the knowledge neither Labour nor the LDs would have wanted to vote him down.
Unfortunately, the sentiment among some Conservatives is the only route to a majority lies over the broken bodies of LD MPs. Probably but it's not going to create a constructive post-election atmosphere. I certainly don't see the party supporting Labour in a Coalition - I suspect we will be relieved to pass the problem over to Nicola.
Anti-Conservative tactical voters in places like Cheltenham only have two choices though: Vote Lib Dem and accept they might enter a Conservative coalition as a moderating influence, or vote Labour / Green and help the Tories take the seat. The evidence is that they'll do the former.
Going from supporting the Tories in 2010 to supporting some sort of Labour - SNP government in 2015 would be a good way of alienating literally everyone in the space of two elections. I agree that it's something the Lib Dems will want to avoid.
Anybody betting on Labour most seats Should wait for the first YouGov poll with a Tory lead of 3%.
And hope it really is an outlier.
They should also take a long hard look at Ed Miliband and ask themselves "is this guy REALLY going to have people take the risk of giving him their X against a Govt. that has, by any objective measure, turned things around?"
The Tories need an 11.4% lead in England before they stop shedding seats to LAB.
If Labour are nearly wiped out in Scotland, and the Labour and Tory gains from the Liberals are roughly evenly spread, then Labour will start about 90 seats behind the Tories, thus requiring about 45 gains from the Tories to have most seats.
That's roughly the number of seats that Kinnock gained from the Tories in 1992.
Ashcroft's poll predicted exactly that so putting both the Conservatives and Labour in the 270s.
Anybody betting on Labour most seats Should wait for the first YouGov poll with a Tory lead of 3%.
And hope it really is an outlier.
They should also take a long hard look at Ed Miliband and ask themselves "is this guy REALLY going to have people take the risk of giving him their X against a Govt. that has, by any objective measure, turned things around?"
The Tories need an 11.4% lead in England before they stop shedding seats to LAB.
Not necessarily. If they're losing chunks to UKIP in the shires, but without losing a commensurate number of seats, their vote will be more efficient.
For info, I've got the Tories suffering no net losses to Labour at about a 7.5% lead in England (4.5% lead overall), with UKIP at 15% in England (14% overall). This is with a model including incumbency and some regional effects (but it doesn't really model UKIP's specific areas of strength, yet).
On topic, it's incredible that we can talk about Labour 'winning' the next election when they are facing near obliteration in Scotland, and will be well behind in votes in England.
Yet they could supply the next PM of the United Kingdom. How perverse is that?
They could be well behind in votes and seats, and supply the next Prime Minister of the United Kingdom.
eg
Con 285 Lab 270 LD 30 SNP 40
Those are entirely plausible numbers, but the most stable combination (apart from a grand coalition, which I put in the category of Not Going To Happen) is Labour + LD + SNP.
I put any coalition involving the SNP in the not going to happen category. On the numbers you cite we'd either have Con Minority, with temporary time-limited LD acquiescence, or some sort of very loose (confidence and supply) or a short-term loose coalition. Both give an absolute majority sans Sinn Fein. 2nd election inside 18-24 months perfectly possible.
The Lib Dems are simply not going to hop out of bed with the Tories and straight into bed with Labour when they've been wiped out in Scotland, lost every national vote, apart from Wales, and are clearly behind in seats.
Not. Going. To. Happen.
I'm not suggesting a coalition. I expect a Labour minority government in those circumstances, with confidence and supply from the Lib Dems and the SNP. It would be grisly for all concerned, of course.
Thanks for the clarification. Cameron will only resign his office and his government (the incumbents hold the cards) if he is certain he can't command the House. IMHO that could only happen if there was a written agreement between all three parties delivered to the press by Ed Miliband. ,snip>
Cameron losing a vote of confidence wouldn't mean an automatic general election, it would give Ed Miliband the chance to try to form a government.
Then if Labour fail, do the SNP have a go? It could all get very Borgen-esque.
On these numbers what could LibDems do, but continue the coalition? They've spent the whole campaign saying they are a vital brake on the Tories worst excesses. They've spent five years saying the deficit is the biggest issue in politics and only the coalition would have dealt with it.
Seems to me that their only way out would be to say they don't support an IN/OUT referendum on EU. But even that's a problem as they were calling for one a few years ago.
Thanks for the clarification. Cameron will only resign his office and his government (the incumbents hold the cards) if he is certain he can't command the House. IMHO that could only happen if there was a written agreement between all three parties delivered to the press by Ed Miliband.
Otherwise, Cameron would be perfectly within his rights to sit tight (as the winner of most seats and most votes) and challenge all the other parties to vote down his first Queen's speech.
What could happen is analogous to Canada in 2006; a very weak Con Minority that barely lasts 18 months. Labour fail to cobble together an agreement. The Lib Dems return to the backbenches and open the popcorn.
Cameron stays in office and makes his first Queen's speech a vote of confidence. All the opposition parties have to put up or shut up. Either the Lib Dems/SNP abstain (depending on the polls/national mood) or bring him down in conjunction with Labour and force a 2nd election.
Cameron losing a vote of confidence wouldn't mean an automatic general election, it would give Ed Miliband the chance to try to form a government.
Then if Labour fail, do the SNP have a go? It could all get very Borgen-esque.
If they can make a reasonable argument that they may be able to win a vote of confidence (say the Tories say they may support them) then sure, they can have a go. Or people who aren't leaders of their parties for that matter. The point of the process is basically just to see if anyone in the House of Commons (or Lords???) can get a majority of the House of Commons to support them. If somebody can then cool, if not then you have a new election
SNP still creeping up on the spreads, especially on Spreadex:
SPIN: 35.5-37.5 Spreadex: 36-39
Still a Hold in my view, if you have a Buy position open. Whether it's a Buy if you don't already have a position is less clear-cut, but on balance probably just about. Ladbrokes' over/under market is now at 39.5.
"Did you hear about the gangs of white taxi drivers in the market towns of Southern England who over a period of decades have been grooming, drugging and serially raping under-age girls of Pakistani Kashmiri heritage?
No of course not. It hasn’t happened and it couldn’t happen for any number of cultural reasons, the main one being this: the very second that the social services or the police or the victims’ community got even a whiff of what was going on there would be all hell to pay."
Did you hear the one about white, posh, publicly school educated politicians of all hues who raped and abused young children?
I've also noticed that all the dodgy Romanist priests are white and catholic.
There is a common factor between the politicians, the priests and the Pakistani Muslim taxi drivers. Not much normal mixing between the sexes, and - in particular - a lot of single sex education.
I'm not sure about the last factor. A lot of the young men in Rotherham will have been educated in state schools. Misogyny is certainly a factor - a fear of women which can lead to brutality against young girls. But one factor is surely a culture which prevents or limits normal day to day interaction between the sexes, imposes ludicrously strict limitations on normal human urges and desires and, paradoxically, idealises women on one level (the Virgin Mary / Asian view of women as maintaining the family's "honour" by being pure) but means that women themselves in all their gloriously messy paradoxes are seen as impure if they want to live their lives to the full, if they exhibit sexual desire and therefore as something to be controlled and abused, if they fall outside this non-existent ideal. FGM comes from the same root.
Women are seen as simply a vehicle for giving birth but the men cannot get their pretty little heads around the fact that to do this women must have sex. Nor that they might actually enjoy it, the horror!
"Did you hear about the gangs of white taxi drivers in the market towns of Southern England who over a period of decades have been grooming, drugging and serially raping under-age girls of Pakistani Kashmiri heritage?
No of course not. It hasn’t happened and it couldn’t happen for any number of cultural reasons, the main one being this: the very second that the social services or the police or the victims’ community got even a whiff of what was going on there would be all hell to pay."
So all those high profile, rich, white, middle class entertainers and media figures got away with child abuse for decades due to cultural reasons did they?
No Polly they didn't, they got away with it because they were thought to be untouchable because they were celebrities. The villains in Rotherham got away with it because they were thought to be untouchable because they were Pakistani Muslims, that is the point.
Both cases are to do with reluctance to deal with people who are elevated above usual levels of scrutiny
Sycophancy around fame was the reason for the celebrities getting away with it, fawning over any ethnic minority was the reason the Rotherham rapists did for so long
"isam - so why aren't Kip going to win Rotheram in May ?"
Because enough tribal voters may believe that Labour have changed. Denis McShane made a sort of apology and the new MP has burnished her credentials.
Old-fashioned Labour is still popular when this sort of stuff happens. I suspect Rotherham has now got an MP that will be given the benefit of the doubt ... probably.
Just a slight worry on the pile of money I've got on Dougie's seat - Any chance he gets a shadow foreign Secretary boost or does that sort of thing not concern your average Paisley voter ?
On topic, it's incredible that we can talk about Labour 'winning' the next election when they are facing near obliteration in Scotland, and will be well behind in votes in England.
Yet they could supply the next PM of the United Kingdom. How perverse is that?
They could be well behind in votes and seats, and supply the next Prime Minister of the United Kingdom.
eg
Con 285 Lab 270 LD 30 SNP 40
Those are entirely plausible numbers, but the most stable combination (apart from a grand coalition, which I put in the category of Not Going To Happen) is Labour + LD + SNP.
Not. Going. To. Happen.
I'm not suggesting a coalition. I expect a Labour minority government in those circumstances, with confidence and supply from the Lib Dems and the SNP. It would be grisly for all concerned, of course.
Thanks for the clarification. Cameron will only resign his office and his government (the incumbents hold the cards) if he is certain he can't command the House. IMHO that could only happen if there was a written agreement between all three parties delivered to the press by Ed Miliband. ,snip>
Cameron losing a vote of confidence wouldn't mean an automatic general election, it would give Ed Miliband the chance to try to form a government.
Then if Labour fail, do the SNP have a go? It could all get very Borgen-esque.
On these numbers what could LibDems do, but continue the coalition? They've spent the whole campaign saying they are a vital brake on the Tories worst excesses. They've spent five years saying the deficit is the biggest issue in politics and only the coalition would have dealt with it.
Seems to me that their only way out would be to say they don't support an IN/OUT referendum on EU. But even that's a problem as they were calling for one a few years ago.
Just say no deal because the Tories were being dicks about it.
Seriously, they were prepared to be seen contemplating a deal with Labour when they had lost the popular vote, got the fewest seats and wouldn't even have had a majority between them. They'll work with whoever gives them the best deal. How things look to the voters is a question for before elections, not after them.
"Did you hear about the gangs of white taxi drivers in the market towns of Southern England who over a period of decades have been grooming, drugging and serially raping under-age girls of Pakistani Kashmiri heritage?
No of course not. It hasn’t happened and it couldn’t happen for any number of cultural reasons, the main one being this: the very second that the social services or the police or the victims’ community got even a whiff of what was going on there would be all hell to pay."
Just a slight worry on the pile of money I've got on Dougie's seat - Any chance he gets a shadow foreign Secretary boost or does that sort of thing not concern your average Paisley voter ?
I am much more concerned that the SNP have put up a 19 year old. But perhaps that might be a masterstroke - inadvertently? - given the profile of Yes voters?
It does, but it's still worth some of anyone's money at 25/1. Coral allowed me £2.
That was 100/1 yesterday
Are you two trying to make me explode with jealousy?
Modesty forbids me from publishes my "book" .... save to say Mrs JackW is taking a particularly keen interest in whether the purchase of a not too modest shoe factory is viable !!
Just a slight worry on the pile of money I've got on Dougie's seat - Any chance he gets a shadow foreign Secretary boost or does that sort of thing not concern your average Paisley voter ?
I am much more concerned that the SNP have put up a 19 year old. But perhaps that might be a masterstroke - inadvertently? - given the profile of Yes voters?
If she's 19 then she must be like the new Scottish Barack Obama or something. UKIP's Boston candidate seems quite good and he is very young.
"Did you hear about the gangs of white taxi drivers in the market towns of Southern England who over a period of decades have been grooming, drugging and serially raping under-age girls of Pakistani Kashmiri heritage?
No of course not. It hasn’t happened and it couldn’t happen for any number of cultural reasons, the main one being this: the very second that the social services or the police or the victims’ community got even a whiff of what was going on there would be all hell to pay."
Did you hear the one about white, posh, publicly school educated politicians of all hues who raped and abused young children?
I've also noticed that all the dodgy Romanist priests are white and catholic.
There is a common factor between the politicians, the priests and the Pakistani Muslim taxi drivers. Not much normal mixing between the sexes, and - in particular - a lot of single sex education.
I'm not sure about the last factor. A lot of the young men in Rotherham will have been educated in state schools. Misogyny is certainly a factor - a fear of women which can lead to brutality against young girls. But one factor is surely a culture which prevents or limits normal day to day interaction between the sexes, imposes ludicrously strict limitations on normal human urges and desires and, paradoxically, idealises women on one level (the Virgin Mary / Asian view of women as maintaining the family's "honour" by being pure) but means that women themselves in all their gloriously messy paradoxes are seen as impure if they want to live their lives to the full, if they exhibit sexual desire and therefore as something to be controlled and abused, if they fall outside this non-existent ideal. FGM comes from the same root.
Women are seen as simply a vehicle for giving birth but the men cannot get their pretty little heads around the fact that to do this women must have sex. Nor that they might actually enjoy it, the horror!
OK, but now explain BBC TV personalities. No shortage of inter-gender interaction there.
I think the main commonality is strong communities and institutions with hierarchies strong enough to suppress dissent and stitch up whistle-blowers.
"Did you hear about the gangs of white taxi drivers in the market towns of Southern England who over a period of decades have been grooming, drugging and serially raping under-age girls of Pakistani Kashmiri heritage?
No of course not. It hasn’t happened and it couldn’t happen for any number of cultural reasons, the main one being this: the very second that the social services or the police or the victims’ community got even a whiff of what was going on there would be all hell to pay."
Just a slight worry on the pile of money I've got on Dougie's seat - Any chance he gets a shadow foreign Secretary boost or does that sort of thing not concern your average Paisley voter ?
I am much more concerned that the SNP have put up a 19 year old. But perhaps that might be a masterstroke - inadvertently? - given the profile of Yes voters?
If she's 19 then she must be like the new Scottish Barack Obama or something. UKIP's Boston candidate seems quite good and he is very young.
The Boston candidate annoyed me. His ramping of the defection of one independent councillor.
Sheesh, he should stay out of politics until his balls have dropped.
Comments
He doesn't always get it righ (UKIP By Elections...) but Labour Minority looks most likely.
Otherwise, Cameron would be perfectly within his rights to sit tight (as the winner of most seats and most votes) and challenge all the other parties to vote down his first Queen's speech.
What could happen is analogous to Canada in 2006; a very weak Con Minority that barely lasts 18 months. Labour fail to cobble together an agreement. The Lib Dems return to the backbenches and open the popcorn.
Cameron stays in office and makes his first Queen's speech a vote of confidence. All the opposition parties have to put up or shut up. Either the Lib Dems/SNP abstain (depending on the polls/national mood) or bring him down in conjunction with Labour and force a 2nd election.
Cheltenham - never been and not that interested to be honest. If I want to stand in a crowded place for a long period, I can use the Central Line - cheaper and far more convenient. I have been to the Hunter chase evening in May though it's usually the night before a round of elections! I am hoping the weather will relent for a trip to Kempton tomorrow. Nice to see four spring jump meetings at Sunbury - probably to make up for the fixture losses to Chelmsford.
And hope it really is an outlier.
They should also take a long hard look at Ed Miliband and ask themselves "is this guy REALLY going to have people take the risk of giving him their X against a Govt. that has, by any objective measure, turned things around?"
Personally I think there is a case for a reduction in council tax based on square footage per occupant. A 1500 square foot house occupied by 1 person should be taxed less than a 3000 square foot house occupied by one person, regardless of where.
SDLT should also be levied on the net, so if you downsize from a £600k house to a £300k one you shouldn't pay any tax at all.
The colossal level of stamp duty has taken us to the point in the south east where you don't move house to gain space any more. You extend and / or you convert the attic, because you can do both for less than the stamp duty involved in moving to gain equivalent space, never mind the price of the house.
In Finchley 3 beds are about a million quid and four are about a third as much again. The stamp duty alone on the latter would be nearly eighty thousand quid, for which sum you could have a new attic conversion, and an extension, and a garden makeover, and a new kitchen, and a new bathroom. You've then pretty much got your 4-bedroom but you've saved a third of a million and contributed to the housing shortage by not selling.
@michaelsavage: The fact Bill Thomas lives in a bona fide mansion somehow puts him in the centre of a bizarre Labour Venn diagram: http://t.co/UvCYmENW3D
I think the "surprise" about 2010 was Cameron's willingness on the Friday afternoon to initiate talks. He could (and I remain convinced of this) have waited and formed a minority Government safe in the knowledge neither Labour nor the LDs would have wanted to vote him down.
Unfortunately, the sentiment among some Conservatives is the only route to a majority lies over the broken bodies of LD MPs. Probably but it's not going to create a constructive post-election atmosphere. I certainly don't see the party supporting Labour in a Coalition - I suspect we will be relieved to pass the problem over to Nicola.
Brave.
Does that make me crazy? Probably.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bd2B6SjMh_w
Edit: argh, how do you link to youtube without vanilla embedding?
No of course not. It hasn’t happened and it couldn’t happen for any number of cultural reasons, the main one being this: the very second that the social services or the police or the victims’ community got even a whiff of what was going on there would be all hell to pay."
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/02/05/rotherham-where-some-cultures-are-more-equal-than-others/
The whole point of html, and hence the web, is that you can easily make links to other webpages, thus making it easy for people to find the information they are interested in.
It is now so much easier to register to vote then with the old paper system, provided that you know how to use Google (this may sadly rule out a lot of people eligible to vote) and have an internet connection (available in public libraries).
If more people saw it as their responsibility to make provision for themselves and their family and the state tried to help such people do that rather than seeing them as a class to be fleeced, we could then focus money raised in taxation on helping those who aren't in a position to help themselves.
I also object to the idea of taxing inflation when that arises purely and simply as a result of a failure of government policy. I would much rather that my house was worth exactly the same as I paid for it rather than having this ludicrous house price inflation. A government which gets revenue from such inflation has no incentive to deal with the causes.
https://www.betfair.com/exchange/#/politics/event/26589827/market?marketId=1.115878540
Thanks for the clarification. Cameron will only resign his office and his government (the incumbents hold the cards) if he is certain he can't command the House. IMHO that could only happen if there was a written agreement between all three parties delivered to the press by Ed Miliband.
Otherwise, Cameron would be perfectly within his rights to sit tight (as the winner of most seats and most votes) and challenge all the other parties to vote down his first Queen's speech.
What could happen is analogous to Canada in 2006; a very weak Con Minority that barely lasts 18 months. Labour fail to cobble together an agreement. The Lib Dems return to the backbenches and open the popcorn.
Cameron stays in office and makes his first Queen's speech a vote of confidence. All the opposition parties have to put up or shut up. Either the Lib Dems/SNP abstain (depending on the polls/national mood) or bring him down in conjunction with Labour and force a 2nd elec
Serious question.
Curiously, it does not show us the recent surge in Tory fortunes that some posters were so sure they had discerned in the opinion polls.
To Win £ 25.00 Liberal Democrats - General Election 2015 - Match Bets - Win Most Seats - SNP v Liberal Democrats @ 10/1
To Win £ 20.00 Labour - General Election 2015 - Scotland - Most UK Parliament Seats in Scotland @ 5/1
To Win £ 10.00 Number of Constituencies won in Scotland by the Conservatives - General Election 2015 - Scotland - Scottish Conservative MPs v Pandas @ 25/1
To Win £ 10.00 Tie - General Election 2015 - Scotland - Scottish Conservative MPs v Pandas @ 10/1
To Win £ 20.00 Labour - Constituency Betting 2015 - Glasgow Central @ 3/1
To Win £ 40.00 Labour - Constituency Betting 2015 - Glasgow North West @ 9/4
To Win £ 5.00 Labour - Constituency Betting 2015 - Dundee West @ 33/1
To Win £ 40.00 Labour - Constituency Betting 2015 - Motherwell and Wishaw @ 3/1
To Win £ 5.00 Liberal Democrat - Constituency Betting 2015 - Gordon @ 16/1
To Win £ 5.00 Liberal Democrat - Constituency Betting 2015 - Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch and Strathspey @ 25/1
They do seem to have arrested their decline and are now just flatlining - bravo.
Edit: Just read the provisions, it seems after a failed confidence motion only 14 days could pass before an automatic election call. Makes sense.
Still don't like FTPA, though. :-)
10/1 on 2 & 25/1 on more than 2 scots tories? That's crazy.
The analysis showed that it was being done by Muslims. This was politically unacceptable so the management summary was rewritten* to say that it was all being done by right wing white skinheads. A lie was fabricated to suit the agenda of the left.
You say that "It hasn’t happened and it couldn’t happen" but this does not mean it will not be said to have happened.
* when I used to do expert witness stuff, this kind of thing was something you used to rip into if the other side's expert did it. If the summary was not supported by or reflective of the analysis it was your first step to showing that the other side's expert had decided on his conclusion in advance of looking at the evidence.
That's roughly the number of seats that Kinnock gained from the Tories in 1992.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bygi8eZw-4q1NGdwU1IwV1VPc1k/view?usp=sharing
And best prices last night:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bygi8eZw-4q1d05oazlrcGpYc0E/view?usp=sharing
The SNP are now odds on in 39 seats and favourites in one more. The previous night the SNP were odds on in 25 seats and favourites in two more. I'll do an analysis in the next day or so on my latest thoughts on Scotland.
Lab Seats, Con votes @ 50-1
I used to follow everything our OGH did, such was his record. I got stung on a couple of pro-Lib Dem bets and learnt my lesson. I would have lost even more had I followed his lead on an Indy ref Yes vote.
Now, I respectfully listen to everyone but DMOR. But, of course, I could get it badly wrong too. But I am putting my own money on it.
I'm on that bet at 100/1 with Paddy Power.
But as RCS and others have pointed out, child abuse happens when groups of people have power over children and a sense of immunity. In Rotherham PC culture gave that sense of immunity; a mysogynistic culture provided the breeding ground for the crimes. In the Catholic church, the sense of immunity came from a widespread feeling that one did not criticise a priest - and this was reinforced by the church hierarchy. I do not know why priests abused children but I feel that an enforced celibacy must have something to do with it. There have been plenty of cases of priests having affairs with women and fathering children as well.
It is depressing to realise how widespread child abuse is. We urgently need to recalibrate how we view children and how we treat them.
I remember mentioning this soon after 2010 but the other part of that truth is that in losing power in the first place the Labour share didn't fall that much. In 1951, Labour actually got more votes than the Conservatives - in 1970, the Conservative share of 46% was mainly on the back of a collapse in the Liberal vote as was the case in 1979.
2010 was different in that the Labour vote fell sharply (while the LD vote didn't change much). Indeed, Labour's 2010 vote tested its 1983 nadir and it's hard to see them going lower. A 1987 scenario (Tories little changed, Labour up a little) is entirely plausible but the political world is very different.
Lib Dems still available at 7-1 in this market, might still be value - not sure ?
Only after his death did 600+ offences come to light.
The Rotherham situation was different in that it was reported to the police and known about for decades. Instead of prosecuting the offenders, the police and the council implemented a racist agenda and sided with the offenders against their victims, because the offenders were all Asians and the victims were mostly only white.
Rotherham will still return a Labour MP at the GE. If Labour councillors don't care about children being raped, why would Labour voters?
Going from supporting the Tories in 2010 to supporting some sort of Labour - SNP government in 2015 would be a good way of alienating literally everyone in the space of two elections. I agree that it's something the Lib Dems will want to avoid.
Is it a new non-aggression pact re Molotov - Ribbentrop?
EDIT: It seems that the EU would prefer a war against Russia, than putting more effort into fighting IS.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/feb/05/jihadist-girl-marry-liberation-failed-islamic-state
Seems to me that their only way out would be to say they don't support an IN/OUT referendum on EU. But even that's a problem as they were calling for one a few years ago.
Betfair 4-6 Hallam Lib Dem
William Hills 3-1, Labour
ROLL UP ROLL UP ARB CITY
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-31110113
It takes 539 years for someone on an average wage to earn Aguero's salary. Waits for Ed Milbiand to take test.
SPIN: 35.5-37.5
Spreadex: 36-39
Still a Hold in my view, if you have a Buy position open. Whether it's a Buy if you don't already have a position is less clear-cut, but on balance probably just about. Ladbrokes' over/under market is now at 39.5.
Women are seen as simply a vehicle for giving birth but the men cannot get their pretty little heads around the fact that to do this women must have sex. Nor that they might actually enjoy it, the horror!
Top up, arb it with Hills, lay it off on their own exchange- Just take your £15 or w/e you are allowed
They allowed me a few quid.
Can't believe I managed to miss the pandas bet though.
Both cases are to do with reluctance to deal with people who are elevated above usual levels of scrutiny
Sycophancy around fame was the reason for the celebrities getting away with it, fawning over any ethnic minority was the reason the Rotherham rapists did for so long
"isam - so why aren't Kip going to win Rotheram in May ?"
Because enough tribal voters may believe that Labour have changed. Denis McShane made a sort of apology and the new MP has burnished her credentials.
Old-fashioned Labour is still popular when this sort of stuff happens. I suspect Rotherham has now got an MP that will be given the benefit of the doubt ... probably.
But you knew that, didn't you?
But, when I realised it was what I thought it was, I got on at 18/1
As I said, Coral's political compiler is someone on work experience.
Just a slight worry on the pile of money I've got on Dougie's seat - Any chance he gets a shadow foreign Secretary boost or does that sort of thing not concern your average Paisley voter ?
http://survation.com/poll-in-nick-cleggs-sheffield-hallam-constituency-survationunite/
Seriously, they were prepared to be seen contemplating a deal with Labour when they had lost the popular vote, got the fewest seats and wouldn't even have had a majority between them. They'll work with whoever gives them the best deal. How things look to the voters is a question for before elections, not after them.
I reckon you would make money blind if you backed a team whenever they conceded a six or lost a wicket
Tissue Price is the awesome PBer who tipped the Pandas bet.
I think the main commonality is strong communities and institutions with hierarchies strong enough to suppress dissent and stitch up whistle-blowers.
Sheesh, he should stay out of politics until his balls have dropped.