The Tories need a much better strategy for housing.
Long-term home ownership levels in the UK are declining. The young are finding it harder and harder to get onto the property ladder, because there aren't enough homes and it's bceome too expensive.
That's actually a long-term problem for the Tories, because their broader electoral success feeds off financial independence from the State, and property ownership. If we end up with more and more renters as time goes on, the better it gets for Labour.
On the flip-side, that'd mean the Tories would have to negotiate the rampant NIMBY'ism of existing (much older) homeowners who disproportionately vote Tory and live in areas where new housing is most needed. And, of course, want no new homes anywhere near them.
It is hard to take this latest piece of Miliband posturing seriously. Even if this information was in the public domain since 2010 (and I believe it was first in the public domain in 2007) Miliband has ignored it for four years (much as Labour ignored so many dubious practices during their 13 years of government) only to raise it at a time when it is most politically advantageous for him. That is hardly looking after the national interest. Looking after the national interest would have been pressing on this issue from 2011 onwards at the latest.
That it seems to have been done in concert with the BBC (so much for impartiality) and Guardian newspaper seems to suggest further that this was a staged politically motivated stunt.
Furthermore, there is a distinct lack of consistency in his approach. He does not for example berate Disney for deciding to make the last episode of Star Wars in London because of the beneficial tax arrangements. Its alright for Disney to avoid US taxes.
Its also alright for Greeks and French to flee to Britain to avoid the increasing levels of taxation in their home countries.
Not only that but I do not recall him berating Ireland or the Baltic States or Central or Eastern Europe for having tax regimes that severely undercut the UK and could just as easily encourage tax avoidance as those non EU locations he was so ready to berate.
Furthermore, he has yet to my knowledge to call for tax harmonisation across the EU or more widely which would be the logical extension to his position.
Lastly I am not aware that he has actually put forward proposals to actually shut down the loopholes which as I understand were around when he and Ed Balls were in the Treasury.
All in all one can only conclude that this is nothing more than a cynical piece of shallow sanctimonious hypocritical self serving partisan political posturing designed by a party and leader who puts their own self interest before that of the nation.
The big question tonight is that as the Whisleblower has stated categorically on Sky News that he e mailed and telephoned HMRC in 2008 who knew and what action was taken by HMRC then
I am not sure the guy is to be trusted to be honest. He stole this data, then tried to sell it to other banks, before contacting tax authorities, before attempting to disappear. He is no "whistleblower" as some are calling him, he is a thief who tried to make money out of this data. It only got into the French authorities hands after they raided him and he was arrested.
In terms of his contact with the authorities, it was if reports are to be believed, via anonymous emails, that basically said "high profile tax clients - do you want it". It wouldn't surprise me if the tax people thought it was spam / phishing type email.
If you ever wanted proof that the BBC is the broadcasting arm of The Guardian & the Labour Party, you just have to view their websites lead story now on Milibands pathetic "dodgy" claim. Utterly disgraceful coverage.
@Big_G_NorthWales The answer is irrelevant, There was a vote in the house tonight and a majority of MP's decided that "No one knew nothing guv" (I may have paraphrased the actual motion a little)
It is hard to take this latest piece of Miliband posturing seriously. Even if this information was in the public domain since 2010 (and I believe it was first in the public domain in 2007) Miliband has ignored it for four years (much as Labour ignored so many dubious practices during their 13 years of government) only to raise it at a time when it is most politically advantageous for him. That is hardly looking after the national interest. Looking after the national interest would have been pressing on this issue from 2011 onwards at the latest.
That it seems to have been done in concert with the BBC (so much for impartiality) and Guardian newspaper seems to suggest further that this was a staged politically motivated stunt.
Furthermore, there is a distinct lack of consistency in his approach. He does not for example berate Disney for deciding to make the last episode of Star Wars in London because of the beneficial tax arrangements. Its alright for Disney to avoid US taxes.
Its also alright for Greeks and French to flee to Britain to avoid the increasing levels of taxation in their home countries.
Not only that but I do not recall him berating Ireland or the Baltic States or Central or Eastern Europe for having tax regimes that severely undercut the UK and could just as easily encourage tax avoidance as those non EU locations he was so ready to berate.
Furthermore, he has yet to my knowledge to call for tax harmonisation across the EU or more widely which would be the logical extension to his position.
Lastly I am not aware that he has actually put forward proposals to actually shut down the loopholes which as I understand were around when he and Ed Balls were in the Treasury.
All in all one can only conclude that this is nothing more than a cynical piece of shallow sanctimonious hypocritical self serving partisan political posturing designed by a party and leader who puts their own self interest before that of the nation.
Unfortunately for the Tories these billionaire Tory donors who don't like paying tax are turning out to be the kiss of death for Cameron. They are as media savvy as a bunch of rodents and rather less attractive. Unfortunately this realization coincided with the Tory Black and White dinner where billionaire donors were seen supporting the party that would maintain their tax free status. The conflagration of this and all being in it together made normal people feel nauseous.
The big question tonight is that as the Whisleblower has stated categorically on Sky News that he e mailed and telephoned HMRC in 2008 who knew and what action was taken by HMRC then
I am not sure the guy is to be trusted to be honest. He stole this data, then tried to sell it to other banks, before contacting tax authorities, before attempting to disappear. He is no "whistleblower" as some are calling him, he is a thief who tried to make money out of this data. It only got into the French authorities hands after they raided him and he was arrested.
That may be the case or not as I dont know those details but what motive would he have for making this claim of informing HMRC in 2008. A thorough investigation into these allegations and dates is essential as it could have huge political implications
On the flip-side, that'd mean the Tories would have to negotiate the rampant NIMBY'ism of existing (much older) homeowners who disproportionately vote Tory and live in areas where new housing is most needed. And, of course, want no new homes anywhere near them.
Tricky.
Well put. There are such areas welcoming to significant new housing which is needed, but the areas where you get the 'no-one local and young can afford to live here' and 'over my dead body will you build x amount here' vastly outnumber those areas.
@___Bobajob___ "It's a left-liberal media conspiracy" A world wide one at that? (of course those crafty left wingers have probably "nobbled" the foreign news as well)
Unfortunately for the Tories these billionaire Tory donors who don't like paying tax are turning out to be the kiss of death for Cameron. They are as media savvy as a bunch of rodents and rather less attractive. Unfortunately this realization coincided with the Tory Black and White dinner where billionaire donors were seen supporting the party that would maintain their tax free status. The conflagration of this and all being in it together made normal people feel nauseous.
The big question tonight is that as the Whisleblower has stated categorically on Sky News that he e mailed and telephoned HMRC in 2008 who knew and what action was taken by HMRC then
I am not sure the guy is to be trusted to be honest. He stole this data, then tried to sell it to other banks, before contacting tax authorities, before attempting to disappear. He is no "whistleblower" as some are calling him, he is a thief who tried to make money out of this data. It only got into the French authorities hands after they raided him and he was arrested.
That may be the case or not as I dont know those details but what motive would he have for making this claim of informing HMRC in 2008. A thorough investigation into these allegations and dates is essential as it could have huge political implications
Well he is now trying to take the moral high ground and say no no I am no a thief, I am a whistle-blower, who objects to these big banks, these people dodging their taxes etc etc etc...so I take everything he says with a huge pinch of salt.
The reports I have read, by "Informing" the tax authorities, isn't quite what you or I would mean when we said we have informed the police of a crime.
I'm angry Cyclefree. I've never in my 49 years seen a regime that is as nepotistic, as sucky up to big corporate money, and as interested in furthering it's own agenda at the expense of supporting services that make a difference to ordinary people as this one.
It is hard to take this latest piece of Miliband posturing seriously. Even if this information was in the public domain since 2010 (and I believe it was first in the public domain in 2007) Miliband has ignored it for four years (much as Labour ignored so many dubious practices during their 13 years of government) only to raise it at a time when it is most politically advantageous for him. That is hardly looking after the national interest. Looking after the national interest would have been pressing on this issue from 2011 onwards at the latest.
That it seems to have been done in concert with the BBC (so much for impartiality) and Guardian newspaper seems to suggest further that this was a staged politically motivated stunt.
Furthermore, there is a distinct lack of consistency in his approach. He does not for example berate Disney for deciding to make the last episode of Star Wars in London because of the beneficial tax arrangements. Its alright for Disney to avoid US taxes.
Its also alright for Greeks and French to flee to Britain to avoid the increasing levels of taxation in their home countries.
Not only that but I do not recall him berating Ireland or the Baltic States or Central or Eastern Europe for having tax regimes that severely undercut the UK and could just as easily encourage tax avoidance as those non EU locations he was so ready to berate.
Furthermore, he has yet to my knowledge to call for tax harmonisation across the EU or more widely which would be the logical extension to his position.
Lastly I am not aware that he has actually put forward proposals to actually shut down the loopholes which as I understand were around when he and Ed Balls were in the Treasury.
All in all one can only conclude that this is nothing more than a cynical piece of shallow sanctimonious hypocritical self serving partisan political posturing designed by a party and leader who puts their own self interest before that of the nation.
It's a left-liberal media conspiracy.
Well if that's the extent of your response clearly you are unable to disagree with me.
I am slightly surprised by Tory tactics. If they think attacking Miliband on the right of people to avoid tax on the grounds that "it is legal" is equal in political judgement in saying it would be good to privatise the NHS because it would increase "efficiency".
Also, getting a non dom tax avoider living in Monaco to head criticism of Labour's tax policy was indeed strange. Ed probably couldn't believe his luck. Quite rightly, he told him to f**k off !
Before you get OGH into trouble, worth pointing out that Pessina is not a non-dom tax avoider. He is an Italian who has never lived in the UK and has never had any liability to pay UK income tax. The only country with the right to complain that by living in Monaco and not (I assume) paying Italian tax is ...... Italy.
Milliband's insinuation that he was somehow avoiding UK tax was nasty, incoherent and not founded on any facts, much like Labour party policy these days.
If Labour do form the government, the Civil Service will have to spend a lot of time teaching them the facts of life, starting with how tax law actually works.
@___Bobajob___ "It's a left-liberal media conspiracy" A world wide one at that? (of course those crafty left wingers have probably "nobbled" the foreign news as well)
@Big_G_NorthWales How much credence does one normally give a wanted felon? Switzerland would like to have a quiet moment with him to offer a small room to stay in... Forever.
The big question tonight is that as the Whisleblower has stated categorically on Sky News that he e mailed and telephoned HMRC in 2008 who knew and what action was taken by HMRC then
I am not sure the guy is to be trusted to be honest. He stole this data, then tried to sell it to other banks, before contacting tax authorities, before attempting to disappear. He is no "whistleblower" as some are calling him, he is a thief who tried to make money out of this data. It only got into the French authorities hands after they raided him and he was arrested.
That may be the case or not as I dont know those details but what motive would he have for making this claim of informing HMRC in 2008. A thorough investigation into these allegations and dates is essential as it could have huge political implications
Well he is now trying to take the moral high ground and say no no I am no a thief, I am a whistle-blower, who objects to these big banks, these people dodging their taxes etc etc etc...so I take everything he says with a huge pinch of salt.
It is still a serious allegation no matter what stance he is taking and the importance of the story requires forensic examination to seek out the truth
I'm angry Cyclefree. I've never in my 49 years seen a regime that is as nepotistic, as sucky up to big corporate money, and as interested in furthering it's own agenda at the expense of supporting services that make a difference to ordinary people as this one.
Where were you from 1997 to 2010?
Didn't you know,that was the tory reserves in power ;-)
It is hard to take this latest piece of Miliband posturing seriously. Even if this information was in the public domain since 2010 (and I believe it was first in the public domain in 2007) Miliband has ignored it for four years (much as Labour ignored so many dubious practices during their 13 years of government) only to raise it at a time when it is most politically advantageous for him. That is hardly looking after the national interest. Looking after the national interest would have been pressing on this issue from 2011 onwards at the latest.
That it seems to have been done in concert with the BBC (so much for impartiality) and Guardian newspaper seems to suggest further that this was a staged politically motivated stunt.
Furthermore, there is a distinct lack of consistency in his approach. He does not for example berate Disney for deciding to make the last episode of Star Wars in London because of the beneficial tax arrangements. Its alright for Disney to avoid US taxes.
Its also alright for Greeks and French to flee to Britain to avoid the increasing levels of taxation in their home countries.
Not only that but I do not recall him berating Ireland or the Baltic States or Central or Eastern Europe for having tax regimes that severely undercut the UK and could just as easily encourage tax avoidance as those non EU locations he was so ready to berate.
Furthermore, he has yet to my knowledge to call for tax harmonisation across the EU or more widely which would be the logical extension to his position.
Lastly I am not aware that he has actually put forward proposals to actually shut down the loopholes which as I understand were around when he and Ed Balls were in the Treasury.
All in all one can only conclude that this is nothing more than a cynical piece of shallow sanctimonious hypocritical self serving partisan political posturing designed by a party and leader who puts their own self interest before that of the nation.
It's a left-liberal media conspiracy.
Well if that's the extent of your response clearly you are unable to disagree with me.
No, I just can't be arsed. Defending any measured anti Tory position on here is a very time-consuming undertaking and I need to go to bed within the next five hours.
On the flip-side, that'd mean the Tories would have to negotiate the rampant NIMBY'ism of existing (much older) homeowners who disproportionately vote Tory and live in areas where new housing is most needed. And, of course, want no new homes anywhere near them.
Tricky.
Well put. There are such areas welcoming to significant new housing which is needed, but the areas where you get the 'no-one local and young can afford to live here' and 'over my dead body will you build x amount here' vastly outnumber those areas.
What amuses me is that there's almost two golden rules on housing:
(1) The shortest time interval humanity can measure is the time between even a whiff of a suggestion that someone might be considering some new housing in the future locally getting into the public domain, and an "action group" being set-up to oppose it (2) That this "action group" says in its introduction, 'of course we support the need for new housing... just not here."
Unfortunately for the Tories these billionaire Tory donors who don't like paying tax are turning out to be the kiss of death for Cameron. They are as media savvy as a bunch of rodents and rather less attractive. Unfortunately this realization coincided with the Tory Black and White dinner where billionaire donors were seen supporting the party that would maintain their tax free status. The conflagration of this and all being in it together made normal people feel nauseous.
Personally I'd like there to be a £50,000 limit on what any one person or entity (company, union, whatever) can donate to a political party in any one year.
Funnily enough neither party have been prepared to agree. Labour are keen to stuff the Tories' millionaire donors but not at all keen to limit what the unions can contribute and the Tories just want to stuff the unions.
Both of them are unwilling to live within their means or to reach out to ordinary voters. Both are in hock to the rich and powerful. Neither of them have clean hands. And neither of them have any basis for moralising about the other.
On the flip-side, that'd mean the Tories would have to negotiate the rampant NIMBY'ism of existing (much older) homeowners who disproportionately vote Tory and live in areas where new housing is most needed. And, of course, want no new homes anywhere near them.
Tricky.
Well put. There are such areas welcoming to significant new housing which is needed, but the areas where you get the 'no-one local and young can afford to live here' and 'over my dead body will you build x amount here' vastly outnumber those areas.
What amuses me is that there's almost two golden rules on housing:
(1) The shortest time interval humanity can measure is the time between even a whiff of a suggestion that someone might be considering some new housing in the future locally getting into the public domain, and an "action group" being set-up to oppose it (2) That this "action group" says in its introduction, 'of course we support the need for new housing... just not here."
The third golden rule is that 'more consultation is needed' no matter how much consultation there was. Sometimes appears in the form 'the wrong type of consultation' was undertaken regardless of how upstanding it was.
It is hard to take this latest piece of Miliband posturing seriously. Even if this information was in the public domain since 2010 (and I believe it was first in the public domain in 2007) Miliband has ignored it for four years (much as Labour ignored so many dubious practices during their 13 years of government) only to raise it at a time when it is most politically advantageous for him. That is hardly looking after the national interest. Looking after the national interest would have been pressing on this issue from 2011 onwards at the latest.
That it seems to have been done in concert with the BBC (so much for impartiality) and Guardian newspaper seems to suggest further that this was a staged politically motivated stunt.
Furthermore, there is a distinct lack of consistency in his approach. He does not for example berate Disney for deciding to make the last episode of Star Wars in London because of the beneficial tax arrangements. Its alright for Disney to avoid US taxes.
Its also alright for Greeks and French to flee to Britain to avoid the increasing levels of taxation in their home countries.
Not only that but I do not recall him berating Ireland or the Baltic States or Central or Eastern Europe for having tax regimes that severely undercut the UK and could just as easily encourage tax avoidance as those non EU locations he was so ready to berate.
Furthermore, he has yet to my knowledge to call for tax harmonisation across the EU or more widely which would be the logical extension to his position.
Lastly I am not aware that he has actually put forward proposals to actually shut down the loopholes which as I understand were around when he and Ed Balls were in the Treasury.
All in all one can only conclude that this is nothing more than a cynical piece of shallow sanctimonious hypocritical self serving partisan political posturing designed by a party and leader who puts their own self interest before that of the nation.
It's a left-liberal media conspiracy.
Well if that's the extent of your response clearly you are unable to disagree with me.
No, I just can't be arsed. Defending any measured anti Tory position on here is a very time-consuming undertaking and I need to go to bed within the next five hours.
Oh you're talking about measured anti Tory party positions and there I was thinking you were a Labour Party supporter.
I am slightly surprised by Tory tactics. If they think attacking Miliband on the right of people to avoid tax on the grounds that "it is legal" is equal in political judgement in saying it would be good to privatise the NHS because it would increase "efficiency".
Also, getting a non dom tax avoider living in Monaco to head criticism of Labour's tax policy was indeed strange. Ed probably couldn't believe his luck. Quite rightly, he told him to f**k off !
Before you get OGH into trouble, worth pointing out that Pessina is not a non-dom tax avoider. He is an Italian who has never lived in the UK and has never had any liability to pay UK income tax. The only country with the right to complain that by living in Monaco and not (I assume) paying Italian tax is ...... Italy.
Milliband's insinuation that he was somehow avoiding UK tax was nasty, incoherent and not founded on any facts, much like Labour party policy these days.
If Labour do form the government, the Civil Service will have to spend a lot of time teaching them the facts of life, starting with how tax law actually works.
I don't recall mentioning anyone by name. Labour has every right to attack anyone who seeks to lecture us about our tax policy. Labour is not proposing Italy's or Monaco's tax policy.
Unfortunately for the Tories these billionaire Tory donors who don't like paying tax are turning out to be the kiss of death for Cameron. They are as media savvy as a bunch of rodents and rather less attractive. Unfortunately this realization coincided with the Tory Black and White dinner where billionaire donors were seen supporting the party that would maintain their tax free status. The conflagration of this and all being in it together made normal people feel nauseous.
Personally I'd like there to be a £50,000 limit on what any one person or entity (company, union, whatever) can donate to a political party in any one year.
Funnily enough neither party have been prepared to agree. Labour are keen to stuff the Tories' millionaire donors but not at all keen to limit what the unions can contribute and the Tories just want to stuff the unions.
Both of them are unwilling to live within their means or to reach out to ordinary voters. Both are in hock to the rich and powerful. Neither of them have clean hands. And neither of them have any basis for moralising about the other.
Donations don't worry me. Just limit spending, then the excessive donations are useless.
Why was everyone going on about non existent bets on Betfair tonight? Is it catching??
You're wrong but I get the impression watching your posts today that you're not someone who likes to be told that, so I'll exit stage right.
I am not wrong, no money traded at 20 or above on betfair on labour majority, despite everyone posting about it
No money has ever traded at those prices
So how am I wrong??
I get the impression you don't know what you're talking about
Are you saying there is a bug in it?
No
You can see how much money has traded at each price in betfair exchange and labour majority has never traded higher than 19.5
Well I don't know what your seeing, but I'm seeing trades all the way up to 32.0 [£8].
Is it a platform thing ? Ipad vs PC ?
I looked at all three and £3@19.5 is the highest, see the graph on my pic
But maybe something strange is going on. It updates in real time though
Ah, well isam and I are looking at different markets. I'm looking at the overall majority market, and seeing 32 as the highest matched. So I guess Rod/TGHOH may be looking at the same....
Both Lab Maj and Con Maj look value to me on the current BF market.
Who knows what may happen? You have to factor in the unfactorable in politics. It's a capital mistake to be too certain nothing much will change.
One thing is for sure, laying Labour at 20s is the route to the poorhouse.
I haven't looked in detail, but I have a suspicion that a Reverse Nabavi strategy of backing Con Maj and betting Labour in the constituency markets may now be fruitful. Further research needed.
Off topic, is anyone going to the "Predicting and Understanding the 2015 General Election" all-day conference hosted by the British Election Study at RIBA, in London, tomorrow?
If so, I'll be there with a friend.
Off to bed now, but vanilla me or post on here if you're around. And I'll try and find you to say hi during one of the breaks!
Both Lab Maj and Con Maj look value to me on the current BF market.
Who knows what may happen? You have to factor in the unfactorable in politics. It's a capital mistake to be too certain nothing much will change.
One thing is for sure, laying Labour at 20s is the route to the poorhouse.
I haven't looked in detail, but I have a suspicion that a Reverse Nabavi strategy of backing Con Maj and betting Labour in the constituency markets may now be fruitful. Further research needed.
*See antifrank. Basically what he's been advising (if that's yer gambit) for a while.
Btw Casino - have you noticed how a Lab/SNP deal is becoming increasingly talked about .... perhaps not as "foolhardy" a bet as you suggested .
What a "marriage made in hell" it will be though!
How we'll laugh at Little Ed being bullied every day by Alex...
I can see a confidence & supply deal, but not a coalition.
Even better.
Alex being called into Downing St. to be given this and that concession everytime Ed want's to pass some middling bit of legislation.
Then Alex comes out of Downing St grinning like a Chershire cat to tell the BBC what Ed has "Given Scotland" this time.
Will be such fun. As long as you have your investments and savings secure and you don't own a business or need regular employment, etc...
My premise is that the Labour Party simply won't let him, and will try and sabotage any such deal.
He's very likely to be behind in seats and votes in England, and wiped out in Scotland. In other words, a total election loser. And I can't see him having the authority to force a deal through.
Some rumours swirling about tomorrow's Ipsos Mori. Think it's interesting.
Care to share? Just between friends. Nobody's watching.
Tomorrow's Ipsos-Mori is a corker! That's all I can say (because that is all that I know)
A-ha. I understand. Looks a bit "Ave It", eh?
Is what the Ipsos-Mori chap tweeted. That it was corker and out tomorrow.
He's gone all Lord Ashcroft on us. The tease.
It will just be an outlier poll one way or another and he's trying to generate some free publicity. I wouldn't get too excited about it.
At one point it used to be a PB maxim (supported strongly by OGH) that the only polling "outlier's" were/are the one's you don't like.
An outlier is an outlier by definition if it lies outside normal polling range – whether you like its contents or otherwise.
But who is to say what a "normal" polling range is? That assumes that public opinion is fixed and will never move, which we know is nonsense.
If a poll has changes outside the MOE then you have to question it but that doesn't mean it's "wrong" or a "rogue" or an "outlier" etc...
Well as we have already had polls in the last 24 hours that are in line, it must be an outlier in some regard or another otherwise the daft sod wouldn't be ramping it!!
It is hard to take this latest piece of Miliband posturing seriously. Even if this information was in the public domain since 2010 (and I believe it was first in the public domain in 2007) Miliband has ignored it for four years (much as Labour ignored so many dubious practices during their 13 years of government) only to raise it at a time when it is most politically advantageous for him. That is hardly looking after the national interest. Looking after the national interest would have been pressing on this issue from 2011 onwards at the latest.
That it seems to have been done in concert with the BBC (so much for impartiality) and Guardian newspaper seems to suggest further that this was a staged politically motivated stunt.
Furthermore, there is a distinct lack of consistency in his approach. He does not for example berate Disney for deciding to make the last episode of Star Wars in London because of the beneficial tax arrangements. Its alright for Disney to avoid US taxes.
Its also alright for Greeks and French to flee to Britain to avoid the increasing levels of taxation in their home countries.
Not only that but I do not recall him berating Ireland or the Baltic States or Central or Eastern Europe for having tax regimes that severely undercut the UK and could just as easily encourage tax avoidance as those non EU locations he was so ready to berate.
Furthermore, he has yet to my knowledge to call for tax harmonisation across the EU or more widely which would be the logical extension to his position.
Lastly I am not aware that he has actually put forward proposals to actually shut down the loopholes which as I understand were around when he and Ed Balls were in the Treasury.
All in all one can only conclude that this is nothing more than a cynical piece of shallow sanctimonious hypocritical self serving partisan political posturing designed by a party and leader who puts their own self interest before that of the nation.
It's a left-liberal media conspiracy.
Well if that's the extent of your response clearly you are unable to disagree with me.
No, I just can't be arsed. Defending any measured anti Tory position on here is a very time-consuming undertaking and I need to go to bed within the next five hours.
Oh you're talking about measured anti Tory party positions and there I was thinking you were a Labour Party supporter.
Well put up or shut up time I guess...still wondering why Ed couldn't have repeated them to a pool interview this evening or even while in his jim jams via twitter.
What's the betting he mumbles something or other vague and not what he said in the HoC. But job done I guess, if you like you leaders smeary.
I'd be more worried about the £94 at 30.0, liability £2,726.
It isnt that liability because the amount is the stake and lay combined
This is utterly bizarre, I have logged into three different Betfair accounts on three different platforms (PC, phone and ipad) and all have 19.5 as the top price matched (£3)
I have logged into Geeks Toy API as well and the top price matched is 19.5 for £3
We are talking about Labour Majority right? On the next government market?
***EDIT*** Mystery solved. We are looking at different markets. I was looking under "next govt" everyone else was looking at "Overall majority"
@patrickwintour: Lib Dems putting out front page of their manifesto tonight, but unhappy members of policy committee say given no prior sight. Tussles ahead.
I'd be more worried about the £94 at 30.0, liability £2,726.
It isnt that liability because the amount is the stake and lay combined
This is utterly bizarre, I have logged into three different Betfair accounts on three different platforms (PC, phone and ipad) and all have 19.5 as the top price matched (£3)
I have logged into Geeks Toy API as well and the top price matched is 19.5 for £3
We are talking about Labour Majority right? On the next government market?
***EDIT*** Mystery solved. We are looking at different markets. I was looking under "next govt" everyone else was looking at "Overall majority"
Surely no-one would bother with backing Lab Maj on the next govt. market, when the prices are (as demonstrated) generally much better on the overall majority one...
Off topic, is anyone going to the "Predicting and Understanding the 2015 General Election" all-day conference hosted by the British Election Study at RIBA, in London, tomorrow?
If so, I'll be there with a friend.
Off to bed now, but vanilla me or post on here if you're around. And I'll try and find you to say hi during one of the breaks!
A genuine question for the legal eagles. Are there different levels of admissible evidence in a libel trial? As in, something another court might not permit being used?
@patrickwintour: Lib Dems putting out front page of their manifesto tonight, but unhappy members of policy committee say given no prior sight. Tussles ahead.
...and nobody cares...
No one will vote for them based on their manifesto, their remaining votes are just some die hard tactical voters in safe LD seats.
Open Europe @OpenEurope · 15m 15 minutes ago Eurogroup presser already over. Impression is there's no agreement whatsoever, not even on how to proceed with negotiations. #Greece
They took 6 hours so that they would't even agree on anything, even a statement.
Three years ago on the Colorado Republican Caucus I laid Mitt Romney at 1.01 for £16. Amazingly he lost to Santorum and I won more than £1,500 after commission. The other side of the bet lost that amount.
Open Europe @OpenEurope · 15m 15 minutes ago Eurogroup presser already over. Impression is there's no agreement whatsoever, not even on how to proceed with negotiations. #Greece
They took 6 hours so that they would't even agree on anything, even a statement.
Hmmm...
@BBCBreaking: Hope for deal on Greek debt with Eurozone by next Monday after "very good discussions" - Greece finance minister http://t.co/Qn96C4fDAB
I'd be more worried about the £94 at 30.0, liability £2,726.
It isnt that liability because the amount is the stake and lay combined
This is utterly bizarre, I have logged into three different Betfair accounts on three different platforms (PC, phone and ipad) and all have 19.5 as the top price matched (£3)
I have logged into Geeks Toy API as well and the top price matched is 19.5 for £3
We are talking about Labour Majority right? On the next government market?
***EDIT*** Mystery solved. We are looking at different markets. I was looking under "next govt" everyone else was looking at "Overall majority"
Surely no-one would bother with backing Lab Maj on the next govt. market, when the prices are (as demonstrated) generally much better on the overall majority one...
Well they aren't always going to be better are they?!!
You could be front of queue at 24 in "Next Govt" for Lab majority now
Someone is trying to back Con Maj at 7 on "Next Govt" when 7 is available on "Overall Majority"
You could prob make money ducking in and out of the two
However some progress is finally made in the EU: Bruno Waterfield @BrunoBrussels · 9m 9 minutes ago I ask @yanisvaroufakis if failure to produce traditional bullshit statement is progress. He replied, 'Well in a sense you are quite right'
Having the referendum in 2016 would give the policy a new lease of life and the immediacy may make it more appealing to business and casual voters..
It's a tricky one. Those who say that the referendum will lead to uncertainty and therefore damage to investment are correct, which is a strong argument for not having too long a lead time. In addition, a shorter time would help focus the minds of our EU friends and fits better with the German and French elections. On the other hand it gives even less time for renegotiation.
Off topic, is anyone going to the "Predicting and Understanding the 2015 General Election" all-day conference hosted by the British Election Study at RIBA, in London, tomorrow?
If so, I'll be there with a friend.
Off to bed now, but vanilla me or post on here if you're around. And I'll try and find you to say hi during one of the breaks!
I tried to get on in January but it was fully booked by then: I went on the waiting list but as there were over 120people on it at that point, no dice. May I ask you a personal favour? I want copies of the presentations and handouts, so can you take all the handouts that are provided and send me them and the links to the presentations? I am more than happy to pay you for your trouble. Reading them will count on my CPD.
If you ever wanted proof that the BBC is the broadcasting arm of The Guardian & the Labour Party, you just have to view their websites lead story now on Milibands pathetic "dodgy" claim. Utterly disgraceful coverage.
Very true. And the BBC assistant political editor (or equiv) - he of the Tories returning the country back to Dickensian times - was smiling like a Cheshire cat before PMQs today, just as the Beeb announced "new" information. The Beeb enjoys putting the boot into the Tories and they work closely with The Guardian to do so. Remember the comment some years ago when a Beeb news editor asked what stories to run - he was told to take it from The Guardian. Nothing has changed. Today they are running a smear campaign. They ignore that this stuff occurred on Labour's watch and nothing was done about it.
Comments
Long-term home ownership levels in the UK are declining. The young are finding it harder and harder to get onto the property ladder, because there aren't enough homes and it's bceome too expensive.
That's actually a long-term problem for the Tories, because their broader electoral success feeds off financial independence from the State, and property ownership. If we end up with more and more renters as time goes on, the better it gets for Labour.
On the flip-side, that'd mean the Tories would have to negotiate the rampant NIMBY'ism of existing (much older) homeowners who disproportionately vote Tory and live in areas where new housing is most needed. And, of course, want no new homes anywhere near them.
Tricky.
That it seems to have been done in concert with the BBC (so much for impartiality) and Guardian newspaper seems to suggest further that this was a staged politically motivated stunt.
Furthermore, there is a distinct lack of consistency in his approach. He does not for example berate Disney for deciding to make the last episode of Star Wars in London because of the beneficial tax arrangements. Its alright for Disney to avoid US taxes.
Its also alright for Greeks and French to flee to Britain to avoid the increasing levels of taxation in their home countries.
Not only that but I do not recall him berating Ireland or the Baltic States or Central or Eastern Europe for having tax regimes that severely undercut the UK and could just as easily encourage tax avoidance as those non EU locations he was so ready to berate.
Furthermore, he has yet to my knowledge to call for tax harmonisation across the EU or more widely which would be the logical extension to his position.
Lastly I am not aware that he has actually put forward proposals to actually shut down the loopholes which as I understand were around when he and Ed Balls were in the Treasury.
All in all one can only conclude that this is nothing more than a cynical piece of shallow sanctimonious hypocritical self serving partisan political posturing designed by a party and leader who puts their own self interest before that of the nation.
In terms of his contact with the authorities, it was if reports are to be believed, via anonymous emails, that basically said "high profile tax clients - do you want it". It wouldn't surprise me if the tax people thought it was spam / phishing type email.
The answer is irrelevant, There was a vote in the house tonight and a majority of MP's decided that "No one knew nothing guv"
(I may have paraphrased the actual motion a little)
You can see how much money has traded at each price in betfair exchange and labour majority has never traded higher than 19.5
'@Nigel_Farage sets out UKIP's stall in The Telegraph. UKIP will be the positive party with firm ideas for the future http://tgr.ph/1IW7VHG
"It's a left-liberal media conspiracy"
A world wide one at that?
(of course those crafty left wingers have probably "nobbled" the foreign news as well)
How we'll laugh at Little Ed being bullied every day by Alex...
The reports I have read, by "Informing" the tax authorities, isn't quite what you or I would mean when we said we have informed the police of a crime.
Milliband's insinuation that he was somehow avoiding UK tax was nasty, incoherent and not founded on any facts, much like Labour party policy these days.
If Labour do form the government, the Civil Service will have to spend a lot of time teaching them the facts of life, starting with how tax law actually works.
How much credence does one normally give a wanted felon?
Switzerland would like to have a quiet moment with him to offer a small room to stay in...
Forever.
(The thinking of some on the left)
That would be over in a few months though, while Ed and Alex would be stuck with each other for half a decade.
You've got to admit it would be pretty funny.
My profile pic is the graph I'm getting... Never traded over 19.5
(1) The shortest time interval humanity can measure is the time between even a whiff of a suggestion that someone might be considering some new housing in the future locally getting into the public domain, and an "action group" being set-up to oppose it
(2) That this "action group" says in its introduction, 'of course we support the need for new housing... just not here."
Funnily enough neither party have been prepared to agree. Labour are keen to stuff the Tories' millionaire donors but not at all keen to limit what the unions can contribute and the Tories just want to stuff the unions.
Both of them are unwilling to live within their means or to reach out to ordinary voters. Both are in hock to the rich and powerful. Neither of them have clean hands. And neither of them have any basis for moralising about the other.
But maybe something strange is going on. It updates in real time though
Both Lab Maj and Con Maj look value to me on the current BF market.
Who knows what may happen? You have to factor in the unfactorable in politics. It's a capital mistake to be too certain nothing much will change.
If a poll has changes outside the MOE then you have to question it but that doesn't mean it's "wrong" or a "rogue" or an "outlier" etc...
The S.O.B shut up pretty sharpish. Didn't he ?
£8 at 32 [Edit: Corrected]
£94 at 30
£47 at 29
£40 at 28
.. etc
Alex being called into Downing St. to be given this and that concession everytime Ed want's to pass some middling bit of legislation.
Then Alex comes out of Downing St grinning like a Chershire cat to tell the BBC what Ed has "Given Scotland" this time.
Will be such fun. As long as you have your investments and savings secure and you don't own a business or need regular employment, etc...
Yes, yes.. it'll never happen. But 20/1 and over? That's value, given the reasons you cite.
Someone did lay Labour at 32s, £8 worth.
Idiotic.
You mean
£8 at 32
If so, I'll be there with a friend.
Off to bed now, but vanilla me or post on here if you're around. And I'll try and find you to say hi during one of the breaks!
He's very likely to be behind in seats and votes in England, and wiped out in Scotland. In other words, a total election loser. And I can't see him having the authority to force a deal through.
Is that odd? An attack only used by one party member.
Cunning. I hadn't thought of that...surely they couldn't be that Machiavellian...
Do we know who writes Ed's PMQ questions?
What's the betting he mumbles something or other vague and not what he said in the HoC. But job done I guess, if you like you leaders smeary.
This is utterly bizarre, I have logged into three different Betfair accounts on three different platforms (PC, phone and ipad) and all have 19.5 as the top price matched (£3)
I have logged into Geeks Toy API as well and the top price matched is 19.5 for £3
We are talking about Labour Majority right? On the next government market?
***EDIT*** Mystery solved. We are looking at different markets. I was looking under "next govt" everyone else was looking at "Overall majority"
If Ed says it first, it will get better coverage than if someone has already let it slip
@patrickwintour: Lib Dems putting out front page of their manifesto tonight, but unhappy members of policy committee say given no prior sight. Tussles ahead.
...and nobody cares...
Are there different levels of admissible evidence in a libel trial? As in, something another court might not permit being used?
Farage said he wanted an early referendum as well, so it'd be calling his bluff.
Open Europe @OpenEurope · 15m 15 minutes ago
Eurogroup presser already over. Impression is there's no agreement whatsoever, not even on how to proceed with negotiations. #Greece
They took 6 hours so that they would't even agree on anything, even a statement.
One of the dangers of apparent certainty bettiing
@BBCBreaking: Hope for deal on Greek debt with Eurozone by next Monday after "very good discussions" - Greece finance minister http://t.co/Qn96C4fDAB
You could be front of queue at 24 in "Next Govt" for Lab majority now
Someone is trying to back Con Maj at 7 on "Next Govt" when 7 is available on "Overall Majority"
You could prob make money ducking in and out of the two
Bruno Waterfield @BrunoBrussels · 9m 9 minutes ago
I ask @yanisvaroufakis if failure to produce traditional bullshit statement is progress. He replied, 'Well in a sense you are quite right'
It's a pre-election pledge to do something AFTER the election.