As ever, an extremely lucid piece by Martin Wolf in today's FT, outlining the difficult choices over tax and spend that the political parties are keeping quiet about. It is impossible, reading this, to see how the Tories will be able to keep to their announced spending plans. A 30+ % cut in defence?
I do not see the article calling for a 30% cut in defence which would be 12 billion out of 40. In fact this article http://www.economicsuk.com/blog/002078.html paints a much better picture and implies Osborne is overstating the thickness of his hair shirt. ''How much of the deficit has been eliminated? The IFS, noting Osborne’s aim of achieving a budget surplus of 1% of GDP by 2020, calculated that 55% of the tax has been completed, with 45% still to go. It is worth noting, however, that on the original aim of merely eliminating the current budget deficit (in other words continuing to borrow to invest), the chancellor is rather closer to finishing the job.''
Such facts - ie the next 5 years being easier than the last 5 - do not imply scaremongering massive defence cuts.
Yes, of course, it's a step forward but wasn't the deficit supposed to have been halved by now ? I imagine Labour will be cherry-picking some of the gems from that June 2010 Emergency Budget in the next couple of months.
An awful lot of desperate Tory number-crunching trying to convince a dubious electorate that the economic good times are back and will only stay if they vote blue.
The jobs data looks and sounds marvellous but the productivity data is awful - companies are finding it easier to recruit people rather than invest in technological improvement but, and we can argue this ad infinitum, most British economic booms have been undermined by labour shortages which have fuelled inflation.
Indeed, I would argue we are actually de-industrialising and using more labour because it's cheap and plentiful.
Wrong kind of jobs, wrong kind of price falls and now wrong kind of tax receipts. Sigh..
Never said any of that, Flashy, There's plenty of statistical data behind the headlines that paints a less rosy picture of the economy than some on here (and in the Tory press) would have us believe.
The fact that pay rises have finally crawled above inflation is good news but it's more due to the latter falling as a result of the short-term (perhaps) impact of collapsing oil prices. The other aspect is that a few months of progress (welcome though that is) doesn't offset years of declining or stagnating living standards for large numbers of people.
It's good to see tax receipt numbers starting to improve as well and of course it's good to see people in jobs and far better than seeing them unemployed but the truth is if companies are employing people rather than investing in technology to improve production that isn't going to be sustainable long term.
Incidentally, there was talk yesterday of how much coverage PwC and Labour would get. Doesn't seem to be anything on the front page, just a brief mention halfway down a minor story under the Politics heading: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-31535635
Yes, of course, it's a step forward but wasn't the deficit supposed to have been halved by now ? I imagine Labour will be cherry-picking some of the gems from that June 2010 Emergency Budget in the next couple of months.
An awful lot of desperate Tory number-crunching trying to convince a dubious electorate that the economic good times are back and will only stay if they vote blue.
The jobs data looks and sounds marvellous but the productivity data is awful - companies are finding it easier to recruit people rather than invest in technological improvement but, and we can argue this ad infinitum, most British economic booms have been undermined by labour shortages which have fuelled inflation.
Indeed, I would argue we are actually de-industrialising and using more labour because it's cheap and plentiful.
Wrong kind of jobs, wrong kind of price falls and now wrong kind of tax receipts. Sigh..
Anyone would think that the LibDems were in opposition.
@another_richard But who wants a "nerdy weed" to run the country? No one, if they are honest.
This is why Labour will lose in May. It is cruel I know, but people make their biggest decisions based on instinct, not reason - and of course it is likely to remain below the surface in opinion polls.
Not many will admit to not voting Labour to opinion polls because their leader seems a "nerdy weed"
Pollsters don't usually require respondents to give a justification, and if they do it's after they ask the main voting intention question.
A lot of people here seem to think the way people rate the leaders will only kick in at the last minute, but I don't think we've really seen any evidence for that theory.
Quite the opposite given that in 2010 the much heralded "Brown epiphany" failed to materialise.
If England and Wales still want's to take the best talent from Scotland and Ireland it should just give in and call itself Britain and Ireland instead of England (which must surely really annoy the Welsh).
Morgan isn't British is he? Oh sorry you said 'and Ireland'
Look I agree, I don't like people playing for a country for a career choice, hence my Rest of World suggestion, which leaves the door open to play the their real country should they become a rest side, without compromise
Eligibility to play for England and Wales is British or Irish citizens (with 4 years residency if not born in England or Wales). Another of those very peculiar ways England/Britain treats Irish Nationality as "not foreign".
Mind you with a name like Eoin Morgan I expect he would be eligible as British with a grandparent or two.
The one point I agree with Mike on is the current strength of Labour's position and their under-estimate of it. What I would say is that it remains soft and is particularly vulnerable on the question of Miliband as PM (becoming more relevant given Putin's adventures), and apparent reliance on negative tactical anti-Tory votes. I suspect that Labour feel uncomfortable echoes of 1992 (and that Tories feel the same echoes). Are they right to? Perhaps so, but I certainly wouldn't bank on it. Miliband could easily be the next PM. If he does, he may well be the last Labour one ever though.
A difference between now and 1992 is that Kinnock with his Welsh windbaggery and horde of Scottish socialists seemed a much bigger threat to suburban middle England than EdM does now.
And it was this threat which was behind the last minute fear factor vote for the suburban everyman John Major.
Now there might be many negative things to say about EdM but he comes across as a nerdy weed rather than a threat.
A nerdy weed is a threat when he goes into the conference chamber with Vladimir Putin and comes out with his underpants on his head.
@another_richard But who wants a "nerdy weed" to run the country? No one, if they are honest.
This is why Labour will lose in May. It is cruel I know, but people make their biggest decisions based on instinct, not reason - and of course it is likely to remain below the surface in opinion polls.
Not many will admit to not voting Labour to opinion polls because their leader seems a "nerdy weed"
Pollsters don't usually require respondents to give a justification, and if they do it's after they ask the main voting intention question.
A lot of people here seem to think the way people rate the leaders will only kick in at the last minute, but I don't think we've really seen any evidence for that theory.
Quite the opposite given that in 2010 the much heralded "Brown epiphany" failed to materialise.
Well, right. I guess the most supportive data point is Major vs Kinnock which saw quite a big advantage for the more popular leader's party compared to the polling, but that's quite hard to disentangle from the polling being duff in the first place.
If England and Wales still want's to take the best talent from Scotland and Ireland it should just give in and call itself Britain and Ireland instead of England (which must surely really annoy the Welsh).
Morgan isn't British is he? Oh sorry you said 'and Ireland'
Look I agree, I don't like people playing for a country for a career choice, hence my Rest of World suggestion, which leaves the door open to play the their real country should they become a rest side, without compromise
Eligibility to play for England and Wales is British or Irish citizens (with 4 years residency if not born in England or Wales). Another of those very peculiar ways England/Britain treats Irish Nationality as "not foreign".
Mind you with a name like Eoin Morgan I expect he would be eligible as British with a grandparent or two.
Joke really
We got done 5-0 in oz w a South African star player and are embarrassing ourselves at the World Cup with an Irish captain. So we have sold our integrity and are still rubbish... Great
I really don't like the look of Professor Fisher's latest forecast. I simply don't see how we could get a sustainable, credible government out of that.
I agree with those who say the Coalition has been a success and that it is unfair that the Lib Dems do not get more credit for it. Being the minority party in a Coalition is not easy. You are either subsumed or you snipe from the sidelines.
In fairness to the Lib Dems the sniping has been kept to a minimum, Uncle Vince apart. What they need to do now is stand proud on the achievements of the Coalition but have a number of distinctive views that they would want to contribute to the next government, however this is made up. This really should not be beyond the wit of man. They need a good, positive message whilst being proud of their achievements.
Really excellent borrowing figures today. Those forecasting that borrowing would clearly increase this year may have humble pie to eat yet again. Osborne (and Danny) has a better grip on public spending and outurns than I can remember in my life time. He must be quite brilliant at finding ways to fix them.
Yougov in November saw a two point Labour lead become a three point Tory one when the question was Cameron's Conservatives or Miliband's Labour. Incumbent PM's personal vote.
Well, I did tell you that with this level of growth, tax receipts would follow.
All going extremely well, just now needs the voters not to deliberately wreck it in May, and we'll be in excellent shape.
As before, though, I'd advise arranging your affairs to protect against voters deliberately wrecking the recovery.
I understand that the Bank of England is expecting growth in 2015 at 2.9%, which is pretty healthy, with reasonable wage growth and continuing employment growth against a background of deflation this year, but not next.
With the exception of the risk of Grexit, things are about as benign as they could be on that view, though I understand that it does see the growth as being consumer-led.
With the LDs on 6 percent, swing-back is almost inevitable.
You think that they are entitled to a minimum vote share?
I certainly do not think they are entitled to a minimum share based on the placards shown above. They are claiming credit for increasing tax allowances but not the freezing and disappearance of allowances for the better paid. IIRC It is the LDs who wanted 20% of the deficit to be eliminated by tax rises during the last election. They certainly want that now.
For the future as this guardian article points out the LDs want to increase taxes (thats INCREASE) more than the conservatives ''However, the Liberal Democrat leader made it clear the party would balance the books in a different way to the Tories through a combination of tax rises and lower spending, rather than focusing on £12bn of extra welfare cuts like Osborne.'' http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/feb/10/clegg-backs-osborne-timetable-eliminate-uk-structural-deficit
So we have a little bit of a self serving article complete with emotive picture which is at total odds with the facts.
Yougov in November saw a two point Labour lead become a three point Tory one when the question was Cameron's Conservatives or Miliband's Labour. Incumbent PM's personal vote.
Swerving the debates could be a big strategic error for Dave. He needs to make the campaign as presidential as possible.
That said, I'm expecting to see ALOT of Ed Miliband about on posters...
I really don't like the look of Professor Fisher's latest forecast. I simply don't see how we could get a sustainable, credible government out of that.
Oh I don't know.
EICIPM with wee Jimmy Krankie lookalike as SoS for Defence and Galloway minister for the middle east.
The new layout of the Guardian website is so confused that it's hard to be sure, but as far as I can see they have been struck dumb by the borrowing figures.
I really don't like the look of Professor Fisher's latest forecast. I simply don't see how we could get a sustainable, credible government out of that.
I agree with those who say the Coalition has been a success and that it is unfair that the Lib Dems do not get more credit for it. Being the minority party in a Coalition is not easy. You are either subsumed or you snipe from the sidelines.
In fairness to the Lib Dems the sniping has been kept to a minimum, Uncle Vince apart. What they need to do now is stand proud on the achievements of the Coalition but have a number of distinctive views that they would want to contribute to the next government, however this is made up. This really should not be beyond the wit of man. They need a good, positive message whilst being proud of their achievements.
Really excellent borrowing figures today. Those forecasting that borrowing would clearly increase this year may have humble pie to eat yet again. Osborne (and Danny) has a better grip on public spending and outurns than I can remember in my life time. He must be quite brilliant at finding ways to fix them.
A Grand Coalition would be sustainable and credible, although it might take a second election delivering the same result to get the parties to suck it up and do it.
Mr. Jonathan, are you really asserting that the Lib Dem mishandling of the tuition fees vote didn't worsen their situation?
It did. In the same way that when in free-fall without a parachute, it is not helpful to take off your hat.
The damage had already been done.
By Vince Cable of all people (remember him?). But he has done his best since then to secure his own re-election (despite being useless as a minister). Indeed the continued presence of Cable at the cabinet table is a strong argument against the supposed benefits of coalition.
tom_watson @tom_watson 4s4 seconds ago The austerity chancellor "backs moves" for a new concert hall in cash strapped central London
We are of course all in it together after all
Apparently the acoustics in all of London's concert halls are pretty rubbish, because they were built before the science of acoustics came to maturity and weren't conveniently demolished during the War, as concert halls from similar eras were on the Continent.
The Royal Festival Hall is post WW2 built in 1951. Granted thats before acoustics became a science.
If you look at modern venues (Sage, o2) they are purpose built halls with a separate building surrounding them...
I really don't like the look of Professor Fisher's latest forecast. I simply don't see how we could get a sustainable, credible government out of that.
I agree with those who say the Coalition has been a success and that it is unfair that the Lib Dems do not get more credit for it. Being the minority party in a Coalition is not easy. You are either subsumed or you snipe from the sidelines.
In fairness to the Lib Dems the sniping has been kept to a minimum, Uncle Vince apart. What they need to do now is stand proud on the achievements of the Coalition but have a number of distinctive views that they would want to contribute to the next government, however this is made up. This really should not be beyond the wit of man. They need a good, positive message whilst being proud of their achievements.
Really excellent borrowing figures today. Those forecasting that borrowing would clearly increase this year may have humble pie to eat yet again. Osborne (and Danny) has a better grip on public spending and outurns than I can remember in my life time. He must be quite brilliant at finding ways to fix them.
A Grand Coalition would be sustainable and credible, although it might take a second election delivering the same result to get the parties to suck it up and do it.
It'd do wonders for the Greens poll ratings, UKIP too.
BREAKING Labour still not agreed how to pay for cut in tuition fees from £9K to £6K/year even though policy to be announced in week's time.
Toenails tweet.
This is where the blank sheet of paper comes home to roost. Labour have had some success by promising various interest groups sweeties come the election without any serious attempt to put together a budget or a workable plan.
We have had the nonsense of one off banker's bonus taxes paying for a plethora of policies, most of which would still need funding in year 2. We have a determination to reverse certain benefit cuts (eg bedroom tax) whilst simultaneously acknowledging that the benefits bill needs to be cut. We now have a promise to cut University fees without a willingness to address the financial consequences of their own programs which encouraged such a high attendance rate.
I really can't recall a party aspiring to government which has such a poor idea of what it can and can't actually do. It increasingly seems that Balls and Miliband can barely bring themselves to speak to each other, let alone agree anything. I am increasingly beginning to wonder if that relationship can survive an election campaign.
Some people this week have suggested that Ed should be embarrassed by all the help they have been getting in kind from those tax avoiders extraordinaire PWC. Surely there must come a point when the embarrassment is on them, having their name associated with such incoherent nonsense.
BREAKING Labour still not agreed how to pay for cut in tuition fees from £9K to £6K/year even though policy to be announced in week's time.
Toenails tweet.
Oh I think we can guess. An anagram of bkernas bnous atx.
That tax has been pledged to pay for so many things now, that the still unborn great great great great grandchildren of todays bankers will be paying it.
Why not simply tax politicians who blatantly milk the expenses system? The descendants of Flipper Balls's can cough up for a few millennia.
#BBCQT Panel just announced for Glasgow: David Starkey, Jacob Rees Mogg, David Coburn MEP, Nick Robinson, Ian Smart & Mhairi Black.
Six panelists ?
Thast's a wind up, it will be Patrick Harvie or Alison Johnstone, John Swinney, Ruth Davidson, Jim Murphy and someone along the lines of Lesley Riddoch or Alan Massie. Given it's the BBC so they can't have Yes outweigh No, then probably Massie as the non-politician meaning Alison Johnstone for gender balance.
Another plank slips from beneath Labour's campaign...
Yup. 3.2% increase in tax take YoY after stripping out the APF. Labour's idea of a taxless recovery did not come about. Coupled with low inflation and decent pay rises their economic argument lies in tatters.
Very good, obviously, but the ONS does caution that some payments to the exchequer are January/February and if high in one might be low in another.
Yougov in November saw a two point Labour lead become a three point Tory one when the question was Cameron's Conservatives or Miliband's Labour. Incumbent PM's personal vote.
I guess Tory candidates will need to list their affiliation on the ballot paper as:
Conservative Party (the one run by David Cameron not Ed Miliband)"
BREAKING Labour still not agreed how to pay for cut in tuition fees from £9K to £6K/year even though policy to be announced in week's time.
Toenails tweet.
Oh I think we can guess. An anagram of bkernas bnous atx.
That tax has been pledged to pay for so many things now, that the still unborn great great great great grandchildren of todays bankers will be paying it.
Why not simply tax politicians who blatantly milk the expenses system? The descendants of Flipper Balls's can cough up for a few millennia.
Politically, the 6000 figure will need defending. If they'd said, we have 2bn from this measure, so that's all we can do, that would be something. But now it really will be "we hate tuition fees, but want to double them compared to our previous term"...
The debt figures are pretty good - but only in the broader context of expectations and plans. In absolute terms we're still borrowing hugely and running a scary and unsustainable deficit. A quick look at Greece or Venezuela or Argentina or any number of other socialist countries tells us exactly where unsustainable borrowing ends up.
I may not like Ozzy's plan to address this 100% - but he does clearly have a plan and even (bless him) talks about running an actual surplus at some point. If the Tories win in May I believe we will avoid disaster.
I am, however, worried that Labour are leading in the polls and clearly have no plan at all to address this most fundamental of our problems. It looks like a real risk of the late teens becoming a rerun of the 1970s.
BREAKING Labour still not agreed how to pay for cut in tuition fees from £9K to £6K/year even though policy to be announced in week's time.
Toenails tweet.
Oh I think we can guess. An anagram of bkernas bnous atx.
That tax has been pledged to pay for so many things now, that the still unborn great great great great grandchildren of todays bankers will be paying it.
Why not simply tax politicians who blatantly milk the expenses system? The descendants of Flipper Balls's can cough up for a few millennia.
The size of the bonus pool in the one year the tax operates (HAHAHAHA! yeah, right) will be miniscule compared to the previous and following years. Not much the gov. can do about that, and the banks will just be living up to the expectations Labour has monotonously set for the last 5 years.
One of the very interesting milestones between now and the election is the Budget. It will be from what i am hearing a Conservative budget which will allow clear water between the LDs and the Tories. This was told to me recently by David Davies who is of the opinion that there wont even be a proper vote on this years budget just on the changes in taxation arrangements needed under the finance act. How much input the LDs will have had into this years budget will become clear the closer we get to it because it is probable they will try and leak everything but there maybe a couple of items that GO will not have told Danny Alexander about. As i said the budget will then form the basis of the Tories financial part of their manifesto.
One of the very interesting milestones between now and the election is the Budget. It will be from what i am hearing a Conservative budget which will allow clear water between the LDs and the Tories. This was told to me recently by David Davies who is of the opinion that there wont even be a proper vote on this years budget just on the changes in taxation arrangements needed under the finance act. How much input the LDs will have had into this years budget will become clear the closer we get to it because it is probable they will try and leak everything but there maybe a couple of items that GO will not have told Danny Alexander about. As i said the budget will then form the basis of the Tories financial part of their manifesto.
Last year the government managed to keep the major pensions reforms in the budget a complete surprise. Belatedly, the coalition government seems to have learned the discipline of purdah for the budget. I expect that to last this year as well since it is in both the Conservatives' and the Lib Dems' interests that the budget should be a success.
In other words, if we had agreed with everything the Conservatives wanted since 2010 (which doesn't sound like any definition of the word "coalition" I've ever read) and slavishly followed it, we might look forward to a couple of point uptick in the campaign.
The problem is, if the voters see the coalition broadly as having done "good stuff" then they won't credit the LDs with any of it because they looked unhappy about being in coalition, and the voters had to listen to the constant whineathon from Uncle Vince about how "he wouldn't have don't it that way". Conversely if the voters broadly see the coalition as having sucked, the LDs can't distance themselves enough from it to claim credit, because their votes sustained it. They inhabit an electoral no-man's land, too close to appear distinctive, too distant to claim much credit.
The convergence of LD and Conservatives post 2005 made the Coalition possible (and it's a pity we don't hear so much of Cameron's inner "liberal conservative" these days) but as the Conservatives have drifted away from the initial tenets of the Coalition, a space has opened for the Party to craft a new direction which is still very much a work in progress but can be seen evolving.
I think there could be electoral space for a small government Liberal party, in the old Liberal tradition, free speech, less political interference, reduced powers of the state, greater transparency etc. Plenty of moderate conservatives, current orange book LDs and Blue Labour types would look favourable on a socially liberal, economically liberal party, with less fatcattery and public school ties. My impression is that the LDs under Farron would try and resurrect the SDP again, which wouldn't be a step forward, especially if Labour lose the GE and ditch Miliband and select someone who isn't a vote repellent idiot, because they would be fishing in the same pool.
"A nerdy weed is a threat when he goes into the conference chamber with Vladimir Putin and comes out with his underpants on his head."
To be fair to Ed, I'm sure he'd be very good at making the coffee. But that is always going to be a problem for an aspiring PM - does he look statesmanlike, has he gravitas? We won't know until it's too late.
Ed can come across as a sympathetic neighbour at best, but can he negotiate? "If you rake your foot off my neck, Mr Putin, I'll agree to stop crying."
One of the very interesting milestones between now and the election is the Budget. It will be from what i am hearing a Conservative budget which will allow clear water between the LDs and the Tories. This was told to me recently by David Davies who is of the opinion that there wont even be a proper vote on this years budget just on the changes in taxation arrangements needed under the finance act. How much input the LDs will have had into this years budget will become clear the closer we get to it because it is probable they will try and leak everything but there maybe a couple of items that GO will not have told Danny Alexander about. As i said the budget will then form the basis of the Tories financial part of their manifesto.
If I thought stuff was going to be leaked I would lay some false trails to make people look stupid.
Positive news on the economy this morning though as always the devil is in the detail and as someone has already opined, January is often a very good month for tax receipts which might make these figures look better than they are.
Nothing wrong with caution - it's a good result for the Coalition and shows that the combination of keeping spending under control and maximising tax receipts is the way to fully restore public finances. The last thing we need is not for the voters to "deliberately wreck the recovery" as some numpty put it earlier but for the Conservatives to deliberately wreck it by showering tax cuts on the wealthiest.
There's no rationale in today's data for tax cuts - there is support for a continuation of the policy of reducing the tax burden on the lowest paid, making sure the correct amounts of tax are received and ensuring spending is kept under control though always with one eye to capital spending as medium to long-term investment on infrastructure.
While there's some of aspects of Conservative economic policy with which I don't agree, the Tories are light years ahead of Labour in this area. There has been no meaningful critique of the Alexander/Osborne policy from the Labour side though the critique from the monetarist end of the spectrum is a lot harder to ignore and raises some key questions about the role of QE and whether spending cuts should have been much greater much earlier.
Mr. Owls, have some difficulty taking the IFS entirely seriously ever since they attacked an early Coalition set of welfare proposals for not being progressive [arguably the most tedious, vacuous, meaningless nonsense currently to infect the political lexicon]. The reason it wasn't 'progressive' is because less money was due to be spent on welfare... because more people were predicted to be in work and would therefore receive less in benefits from the taxpayer. Horrid indeed.
"A nerdy weed is a threat when he goes into the conference chamber with Vladimir Putin and comes out with his underpants on his head."
To be fair to Ed, I'm sure he'd be very good at making the coffee. But that is always going to be a problem for an aspiring PM - does he look statesmanlike, has he gravitas? We won't know until it's too late.
Ed can come across as a sympathetic neighbour at best, but can he negotiate? "If you rake your foot off my neck, Mr Putin, I'll agree to stop crying."
But I had my doubts about Cameron, and still do.
Knifing your own brother shows a certain amount of 'steel'.
One of the very interesting milestones between now and the election is the Budget. It will be from what i am hearing a Conservative budget which will allow clear water between the LDs and the Tories. This was told to me recently by David Davies who is of the opinion that there wont even be a proper vote on this years budget just on the changes in taxation arrangements needed under the finance act. How much input the LDs will have had into this years budget will become clear the closer we get to it because it is probable they will try and leak everything but there maybe a couple of items that GO will not have told Danny Alexander about. As i said the budget will then form the basis of the Tories financial part of their manifesto.
Push IHT threshold up to a million would be good
That would be a good political move, and then in effect challenge Labour to bring it back down again if they win.. GB would understand perfectly
One of the very interesting milestones between now and the election is the Budget. It will be from what i am hearing a Conservative budget which will allow clear water between the LDs and the Tories. This was told to me recently by David Davies who is of the opinion that there wont even be a proper vote on this years budget just on the changes in taxation arrangements needed under the finance act. How much input the LDs will have had into this years budget will become clear the closer we get to it because it is probable they will try and leak everything but there maybe a couple of items that GO will not have told Danny Alexander about. As i said the budget will then form the basis of the Tories financial part of their manifesto.
Push IHT threshold up to a million would be good
Insurance Premium Tax is a likely candidate for an increase.
tom_watson @tom_watson 4s4 seconds ago The austerity chancellor "backs moves" for a new concert hall in cash strapped central London
We are of course all in it together after all
Apparently the acoustics in all of London's concert halls are pretty rubbish, because they were built before the science of acoustics came to maturity and weren't conveniently demolished during the War, as concert halls from similar eras were on the Continent.
The Royal Festival Hall is post WW2 built in 1951. Granted thats before acoustics became a science.
If you look at modern venues (Sage, o2) they are purpose built halls with a separate building surrounding them...
Philistine Labour. Oh ... 'Former Foreign Secretary David Miliband, speaking from Erbil, Iraq, said: “It is great to hear that London is determined to get better and better. Music and architecture should make for a powerful mix in pushing the city forward.” '
"A nerdy weed is a threat when he goes into the conference chamber with Vladimir Putin and comes out with his underpants on his head."
To be fair to Ed, I'm sure he'd be very good at making the coffee. But that is always going to be a problem for an aspiring PM - does he look statesmanlike, has he gravitas? We won't know until it's too late.
Ed can come across as a sympathetic neighbour at best, but can he negotiate? "If you rake your foot off my neck, Mr Putin, I'll agree to stop crying."
But I had my doubts about Cameron, and still do.
Knifing your own brother shows a certain amount of 'steel'.
Standing up to the neoconservatives too. I agree with Oborne on Ed, there is a lot to admire about and that is probably why the vitriol.
Like Lord Ashcroft, I take it with a hefty pinch of salt.
I've backed the SNP in Stirling... but have alot more on them in the west of Scotland.
I wouldn't rip up your betting slip on Stirling just yet on the strength of this article. The suggestion by one unnamed MP that Labour were down 6% in traditional Labour areas but up 15% in posher areas sounds fanciful to me given the national polling. It would be an unusual seat indeed that bucked the national trends to that extent.
Like Lord Ashcroft, I take it with a hefty pinch of salt.
I've backed the SNP in Stirling... but have alot more on them in the west of Scotland.
I wouldn't rip up your betting slip on Stirling just yet on the strength of this article. The suggestion by one unnamed MP that Labour were down 6% in traditional Labour areas but up 15% in posher areas sounds fanciful to me given the national polling. It would be an unusual seat indeed that bucked the national trends to that extent.
So we're hearing about good "private polling" for Labour, Lib Dems, Conservatives, UKIP. But not from the SNP
Labour are targeting the young vote because they know the more mature voter is turning their back.
It's increasingly coming through in polling where the Tory advantage at 65+, moved down to 55+ some months back and is increasingly showing up at 45+.
That is the most important change in any voting metric we have seen in years. Labour always did surprisingly well in the 40-55 range. Maybe the hatred for Fatcha is mellowing the more that pensions and property values figure in their values?
On the economic front, it all feels a bit 1997. The conservatives ceding power just as the exchequer starts to coin it.
There is a big difference in that the appetite for change doesnt feel the same as 1997.. Labour havent got Blair2 standing..nor does the Govt feel tired and clapped out.
Why have Populus suddenly decided UKIP will do better than they did before in the last month ?
When working out a bet do you look at the 100% Betfair market or the bookies over round?
Surely you look at the raw numbers to make a decision, and fair enough if a pollster/bookie agrees with you you're likely to favour them, but obviously Ukip haven't improved, they are just doing better than anyone thought before or worse than they are shown now!
Is it time for Ed to agree with Nick? Whatever one thinks of the Lib Dems I cannot understand why Labour don't point out that the Lib Dems fiscal plans are much closer to themselves than the Tories. If I was Ed Miliband I would try and claim the position of moderation - some cuts, some tax rises, reducing the deficit over the course of the parliament and point out that although they won't say it publicly, the Lib Dems' plans are much closer to Labour than to the Tories. I won't hold my breath given the evidence that Labour is blindly tribal and led by an amateur.
Labour are targeting the young vote because they know the more mature voter is turning their back.
It's increasingly coming through in polling where the Tory advantage at 65+, moved down to 55+ some months back and is increasingly showing up at 45+.
That is the most important change in any voting metric we have seen in years. Labour always did surprisingly well in the 40-55 range. Maybe the hatred for Fatcha is mellowing the more that pensions and property values figure in their values?
Doesn't seem to be a worry in London !
Do the Conservatives have a chance of taking Hammersmith ?
I'm guessing the answer is no... and yet if you were to go by property values...
Is it time for Ed to agree with Nick? Whatever one thinks of the Lib Dems I cannot understand why Labour don't point out that the Lib Dems fiscal plans are much closer to themselves than the Tories. If I was Ed Miliband I would try and claim the position of moderation - some cuts, some tax rises, reducing the deficit over the course of the parliament and point out that although they won't say it publicly, the Lib Dems' plans are much closer to Labour than to the Tories.
Surely that would just drive the more radical elements in Labour towards the SNP and Greens?
One of the very interesting milestones between now and the election is the Budget. It will be from what i am hearing a Conservative budget which will allow clear water between the LDs and the Tories. This was told to me recently by David Davies who is of the opinion that there wont even be a proper vote on this years budget just on the changes in taxation arrangements needed under the finance act. How much input the LDs will have had into this years budget will become clear the closer we get to it because it is probable they will try and leak everything but there maybe a couple of items that GO will not have told Danny Alexander about. As i said the budget will then form the basis of the Tories financial part of their manifesto.
Push IHT threshold up to a million would be good
Insurance Premium Tax is a likely candidate for an increase.
As an insurance broker I always look at this to see whether it will go up - however the Government traditionally does not like to tax (too heavily) 'prudent' actions by the populace. Since insurance is undoubtedly a great benefit and that people stand to lose fortunes without it (which the Government might have to pick up! Witness Pool-re and Flood-re) the Government tries not to discourage the purchase of insurance.
The reason why the level of Insurance Premium Tax (IPT) is 20% for travel insurance and warranties (purchased in shops/ garages) is that travel agents and high-street retailers realised that they could reduce the price of goods/ services (taxed at 20% VAT) and bump up the cost of insurance (taxed at 2.5%, 5% or 6% depending on the year.)
Why have Populus suddenly decided UKIP will do better than they did before in the last month ?
When working out a bet do you look at the 100% Betfair market or the bookies over round?
Surely you look at the raw numbers to make a decision, and fair enough if a pollster/bookie agrees with you you're likely to favour them, but obviously Ukip haven't improved, they are just doing better than anyone thought before or worse than they are shown now!
I look at Ladbrokes prices then calculate to 100%.
As for NOAA http://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/01/17/on-the-biases-caused-by-omissions-in-the-2014-noaa-state-of-the-climate-report/ ''but then NOAA clarifies their global surface temperature anomalies as “+0.69 ± 0.09” deg C. Alas, we discover that the new record high by 0.04 deg C is within the +/-0.09 deg C uncertainty of the dataset.'' ''So, according to NOAA, the chance that 2014 was the warmest on record was 48.0% and based on their table, the global surface temperature anomalies in 2014 appear in the range of “more unlikely than likely”.'' ''Therefore, NOAA has omitted the fact that data indicate El Niño conditions existed along the equatorial Pacific, outside of the region they use as an ENSO index, so they could claim ENSO “conditions remained neutral in this region during the entire year and the globe reached record warmth despite this. Of course, the intent of that NOAA statement was to give the impression that there was a general overall warming that could not be attributed to El Niño conditions, when, in fact, El Niño conditions did exist in 2014.''
Why have Populus suddenly decided UKIP will do better than they did before in the last month ?
When working out a bet do you look at the 100% Betfair market or the bookies over round?
Surely you look at the raw numbers to make a decision, and fair enough if a pollster/bookie agrees with you you're likely to favour them, but obviously Ukip haven't improved, they are just doing better than anyone thought before or worse than they are shown now!
I look at Ladbrokes prices then calculate to 100%.
What I do for a living is all about adding weighting to raw numbers and making a judgement... It's easy when there is a lot if form in the book, but almost pointless when a new kid on the block turns up.. Hence betting opportunities in SNP and Ukip areas, be they backing or laying
I really don't like the look of Professor Fisher's latest forecast. I simply don't see how we could get a sustainable, credible government out of that.
I agree with those who say the Coalition has been a success and that it is unfair that the Lib Dems do not get more credit for it. Being the minority party in a Coalition is not easy. You are either subsumed or you snipe from the sidelines.
In fairness to the Lib Dems the sniping has been kept to a minimum, Uncle Vince apart. What they need to do now is stand proud on the achievements of the Coalition but have a number of distinctive views that they would want to contribute to the next government, however this is made up. This really should not be beyond the wit of man. They need a good, positive message whilst being proud of their achievements.
Really excellent borrowing figures today. Those forecasting that borrowing would clearly increase this year may have humble pie to eat yet again. Osborne (and Danny) has a better grip on public spending and outurns than I can remember in my life time. He must be quite brilliant at finding ways to fix them.
I really don't like the look of Professor Fisher's latest forecast. I simply don't see how we could get a sustainable, credible government out of that.
...
In fairness to the Lib Dems the sniping has been kept to a minimum, Uncle Vince apart.
Unfortunately one of the 'minimum' snipings was to prevent the new seat recommendations by the electoral commission. The Tories losing 30 seats is quite a bit of 'minimum sniping'
As for NOAA http://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/01/17/on-the-biases-caused-by-omissions-in-the-2014-noaa-state-of-the-climate-report/ ''but then NOAA clarifies their global surface temperature anomalies as “+0.69 ± 0.09” deg C. Alas, we discover that the new record high by 0.04 deg C is within the +/-0.09 deg C uncertainty of the dataset.'' ''So, according to NOAA, the chance that 2014 was the warmest on record was 48.0% and based on their table, the global surface temperature anomalies in 2014 appear in the range of “more unlikely than likely”.'' ''Therefore, NOAA has omitted the fact that data indicate El Niño conditions existed along the equatorial Pacific, outside of the region they use as an ENSO index, so they could claim ENSO “conditions remained neutral in this region during the entire year and the globe reached record warmth despite this. Of course, the intent of that NOAA statement was to give the impression that there was a general overall warming that could not be attributed to El Niño conditions, when, in fact, El Niño conditions did exist in 2014.''
Oh Heck. I'm 100% behind one of Flightpaths posts :-)
I don't think many people in the bubble yet realise quite how many people in the UK/USA etc. treat statements from their own governments, public institutions and mainstream media with the same cycnism that Russians treated statements from Pravda and Izvestiya in the days of the Soviet Union.
Comments
In fact this article
http://www.economicsuk.com/blog/002078.html
paints a much better picture and implies Osborne is overstating the thickness of his hair shirt.
''How much of the deficit has been eliminated? The IFS, noting Osborne’s aim of achieving a budget surplus of 1% of GDP by 2020, calculated that 55% of the tax has been completed, with 45% still to go. It is worth noting, however, that on the original aim of merely eliminating the current budget deficit (in other words continuing to borrow to invest), the chancellor is rather closer to finishing the job.''
Such facts - ie the next 5 years being easier than the last 5 - do not imply scaremongering massive defence cuts.
The fact that pay rises have finally crawled above inflation is good news but it's more due to the latter falling as a result of the short-term (perhaps) impact of collapsing oil prices. The other aspect is that a few months of progress (welcome though that is) doesn't offset years of declining or stagnating living standards for large numbers of people.
It's good to see tax receipt numbers starting to improve as well and of course it's good to see people in jobs and far better than seeing them unemployed but the truth is if companies are employing people rather than investing in technology to improve production that isn't going to be sustainable long term.
Nick Clegg out there with the media each and every day, selling the LibDem message to people who just won't listen to the man.
They could easily go backwards during the campaign.
http://www.theguardian.com/education/2015/feb/20/labour-university-tuition-fees-vince-cable?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
Courageous, even.
All going extremely well, now it just needs the voters not to deliberately wreck it in May, and we'll be in excellent shape.
As before, though, I'd advise arranging your affairs to protect against voters deliberately wrecking the recovery.
Mind you with a name like Eoin Morgan I expect he would be eligible as British with a grandparent or two.
We got done 5-0 in oz w a South African star player and are embarrassing ourselves at the World Cup with an Irish captain. So we have sold our integrity and are still rubbish... Great
I agree with those who say the Coalition has been a success and that it is unfair that the Lib Dems do not get more credit for it. Being the minority party in a Coalition is not easy. You are either subsumed or you snipe from the sidelines.
In fairness to the Lib Dems the sniping has been kept to a minimum, Uncle Vince apart. What they need to do now is stand proud on the achievements of the Coalition but have a number of distinctive views that they would want to contribute to the next government, however this is made up. This really should not be beyond the wit of man. They need a good, positive message whilst being proud of their achievements.
Really excellent borrowing figures today. Those forecasting that borrowing would clearly increase this year may have humble pie to eat yet again. Osborne (and Danny) has a better grip on public spending and outurns than I can remember in my life time. He must be quite brilliant at finding ways to fix them.
With the exception of the risk of Grexit, things are about as benign as they could be on that view, though I understand that it does see the growth as being consumer-led.
For the future as this guardian article points out the LDs want to increase taxes (thats INCREASE) more than the conservatives
''However, the Liberal Democrat leader made it clear the party would balance the books in a different way to the Tories through a combination of tax rises and lower spending, rather than focusing on £12bn of extra welfare cuts like Osborne.''
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/feb/10/clegg-backs-osborne-timetable-eliminate-uk-structural-deficit
So we have a little bit of a self serving article complete with emotive picture which is at total odds with the facts.
That said, I'm expecting to see ALOT of Ed Miliband about on posters...
Toenails tweet.
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/commentators/when-will-the-west-own-up-to-the-role-its-played-in-the-implosion-of-libya-10057749.html
EICIPM with wee Jimmy Krankie lookalike as SoS for Defence and Galloway minister for the middle east.
I see what you mean
#BBCQT Panel just announced for Glasgow: David Starkey, Jacob Rees Mogg, David Coburn MEP, Nick Robinson, Ian Smart & Mhairi Black.
Six panelists ?
Indeed the continued presence of Cable at the cabinet table is a strong argument against the supposed benefits of coalition.
If you look at modern venues (Sage, o2) they are purpose built halls with a separate building surrounding them...
Magic Money Tree.
Edited extra bit: I think there have been six member panels occasionally in the past.
We have had the nonsense of one off banker's bonus taxes paying for a plethora of policies, most of which would still need funding in year 2. We have a determination to reverse certain benefit cuts (eg bedroom tax) whilst simultaneously acknowledging that the benefits bill needs to be cut. We now have a promise to cut University fees without a willingness to address the financial consequences of their own programs which encouraged such a high attendance rate.
I really can't recall a party aspiring to government which has such a poor idea of what it can and can't actually do. It increasingly seems that Balls and Miliband can barely bring themselves to speak to each other, let alone agree anything. I am increasingly beginning to wonder if that relationship can survive an election campaign.
Some people this week have suggested that Ed should be embarrassed by all the help they have been getting in kind from those tax avoiders extraordinaire PWC. Surely there must come a point when the embarrassment is on them, having their name associated with such incoherent nonsense.
Why not simply tax politicians who blatantly milk the expenses system? The descendants of Flipper Balls's can cough up for a few millennia.
I reckon Jacob Rees Mogg is going to come out of this looking good. Coburn and Black are going to get into a heated barney I reckon.
It's increasingly coming through in polling where the Tory advantage at 65+, moved down to 55+ some months back and is increasingly showing up at 45+.
Conservative Party (the one run by David Cameron not Ed Miliband)"
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-politics-31546943
It's a toss-up which of George Osborne and Boris Johnson has the most memorable expression.
I may not like Ozzy's plan to address this 100% - but he does clearly have a plan and even (bless him) talks about running an actual surplus at some point. If the Tories win in May I believe we will avoid disaster.
I am, however, worried that Labour are leading in the polls and clearly have no plan at all to address this most fundamental of our problems. It looks like a real risk of the late teens becoming a rerun of the 1970s.
http://www.ifs.org.uk/uploads/publications/bns/BN158.pdf
NOAA has released their global report for January 2015 and it's a worrying read. The globe remains anomalously warm.
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/2015/1
This was told to me recently by David Davies who is of the opinion that there wont even be a proper vote on this years budget just on the changes in taxation arrangements needed under the finance act.
How much input the LDs will have had into this years budget will become clear the closer we get to it because it is probable they will try and leak everything but there maybe a couple of items that GO will not have told Danny Alexander about.
As i said the budget will then form the basis of the Tories financial part of their manifesto.
"A nerdy weed is a threat when he goes into the conference chamber with Vladimir Putin and comes out with his underpants on his head."
To be fair to Ed, I'm sure he'd be very good at making the coffee. But that is always going to be a problem for an aspiring PM - does he look statesmanlike, has he gravitas? We won't know until it's too late.
Ed can come across as a sympathetic neighbour at best, but can he negotiate? "If you rake your foot off my neck, Mr Putin, I'll agree to stop crying."
But I had my doubts about Cameron, and still do.
Nothing wrong with caution - it's a good result for the Coalition and shows that the combination of keeping spending under control and maximising tax receipts is the way to fully restore public finances. The last thing we need is not for the voters to "deliberately wreck the recovery" as some numpty put it earlier but for the Conservatives to deliberately wreck it by showering tax cuts on the wealthiest.
There's no rationale in today's data for tax cuts - there is support for a continuation of the policy of reducing the tax burden on the lowest paid, making sure the correct amounts of tax are received and ensuring spending is kept under control though always with one eye to capital spending as medium to long-term investment on infrastructure.
While there's some of aspects of Conservative economic policy with which I don't agree, the Tories are light years ahead of Labour in this area. There has been no meaningful critique of the Alexander/Osborne policy from the Labour side though the critique from the monetarist end of the spectrum is a lot harder to ignore and raises some key questions about the role of QE and whether spending cuts should have been much greater much earlier.
Mr. Owls, have some difficulty taking the IFS entirely seriously ever since they attacked an early Coalition set of welfare proposals for not being progressive [arguably the most tedious, vacuous, meaningless nonsense currently to infect the political lexicon]. The reason it wasn't 'progressive' is because less money was due to be spent on welfare... because more people were predicted to be in work and would therefore receive less in benefits from the taxpayer. Horrid indeed.
19/02/2015 11:50
Chelsea fan in racism storm pictured with Farage… wow. pic.twitter.com/b5dF1hbosP
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/generalelection/wealthy-scottish-voters-could-offer-ed-miliband-a-route-to-no-10-10057853.html
Like Lord Ashcroft, I take it with a hefty pinch of salt.
Oh ... 'Former Foreign Secretary David Miliband, speaking from Erbil, Iraq, said: “It is great to hear that London is determined to get better and better. Music and architecture should make for a powerful mix in pushing the city forward.” '
http://www.populus.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/OmOnline_Vote_20-02-2015_BPC.pdf
UKIP unweighted 281 -> 244
http://www.populus.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/OmOnline_Vote_05-01-2015_BPC.pdf
UKIP unweighted 284 -> 165.
Maybe they are going to make Dave share power with Nigel.
Considering the resources the cons allocate to overseas aid whilst Russian bears darken the skies, it will serve Dave right.
No economic rationale, but an almost overwhelming political rationale.
A billion or two is neither here nor there, but it would make a huge symbolic difference. In the end, austerity pays.
Ho ho.
I hope the author's sources are better informed than he is.
'Glasgow and Dundee were the only two regions of Scotland which voted Yes in last September’s independence referendum.'
Labour havent got Blair2 standing..nor does the Govt feel tired and clapped out.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/technology-science/science/planet-earth-enters-intergalactic-danger-5196583
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZzQ3eBerHfM
Surely you look at the raw numbers to make a decision, and fair enough if a pollster/bookie agrees with you you're likely to favour them, but obviously Ukip haven't improved, they are just doing better than anyone thought before or worse than they are shown now!
Do the Conservatives have a chance of taking Hammersmith ?
I'm guessing the answer is no... and yet if you were to go by property values...
The reason why the level of Insurance Premium Tax (IPT) is 20% for travel insurance and warranties (purchased in shops/ garages) is that travel agents and high-street retailers realised that they could reduce the price of goods/ services (taxed at 20% VAT) and bump up the cost of insurance (taxed at 2.5%, 5% or 6% depending on the year.)
And
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/02/18/can-we-stop-the-doom-mongering/
As for NOAA
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/01/17/on-the-biases-caused-by-omissions-in-the-2014-noaa-state-of-the-climate-report/
''but then NOAA clarifies their global surface temperature anomalies as “+0.69 ± 0.09” deg C. Alas, we discover that the new record high by 0.04 deg C is within the +/-0.09 deg C uncertainty of the dataset.''
''So, according to NOAA, the chance that 2014 was the warmest on record was 48.0% and based on their table, the global surface temperature anomalies in 2014 appear in the range of “more unlikely than likely”.''
''Therefore, NOAA has omitted the fact that data indicate El Niño conditions existed along the equatorial Pacific, outside of the region they use as an ENSO index, so they could claim ENSO “conditions remained neutral in this region during the entire year and the globe reached record warmth despite this.
Of course, the intent of that NOAA statement was to give the impression that there was a general overall warming that could not be attributed to El Niño conditions, when, in fact, El Niño conditions did exist in 2014.''
etc etc etc...
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/01/23/super-heated-air-from-climate-science-on-noaas-hottest-year/
We could go on...
I don't think many people in the bubble yet realise quite how many people in the UK/USA etc. treat statements from their own governments, public institutions and mainstream media with the same cycnism that Russians treated statements from Pravda and Izvestiya in the days of the Soviet Union.