Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Another phone pollster, ComRes, has UKIP declining. CON lea

2»

Comments

  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    ComRes for @DailyMailUK: majority (55%) think that if SNP joins coalition govt they shouldn't be allowed to decide on non-Scots laws

    SNP MPs are no more (or less) qualified to vote on English only matters than any other parties Scottish MP's. Indeed the SNP MPs are more likely to abstain than other parties.

    An SNP coalition would be electoral suicide for Labour both sides of the border.
    They don't have to join a coalition - the misunderstanding on this is as bad as debt/deficit confusion.
    Supply and Confidence is not much better for either SLAB or EWLAB. Why switch back if you are former SLAB? And why let the celtic (non-Lab) tail wag the English dog?

    Better a Lab minority, and agree an EVFEL deal with the Tories.
    A Labour minority with Conservative support O_O ?!
    Support only for a cross party EVFEL bill. Probably would get LD and UKIP support too if well drafted.

    Indeed all Constitutional reform should be agreed between parties.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,736
    Whiplash, Grand Budapest Hotel and Night Crawler were my three favorites in last year.

    I hated Boyhood
  • The Times

    Senior Liberal Democrats declared that pre-election TV debates would take place “over their dead body” after Britain’s four main broadcasters yesterday announced the order in which they would screen three proposed debates.

    The party refused to rule out the possibility of legal action as it emerged that the key head-to-head debate between David Cameron and Ed Miliband, which excludes Nick Clegg, the Lib Dem leader, will take place a week before the general election.

    This means that the chances of the debates going ahead is receding further, with both coalition partners expressing strong objections to the proposed format.
  • Scott_P said:

    There will be no 2nd GE this year if no party wins a majority. Fixed Term Parliament Act.

    That's a cast iron guarantee, just like "2010 Lib Dems are Labour's impregnable firewall"...
    They still are. Remember LAB does not need a lead to be top on seats even taking into account Scotland.

  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,386
    So how are we standing on EICIPM vs EMWNBPM?
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    edited February 2015
    GIN1138 said:

    Scott_P said:

    There will be no 2nd GE this year if no party wins a majority. Fixed Term Parliament Act.

    That's a cast iron guarantee, just like "2010 Lib Dems are Labour's impregnable firewall"...
    Just what DID happen to the 2010 Lib's?
    They've largely stayed with Labour (albeit with a few floating to the Greens).

    It's traditional 2010 Labour "core voters" who the party was taking for granted which have been Labour's undoing.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    GIN1138 said:

    Scott_P said:

    There will be no 2nd GE this year if no party wins a majority. Fixed Term Parliament Act.

    That's a cast iron guarantee, just like "2010 Lib Dems are Labour's impregnable firewall"...
    Just what DID happen to the 2010 Lib's?
    According to table 3:

    54 % will stay LD and 13% each to Lab and Tory, so best not count those Red LD chickens just yet.
  • Douglas Carswell in tomorrow's Times

    Enoch Powell was wrong about immigration - The firebrand misjudged Britain’s ability to become a multi-ethnic society at ease with itself
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,386

    Scott_P said:

    There will be no 2nd GE this year if no party wins a majority. Fixed Term Parliament Act.

    That's a cast iron guarantee, just like "2010 Lib Dems are Labour's impregnable firewall"...
    They still are.

    Still plenty for Labour to fall when the 2010 Lib's go back to The Dead Dove or more likely, stay at home on the day?

    Labour to poll lower under Ed The Younger than El Gord?

  • The time for change/Ed Miliband pair of questions looks pretty good for the Conservatives. 34% saying 'we need to stay the course' sound reasonably solid. If one in ten, or even one in 20, of the 60% saying 'it's time for a change' can be persuaded that the alternatives actually on offer are a change for the worse, then that could be enough.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,386

    Douglas Carswell in tomorrow's Times

    Enoch Powell was wrong about immigration - The firebrand misjudged Britain’s ability to become a multi-ethnic society at ease with itself

    Farage won't like that. Is the UKIP leadership contest already under way?

  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,736
    GIN1138 said:

    So how are we standing on EICIPM vs EMWNBPM?

    The former is looking good in my eyes.

    The betting markets however "offer value" on that outcome
  • Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    ComRes for @DailyMailUK: majority (55%) think that if SNP joins coalition govt they shouldn't be allowed to decide on non-Scots laws

    SNP MPs are no more (or less) qualified to vote on English only matters than any other parties Scottish MP's. Indeed the SNP MPs are more likely to abstain than other parties.

    An SNP coalition would be electoral suicide for Labour both sides of the border.
    They don't have to join a coalition - the misunderstanding on this is as bad as debt/deficit confusion.
    Supply and Confidence is not much better for either SLAB or EWLAB. Why switch back if you are former SLAB? And why let the celtic (non-Lab) tail wag the English dog?

    Better a Lab minority, and agree an EVFEL deal with the Tories.
    A Labour minority with Conservative support O_O ?!
    Support only for a cross party EVFEL bill. Probably would get LD and UKIP support too if well drafted.

    Indeed all Constitutional reform should be agreed between parties.
    Whatever happened to democracy? There needs to be competition between ideas. If you have consensus, you are in danger of having stitch-up.

  • FlightpathFlightpath Posts: 4,012

    The financial deterioration of the FT sector continues to worsen, with stress concentrated in the acute sector, where 60 trusts – 73 per cent of all acute FTs – are now in deficit.

    This compares to zero in 2010 in deficit and 21 trusts in 2013

    Is this what weaponising the NHS looks like?
    Take a look at the NHS budget. Then take a look at the massive government deficit left by Labour in 2010. Then take a look at Labour's promise to make £20 billion of eficiency savings in the NHS in their 2010 manifesto - after saying NHS spending was high enough.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    Scott_P said:

    There will be no 2nd GE this year if no party wins a majority. Fixed Term Parliament Act.

    That's a cast iron guarantee, just like "2010 Lib Dems are Labour's impregnable firewall"...
    And farage not appearing in the debates


    Although you might win that accidentally if there are no debates I guess
  • GIN1138 said:

    Scott_P said:

    There will be no 2nd GE this year if no party wins a majority. Fixed Term Parliament Act.

    That's a cast iron guarantee, just like "2010 Lib Dems are Labour's impregnable firewall"...
    They still are.

    Still plenty for Labour to fall when the 2010 Lib's go back to The Dead Dove or more likely, stay at home on the day?

    Labour to poll lower under Ed The Younger than El Gord?

    Isn't going to happen. However crap Ed is, Labour client base is large enough and bizarrely their brand still seems to be far less tarnished than the Tories, meaning they will still get 30%+
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,411

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    ComRes for @DailyMailUK: majority (55%) think that if SNP joins coalition govt they shouldn't be allowed to decide on non-Scots laws

    SNP MPs are no more (or less) qualified to vote on English only matters than any other parties Scottish MP's. Indeed the SNP MPs are more likely to abstain than other parties.

    An SNP coalition would be electoral suicide for Labour both sides of the border.
    They don't have to join a coalition - the misunderstanding on this is as bad as debt/deficit confusion.
    Supply and Confidence is not much better for either SLAB or EWLAB. Why switch back if you are former SLAB? And why let the celtic (non-Lab) tail wag the English dog?

    Better a Lab minority, and agree an EVFEL deal with the Tories.
    A Labour minority with Conservative support O_O ?!
    Support only for a cross party EVFEL bill. Probably would get LD and UKIP support too if well drafted.

    Indeed all Constitutional reform should be agreed between parties.
    Ok - that's fair enough, but the big one... the budget is emphatically not an English law.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    TGOHF said:

    Outliers all around

    @OliverCooper: UKIP are now polling their lowest since April in a ComRes poll, their lowest since September in YouGov, and their lowest ever in Ashcroft.

    I guess the outlier would be last weeks record high with populus, although that would have passed many by as no one on here mentioned it!
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    isam said:

    And farage not appearing in the debates

    Although you might win that

    Never in doubt... :-)
  • GIN1138 said:

    Douglas Carswell in tomorrow's Times

    Enoch Powell was wrong about immigration - The firebrand misjudged Britain’s ability to become a multi-ethnic society at ease with itself

    Farage won't like that. Is the UKIP leadership contest already under way?

    Carswell is nailed on to win his seat, Farage less so.

    I also think after that woman on meet the Kippers, Carswell is trying to show the party isn't full of loons, racists and fruitcakes, mostly.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,848
    edited February 2015
    Dair said:

    philiph said:

    Dair said:

    TGOHF said:

    Dair said:

    Pulpstar said:

    ComRes for @DailyMailUK: majority (55%) think that if SNP joins coalition govt they shouldn't be allowed to decide on non-Scots laws

    Have English MPs been deciding on non-English laws recently ?
    They're not allowed to, only the Scots get to do that.

    You don't wield power without controlling the budget. Currently English MPs decide how much of Scotland's own money Scotland gets back. Hence, no such thing as English or Scottish only matters in very nearly every instance.
    A Scottish MP made the budgets between 1997-2007 and these were voted upon by Scottish MPs.

    Hardly to the benefit of Scotland with a net loss of around £35bn** over that ten year period, removed from Scotland and spent on London.

    **topline GERS the reality was likely to have been much, much higher.
    I am shocked at how selfish and introspective Scotland has become.

    Within the Union there is no such thing as Scotlands money.

    It is one of the things about a Union you pool resources for the benefit of all. You support the weakest, not stamp your grubby feet shouting 'it's our money. Give it back you big bully!'

    For a nation that claims to be altruistic it is very sad to see.
    Not wanting to subsidise England is not being selfish. It is merely seeking fairness. If England hadn't spent Scotland's money on such ridiculous largesse for London (continuing with another £15bn choo choo currently featured on BBC2) then Scotland would not be ready to dump the Union.

    That doesn't even consider the utter disbelief Scotland has that there is no recognition from England at just how large the subsidy they have received is, not only is it unrecognised but the general opinion in England appears to be that it is subsidising Scotland!

    Utterly ridiculous.
    I've been meaning to ask you something about the export surplus of Scotland you were speaking of yesterday. I tried to look it up, but couldn't find the information. Is your contention that Scotland is a benefactor based on international exports, or 'exports' to the rest of the UK?
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118

    Douglas Carswell in tomorrow's Times

    Enoch Powell was wrong about immigration - The firebrand misjudged Britain’s ability to become a multi-ethnic society at ease with itself

    Carswell does talk some crap at times, wonder if he has ever been to East London
  • Douglas Carswell in tomorrow's Times

    Enoch Powell was wrong about immigration - The firebrand misjudged Britain’s ability to become a multi-ethnic society at ease with itself

    So Carswell's a sound Cameroon, as everyone used to think before he went all peculiar.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 14,142

    philiph said:

    GIN1138 said:

    YouGov/Sun poll tonight - Labour and Tories tied: CON 33%, LAB 33%, LD 8%, UKIP 13%, GRN 7%

    So The Scores On The Board are:

    Populus - Tie

    The Good Lord - Lab Lead

    ComRes - Con Lead

    YouGov - Tie

    #megpollingmonday

    And the winner is????
    Those that will benefit from a second GE in a year? The losers are all those that pump money into political parties as they fund a second campaign.
    There will be no 2nd GE this year if no party wins a majority. Fixed Term Parliament Act.


    This can be put in bold all anyone likes, it is simply not true.

    FTPA provides for elections if a motion of no confidence in a Govt. is passed, and not superseded within 14 days.


    a) likely presence of two mainstream GB parties, two minor GB parties and numerous nationalist parties
    +
    b) the experience of minor coalition parties across Europe in the past decades
    =
    c) parties are unlikely to lend support if there is any future electoral capital to be made from not doing so.


    I should think it entirely likely that if a no-confidence motion succeeds, it would lead to a dissolution of parliament.

  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,386
    edited February 2015
    isam said:

    Douglas Carswell in tomorrow's Times

    Enoch Powell was wrong about immigration - The firebrand misjudged Britain’s ability to become a multi-ethnic society at ease with itself

    Carswell does talk some crap at times
    LOL! Here we go...

    #ferretsinasack

  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,386

    Douglas Carswell in tomorrow's Times

    Enoch Powell was wrong about immigration - The firebrand misjudged Britain’s ability to become a multi-ethnic society at ease with itself

    So Carswell's a sound Cameroon, as everyone used to think before he went all peculiar.
    I'm wondering whether Carswell "went rogue" to infiltrate UKIP, take it over and facilitate and eventual Con/UKIP merger?
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    Scott_P said:

    isam said:

    And farage not appearing in the debates

    Although you might win that

    Never in doubt... :-)
    I wonder how it would be settled if there were no debates?
  • Douglas Carswell in tomorrow's Times

    Enoch Powell was wrong about immigration - The firebrand misjudged Britain’s ability to become a multi-ethnic society at ease with itself

    So Carswell's a sound Cameroon, as everyone used to think before he went all peculiar.
    If I didn't know better, Carswell is trying to troll the Kippers

    Powell was wrong.....Immigration has not been without its challenges. Yet it has been, overwhelmingly, a story of success. Britain today is more at ease with the multi-ethnic society that we have become than once seemed imaginable — and not just to Enoch Powell. Like many before and since, Powell underestimated the ability of a free society to adapt.

    Powell talked of Britain “heaping up its own funeral pyre”. Yet our country has more than survived. We have, in all kinds of ways, thrived.

    Equally wrong, too, has been the “multiculti groupthink” of much of the past few decades.

    That, too, underestimates the strength of social cohesion to create and renew common identity. Social cohesion has happened precisely because people have been defined by what they share, not by difference.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    GIN1138 said:

    isam said:

    Douglas Carswell in tomorrow's Times

    Enoch Powell was wrong about immigration - The firebrand misjudged Britain’s ability to become a multi-ethnic society at ease with itself

    Carswell does talk some crap at times
    LOL! Here we go...

    #ferretsinasack

    Well, blimey I know he is meant to be good cop but he is taking it too far now !
  • Douglas Carswell in tomorrow's Times

    Enoch Powell was wrong about immigration - The firebrand misjudged Britain’s ability to become a multi-ethnic society at ease with itself

    So Carswell's a sound Cameroon, as everyone used to think before he went all peculiar.
    Carswell is absolutely right about multi-ethnic. Which is very different from multi-cultural. But he certainly isn't a Cameroon. He is not a Europhile for a start.
  • So Carswell has said

    1) Enoch was wrong

    2) Immigration is a success for the country

    3) The country has thrived because of immigration
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,386

    So Carswell has said

    1) Enoch was wrong

    2) Immigration is a success for the country

    3) The country has thrived because of immigration

    LibLabCon could all sign up to that...

  • GIN1138 said:

    Douglas Carswell in tomorrow's Times

    Enoch Powell was wrong about immigration - The firebrand misjudged Britain’s ability to become a multi-ethnic society at ease with itself

    So Carswell's a sound Cameroon, as everyone used to think before he went all peculiar.
    I'm wondering whether Carswell "went rogue" to infiltrate UKIP, take it over and facilitate and eventual Con/UKIP merger?
    To be honest I think the truth is actually much simpler: he's really not a party man, he has very much his own take on things. In many ways he is closer to the Cameroons than to either UKIP or the traditional Conservative party, but he doesn't really fit any label too well.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527

    Pulpstar said:

    Tories Most votes, most seats, Dave out the job I reckon if this is the score.

    A tory lead & over 10 wks campaigning to bung in the mixer = ok for tories. Suppose you said 'if' but do you reckon these polls will stagnate from here on in?
    The official election campaign which begins at the end of March has favoured the Opposition in 10 of the last 14 general election capaigns - 3 favoured the Government -1 being neutral. However, of the 3 which saw the Government strengthen during the campaign ,1979 and 1997 were cases of the incumbent lagging by 12 - 20% and making up some ground before polling day. Neither of those examples fits what we are looking at today. But that still leaves 1992 for Tory optimists.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548

    The financial deterioration of the FT sector continues to worsen, with stress concentrated in the acute sector, where 60 trusts – 73 per cent of all acute FTs – are now in deficit.

    This compares to zero in 2010 in deficit and 21 trusts in 2013

    Is this what weaponising the NHS looks like?
    Take a look at the NHS budget. Then take a look at the massive government deficit left by Labour in 2010. Then take a look at Labour's promise to make £20 billion of eficiency savings in the NHS in their 2010 manifesto - after saying NHS spending was high enough.
    "Efficiency savings" are a nonsense. I know because I am responsible for a fairly large NHS budget. The NHS tariffs were originally set at the average rate across hospitals for costs. These get topsliced by 4% each year as "Efficiency savings" until we reach the point that Trusts cannot break even with these then either close money losing services or run a deficit.

    I do not think that the NHS deficit will be that big an issue. We have been given a nod and a wink not to worry about it this financial year, just have plans to meet it next year. It may well be a much bigger issue after the election.
  • FlightpathFlightpath Posts: 4,012
    edited February 2015
    Dair said:

    Pulpstar said:

    ComRes for @DailyMailUK: majority (55%) think that if SNP joins coalition govt they shouldn't be allowed to decide on non-Scots laws

    Have English MPs been deciding on non-English laws recently ?
    They're not allowed to, only the Scots get to do that.

    You don't wield power without controlling the budget. Currently English MPs decide how much of Scotland's own money Scotland gets back. Hence, no such thing as English or Scottish only matters in very nearly every instance.
    Stop talking such utter and complete self serving dictatorial bilge. The entire nations parliament votes on the budget for the entire nation. Under devolution how does that give the right for Scottish MPs to vote on the English NHS?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,411

    Douglas Carswell in tomorrow's Times

    Enoch Powell was wrong about immigration - The firebrand misjudged Britain’s ability to become a multi-ethnic society at ease with itself

    So Carswell's a sound Cameroon, as everyone used to think before he went all peculiar.
    If I didn't know better, Carswell is trying to troll the Kippers

    Powell was wrong.....Immigration has not been without its challenges. Yet it has been, overwhelmingly, a story of success. Britain today is more at ease with the multi-ethnic society that we have become than once seemed imaginable — and not just to Enoch Powell. Like many before and since, Powell underestimated the ability of a free society to adapt.

    Powell talked of Britain “heaping up its own funeral pyre”. Yet our country has more than survived. We have, in all kinds of ways, thrived.

    Equally wrong, too, has been the “multiculti groupthink” of much of the past few decades.

    That, too, underestimates the strength of social cohesion to create and renew common identity. Social cohesion has happened precisely because people have been defined by what they share, not by difference.
    No reason Ukip can't be a broad church...
  • Because I can't copy and paste more of the article without News International's Lawyers sending Mike threatening letters, I do recommend buying the Times just for Carswell's article.

    It is a very nuanced, thoughtful article by him, there's stuff Kippers will agree with.

    But if we're going to have a proper debate on immigration in this country, we need the likes of Douglas Carswell at the forefront of it.
  • So Carswell has said

    1) Enoch was wrong

    2) Immigration is a success for the country

    3) The country has thrived because of immigration

    I have never heard him talk about Powell before but the other two points he has repeated regularly for years.
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,928

    Whiplash, Grand Budapest Hotel and Night Crawler were my three favorites in last year.

    I hated Boyhood

    Agree with you about Nightcrawler but not GBH (just realised) - disliking it seems to earn the wrath of a lot of people though. Surprised anyone wouldn't like Boyhood which I wanted to win best pic - better than Birdman which was a little too fancy for its own good.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,386
    edited February 2015
    I see Mr Jack still hasn't surfaced since "Fifty Shades" hit the Flicks...

    The mind boggles...

    Night x.
  • And the scores from the board for the ComRes Scottish sub sample SNP 43, LAB 24, Tory 20, LIb 10 Green 2 and UKIP a big fat round 0. Yep 0 in the sub sample. Yes I know it is only a cross break but don't you just love saying it UKIP 0%!
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    Mortimer said:

    philiph said:

    GIN1138 said:

    YouGov/Sun poll tonight - Labour and Tories tied: CON 33%, LAB 33%, LD 8%, UKIP 13%, GRN 7%

    So The Scores On The Board are:

    Populus - Tie

    The Good Lord - Lab Lead

    ComRes - Con Lead

    YouGov - Tie

    #megpollingmonday

    And the winner is????
    Those that will benefit from a second GE in a year? The losers are all those that pump money into political parties as they fund a second campaign.
    There will be no 2nd GE this year if no party wins a majority. Fixed Term Parliament Act.


    This can be put in bold all anyone likes, it is simply not true.

    FTPA provides for elections if a motion of no confidence in a Govt. is passed, and not superseded within 14 days.


    a) likely presence of two mainstream GB parties, two minor GB parties and numerous nationalist parties
    +
    b) the experience of minor coalition parties across Europe in the past decades
    =
    c) parties are unlikely to lend support if there is any future electoral capital to be made from not doing so.


    I should think it entirely likely that if a no-confidence motion succeeds, it would lead to a dissolution of parliament.

    I agree. 2 elections looks quite likely to me. Plenty of betting opportunities too!
  • DairDair Posts: 6,108


    I've been meaning to ask you something about the export surplus of Scotland you were speaking of yesterday. I tried to look it up, but couldn't find the information. Is your contention that Scotland is a benefactor based on international exports, or 'exports' to the rest of the UK?

    While not perfect due to the huge "unknown" totals which include Hydrocarbons, Electricity and would therefore make the Scottish position far better, the figures here : -

    https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/uk-regional-trade-statistics-third-quarter-2013

    Show Scotland exporting £14.6bn and importing £11bn the trade surplus Scotland holds is even more impressive as a percentage. Remember Scotland is 8.3% of the UK total.

    Scotland is 8.8% of Exports and 4.3% of Imports.

    Internally I don't have the figures to hand but remember England imports Basics such as Electricity and foodstuffs in huge quantities from Scotland making the balance of negotiations for any necessary trade agreements heavily biased in Scotland's favour.
  • So Carswell has said

    1) Enoch was wrong

    2) Immigration is a success for the country

    3) The country has thrived because of immigration

    I have never heard him talk about Powell before but the other two points he has repeated regularly for years.
    It comes down to him thinking Enoch Powell was a pessimist, when he should have been an optimist.

    Douglas Carswell has faith in the country to always adapt for the better no matter what happens.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    Pulpstar said:

    Douglas Carswell in tomorrow's Times

    Enoch Powell was wrong about immigration - The firebrand misjudged Britain’s ability to become a multi-ethnic society at ease with itself

    So Carswell's a sound Cameroon, as everyone used to think before he went all peculiar.
    If I didn't know better, Carswell is trying to troll the Kippers

    Powell was wrong.....Immigration has not been without its challenges. Yet it has been, overwhelmingly, a story of success. Britain today is more at ease with the multi-ethnic society that we have become than once seemed imaginable — and not just to Enoch Powell. Like many before and since, Powell underestimated the ability of a free society to adapt.

    Powell talked of Britain “heaping up its own funeral pyre”. Yet our country has more than survived. We have, in all kinds of ways, thrived.

    Equally wrong, too, has been the “multiculti groupthink” of much of the past few decades.

    That, too, underestimates the strength of social cohesion to create and renew common identity. Social cohesion has happened precisely because people have been defined by what they share, not by difference.
    No reason Ukip can't be a broad church...
    Not sure Nigel will agree.

  • isamisam Posts: 41,118

    So Carswell has said

    1) Enoch was wrong

    2) Immigration is a success for the country

    3) The country has thrived because of immigration

    Yet when asked what you thought needed to change in Britain after the Charlie Hebdo attacks you said we needed to stop the de facto segregation of different communities.. That is a direct effect of mass immigration and the overwhelming reason powell was so set against it

    So look like you agree w powell not Carswell
  • FalseFlagFalseFlag Posts: 1,801
    Glad we got rid of Carswell from the Conservative party.
  • isam said:

    So Carswell has said

    1) Enoch was wrong

    2) Immigration is a success for the country

    3) The country has thrived because of immigration

    Yet when asked what you thought needed to change in Britain after the Charlie Hebdo attacks you said we needed to stop the de facto segregation of different communities.. That is a direct effect of mass immigration and the overwhelming reason powell was so set against it

    So look like you agree w powell not Carswell
    No I don't.

    I said it was one of the things that contribute, but not the only thing, I think it has a lot more to do with social/economic class.

    Enoch Powell said someone like me couldn't possibly be English/British. I think I've rather disproved that.

    He was also responsible for some stupid predictions, a war between the UK and US was another one.
  • FlightpathFlightpath Posts: 4,012

    So Carswell has said

    1) Enoch was wrong

    2) Immigration is a success for the country

    3) The country has thrived because of immigration

    I have never heard him talk about Powell before but the other two points he has repeated regularly for years.
    It comes down to him thinking Enoch Powell was a pessimist, when he should have been an optimist.

    Douglas Carswell has faith in the country to always adapt for the better no matter what happens.

    So Carswell has said

    1) Enoch was wrong

    2) Immigration is a success for the country

    3) The country has thrived because of immigration

    I have never heard him talk about Powell before but the other two points he has repeated regularly for years.
    It comes down to him thinking Enoch Powell was a pessimist, when he should have been an optimist.

    Douglas Carswell has faith in the country to always adapt for the better no matter what happens.
    Does he have to test that theory to destruction by joining UKIP then?
  • These were the key proposals from the Carswell/Hannan book of 2008:

    Scrapping all MPs' expenses except those relating to running an office and travel from the constituency
    Selecting candidates through open primaries
    Local and national referendums
    "People's Bills", to be placed before Parliament if they attract a certain number of signatures
    Placing the police under locally elected Sheriffs, who would also set local sentencing guidelines
    Appointing heads of quangos, senior judges and ambassadors through open hearings rather than prime ministerial patronage
    Devolving to English counties and cities all the powers which were devolved to Edinburgh under the 1998 Scotland Act
    Placing social security, too, under local authorities
    Making councils self-financing by scrapping VAT and replacing it with a Local Sales Tax
    Allowing people to pay their contributions into personal healthcare accounts, with a mandatory insurance component
    Letting parents opt out of their Local Education Authority, carrying to any school the financial allocation that would have been spent on their child
    Replacing EU membership with a Swiss-style bilateral free trade accord
    Requiring all foreign treaties to be ratified by Parliament
    Scrapping the Human Rights Act withdrawing from the ECHR and guaranteeing parliamentary legislation against judicial activism
    A "Great Repeal Bill" to annul unnecessary and burdensome laws

    http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danielhannan/5329377/My_plan_to_rescue_Britain_in_just_12_months/

    Interesting stuff.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,568
    Mike is right about a fast second election. People arguing from Continental experience don't understand how MPs think. "I've been elected for 5 years. I can make the best of the situation, or I can put my career instantly at risk, duh." Most will think it a no-brainer, especially as a couple of parties will probably be preoccupied with leadership elections.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,963
    edited February 2015
    Last time I heard Douglas Carswell talk about Enoch Powell was a few years ago.

    He pointed out that Powell made the Rivers of Blood speech in April 1968. A few months later the D'Oliveria affair happened, which brought race/racism into the public eye.

    Here was an immigrant to this country who was a fine addition to this country, being treated like a second class citizen by both South Africa and the England selectors.

    It offended the British sense of fair play and decency and by a quirk of fate, Powell was lumped into the same category as those who supported and practised apartheid.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,821
    edited February 2015

    Mike is right about a fast second election. People arguing from Continental experience don't understand how MPs think. "I've been elected for 5 years. I can make the best of the situation, or I can put my career instantly at risk, duh." Most will think it a no-brainer, especially as a couple of parties will probably be preoccupied with leadership elections.

    Yes, and for a second election to happen, more than 50% of MPs have to agree that 'now is the best time'. Since all the parties will be jostling for position, trying to choose the best time for their own interests, and trying to shaft each other, even if they're not preoccupied with electing a new leader, it could be some time before there's a majority willing, able and ready to pull the plug.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118

    isam said:

    So Carswell has said

    1) Enoch was wrong

    2) Immigration is a success for the country

    3) The country has thrived because of immigration

    Yet when asked what you thought needed to change in Britain after the Charlie Hebdo attacks you said we needed to stop the de facto segregation of different communities.. That is a direct effect of mass immigration and the overwhelming reason powell was so set against it

    So look like you agree w powell not Carswell
    No I don't.

    I said it was one of the things that contribute, but not the only thing, I think it has a lot more to do with social/economic class.

    Enoch Powell said someone like me couldn't possibly be English/British. I think I've rather disproved that.

    He was also responsible for some stupid predictions, a war between the UK and US was another one.
    You can't help who you end up agreeing with unwittingly or not, don't tie yourself in knots trying to undo it
  • Mike says we should be getting the Survation poll for the Mirror tomorrow night.

    And on that note, goodnight everybody
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548

    Mike is right about a fast second election. People arguing from Continental experience don't understand how MPs think. "I've been elected for 5 years. I can make the best of the situation, or I can put my career instantly at risk, duh." Most will think it a no-brainer, especially as a couple of parties will probably be preoccupied with leadership elections.

    Yes, and for a second election to happen, more than 50% of MPs have to agree that 'now is the best time'. Since all the parties will be jostling for position, trying to choose the best time for their own interests, and trying to shaft each other, even if they're not preoccupied with electing a new leader, it could be some time before there's a majority willing, able and ready to pull the plug.
    Most MPs are in safe seats so have little to lose in a second election. NickP is an exception in this.

  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548

    These were the key proposals from the Carswell/Hannan book of 2008:

    Scrapping all MPs' expenses except those relating to running an office and travel from the constituency
    Selecting candidates through open primaries
    Local and national referendums
    "People's Bills", to be placed before Parliament if they attract a certain number of signatures
    Placing the police under locally elected Sheriffs, who would also set local sentencing guidelines
    Appointing heads of quangos, senior judges and ambassadors through open hearings rather than prime ministerial patronage
    Devolving to English counties and cities all the powers which were devolved to Edinburgh under the 1998 Scotland Act
    Placing social security, too, under local authorities
    Making councils self-financing by scrapping VAT and replacing it with a Local Sales Tax
    Allowing people to pay their contributions into personal healthcare accounts, with a mandatory insurance component
    Letting parents opt out of their Local Education Authority, carrying to any school the financial allocation that would have been spent on their child
    Replacing EU membership with a Swiss-style bilateral free trade accord
    Requiring all foreign treaties to be ratified by Parliament
    Scrapping the Human Rights Act withdrawing from the ECHR and guaranteeing parliamentary legislation against judicial activism
    A "Great Repeal Bill" to annul unnecessary and burdensome laws

    http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danielhannan/5329377/My_plan_to_rescue_Britain_in_just_12_months/

    Interesting stuff.

    The book hardly mentions immigration...
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 14,142

    Mike is right about a fast second election. People arguing from Continental experience don't understand how MPs think. "I've been elected for 5 years. I can make the best of the situation, or I can put my career instantly at risk, duh." Most will think it a no-brainer, especially as a couple of parties will probably be preoccupied with leadership elections.

    I can see your point Nick - though I think it does ignore the likely pressures exerted by numerous parties whipping operations, and the court of public opinion.

    However, if MPs are that wont to prefer continual constitutional gridlock out of fear, it is yet another reason why the FTPA should be repealed as the last act of this Govt.


  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    May is too far into the year for a second election to be likely. More probable is another election 12 - 18 months later - similar to 1964 - 66 or 1950 - 51.
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,928

    Mike is right about a fast second election. People arguing from Continental experience don't understand how MPs think. "I've been elected for 5 years. I can make the best of the situation, or I can put my career instantly at risk, duh." Most will think it a no-brainer, especially as a couple of parties will probably be preoccupied with leadership elections.

    But most MPs aren't in marginals! However there must be quite a few relative non-entity SNP activists (hope that's not too offensive, I'm presuming the A team will stay in Edinburgh) who could soon find themselves in parliament.

    I honestly can't work out what we're heading towards. I guess some kind of minority government that may change hands at some point. Rory Bremner joked about having a new PM every week. I trust that is over the top.
  • FlightpathFlightpath Posts: 4,012
    edited February 2015

    The financial deterioration of the FT sector continues to worsen, with stress concentrated in the acute sector, where 60 trusts – 73 per cent of all acute FTs – are now in deficit.

    This compares to zero in 2010 in deficit and 21 trusts in 2013

    Is this what weaponising the NHS looks like?
    Take a look at the NHS budget. Then take a look at the massive government deficit left by Labour in 2010. Then take a look at Labour's promise to make £20 billion of eficiency savings in the NHS in their 2010 manifesto - after saying NHS spending was high enough.
    "Efficiency savings" are a nonsense. I know because I am responsible for a fairly large NHS budget. The NHS tariffs were originally set at the average rate across hospitals for costs. These get topsliced by 4% each year as "Efficiency savings" until we reach the point that Trusts cannot break even with these then either close money losing services or run a deficit.

    I do not think that the NHS deficit will be that big an issue. We have been given a nod and a wink not to worry about it this financial year, just have plans to meet it next year. It may well be a much bigger issue after the election.
    Or you make efficiency savings. The NHS budget has not been cut by 4% a year. In 2010 the NHS budget was £117 bn. In 2015 it is £133 bn. (I know the problem of health care inflation)

    I am happy with the NHS. I do not want to see it a political football.
    The NAO said in 2010ish that over the past ten years NHS expenditure had increased in real terms by 71 per cent.
    Labour commissioned a report by McKinsey - and Brown may have told them what he wanted to hear, who knows - but their report said in 2009 that savings could deliver up to £15 billion to the NHS even with no further funding growth.

    My point is I grow tired of Labour's weaponising of the NHS when they wasted the money they spent and they determined to make the savings they are complaining about now.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,568



    Most MPs are in safe seats so have little to lose in a second election. NickP is an exception in this.

    True, but don't underestimate the hassle factor. I enjoy elections, win or lose, but I'm rare in that. Most MPs dislike them intensely - the campaign eats your whole life for a few months (apart from posting on PB, of course), you're constantly at risk of saying something unfortunate and getting instantly axed to avoid embarrassment to the party, and when you've finished you may find yourself exactly where you were before, a humble backbencher.

    Suppose your Trust proposed that everyone reapply for their jobs next month. Even if you were really confident that you'd be reappointed, wouldn't you feel it was a hassle you could do without? And if they said, "Now let's do it again"?

  • FlightpathFlightpath Posts: 4,012

    GIN1138 said:

    Douglas Carswell in tomorrow's Times

    Enoch Powell was wrong about immigration - The firebrand misjudged Britain’s ability to become a multi-ethnic society at ease with itself

    Farage won't like that. Is the UKIP leadership contest already under way?

    Carswell is nailed on to win his seat, Farage less so.

    I also think after that woman on meet the Kippers, Carswell is trying to show the party isn't full of loons, racists and fruitcakes, mostly.
    But it is.
    Carswell, Ratner-like, has just rubbished UKIP's USP.
    If the main thing for him is a referendum on the EU then why is he where he is? I think I, who would rather like a referendum on the EU, am entitled to be rather annoyed with him.
  • anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746
    edited February 2015
    I think schools in Berkshire had half-term holidays last week. Could school holidays be contributing to the variation in the UKIP numbers?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,916
    Geoff M Or better still the English Democrats' whose official policy is now for English independence
  • Think the last couple of days have seen a bit of shift.

    Ashcroft polls have been volatile previously and could just as easy give a 5% Tory lead next week.

    YouGov have been moving in a very narrow range in the last few months but seem to have closed the small lead Labour gained last week again.

    Of more relevance is the Com Res, Opinium and Populus polls which are all showing two things - the lowest UKIP shares and the best Tory results for quite some considerable time.

    Labour probably just ahead on seats still at the moment but 4 things will shape the next 10 weeks.

    1) Can Labour gain back any ground in Scotland (I'm thinking not much and see SNP winning perhaps close to 40 seats)

    2) Will the Lib Dem vote increase and if so will it badly hurt Labour (I can see the Lib Dems gaining, but I think a lot of the gain will be back from other NOTA parties)

    3) Will UKIP continue to fall and if so, who will benefit the most (Yes I think UKIP will keep getting squeezed and this is the will be the crux of the election - perhaps a lot of the wwc vote is soft and might go back to Labour, or maybe those on the right might be spooked into
    running back to the tories by the prospect of Ed or Ed and Nicola)

    4) The campaign - as the campaign starts to dominate the media narrative more and more, can Labour keep it's brand to the forefront and Ed in the background and will the Tories be able to make it a more presidential campaign and use Dave, who, whatever you think about them, is still their best weapon.

    The answers to the above could still mean a difference of 5% or so either way to the reds or blues, so overall majority cannot be ruled out categorically for either. On balance, taking account of the above, I think there is slightly more upside for the Tories. I think they will probably run a decent campaign. Their brand, whilst despicable to tribal voters from other parts of the political spectrum is, when taking into account the economic data of late, probably not too tainted for floaters and switchers.

    Over Tories largest part on seats and votes - but probably falling short of 326 seats needed.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548

    The financial deterioration of the FT sector continues to worsen, with stress concentrated in the acute sector, where 60 trusts – 73 per cent of all acute FTs – are now in deficit.

    This compares to zero in 2010 in deficit and 21 trusts in 2013

    Is this what weaponising the NHS looks like?
    Take a look at the NHS budget. Then take a look at the massive government deficit left by Labour in 2010. Then take a look at Labour's promise to make £20 billion of eficiency savings in the NHS in their 2010 manifesto - after saying NHS spending was high enough.
    "Efficiency savings" are a nonsense. I know because I am responsible for a fairly large NHS budget. The NHS tariffs were originally set at the average rate across hospitals for costs. These get topsliced by 4% each year as "Efficiency savings" until we reach the point that Trusts cannot break even with these then either close money losing services or run a deficit.

    I do not think that the NHS deficit will be that big an issue. We have been given a nod and a wink not to worry about it this financial year, just have plans to meet it next year. It may well be a much bigger issue after the election.
    Or you make efficiency savings. The NHS budget has not been cut by 4% a year. In 2010 the NHS budget was £117 bn. In 2015 it is £133 bn. (I know the problem of health care inflation)

    I am happy with the NHS. I do not want to see it a political football.
    The NAO said in 2010ish that over the past ten years NHS expenditure had increased in real terms by 71 per cent.
    Labour commissioned a report by McKinsey - and Brown may have told them what he wanted to hear, who knows - but their report said in 2009 that savings could deliver up to £15 billion to the NHS even with no further funding growth.

    My point is I grow tired of Labour's weaponising of the NHS when they wasted the money they spent and they determined to make the savings they are complaining about now.
    We make "efficiency savings" then get business case approval for a new person to do the same job! Happens most years.

    There are efficiencies to be made, I have never claimed otherwise, but these savings "CIP cost improvement plans" are largely fictitious.

    Most of our real efficiencies are technologically driven, initiated by doctors and held back by managers and nurses.
  • Nearly a third (32%) of Labour voters think Ed would be a bad Prime Minister - and barely over half (53%) who voted Labour in 2010 think he would be good.

    The 'don't knows' on this question are also quite low - the highest among Lib Dems (16%), but Con (4%), Lab (6%), UKIP (7%) Green (5%) and SNP (10%) suggest people have pretty much made up their minds......
  • Interesting question on 'fairness' - in the event of a coalition involving the SNP, should Scots MPs be allowed to vote on laws that don't impact Scotland:

    OA: -17
    Con: -41
    Lab: +10
    LibD: -27
    UKIP: -20
    SNP: -8

    Only Lab voters net in favour.....I wonder why?
  • Just for fun

    The Climate Forecast System, which is a weather model that goes out to 9 months in the future, predicts the following for 7th May.

    Rain and strong winds encroaching from the West to northern Britain, drier calmer conditions to the south and east
  • "Labour until I Die"

    Interesting ComRes on 'would vote Labour no matter who the leader is'

    England: 21
    Scotland: 14
  • BBC report critical of Department of Business, Innovation & Skills:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-31587953

    Neglects to mention Minister responsible......
  • Carlotta

    Yes and the ComnRes sub sample has the SNP 20 points ahead and heading for a landslide. The lead story on the news tonight was the fall of ex Scottish Secretary and NO man Malcolm Rifikind which will hardly assist the beleaguered Tory interest.

    The poll actually shows strong majorities in favour of the SNP being in a UK coalition, most noticeably among SNP and Labour voters. In terms of what they vote on then the case they have made is that there are next to no issues that don't affect Scotland and certainly income tax is not one of them. Most people in Scotland (Yes or No) are rather looking forward to the idea of Scotland being in poll position for a change.
  • IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966
    scotslass said:

    Most people in Scotland (Yes or No) are rather looking forward to the idea of Scotland being in poll position for a change.

    That going to be a spin of the dice. If either major party get a majority, or a CON+LD coalition is formed, no one will care what the SNP thinks for the next five years. If its LAB+SNP then the SNP will be in the driving seat for the next five years, and it probably swings on a couple of thousand votes across a handful of marginals... what fun :(

  • MyBurningEarsMyBurningEars Posts: 3,651
    edited February 2015
    Another random thought re restriction of MPs' incomes (seeing as I got a response to my half-joke, half-serious suggestion that MPs should be debarred from owning any real estate so that none have a financial interest in policies that push up house prices) ... what happens to people who receive a long-run cash flow for work done long ago? It's not uncommon for MPs to have, or have had, a literary career which would generate royalties years after their book is written. The same could happen to an artist or musician, though that has been historically rather less of an issue.

    Do we ban all successful novelists from entering parliament, unless they rescind their copyrights? Are MPs banned from writing a new historical biography, or simply banned from publishing it while in office?

    I'd love to know what proponents of a "15% rule" or some variant thereof would actually make of such cases.
  • StereotomyStereotomy Posts: 4,092

    Think the last couple of days have seen a bit of shift.

    Ashcroft polls have been volatile previously and could just as easy give a 5% Tory lead next week.

    YouGov have been moving in a very narrow range in the last few months but seem to have closed the small lead Labour gained last week again.

    Of more relevance is the Com Res, Opinium and Populus polls which are all showing two things - the lowest UKIP shares and the best Tory results for quite some considerable time.

    Labour probably just ahead on seats still at the moment but 4 things will shape the next 10 weeks.

    1) Can Labour gain back any ground in Scotland (I'm thinking not much and see SNP winning perhaps close to 40 seats)

    2) Will the Lib Dem vote increase and if so will it badly hurt Labour (I can see the Lib Dems gaining, but I think a lot of the gain will be back from other NOTA parties)

    3) Will UKIP continue to fall and if so, who will benefit the most (Yes I think UKIP will keep getting squeezed and this is the will be the crux of the election - perhaps a lot of the wwc vote is soft and might go back to Labour, or maybe those on the right might be spooked into
    running back to the tories by the prospect of Ed or Ed and Nicola)

    4) The campaign - as the campaign starts to dominate the media narrative more and more, can Labour keep it's brand to the forefront and Ed in the background and will the Tories be able to make it a more presidential campaign and use Dave, who, whatever you think about them, is still their best weapon.

    The answers to the above could still mean a difference of 5% or so either way to the reds or blues, so overall majority cannot be ruled out categorically for either. On balance, taking account of the above, I think there is slightly more upside for the Tories. I think they will probably run a decent campaign. Their brand, whilst despicable to tribal voters from other parts of the political spectrum is, when taking into account the economic data of late, probably not too tainted for floaters and switchers.

    Over Tories largest part on seats and votes - but probably falling short of 326 seats needed.

    On point 2), my understanding is that a small lib dem recovery would (seat-wise) hurt the cons a lot more than lab.

    On 3), historically there seems to have been a rise in UKIP votes when they've had more media attention, and a drop when they've had less. Given they're a "major party" according to broadcasters, they will be getting more attention in the short campaign than they are now, plus Farage will be in two of the debates (assuming they go ahead). So it's quite possible that their downward trajectory will stop or even reverse.
  • Hengists_GiftHengists_Gift Posts: 628
    edited February 2015
    scotslass said:

    Carlotta

    Yes and the ComnRes sub sample has the SNP 20 points ahead and heading for a landslide. The lead story on the news tonight was the fall of ex Scottish Secretary and NO man Malcolm Rifikind which will hardly assist the beleaguered Tory interest.

    The poll actually shows strong majorities in favour of the SNP being in a UK coalition, most noticeably among SNP and Labour voters. In terms of what they vote on then the case they have made is that there are next to no issues that don't affect Scotland and certainly income tax is not one of them. Most people in Scotland (Yes or No) are rather looking forward to the idea of Scotland being in poll position for a change.

    No it doesn't. What is says is a majority believe you should not be excluded from a coalition. That's a very different thing to actively welcoming your involvement. As to what you should or should not involve yourselves in (and the poll refers to 'laws' not 'issues'). It doesn't matter what you think if the English media and public don't like what your up to then Labour will suffer and suffer greatly in the popularity stakes.

    Ironically many of us down south are also looking forward to you lot getting involved but perhaps for different reasons......

  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,041

    Think the last couple of days have seen a bit of shift.

    Ashcroft polls have been volatile previously and could just as easy give a 5% Tory lead next week.

    YouGov have been moving in a very narrow range in the last few months but seem to have closed the small lead Labour gained last week again.

    Of more relevance is the Com Res, Opinium and Populus polls which are all showing two things - the lowest UKIP shares and the best Tory results for quite some considerable time.

    Labour probably just ahead on seats still at the moment but 4 things will shape the next 10 weeks.

    1) Can Labour gain back any ground in Scotland (I'm thinking not much and see SNP winning perhaps close to 40 seats)

    2) Will the Lib Dem vote increase and if so will it badly hurt Labour (I can see the Lib Dems gaining, but I think a lot of the gain will be back from other NOTA parties)

    3) Will UKIP continue to fall and if so, who will benefit the most (Yes I think UKIP will keep getting squeezed and this is the will be the crux of the election - perhaps a lot of the wwc vote is soft and might go back to Labour, or maybe those on the right might be spooked into
    running back to the tories by the prospect of Ed or Ed and Nicola)

    4) The campaign - as the campaign starts to dominate the media narrative more and more, can Labour keep it's brand to the forefront and Ed in the background and will the Tories be able to make it a more presidential campaign and use Dave, who, whatever you think about them, is still their best weapon.

    The answers to the above could still mean a difference of 5% or so either way to the reds or blues, so overall majority cannot be ruled out categorically for either. On balance, taking account of the above, I think there is slightly more upside for the Tories. I think they will probably run a decent campaign. Their brand, whilst despicable to tribal voters from other parts of the political spectrum is, when taking into account the economic data of late, probably not too tainted for floaters and switchers.

    Over Tories largest part on seats and votes - but probably falling short of 326 seats needed.

    On point 2), my understanding is that a small lib dem recovery would (seat-wise) hurt the cons a lot more than lab.

    On 3), historically there seems to have been a rise in UKIP votes when they've had more media attention, and a drop when they've had less. Given they're a "major party" according to broadcasters, they will be getting more attention in the short campaign than they are now, plus Farage will be in two of the debates (assuming they go ahead). So it's quite possible that their downward trajectory will stop or even reverse.
    I'm dunno, they've had a lot of media attention recently and it hasn't done them that well!
  • Greens are actually on 8% in ComRes, Mike.

    Check table 6.
  • Hengists_GiftHengists_Gift Posts: 628
    edited February 2015
    RobD said:



    Over Tories largest part on seats and votes - but probably falling short of 326 seats needed.

    On point 2), my understanding is that a small lib dem recovery would (seat-wise) hurt the cons a lot more than lab.

    I'm dunno, they've had a lot of media attention recently and it hasn't done them that well!
    In comparison to Labour and the Tories they have had very little coverage and what they have had hasn't generally been helpful. Its not largely been from the party's leadership or about the party's campaign per se but about petty side issues such as the Channel 4 smearfest, the BBC2 stitch up, dodgy professional politicians defecting and Students Unions effectively ending free speech

    Furthermore, most of the dialogue about policies has purely involved Labour and the Tories up until now with both the Libdems and UKIP shut out by the media. Come the last six weeks UKIP and the Libdems will be given the opportunity to comment on just about everything in much greater detail and set their own policies against those of the other parties.

    So I think its evens whether they continue to stagnate or pick up again. A big test will be the Spring Conference this weekend which is the effective kick off of the UKIP campaign. It'll be interesting to see what sort of coverage UKIP receive afterwards and how the party go forward once they have fired the starting gun for their campaign.
  • IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966

    RobD said:



    Over Tories largest part on seats and votes - but probably falling short of 326 seats needed.

    On point 2), my understanding is that a small lib dem recovery would (seat-wise) hurt the cons a lot more than lab.

    I'm dunno, they've had a lot of media attention recently and it hasn't done them that well!
    In comparison to Labour and the Tories they have had very little coverage and what they have had hasn't generally been helpful. Its not largely been from the party's leadership or about the party's campaign per se but about petty side issues such as the Channel 4 smearfest, the BBC2 stitch up, dodgy professional politicians defecting and Students Unions effectively ending free speech
    There is also the question of whether the adverse coverage from Ch4 and BBC2 have changed anything at all, or if they have just made the UKIP vote "more shy".

  • Rifkind is surely dead meat as its hard to see even Cameron
    who has a history of defending the indefensible (Miller, Coulson etc)
    retaining a man as chair of an important committee who would
    whore himself out to the extent he appears willing to

    While not good for Labour as Straw was involved too the story
    is still worse for the Tories especially with the quotes from
    the Kensington Mp about "someone of my background cant
    be expected to live on 67k" and "I have a lot of free time on.my
    hands" and worst of all "I am self employed, no one pays me a
    salary" being so memorable whereas Jacks were as dull as most
    of his speeches

    Plus Straw is quitting and was a Blairite not an Ed supporter whereas
    Rifkind is the typical Cameroon Tory..warmongering, pro
    Israel, greedy, arrogant and for hire to anyone with enough
    money..A poster boy in fact for much of the modern Conservative Party
  • IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966
    edited February 2015

    Rifkind is surely dead meat as its hard to see even Cameron
    who has a history of defending the indefensible (Miller, Coulson etc)
    retaining a man as chair of an important committee who would
    whore himself out to the extent he appears willing to

    While not good for Labour as Straw was involved too the story
    is still worse for the Tories especially with the quotes from
    the Kensington Mp about "someone of my background cant
    be expected to live on 67k" and "I have a lot of free time on.my
    hands" and worst of all "I am self employed, no one pays me a
    salary" being so memorable whereas Jacks were as dull as most
    of his speeches

    Plus Straw is quitting and was a Blairite not an Ed supporter whereas
    Rifkind is the typical Cameroon Tory..warmongering, pro
    Israel, greedy, arrogant and for hire to anyone with enough
    money..A poster boy in fact for much of the modern Conservative Party

    If anyone not a political obsessive (so 99% of voters) remembers either by next week I will be quite surprised, the accusations are very weak sauce and are not going to hold the front pages very long with all the other political and international excitement going on
  • Indigo said:

    Rifkind is surely dead meat as its hard to see even Cameron
    who has a history of defending the indefensible (Miller, Coulson etc)
    retaining a man as chair of an important committee who would
    whore himself out to the extent he appears willing to

    While not good for Labour as Straw was involved too the story
    is still worse for the Tories especially with the quotes from
    the Kensington Mp about "someone of my background cant
    be expected to live on 67k" and "I have a lot of free time on.my
    hands" and worst of all "I am self employed, no one pays me a
    salary" being so memorable whereas Jacks were as dull as most
    of his speeches

    Plus Straw is quitting and was a Blairite not an Ed supporter whereas
    Rifkind is the typical Cameroon Tory..warmongering, pro
    Israel, greedy, arrogant and for hire to anyone with enough
    money..A poster boy in fact for much of the modern Conservative Party

    If anyone not a political obsessive (so 99% of voters) remembers either by next week I will be quite surprised, the accusations are very weak sauce and are not going to hold the front pages very long with all the other political and international excitement going on
    True..but Rifkinds story could rumble on and on as he appears
    set to try and continue his career as though unblemished and
    every time he appears on TV unapologetic and arrogant it will
    be a least a minor irritation to swing voters more worried about their own
    living standards on far less than 67k and with far less "time on
    their hands" and take up airtime the Tories would rather be filled with
    their Mps banging on about their fantasy Long Term Economic Plan
  • Hengists_GiftHengists_Gift Posts: 628
    edited February 2015

    Rifkind is surely dead meat as its hard to see even Cameron
    who has a history of defending the indefensible (Miller, Coulson etc)
    retaining a man as chair of an important committee who would
    whore himself out to the extent he appears willing to

    While not good for Labour as Straw was involved too the story
    is still worse for the Tories especially with the quotes from
    the Kensington Mp about "someone of my background cant
    be expected to live on 67k" and "I have a lot of free time on.my
    hands" and worst of all "I am self employed, no one pays me a
    salary" being so memorable whereas Jacks were as dull as most
    of his speeches

    Plus Straw is quitting and was a Blairite not an Ed supporter whereas
    Rifkind is the typical Cameroon Tory..warmongering, pro
    Israel, greedy, arrogant and for hire to anyone with enough
    money..A poster boy in fact for much of the modern Conservative Party

    I'm sure it will get 'Outraged of Islington' and 'Disgusted of Primrose Hill' frothing over their smoked tofu but I suspect for most it will be. 'Yep more greed from the Westminster rabble or somesuch'. I don't think a lot of voters differentiate anymore. It's just more of the same old corruption
  • Rifkind is surely dead meat as its hard to see even Cameron
    who has a history of defending the indefensible (Miller, Coulson etc)
    retaining a man as chair of an important committee who would
    whore himself out to the extent he appears willing to

    While not good for Labour as Straw was involved too the story
    is still worse for the Tories especially with the quotes from
    the Kensington Mp about "someone of my background cant
    be expected to live on 67k" and "I have a lot of free time on.my
    hands" and worst of all "I am self employed, no one pays me a
    salary" being so memorable whereas Jacks were as dull as most
    of his speeches

    Plus Straw is quitting and was a Blairite not an Ed supporter whereas
    Rifkind is the typical Cameroon Tory..warmongering, pro
    Israel, greedy, arrogant and for hire to anyone with enough
    money..A poster boy in fact for much of the modern Conservative Party

    I'm sure it will get 'Outraged of Islington' and 'Disgusted of Primrose Hill' frothing over their smoked tofu but I suspect for most it will be. 'Yep more greed from the Westminster rabble or somesuch'. I don't think a lot of voters differentiate anymore. It's just more of the same old corruption
    I suppose so...as Totally Unshocked of Sheffield it merely confirmed
    my opinion.of both men already..but the Rifkind part has the slight
    chance of becoming a Neil Hamilton Tatton 97 election story
    if he continues in his current vein

    Where are you Mr Bell? Put that white suit on one more time?

  • Rifkind is surely dead meat as its hard to see even Cameron
    who has a history of defending the indefensible (Miller, Coulson etc)
    retaining a man as chair of an important committee who would
    whore himself out to the extent he appears willing to

    While not good for Labour as Straw was involved too the story
    is still worse for the Tories especially with the quotes from
    the Kensington Mp about "someone of my background cant
    be expected to live on 67k" and "I have a lot of free time on.my
    hands" and worst of all "I am self employed, no one pays me a
    salary" being so memorable whereas Jacks were as dull as most
    of his speeches

    Plus Straw is quitting and was a Blairite not an Ed supporter whereas
    Rifkind is the typical Cameroon Tory..warmongering, pro
    Israel, greedy, arrogant and for hire to anyone with enough
    money..A poster boy in fact for much of the modern Conservative Party

    I'm sure it will get 'Outraged of Islington' and 'Disgusted of Primrose Hill' frothing over their smoked tofu but I suspect for most it will be. 'Yep more greed from the Westminster rabble or somesuch'. I don't think a lot of voters differentiate anymore. It's just more of the same old corruption
    I suppose so...as Totally Unshocked of Sheffield it merely confirmed
    my opinion.of both men already..but the Rifkind part has the slight
    chance of becoming a Neil Hamilton Tatton 97 election story
    if he continues in his current vein

    Where are you Mr Bell? Put that white suit on one more time?

    nah I don't think so he represents Kensington & Chelsea. There probably isn't a more sympathetic constituency for him in the country although if this drags on it will be intriguing to see who will be the Tory standing there if he can't get 'unsuspended' in time.

    Meanwhile of course in the wake of Rotherham, Greater Manchester, Saville, Clifford et al Miliband decides to bring back the 'chivalrous and gallant' John Prescott to the front line. Its all getting rather surreal really.....

  • The financial deterioration of the FT sector continues to worsen, with stress concentrated in the acute sector, where 60 trusts – 73 per cent of all acute FTs – are now in deficit.

    This compares to zero in 2010 in deficit and 21 trusts in 2013

    Is this what weaponising the NHS looks like?
    n.
    Or you make efficiency savings. The NHS budget has not been cut by 4% a year. In 2010 the NHS budget was £117 bn. In 2015 it is £133 bn. (I know the problem of health care inflation)

    I am happy with the NHS. I do not want to see it a political football.
    The NAO said in 2010ish that over the past ten years NHS expenditure had increased in real terms by 71 per cent.
    Labour commissioned a report by McKinsey - and Brown may have told them what he wanted to hear, who knows - but their report said in 2009 that savings could deliver up to £15 billion to the NHS even with no further funding growth.

    My point is I grow tired of Labour's weaponising of the NHS when they wasted the money they spent and they determined to make the savings they are complaining about now.


    Trying to get efficiency savings is laudable .. but the real problem i demand and especially demand by the elderly. Living longer, more of them and more ways of keeping them alive longer.

    I am an OAP and fortunately healthy (so far) but help neighbours in their 80s...by taking them to hospital etc. I am struck by the percentage of elderly patients in Outpatients waiting for a doctor: they must account for well over 60% of all attendees.

    In my view a lot more could be done to organise the fitter OAPs to help those less able.. and encourage those a decade away from retirement to exercise more. I am shocked how seriously unfit many 50 year old people are.

    Nothing complex: just walking more and doing simple exercises would make many enjoy far better health and live more enjoyable lives: let alone save the NHS a great deal of time and money.

    I see no evidence of any Party nor any medical staff addressing this issue. Prevention is far cheaper and better than cure.


    With the the forecast boom in OAPs post 2029, it will become impossible to fund the rise in OAPs as the NHS stands. We are talking "10 million people in the UK are over 65 years old. The latest projections are for 5½ million more elderly people in 20 years time and the number will have nearly doubled to around 19 million by 2050. " http://tinyurl.com/c5vepm3
  • weejonnieweejonnie Posts: 3,820

    The Times

    Senior Liberal Democrats declared that pre-election TV debates would take place “over their dead body” after Britain’s four main broadcasters yesterday announced the order in which they would screen three proposed debates.

    The party refused to rule out the possibility of legal action as it emerged that the key head-to-head debate between David Cameron and Ed Miliband, which excludes Nick Clegg, the Lib Dem leader, will take place a week before the general election.

    This means that the chances of the debates going ahead is receding further, with both coalition partners expressing strong objections to the proposed format.


    I don't think that the LDs can do anything - there's no contract between them and the media- and being empty chaired in the two other debates won't look good.
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,300
    Bennett scoring more own goals than Man U.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p02kpx6j

    Clearly not selected on merit.
  • JPJ2JPJ2 Posts: 380
    Frankbooth

    " However there must be quite a few relative non-entity SNP activists (hope that's not too offensive, I'm presuming the A team will stay in Edinburgh) who could soon find themselves in parliament."

    Not as many as you might think. In fact I would say the SNP now have the strongest slate of candidates they have ever had for Westminster, at least since the creation of Holyrood.

    The reason for that must surely be the combination of the politicising effect of the referendum and the evidence that many more SNP candidates are likely to become MPs.

    As an example, perhaps John Nicolson (ex-BBC) might not have been tempted to stand for the SNP in East Dunbartonshire were it not for the referendum and a belief that he could win.

    I suggest that his campaign may well catch fire, resulting in a win in 2015 from 4th in GE2010-goodbye Jo Swinson if it happens.

  • Moses_Moses_ Posts: 4,865
    Sky news

    Bercow says MPs will cop it if they have broken rules. He went on to say......

    "People should not be in Parliament to add to their personal fortune."

    http://news.sky.com/story/1433564/bercow-cash-for-access-mps-may-cop-it

This discussion has been closed.