Incidentally, the SPIN "overall majority" market looks tasty. The range is 28-34, where 0 is any coalition, 50 is a single party minority, and 100 is an overall majority. Neither LibDems nor SNP seem likely to me to want to join a coalition, and nobody will offer one to the DUP, UKIP or Greens. The main risk is a LibDem resurgence leading to them confidently re-entering government (on either side), but is that a 28% chance? Do your own research, of course.
The Tories wont offer DUP a coalition? Not sure I follow the logic here.
No chance of the DUP being in coalition with anyone. If the numbers work for either Labour or Conservative they will offer supply & confidence or support on a bill by bill basis.
If Cameron is a handful of seats short and UKIP get 8 seats and he says he can do business with either party they might find their principles fraying at the edges. Join the Coalition and get the pork barrel, or become an irrelevance on the sidelines.
Precisely. The warm feel of those leather cabinet seats will suddenly over power any principled stands made in the campaign. One thing we know about Cam and Osb is they can sort out a coalition agreement.
Neither the Lib Dems nor the DUP will wish to share ministerial posts. DUP offering supply and confidence to a Lib-Dem/Conservative coalition is as far as the next Conservative coalition will reach imo.
Political Studies Assoc survey of 500 "experts" (warning: incl me) predicts: Lab 282 seats, Con 278, SNP 29, LD 25, UKIP 7, Green 2
No evidence that the SNP has slipped this far. And anyway, if they get into this 29 seats range, then is a crap shoot, as a wide band of range of Scottish seats around that margin would be Too Close To Call.
""We've always said that the licence fee should be updated to reflect changing times," Lord Hall will say in his speech. "Adapting the licence fee for the internet age... is vital."
Sounds like he wants a licence fee for computers. Which would be completely unacceptable.
Are more 'independent' Scottish Lib.Dems. like Viscount Thurso and Charles Kennedy not slightly safer, other things being equal? Charles K didn't vote for the coalition.
I don't live in or near Amersham but I thought that Cheryl Gillan was against HS2 and left the government in protest. Maybe I was wrong.
She has spoken out many times against HS2, then sold her cottage in Old Amersham as quickly as she could, which is seen as hypocritical locally. She is seen as speaking out in order to keep her seat but privately couldn't care less and has adjusted her personal situation to suit.
Claiming for a tin of dog food hasn't helped either.
They'd probably settle for a referendum on AV+ and a rich tea biscuit.
I think we're already starting to see that the LDs (and indeed anyone else if they have any sesne) are going to extract a heavy price for Cameron's EU Refrendum. Such a totemic policy is fine if you can win a majority - if not, it becomes a stick with which you can be beaten.
I got some stick from a few Tory numpties on here for suggesting the price for the LDs supporting the EU Refrendum should be the introduction of STV for all elections without a referendum.
Perhaps but could Cameron persuade his backbenchers to support any Coalition which did not guarantee his beloved referendum ?
Incidentally, the SPIN "overall majority" market looks tasty. The range is 28-34, where 0 is any coalition, 50 is a single party minority, and 100 is an overall majority. Neither LibDems nor SNP seem likely to me to want to join a coalition, and nobody will offer one to the DUP, UKIP or Greens. The main risk is a LibDem resurgence leading to them confidently re-entering government (on either side), but is that a 28% chance? Do your own research, of course.
The Tories wont offer DUP a coalition? Not sure I follow the logic here.
No chance of the DUP being in coalition with anyone. If the numbers work for either Labour or Conservative they will offer supply & confidence or support on a bill by bill basis.
If Cameron is a handful of seats short and UKIP get 8 seats and he says he can do business with either party they might find their principles fraying at the edges. Join the Coalition and get the pork barrel, or become an irrelevance on the sidelines.
If I am not mistaken haven't the Libdems lost considerable funding by going into coalition by losing their Short money? It seems to me that any 'pork' comes from staying in opposition which probably explains in part why all the smaller parties are talking confidence and supply.
" As the election gets closer, and Labour's chances of winning an outright majority continue to look like a long shot, there's bound to be plenty of discussion over what happens next.
If Ed Miliband leads the party with the largest number of seats, then he should get the first shot at forming a Parliamentary majority - or govern as the leader of a minority government. In recent months the party has talked over what a Lab/Lib coalition might look like, or if a Lab/SNP coalition might work (it wouldn't, as I've written before). But so far no Labour figure has floated the idea of a Labour/Tory coalition.
Until now. The...unique...Gisela Stuart MP (who won one of 2010'S hardest fought races to hold her Birmingham Edgbaston seat) has told the FT that she thinks we should consider a "grand" coalition with the Tories."
""We've always said that the licence fee should be updated to reflect changing times," Lord Hall will say in his speech. "Adapting the licence fee for the internet age... is vital."
Sounds like he wants a licence fee for computers. Which would be completely unacceptable.
The distortion imposed on the UK online news market by the BBC is unbelievable. One of the genuinely good things about Murdoch is his funding of the loss-making Sky News to provide a (broadly non-partisan) alternative to the tentacled montrosity that is BBC News.
On topic my MP is Cheryl Gillam and she is loathed because of HS2, won't stop her winning though.
I read this earlier, I am nowhere near as au fait with this stuff as most of you, except to say wind farms are an expensive, inefficient blot on the landscape. But this looks good to me, I take the figures with a pinch of salt but if they can get within 20% of those stated it looks a good idea:
Tidal power seems the most sensible green energy alternative and if 'the series of six lagoons could generate 8% of the UK's electricity for an investment of £30bn' then that is about comparable with a new nuclear station. And the tides are regular and predictable. I'm sure the greens will find some way to complain about it... the Severn Barrage stays moribund because of wading birds. No doubt there will be an unacceptable carbon footprint for all the concrete being used.
On topic my MP is Cheryl Gillam and she is loathed because of HS2, won't stop her winning though.
I read this earlier, I am nowhere near as au fait with this stuff as most of you, except to say wind farms are an expensive, inefficient blot on the landscape. But this looks good to me, I take the figures with a pinch of salt but if they can get within 20% of those stated it looks a good idea:
Tidal power seems the most sensible green energy alternative and if 'the series of six lagoons could generate 8% of the UK's electricity for an investment of £30bn' then that is about comparable with a new nuclear station. And the tides are regular and predictable. I'm sure the greens will find some way to complain about it... the Severn Barrage stays moribund because of wading birds. No doubt there will be an unacceptable carbon footprint for all the concrete being used.
Yes, utterly predictable tidal power should certainly form part of our energy plan - we have some of the largest potential energy reservoirs in the world with our tides, we should harness them for the nation.
You have to love things like 500 experts share their GE predictions. Who decides they are experts? Themselves probably. Nothing like academics in ivory towers thinking themselves far more important than society does.
Would be interesting to know how many would recognize him if they passed by him in the street - probably not many as his presence in Doncaster must be a rare event.
On topic: Of course Mike is right both in stating that LibDem incumbents have the advantage of a personal vote (sometimes a very large personal vote), and that the LibDem party will campaign on this basis rather than emphasising the LibDem brand.
However, it is very important to understand that the personal vote of incumbents is already in the 2010 starting figures. So it may not provide as much comfort as the LibDems hope.
There still seems to be a strong denial of reality in the minds of liberals. It seems that the Perfect Storm they now face isn't registering. It's easy to synmpathise with them because much of it is not their fault but for all these reasons they will be doing very well to get over 20 seats in 2015.
Things that aren't their fault : -
1. They found an opportunity for coalition at a time when the government was always going to be unpopular.
2. The only realistic option was the Tories who would be toxic to swathes of their support.
2. It's happened at a time when a genuine challenge for third party developed in UKIP.
4. It's happened at a time when a genuine appeal to many of their core voters has appeared relevant in the Greens.
5. They are massively over-represented in Scotland and face the same challenge from the SNP surge that Labour do.
6. How many people in their 30s and 40s who didn't follow politics as a teenager will only know Cyril Smith as the face of Liberalism? A regular on the chat shows and celebrity appearances in the late 70s and 80s, I think the damage he is causing is not being fully considered.
On top of this they have made some serious mistakes of their own making.
1. Going for AV to gerrymander FPTP in favour of the third party instead of sticking with their supposed commitment to PR which they happily threw away.
2. Completely rejecting their long standing commitment to Federalism leading to complete irrelevance in Scotland (there are already two larger Unionist parties - there would be a gap for proper Federalists).
3. A complete failure of media management, their striking (if ridiculous) implementation of £10k tax threshold isn't visible while their backtrack on tuition fees is still at the forefront of people's minds.
There really are far too many reasons for thinking that Liberals with hopes of a representation over 20 this year are living in cloud cuckoo land.
On topic: Of course Mike is right both in stating that LibDem incumbents have the advantage of a personal vote (sometimes a very large personal vote), and that the LibDem party will campaign on this basis rather than emphasising the LibDem brand.
However, it is very important to understand that the personal vote of incumbents is already in the 2010 starting figures. So it may not provide as much comfort as the LibDems hope.
Those that have been away from the Gov't seem to do considerably better than those that haven't, and the effect seems to work best when you have a Conservative opponent.
On topic my MP is Cheryl Gillam and she is loathed because of HS2, won't stop her winning though.
I read this earlier, I am nowhere near as au fait with this stuff as most of you, except to say wind farms are an expensive, inefficient blot on the landscape. But this looks good to me, I take the figures with a pinch of salt but if they can get within 20% of those stated it looks a good idea:
Tidal power seems the most sensible green energy alternative and if 'the series of six lagoons could generate 8% of the UK's electricity for an investment of £30bn' then that is about comparable with a new nuclear station. And the tides are regular and predictable. I'm sure the greens will find some way to complain about it... the Severn Barrage stays moribund because of wading birds. No doubt there will be an unacceptable carbon footprint for all the concrete being used.
Yes, utterly predictable tidal power should certainly form part of our energy plan - we have some of the largest potential energy reservoirs in the world with our tides, we should harness them for the nation.
I'm really no expert, but when I spent a couple of hours googling this it seemed the main issue with tidal power is, erm, the tides.
Predictably being able to generate a large amount of electricity at 4am isn't really that useful.
Regarding Inverness, Danny Alexander is a popular local boy from Aviemore and still lives locally with his wife and children. His mother is one of the most energetic charity type workers in the community and the family is well liked.
Drew Hendry is the arrogant face of an even more arrogant SNP led Highland Council administration. The council is taking decision after decision which is seriously irritating the electorate e.g. threatened cutting back on road salting, closure of local schools. There has been a fair amount of internal strife within SNP circles with moderates being ousted by left-wing YES men. The imposition of average speed cameras on the A9 was a huge issue which Danny opposed and he had the backing of most locals.
In the Highlands we see the SNP becoming more and more like a Central Belt left wing mafia.
""We've always said that the licence fee should be updated to reflect changing times," Lord Hall will say in his speech. "Adapting the licence fee for the internet age... is vital."
Sounds like he wants a licence fee for computers. Which would be completely unacceptable.
3. A complete failure of media management, their striking (if ridiculous) implementation of £10k tax threshold isn't visible while their backtrack on tuition fees is still at the forefront of people's minds.
The £10k tax threshold is something they should have sung from the rooftops, but it's barely going to register I think. I'm grateful for this personally at any rate.
25% down weighting of the raw UKIP figures (281 raw 210 weighted). And these are the 'adjusted' figures which give UKIP better figures?
25% is a heck of an adjustment down presumably on assumption that a lot of pro kipper respondents wont vote.
If my hunch that, after all the 'racist' smearing there are a significant number of shy kippers so UKIP should be adjusted up, the election result will be quite extraordinary with kipper candidates who only agreed to stand or were only selected because the seat was unwinnable finding themselves MPs.
Mr. Watcher, no idea, but that's one of the few conclusions that can be reached based on what Hall has said. The alternative would seem to be a levy on every household in the country, regardless of whether they own a TV, or computer.
25% down weighting of the raw UKIP figures (281 raw 210 weighted). And these are the 'adjusted' figures which give UKIP better figures?
25% is a heck of an adjustment down presumably on assumption that a lot of pro kipper respondents wont vote.
If my hunch that, after all the 'racist' smearing there are a significant number of shy kippers so UKIP should be adjusted up, the election result will be quite extraordinary with kipper candidates who only agreed to stand or were only selected because the seat was unwinnable finding themselves MPs.
Phone polls are a better indication of true UKIP support. They have far far less adjustment, although UKIP suffer from ICM's spiral of silence - but that's a seperate matter.
That said, 14% sounds about right for UKIP - they are over-represented on Populus panel so there does need to be some adjustment downwards (Compare it to Yougov raw numbers)
Regarding Inverness, Danny Alexander is a popular local boy from Aviemore and still lives locally with his wife and children. His mother is one of the most energetic charity type workers in the community and the family is well liked.
Drew Hendry is the arrogant face of an even more arrogant SNP led Highland Council administration. The council is taking decision after decision which is seriously irritating the electorate e.g. threatened cutting back on road salting, closure of local schools. There has been a fair amount of internal strife within SNP circles with moderates being ousted by left-wing YES men. The imposition of average speed cameras on the A9 was a huge issue which Danny opposed and he had the backing of most locals.
In the Highlands we see the SNP becoming more and more like a Central Belt left wing mafia.
I have a feeling that the SNP might not do as well as they think they will and there area lot of shy (or perhaps browbeaten) voters not wanting to admit they wont be suporting SENU-pf
(Scottish European National Union - Patriotic Front)
Incidentally, the SPIN "overall majority" market looks tasty. The range is 28-34, where 0 is any coalition, 50 is a single party minority, and 100 is an overall majority. Neither LibDems nor SNP seem likely to me to want to join a coalition, and nobody will offer one to the DUP, UKIP or Greens. The main risk is a LibDem resurgence leading to them confidently re-entering government (on either side), but is that a 28% chance? Do your own research, of course.
An interesting suggestion Nick. I bow to your better judgement on such matters but I would have thought that the best chance of a coalition depended primarily not so much on the LibDems doing better than expected, but rather on one or other of the two major parties winning around 300 seats (unlikely I know but just possible) and thereby seeing themselves within sight of the winning post with the support of say 20-25 LibDem MPs. Surely in such circumstances they would offer the Yellows the earth to grasp the opportunity to hold onto power for the next 5 years.
Well, I defer to LibDems here but I'd think that if they've lost half their seats and two thirds of their votes they will be preoccupied with a new leadership election rather than rushing into junior partnership with anyone, especially if the majority would barely exist even then (300+20 is not a majority at all, and lumping in DUP and UKIP makes LD participation even more unlikely). I know they've ruled out C&S, but "not bringing a government down, in the national interest", seems a plausible holding position.
As others have said, the DUP wants £££ for Ulster, not Cabinet seats. Essentially I think it will turn out that the SNP wants the equivalent, plus ore devolution, for Scotland.
On topic my MP is Cheryl Gillam and she is loathed because of HS2, won't stop her winning though.
I read this earlier, I am nowhere near as au fait with this stuff as most of you, except to say wind farms are an expensive, inefficient blot on the landscape. But this looks good to me, I take the figures with a pinch of salt but if they can get within 20% of those stated it looks a good idea:
Tidal power seems the most sensible green energy alternative and if 'the series of six lagoons could generate 8% of the UK's electricity for an investment of £30bn' then that is about comparable with a new nuclear station. And the tides are regular and predictable. I'm sure the greens will find some way to complain about it... the Severn Barrage stays moribund because of wading birds. No doubt there will be an unacceptable carbon footprint for all the concrete being used.
Yes, utterly predictable tidal power should certainly form part of our energy plan - we have some of the largest potential energy reservoirs in the world with our tides, we should harness them for the nation.
I'm really no expert, but when I spent a couple of hours googling this it seemed the main issue with tidal power is, erm, the tides.
Predictably being able to generate a large amount of electricity at 4am isn't really that useful.
I believe there were also concerns about taking power out of the waves reduced significantly their ability to keep the beaches clean... that was certainly mentioned in the era of the "nodding duck" wave power trails.
On topic my MP is Cheryl Gillam and she is loathed because of HS2, won't stop her winning though.
I read this earlier, I am nowhere near as au fait with this stuff as most of you, except to say wind farms are an expensive, inefficient blot on the landscape. But this looks good to me, I take the figures with a pinch of salt but if they can get within 20% of those stated it looks a good idea:
Tidal power seems the most sensible green energy alternative and if 'the series of six lagoons could generate 8% of the UK's electricity for an investment of £30bn' then that is about comparable with a new nuclear station. And the tides are regular and predictable. I'm sure the greens will find some way to complain about it... the Severn Barrage stays moribund because of wading birds. No doubt there will be an unacceptable carbon footprint for all the concrete being used.
Yes, utterly predictable tidal power should certainly form part of our energy plan - we have some of the largest potential energy reservoirs in the world with our tides, we should harness them for the nation.
I'm really no expert, but when I spent a couple of hours googling this it seemed the main issue with tidal power is, erm, the tides.
Predictably being able to generate a large amount of electricity at 4am isn't really that useful.
I'm a bit reluctant to pitch in on this because I don't know much about it, and it's probably going to get a bunch of responses from other people who don't know much about it, but if you have the ability to dam a bunch of separate bits of water off you can store water temporarily at different levels and create power when you need it. If you've sometimes got surplus power on the rest of the grid, you can also use that to pump water back uphill like a traditional pump-storage hydro plant.
Back in this site's sweet spot, I guess the practical issue in the UK is how you're going to get anything substantial past the RSPB, which is a terrifying lobbying monster with over a million members, twice the total membership of all the British political parties combined.
On universal swing the Lib Dems should be facing oblivion at the moment having lost nearly 2/3 of their 2010 vote.
I just tried Baxtering the current UK Polling Report average and it has the LibDems on 18, which seems surprisingly perky. This drop in seats is only barely worse than the drop in vote share, which is impressive considering the way FPTP would normally hammer you disproportionately as you get further away from the sweet zone.
Quite a number of the Lib Dem seats have been built up to be seriously "safe" in normal times with very big majorities. So even very large swings have them hanging on.
But they do seem to be doing better than that (SPIN agrees) and as you say that really should not be the case as their overall support falls.
I have 2 small bets with Isam. The first, that the Lib Dems will outpoll UKIP I am pretty pessimistic about. The second, that the Lib Dems will have more than 4x the seats of UKIP I am supremely confident of.
If the Lib Dems do hold on to a reasonable clutch of seats no doubt this is the explanation that will be given. It was all down to the reputation of individual MPs. I just can't see how Clegg would have the authority to survive, more still, act as a kingmaker.
On topic my MP is Cheryl Gillam and she is loathed because of HS2, won't stop her winning though.
I read this earlier, I am nowhere near as au fait with this stuff as most of you, except to say wind farms are an expensive, inefficient blot on the landscape. But this looks good to me, I take the figures with a pinch of salt but if they can get within 20% of those stated it looks a good idea:
Tidal power seems the most sensible green energy alternative and if 'the series of six lagoons could generate 8% of the UK's electricity for an investment of £30bn' then that is about comparable with a new nuclear station. And the tides are regular and predictable. I'm sure the greens will find some way to complain about it... the Severn Barrage stays moribund because of wading birds. No doubt there will be an unacceptable carbon footprint for all the concrete being used.
Yes, utterly predictable tidal power should certainly form part of our energy plan - we have some of the largest potential energy reservoirs in the world with our tides, we should harness them for the nation.
I'm really no expert, but when I spent a couple of hours googling this it seemed the main issue with tidal power is, erm, the tides.
Predictably being able to generate a large amount of electricity at 4am isn't really that useful.
I'm a bit reluctant to pitch in on this because I don't know much about it, and it's probably going to get a bunch of responses from other people who don't know much about it, but if you have the ability to dam a bunch of separate bits of water off you can store water temporarily at different levels and create power when you need it. If you've sometimes got surplus power on the rest of the grid, you can also use that to pump water back uphill like a traditional pump-storage hydro plant.
Back in this site's sweet spot, I guess the practical issue in the UK is how you're going to get anything substantial past the RSPB, which is a terrifying lobbying monster with over a million members, twice the total membership of all the British political parties combined.
They haven't done much about the ugly bird blender monstrosities that blight our landscape.
On top of this they have made some serious mistakes of their own making.
1. Going for AV to gerrymander FPTP in favour of the third party instead of sticking with their supposed commitment to PR which they happily threw away.
2. Completely rejecting their long standing commitment to Federalism leading to complete irrelevance in Scotland (there are already two larger Unionist parties - there would be a gap for proper Federalists).
3. A complete failure of media management, their striking (if ridiculous) implementation of £10k tax threshold isn't visible while their backtrack on tuition fees is still at the forefront of people's minds.
There really are far too many reasons for thinking that Liberals with hopes of a representation over 20 this year are living in cloud cuckoo land.
Well, thank you for yet another cheery assessment from someone clearly not well disposed. Perhaps the SNP can learn some lessons from the LDs when they jump into bed with Labour.
I don't disagree with point one and I've said so on here many times. I don't really understand point 2 - I'm not sure what you mean by "Federalism". The SNP portrays anyone who doesn't support full independence as a "Unionist" (whatever that means as well) so of course the LDs are a Unionist party in that sense.
Point 3 - well, we'll see. I've often criticised Nick for the tuition fees debacle and doubtless it'll be dragged out in the campaign proper but the Party has a good story to tell on aspects of the economy and you can be sure that will be heard as well.
25% down weighting of the raw UKIP figures (281 raw 210 weighted). And these are the 'adjusted' figures which give UKIP better figures?
25% is a heck of an adjustment down presumably on assumption that a lot of pro kipper respondents wont vote.
If my hunch that, after all the 'racist' smearing there are a significant number of shy kippers so UKIP should be adjusted up, the election result will be quite extraordinary with kipper candidates who only agreed to stand or were only selected because the seat was unwinnable finding themselves MPs.
Phone polls are a better indication of true UKIP support. They have far far less adjustment, although UKIP suffer from ICM's spiral of silence - but that's a seperate matter.
That said, 14% sounds about right for UKIP - they are over-represented on Populus panel so there does need to be some adjustment downwards (Compare it to Yougov raw numbers)
You cannot compare the two pollsters panels because when Yougov set up their panel UKIP were not a real presence in politics and therefore nobody identified with them. Yougov also do not update their panel members profiles very often if at all. Therefore many members of the panel could have joined back in the days as Tories or Labour or Libdem who are now UKIP but Youov will still see them as what they first said they were. Those same people could have joined the Populus panel recently and said they were UKIP and from a Populus perspective are UKIP.
If the Lib Dems do hold on to a reasonable clutch of seats no doubt this is the explanation that will be given. It was all down to the reputation of individual MPs. I just can't see how Clegg would have the authority to survive, more still, act as a kingmaker.
He doesn't need authority. He needs to have the votes somebody needs in parliament to pass their stuff.
It's hard to see his MPs knifing him while they're still working out if they can get back into government, and a reduced number of LibDem survivors means better jobs for the ones who are left.
If the Lib Dems do hold on to a reasonable clutch of seats no doubt this is the explanation that will be given. It was all down to the reputation of individual MPs. I just can't see how Clegg would have the authority to survive, more still, act as a kingmaker.
If Dave loses ground how would he have the authority to remain as PM? If Ed fails to secure a majority how would he have the authority to become PM? As has been said here before, it's all down to numbers of seats. Someone has to govern and if they need to form a coalition in order to do that, then that is what they must do.
Point 3 - well, we'll see. I've often criticised Nick for the tuition fees debacle and doubtless it'll be dragged out in the campaign proper but the Party has a good story to tell on aspects of the economy and you can be sure that will be heard as well.
In some ways I would describe the currently extremely high personal allowance threshold as a moral disaster. We now have whole swathes of the country who have no personal interest in the government spending its revenue properly, because they don't contribute to it visibly though their pay packet (yes, they pay VAT, but for most people that is just part of the price). A very low starter rate would make a lot more sense, I have a lot of time for Brown's 10% starting rate, and was mystified (although rather less so, I assume, than a lot of people that suddenly got substantially worse off) by him withdrawing it.
I agree with Nick P that any kind of formal coalition is really quite unlikely. The DUP won't enter a coalition, they can barrel more pork from the outside. The SNP won't enter a coalition with Labour because Labour are the arch-enemy that they are trying to destroy and whom they need to blame for everything, and they certainly won't enter a coalition with the Tories whom they need as a bogeyman. In any case, why on earth would the SNP, of all parties, want to work hard to produce a stable UK government?
That leaves only the LibDems. Whilst I imagine that many of the senior LibDem ministers would prefer coalition to C & S, getting any new agreement past LibDem MPs, and the party as a whole, looks very problematic. The experience of this coalition has not exactly turned out well for them (although as I've said before I think that is partly because they got their messaging wrong), so any kind of coalition probably won't appeal. Furthermore, there are very practical problems with either of the two possible partners. If they stay with the Conservatives, they risk losing even more of their distinct identity. If they switch to Labour, they look like opportunistic cynics reversing what they've just achieved, and also they shackle themselves to Ed Miliband, which would be asking for trouble.
As I've been saying for the last couple of years, there is a high probability of no viable government being possible. Although the political risk of the GE is beginning to be understood by the financial markets, they still haven't really understood the full extent of the risk.
Whether SPIN's market is the best way of playing this is another matter - I think there are better bets elesewhere.
On topic my MP is Cheryl Gillam and she is loathed because of HS2, won't stop her winning though.
I read this earlier, I am nowhere near as au fait with this stuff as most of you, except to say wind farms are an expensive, inefficient blot on the landscape. But this looks good to me, I take the figures with a pinch of salt but if they can get within 20% of those stated it looks a good idea:
Tidal power seems the most sensible green energy alternative and if 'the series of six lagoons could generate 8% of the UK's electricity for an investment of £30bn' then that is about comparable with a new nuclear station. And the tides are regular and predictable. I'm sure the greens will find some way to complain about it... the Severn Barrage stays moribund because of wading birds. No doubt there will be an unacceptable carbon footprint for all the concrete being used.
Yes, utterly predictable tidal power should certainly form part of our energy plan - we have some of the largest potential energy reservoirs in the world with our tides, we should harness them for the nation.
I'm really no expert, but when I spent a couple of hours googling this it seemed the main issue with tidal power is, erm, the tides.
Predictably being able to generate a large amount of electricity at 4am isn't really that useful.
I'm a bit reluctant to pitch in on this because I don't know much about it, and it's probably going to get a bunch of responses from other people who don't know much about it, but if you have the ability to dam a bunch of separate bits of water off you can store water temporarily at different levels and create power when you need it. If you've sometimes got surplus power on the rest of the grid, you can also use that to pump water back uphill like a traditional pump-storage hydro plant.
Back in this site's sweet spot, I guess the practical issue in the UK is how you're going to get anything substantial past the RSPB, which is a terrifying lobbying monster with over a million members, twice the total membership of all the British political parties combined.
I'm a bit reluctant to pitch in on this because I don't know much about it, and it's probably going to get a bunch of responses from other people who don't know much about it, but if you have the ability to dam a bunch of separate bits of water off you can store water temporarily at different levels and create power when you need it. If you've sometimes got surplus power on the rest of the grid, you can also use that to pump water back uphill like a traditional pump-storage hydro plant.
Back in this site's sweet spot, I guess the practical issue in the UK is how you're going to get anything substantial past the RSPB, which is a terrifying lobbying monster with over a million members, twice the total membership of all the British political parties combined.
They haven't done much about the ugly bird blender monstrosities that blight our landscape.
We are involved in scrutinising hundreds of wind farm applications every year to determine their likely wildlife impacts, and we ultimately object to about 6% of those we engage with, because they threaten bird populations. Where developers are willing to adapt plans to reduce impacts to acceptable levels we withdraw our objections, in other cases we robustly oppose them.
If the Lib Dems do hold on to a reasonable clutch of seats no doubt this is the explanation that will be given. It was all down to the reputation of individual MPs. I just can't see how Clegg would have the authority to survive, more still, act as a kingmaker.
If Dave loses ground how would he have the authority to remain as PM? If Ed fails to secure a majority how would he have the authority to become PM? As has been said here before, it's all down to numbers of seats. Someone has to govern and if they need to form a coalition in order to do that, then that is what they must do.
If no plausible Coalition is possible, or only a very weak one is possible which then implodes within weeks we are in rather uncharted territory with the FTPA idiocy.
If the LDs want to go into opposition and recuperate, but might agree on a bill by bill basis, and LAB can't make a deal with the SNP that it's backbenchers would wear, so it goes to bill-by-bill as well, its going to be a fun time with the possibility of the government falling almost every day.
If the Lib Dems do hold on to a reasonable clutch of seats no doubt this is the explanation that will be given. It was all down to the reputation of individual MPs. I just can't see how Clegg would have the authority to survive, more still, act as a kingmaker.
If Dave loses ground how would he have the authority to remain as PM? If Ed fails to secure a majority how would he have the authority to become PM? As has been said here before, it's all down to numbers of seats. Someone has to govern and if they need to form a coalition in order to do that, then that is what they must do.
If no plausible Coalition is possible, or only a very weak one is possible which then implodes within weeks we are in rather uncharted territory with the FTPA idiocy.
If the LDs want to go into opposition and recuperate, but might agree on a bill by bill basis, and LAB can't make a deal with the SNP that it's backbenchers would wear, so it goes to bill-by-bill as well, its going to be a fun time with the possibility of the government falling almost every day.
There's always a possible coalition Con/Lab or Lab/Con.
Morning all, why don't we just have a thread headed "LibDem MPs are maverick, comfy, loveable folk we all want to save for the nation"
We shall see how wonderful the voters think their LibDem sitting MPs are on 7th May.
Easterross - how many Black Cabs do you think the LDs will need to convey their Parliamentary contingent post 7 May?
I cannot fathom out what is happening up here in the Highlands. I expect Alistair Carmichael and Charles Kennedy to hold on easily and have a gut feeling the anti-Drew Hendry element may just save Danny but in my seat only Jack W can save John Thurso.
First in an occasional series on Osborne's - ahem - 'successes':
UK drug manufacture drops by a quarter
The coalition’s ambitions to promote the UK’s £60bn pharmaceutical sector as a high-growth industry have suffered a blow after drug output dropped by a quarter during the lifetime of the government despite an expanding market at home.
Point 3 - well, we'll see. I've often criticised Nick for the tuition fees debacle and doubtless it'll be dragged out in the campaign proper but the Party has a good story to tell on aspects of the economy and you can be sure that will be heard as well.
In some ways I would describe the currently extremely high personal allowance threshold as a moral disaster. We now have whole swathes of the country who have no personal interest in the government spending its revenue properly, because they don't contribute to it visibly though their pay packet (yes, they pay VAT, but for most people that is just part of the price). A very low starter rate would make a lot more sense, I have a lot of time for Brown's 10% starting rate, and was mystified (although rather less so, I assume, than a lot of people that suddenly got substantially worse off) by him withdrawing it.
People are very happy to quote "No Taxation without Representation" but seem quite unwilling to consider the corollary.
The experience of this coalition has not exactly turned out well for them (although as I've said before I think that is partly because they got their messaging wrong), so any kind of coalition probably won't appeal. Furthermore, there are very practical problems with either of the two possible partners. If they stay with the Conservatives, they risk losing even more of their distinct identity.
In the "alternative history" where the LDs pulled in close as coalition partners, put Uncle Vince out to pasture (maybe bundled him into The Lords) and dropped all the differentiation briefing which did little more than sound like constant whining to the public. At the moment it looks to many like trying to have their cake and eat it, support the Tories, maintain them in power, and complain endlessly about their policies. What would have happened ? They would have been able to take a large share of the credit for the coalitions successes without looking like hypocrites for all the criticism they had been making all along. They might have been edging into a coupon coalition sort of position for GE2015. Lets face it they can hardly have done much worse in the polls
First in an occasional series on Osborne's - ahem - 'successes':
UK drug manufacture drops by a quarter
The coalition’s ambitions to promote the UK’s £60bn pharmaceutical sector as a high-growth industry have suffered a blow after drug output dropped by a quarter during the lifetime of the government despite an expanding market at home.
Industry representatives said the decline in output over the past five years was partly due to the expiration of patents on a range of money-spinning drugs, which has prompted big pharma companies to shift production to lower-cost countries.
and
However, the climate is changing. Many observers say that the introduction of the patent box in 2013 has allowed companies to retain the profits of innovation carried out in the UK.
Moreover, wage pressure in low-cost countries was “reducing the differential”, according to James Christie, of the Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry.
He pointed out that AstraZeneca and GlaxoSmithKline had recently announced new investments, indicating that the UK was once more becoming an attractive location for manufacturing.
If the Lib Dems do hold on to a reasonable clutch of seats no doubt this is the explanation that will be given. It was all down to the reputation of individual MPs. I just can't see how Clegg would have the authority to survive, more still, act as a kingmaker.
If Dave loses ground how would he have the authority to remain as PM? If Ed fails to secure a majority how would he have the authority to become PM? As has been said here before, it's all down to numbers of seats. Someone has to govern and if they need to form a coalition in order to do that, then that is what they must do.
If no plausible Coalition is possible, or only a very weak one is possible which then implodes within weeks we are in rather uncharted territory with the FTPA idiocy.
If the LDs want to go into opposition and recuperate, but might agree on a bill by bill basis, and LAB can't make a deal with the SNP that it's backbenchers would wear, so it goes to bill-by-bill as well, its going to be a fun time with the possibility of the government falling almost every day.
The thing is under the fixed term parliament act in the case of a minority government the effective power to force an election and bring the government down is wholly handed over to the opposition parties. The government will not be able to dissolve parliament and call an election facing defeat after defeat after defeat on the floor of the house and so therefore could be left as a zombie government for months or even years potentially. It changes the dynamics of such matters significantly.
Now potentially such circumstances could precipitate governing parties to begin to rip themselves apart if they lose discipline in the face of being frustrated by the opposition parties.
This may well be a very good election to lose.....
I'm now beginning to think that JackW might be right about Ed.
Adherents are most welcome, however late to the party they arrive ....
Calling Nick Palmer ....
Jack W could be as right about Ed as he was with Watford last time which he maintained throughout was an LD gain. I said a CON gain.
Most ungallant of OGH to refer to a temporary loss of form caused I might add by a severe shortage of single malt Chez JackW and a perverse electorate clearly determined to undermine my 2010 TOTY campaign, for which the unscrupulous, and eventual runner-up, Peter the Punter was obviously responsible.
Have I mentioned I am the reigning TOTY .... There's nothing quite like a long reign .... ask Her Majesty the Queen.
If the Lib Dems do hold on to a reasonable clutch of seats no doubt this is the explanation that will be given. It was all down to the reputation of individual MPs. I just can't see how Clegg would have the authority to survive, more still, act as a kingmaker.
If Dave loses ground how would he have the authority to remain as PM? If Ed fails to secure a majority how would he have the authority to become PM? As has been said here before, it's all down to numbers of seats. Someone has to govern and if they need to form a coalition in order to do that, then that is what they must do.
If no plausible Coalition is possible, or only a very weak one is possible which then implodes within weeks we are in rather uncharted territory with the FTPA idiocy.
If the LDs want to go into opposition and recuperate, but might agree on a bill by bill basis, and LAB can't make a deal with the SNP that it's backbenchers would wear, so it goes to bill-by-bill as well, its going to be a fun time with the possibility of the government falling almost every day.
There's always a possible coalition Con/Lab or Lab/Con.
They wouldn't risk it even if they could agree it. It would confirm to lots of voters everything the kippers had been saying about LibLabCon, a grand coalition would have UKIP in the high 20's at GE2020, and gain a load of seats from by-elections, not to mention the whole Tory right would peel off the day after the announcement... I can see why it appeals to you
@Dair - I enjoyed your observations on a UK exit from the EU and the calamity this would bring. I wondered where you think Scotland fits into this. If, say, the UK did leave and that somehow led to Scottish independence and Scotland's reintegration into the EU, how would having a non-member state as the country's biggest trading partner by far be affected by the tariffs you were talking about; and what would be the likelihood of a currency union in such circumstances?
The experience of this coalition has not exactly turned out well for them (although as I've said before I think that is partly because they got their messaging wrong), so any kind of coalition probably won't appeal. Furthermore, there are very practical problems with either of the two possible partners. If they stay with the Conservatives, they risk losing even more of their distinct identity.
In the "alternative history" where the LDs pulled in close as coalition partners, put Uncle Vince out to pasture (maybe bundled him into The Lords) and dropped all the differentiation briefing which did little more than sound like constant whining to the public. At the moment it looks to many like trying to have their cake and eat it, support the Tories, maintain them in power, and complain endlessly about their policies. What would have happened ? They would have been able to take a large share of the credit for the coalitions successes without looking like hypocrites for all the criticism they had been making all along. They might have been edging into a coupon coalition sort of position for GE2015. Lets face it they can hardly have done much worse in the polls
So the LDs should have supported the Tories completely in what they wanted to do and not implemented any of their own policies - and that would have helped them in the polls?
'There is an almost total obsession that the vote on May 7th is about parties reinforced by the fact that almost all the polling asks WHICH you will be supporting rather than WHO.'
Last week we were advised that the Lib Dems had results from private polling they had conducted that confirmed they were 'competitive'in seats like Solihull.
If the Lib Dems do hold on to a reasonable clutch of seats no doubt this is the explanation that will be given. It was all down to the reputation of individual MPs. I just can't see how Clegg would have the authority to survive, more still, act as a kingmaker.
If Dave loses ground how would he have the authority to remain as PM? If Ed fails to secure a majority how would he have the authority to become PM? As has been said here before, it's all down to numbers of seats. Someone has to govern and if they need to form a coalition in order to do that, then that is what they must do.
If no plausible Coalition is possible, or only a very weak one is possible which then implodes within weeks we are in rather uncharted territory with the FTPA idiocy.
If the LDs want to go into opposition and recuperate, but might agree on a bill by bill basis, and LAB can't make a deal with the SNP that it's backbenchers would wear, so it goes to bill-by-bill as well, its going to be a fun time with the possibility of the government falling almost every day.
There's always a possible coalition Con/Lab or Lab/Con.
They wouldn't risk it even if they could agree it. It would confirm to lots of voters everything the kippers had been saying about LibLabCon, a grand coalition would have UKIP in the high 20's at GE2020, and gain a load of seats from by-elections, not to mention the whole Tory right would peel off the day after the announcement... I can see why it appeals to you
He's a big teaser, he took me half the way there He's a big teaser, he took me half the way there now It was peak Kipper, a one way ticket yeah It took me so long to find out, but I found out
If the Lib Dems do hold on to a reasonable clutch of seats no doubt this is the explanation that will be given. It was all down to the reputation of individual MPs. I just can't see how Clegg would have the authority to survive, more still, act as a kingmaker.
If Dave loses ground how would he have the authority to remain as PM? If Ed fails to secure a majority how would he have the authority to become PM? As has been said here before, it's all down to numbers of seats. Someone has to govern and if they need to form a coalition in order to do that, then that is what they must do.
If no plausible Coalition is possible, or only a very weak one is possible which then implodes within weeks we are in rather uncharted territory with the FTPA idiocy.
If the LDs want to go into opposition and recuperate, but might agree on a bill by bill basis, and LAB can't make a deal with the SNP that it's backbenchers would wear, so it goes to bill-by-bill as well, its going to be a fun time with the possibility of the government falling almost every day.
The thing is under the fixed term parliament act in the case of a minority government the effective power to force an election and bring the government down is wholly handed over to the opposition parties. The government will not be able to dissolve parliament and call an election and so therefore could be left as a zombie government for months or even years potentially. It changes the dynamics of such matters significantly.
You are overlooking the fact that a PM could whip his own MPs to vote their own government down in a confidence motion
If the Lib Dems do hold on to a reasonable clutch of seats no doubt this is the explanation that will be given. It was all down to the reputation of individual MPs. I just can't see how Clegg would have the authority to survive, more still, act as a kingmaker.
If Dave loses ground how would he have the authority to remain as PM? If Ed fails to secure a majority how would he have the authority to become PM? As has been said here before, it's all down to numbers of seats. Someone has to govern and if they need to form a coalition in order to do that, then that is what they must do.
If no plausible Coalition is possible, or only a very weak one is possible which then implodes within weeks we are in rather uncharted territory with the FTPA idiocy.
If the LDs want to go into opposition and recuperate, but might agree on a bill by bill basis, and LAB can't make a deal with the SNP that it's backbenchers would wear, so it goes to bill-by-bill as well, its going to be a fun time with the possibility of the government falling almost every day.
FTPA doesn't say what you think it does.
If nobody can command the confidence of the House of Commons then there will be a new election.
All the FTPA prevents is the larger coalition partner "doing over" the junior one.
If the Lib Dems do hold on to a reasonable clutch of seats no doubt this is the explanation that will be given. It was all down to the reputation of individual MPs. I just can't see how Clegg would have the authority to survive, more still, act as a kingmaker.
If Dave loses ground how would he have the authority to remain as PM? If Ed fails to secure a majority how would he have the authority to become PM? As has been said here before, it's all down to numbers of seats. Someone has to govern and if they need to form a coalition in order to do that, then that is what they must do.
If no plausible Coalition is possible, or only a very weak one is possible which then implodes within weeks we are in rather uncharted territory with the FTPA idiocy.
If the LDs want to go into opposition and recuperate, but might agree on a bill by bill basis, and LAB can't make a deal with the SNP that it's backbenchers would wear, so it goes to bill-by-bill as well, its going to be a fun time with the possibility of the government falling almost every day.
The thing is under the fixed term parliament act in the case of a minority government the effective power to force an election and bring the government down is wholly handed over to the opposition parties. The government will not be able to dissolve parliament and call an election and so therefore could be left as a zombie government for months or even years potentially. It changes the dynamics of such matters significantly.
I think the government would have to resort to forcing everything through as votes of confidence and dare the other parties to vote them down. If the government falls they are off the hook and the other parties have a couple of weeks to form a new government or elections are called.
Or more mischievously, they declare a State of Emergency, then using powers in the Civil Contingencies Act (2004) they make an Order in Council to amend the FTPA or even the Representation of the People Act, and then call an election Blair was told to exclude those sort of acts from the CCA, but didn't, idiot.
A little known fact: Quinton Kynaston, the North London school attended by Jihadi John, is also the alma mater of Madness lead singer Suggs and taxi driving mastermind champ Fred Housego.
"I'm now beginning to think that JackW might be right about Ed."
He's allowing his love for the coalition to colour his judgement. I even fear it might have corrupted his ARSE.
Now that Roger has appended a black spot to my ARSE it must be clear to all PB that the projections from my mighty organ will be more prophetic than usual.
If the Lib Dems do hold on to a reasonable clutch of seats no doubt this is the explanation that will be given. It was all down to the reputation of individual MPs. I just can't see how Clegg would have the authority to survive, more still, act as a kingmaker.
If Dave loses ground how would he have the authority to remain as PM? If Ed fails to secure a majority how would he have the authority to become PM? As has been said here before, it's all down to numbers of seats. Someone has to govern and if they need to form a coalition in order to do that, then that is what they must do.
If no plausible Coalition is possible, or only a very weak one is possible which then implodes within weeks we are in rather uncharted territory with the FTPA idiocy.
If the LDs want to go into opposition and recuperate, but might agree on a bill by bill basis, and LAB can't make a deal with the SNP that it's backbenchers would wear, so it goes to bill-by-bill as well, its going to be a fun time with the possibility of the government falling almost every day.
The thing is under the fixed term parliament act in the case of a minority government the effective power to force an election and bring the government down is wholly handed over to the opposition parties. The government will not be able to dissolve parliament and call an election and so therefore could be left as a zombie government for months or even years potentially. It changes the dynamics of such matters significantly.
You are overlooking the fact that a PM could whip his own MPs to vote their own government down in a confidence motion
Not in a minority government, the opposition parties could vote it down.
I have a possible theory about why the Tories are in such a dire position.
Lynton Crosby for all his talents is basically a hard right attack dog. It doesn't work with Cameron and it doesn't even work with the Tories because 1. UKIP will always outflank them on the right and 2. After five years we now know Cameron is a small 'l' liberal.
He needs Steve Hilton urgently if this isn't going to slip even further away. Who honestly didn't think that by now the Tories would have it done and dusted
He's a big teaser, he took me half the way there He's a big teaser, he took me half the way there now It was peak Kipper, a one way ticket yeah It took me so long to find out, but I found out
Jack W could be as right about Ed as he was with Watford last time which he maintained throughout was an LD gain. I said a CON gain.
It's unfair to keep mentioning that little lapse on the part of Jack. We should change the subject to something more recent, for example to, let me see, a punter selling the SNP on the spreads at 18.5.... :InnocentFace
If the Lib Dems do hold on to a reasonable clutch of seats no doubt this is the explanation that will be given. It was all down to the reputation of individual MPs. I just can't see how Clegg would have the authority to survive, more still, act as a kingmaker.
If Dave loses ground how would he have the authority to remain as PM? If Ed fails to secure a majority how would he have the authority to become PM? As has been said here before, it's all down to numbers of seats. Someone has to govern and if they need to form a coalition in order to do that, then that is what they must do.
If no plausible Coalition is possible, or only a very weak one is possible which then implodes within weeks we are in rather uncharted territory with the FTPA idiocy.
If the LDs want to go into opposition and recuperate, but might agree on a bill by bill basis, and LAB can't make a deal with the SNP that it's backbenchers would wear, so it goes to bill-by-bill as well, its going to be a fun time with the possibility of the government falling almost every day.
FTPA doesn't say what you think it does.
If nobody can command the confidence of the House of Commons then there will be a new election.
All the FTPA prevents is the larger coalition partner "doing over" the junior one.
As someone else just posted it also allows opposition parties to condemn a lame duck minority government to a living death by refusing to let it lose confidence motions, or do anything useful.
If the Lib Dems do hold on to a reasonable clutch of seats no doubt this is the explanation that will be given. It was all down to the reputation of individual MPs. I just can't see how Clegg would have the authority to survive, more still, act as a kingmaker.
If Dave loses ground how would he have the authority to remain as PM? If Ed fails to secure a majority how would he have the authority to become PM? As has been said here before, it's all down to numbers of seats. Someone has to govern and if they need to form a coalition in order to do that, then that is what they must do.
If no plausible Coalition is possible, or only a very weak one is possible which then implodes within weeks we are in rather uncharted territory with the FTPA idiocy.
If the LDs want to go into opposition and recuperate, but might agree on a bill by bill basis, and LAB can't make a deal with the SNP that it's backbenchers would wear, so it goes to bill-by-bill as well, its going to be a fun time with the possibility of the government falling almost every day.
The thing is under the fixed term parliament act in the case of a minority government the effective power to force an election and bring the government down is wholly handed over to the opposition parties. The government will not be able to dissolve parliament and call an election and so therefore could be left as a zombie government for months or even years potentially. It changes the dynamics of such matters significantly.
You are overlooking the fact that a PM could whip his own MPs to vote their own government down in a confidence motion
Not in a minority government, the opposition parties could vote it down.
Yes. Government: "We have No Confidence in ourselves" Opposition: "Don't worry we have Confidence in you."
In the "alternative history" where the LDs pulled in close as coalition partners, put Uncle Vince out to pasture (maybe bundled him into The Lords) and dropped all the differentiation briefing which did little more than sound like constant whining to the public. At the moment it looks to many like trying to have their cake and eat it, support the Tories, maintain them in power, and complain endlessly about their policies. What would have happened ? They would have been able to take a large share of the credit for the coalitions successes without looking like hypocrites for all the criticism they had been making all along. They might have been edging into a coupon coalition sort of position for GE2015. Lets face it they can hardly have done much worse in the polls
But that was never going to happen as anyone who understands politics will tell you. The LDs needed to maintain a distinct identity and even at the Rose Garden love-in, Nick and Dave made it clear the two parties would remain independent entities. The route you suggest would have led to a permanent LD schism (something about which you'd doubtless be very unhappy).
I don't believe the LDs have "complained endlessly" - there have been plenty of complaints from the Conservative side as well.
The problem has been that whatever Cameron's inate "liberal conservatism", he has been unable to control elements of his Party who believed the Party won the 2010 GE with a majority of 100 or more and wanted to govern in that fashion.
Both parties have done well to hold the Coalition together and there's a lot to be positive about but this was only going to be a limited-time offer and the convergence of LDs and Conservatives after a long period of Labour Government didn't last too long.
If the Lib Dems do hold on to a reasonable clutch of seats no doubt this is the explanation that will be given. It was all down to the reputation of individual MPs. I just can't see how Clegg would have the authority to survive, more still, act as a kingmaker.
If Dave loses ground how would he have the authority to remain as PM? If Ed fails to secure a majority how would he have the authority to become PM? As has been said here before, it's all down to numbers of seats. Someone has to govern and if they need to form a coalition in order to do that, then that is what they must do.
If no plausible Coalition is possible, or only a very weak one is possible which then implodes within weeks we are in rather uncharted territory with the FTPA idiocy.
If the LDs want to go into opposition and recuperate, but might agree on a bill by bill basis, and LAB can't make a deal with the SNP that it's backbenchers would wear, so it goes to bill-by-bill as well, its going to be a fun time with the possibility of the government falling almost every day.
The thing is under the fixed term parliament act in the case of a minority government the effective power to force an election and bring the government down is wholly handed over to the opposition parties. The government will not be able to dissolve parliament and call an election and so therefore could be left as a zombie government for months or even years potentially. It changes the dynamics of such matters significantly.
You are overlooking the fact that a PM could whip his own MPs to vote their own government down in a confidence motion
Not in a minority government, the opposition parties could vote it down.
Hah That'd be bizarre - "Keep them on the rack for longer !"
'Mohammed Emwazi, the person now widely known as ‘Jihadi John’, was a drug-addled drifter, and regular cannabis-smoker, before he embraced Islamist fanaticism.
This has now proved to be the case with the killers of Lee Rigby, with two recent Islamist killers in Canada, with all the culprits of the recent Islamist killings in Paris, and the Copenhagen killer, Omar el-Hussein
I just thought I’d mention it. It still seems to me to be a link worth investigating. And while we investigate it, silly politicians and others who seek to weaken the already feeble laws against this allegedly soft drug should surely cancel their plans.'
If the Lib Dems do hold on to a reasonable clutch of seats no doubt this is the explanation that will be given. It was all down to the reputation of individual MPs. I just can't see how Clegg would have the authority to survive, more still, act as a kingmaker.
If Dave loses ground how would he have the authority to remain as PM? If Ed fails to secure a majority how would he have the authority to become PM? As has been said here before, it's all down to numbers of seats. Someone has to govern and if they need to form a coalition in order to do that, then that is what they must do.
If no plausible Coalition is possible, or only a very weak one is possible which then implodes within weeks we are in rather uncharted territory with the FTPA idiocy.
If the LDs want to go into opposition and recuperate, but might agree on a bill by bill basis, and LAB can't make a deal with the SNP that it's backbenchers would wear, so it goes to bill-by-bill as well, its going to be a fun time with the possibility of the government falling almost every day.
The thing is under the fixed term parliament act in the case of a minority government the effective power to force an election and bring the government down is wholly handed over to the opposition parties. The government will not be able to dissolve parliament and call an election and so therefore could be left as a zombie government for months or even years potentially. It changes the dynamics of such matters significantly.
You are overlooking the fact that a PM could whip his own MPs to vote their own government down in a confidence motion
But as a minority they still require opposition support to do it. It has to be a no confidence vote or a two thirds majority I believe. Therefore if the government is in minority then it will be up to the opposition parties to joiin with the government to end the government and they will be able to do that at a time of their choosing. Even if the government put forward a no confidence vote in themselves if the opposition choose not to support it then they remain in government. Basically, this scenario allows the possibility of opposition parties demanding government parties change leaders to get a new election or suffer the consequences. Whether they would or not is another matter but the power lies with the opposition parties.
If the Lib Dems do hold on to a reasonable clutch of seats no doubt this is the explanation that will be given. It was all down to the reputation of individual MPs. I just can't see how Clegg would have the authority to survive, more still, act as a kingmaker.
If Dave loses ground how would he have the authority to remain as PM? If Ed fails to secure a majority how would he have the authority to become PM? As has been said here before, it's all down to numbers of seats. Someone has to govern and if they need to form a coalition in order to do that, then that is what they must do.
If no plausible Coalition is possible, or only a very weak one is possible which then implodes within weeks we are in rather uncharted territory with the FTPA idiocy.
If the LDs want to go into opposition and recuperate, but might agree on a bill by bill basis, and LAB can't make a deal with the SNP that it's backbenchers would wear, so it goes to bill-by-bill as well, its going to be a fun time with the possibility of the government falling almost every day.
There's always a possible coalition Con/Lab or Lab/Con.
They wouldn't risk it even if they could agree it. It would confirm to lots of voters everything the kippers had been saying about LibLabCon, a grand coalition would have UKIP in the high 20's at GE2020, and gain a load of seats from by-elections, not to mention the whole Tory right would peel off the day after the announcement... I can see why it appeals to you
Why would it appeal to me?
Because the Tory party would split right down the middle, with the Right Wing peeling off possibly to the kippers, or possibly some less fruitcakey new party under someone sensible like Hannan
He's a big teaser, he took me half the way there He's a big teaser, he took me half the way there now It was peak Kipper, a one way ticket yeah It took me so long to find out, but I found out
Even if UKIP fall to 9.5% that's only worth 15 seats to the Tories. As the author says, Lab-Tory floaters remain essential: with all the excitement of minor party surges/annihilations they're easy to overlook.
He's a big teaser, he took me half the way there He's a big teaser, he took me half the way there now It was peak Kipper, a one way ticket yeah It took me so long to find out, but I found out
@Dair - I enjoyed your observations on a UK exit from the EU and the calamity this would bring. I wondered where you think Scotland fits into this. If, say, the UK did leave and that somehow led to Scottish independence and Scotland's reintegration into the EU, how would having a non-member state as the country's biggest trading partner by far be affected by the tariffs you were talking about; and what would be the likelihood of a currency union in such circumstances?
'Mohammed Emwazi, the person now widely known as ‘Jihadi John’, was a drug-addled drifter, and regular cannabis-smoker, before he embraced Islamist fanaticism.
This has now proved to be the case with the killers of Lee Rigby, with two recent Islamist killers in Canada, with all the culprits of the recent Islamist killings in Paris, and the Copenhagen killer, Omar el-Hussein
I just thought I’d mention it. It still seems to me to be a link worth investigating. And while we investigate it, silly politicians and others who seek to weaken the already feeble laws against this allegedly soft drug should surely cancel their plans.'
In the "alternative history" where the LDs pulled in close as coalition partners, put Uncle Vince out to pasture (maybe bundled him into The Lords) and dropped all the differentiation briefing which did little more than sound like constant whining to the public. At the moment it looks to many like trying to have their cake and eat it, support the Tories, maintain them in power, and complain endlessly about their policies. What would have happened ? They would have been able to take a large share of the credit for the coalitions successes without looking like hypocrites for all the criticism they had been making all along. They might have been edging into a coupon coalition sort of position for GE2015. Lets face it they can hardly have done much worse in the polls
But that was never going to happen as anyone who understands politics will tell you. The LDs needed to maintain a distinct identity and even at the Rose Garden love-in, Nick and Dave made it clear the two parties would remain independent entities. The route you suggest would have led to a permanent LD schism (something about which you'd doubtless be very unhappy).
But that is exactly the problem, the voters by and large don't understand politics, they just see Uncle Vince on any chat show that will have him complaining about the coalition, while the LDs support them. I didn't say it's right, but it's how it will look to the voters.
I don't believe the LDs have "complained endlessly" - there have been plenty of complaints from the Conservative side as well.
True, but the positions are not comparable, the CONs are in the mid 30's, the LDs are in single digits, the roll of the junior partner pays differently with the public, you are the one supporting the government.
@Dair - I enjoyed your observations on a UK exit from the EU and the calamity this would bring. I wondered where you think Scotland fits into this. If, say, the UK did leave and that somehow led to Scottish independence and Scotland's reintegration into the EU, how would having a non-member state as the country's biggest trading partner by far be affected by the tariffs you were talking about; and what would be the likelihood of a currency union in such circumstances?
There wouldn't be a currency union, Scotland would develop its own currency. As an exporting nation, Scotland would still have costs to bear by English withdrawl but that would partly be ameliorated by the English reliance on imports from Scotland. Scotland is self sufficient in electricity, food, fuel and water, England is not in the first three and projected not to be in the last.
The main difference to England staying in is that it might make it inevitable for Scotland to go down the EFTA route rather than retaining her EU membership. That might have positive long term benefits.
'Mohammed Emwazi, the person now widely known as ‘Jihadi John’, was a drug-addled drifter, and regular cannabis-smoker, before he embraced Islamist fanaticism.
This has now proved to be the case with the killers of Lee Rigby, with two recent Islamist killers in Canada, with all the culprits of the recent Islamist killings in Paris, and the Copenhagen killer, Omar el-Hussein
I just thought I’d mention it. It still seems to me to be a link worth investigating. And while we investigate it, silly politicians and others who seek to weaken the already feeble laws against this allegedly soft drug should surely cancel their plans.'
If the Lib Dems do hold on to a reasonable clutch of seats no doubt this is the explanation that will be given. It was all down to the reputation of individual MPs. I just can't see how Clegg would have the authority to survive, more still, act as a kingmaker.
If Dave loses ground how would he have the authority to remain as PM? If Ed fails to secure a majority how would he have the authority to become PM? As has been said here before, it's all down to numbers of seats. Someone has to govern and if they need to form a coalition in order to do that, then that is what they must do.
If no plausible Coalition is possible, or only a very weak one is possible which then implodes within weeks we are in rather uncharted territory with the FTPA idiocy.
If the LDs want to go into opposition and recuperate, but might agree on a bill by bill basis, and LAB can't make a deal with the SNP that it's backbenchers would wear, so it goes to bill-by-bill as well, its going to be a fun time with the possibility of the government falling almost every day.
There's always a possible coalition Con/Lab or Lab/Con.
Unless a coalition of some kind is formed, all bets are scratched.
Quite why anyone would want to build up a book laying long-odds bets on this market is beyond me. Still, I can't complain about getting 100/1 with no-coalition-no-bet
If the Lib Dems do hold on to a reasonable clutch of seats no doubt this is the explanation that will be given. It was all down to the reputation of individual MPs. I just can't see how Clegg would have the authority to survive, more still, act as a kingmaker.
If Dave loses ground how would he have the authority to remain as PM? If Ed fails to secure a majority how would he have the authority to become PM? As has been said here before, it's all down to numbers of seats. Someone has to govern and if they need to form a coalition in order to do that, then that is what they must do.
If no plausible Coalition is possible, or only a very weak one is possible which then implodes within weeks we are in rather uncharted territory with the FTPA idiocy.
If the LDs want to go into opposition and recuperate, but might agree on a bill by bill basis, and LAB can't make a deal with the SNP that it's backbenchers would wear, so it goes to bill-by-bill as well, its going to be a fun time with the possibility of the government falling almost every day.
The thing is under the fixed term parliament act in the case of a minority government the effective power to force an election and bring the government down is wholly handed over to the opposition parties. The government will not be able to dissolve parliament and call an election and so therefore could be left as a zombie government for months or even years potentially. It changes the dynamics of such matters significantly.
You are overlooking the fact that a PM could whip his own MPs to vote their own government down in a confidence motion
Not in a minority government, the opposition parties could vote it down.
Hah That'd be bizarre - "Keep them on the rack for longer !"
If they were flailing around looking ineffectual and haemorrhaging votes you could see the appeal to the opposition parties...
Comments
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-31691008
Bet valid for the following seat ranges:
314 >/ Lib Dem + Con >/ 323 seats.
""We've always said that the licence fee should be updated to reflect changing times," Lord Hall will say in his speech. "Adapting the licence fee for the internet age... is vital."
Sounds like he wants a licence fee for computers. Which would be completely unacceptable.
Claiming for a tin of dog food hasn't helped either.
I got some stick from a few Tory numpties on here for suggesting the price for the LDs supporting the EU Refrendum should be the introduction of STV for all elections without a referendum.
Perhaps but could Cameron persuade his backbenchers to support any Coalition which did not guarantee his beloved referendum ?
Con 32 (+1) Lab 34 (+1) LD 8 (-1) UKIP 14 (-2) Greens 5 (-1)
http://populus.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/OmOnline_Vote_02-03-2015_BPC.pdf
Looking dire for Dave in England based off these numbers.
" As the election gets closer, and Labour's chances of winning an outright majority continue to look like a long shot, there's bound to be plenty of discussion over what happens next.
If Ed Miliband leads the party with the largest number of seats, then he should get the first shot at forming a Parliamentary majority - or govern as the leader of a minority government. In recent months the party has talked over what a Lab/Lib coalition might look like, or if a Lab/SNP coalition might work (it wouldn't, as I've written before). But so far no Labour figure has floated the idea of a Labour/Tory coalition.
Until now. The...unique...Gisela Stuart MP (who won one of 2010'S hardest fought races to hold her Birmingham Edgbaston seat) has told the FT that she thinks we should consider a "grand" coalition with the Tories."
Ed Miliband is only the fourth most influential person in Doncaster, according to a new "power list" created by the town's paper.
The Labour leader was deemed to be less powerful in the area than a council official, the local mayor and a singer in the boy band One Direction.
It comes despite the Doncaster North MP being one of only two men likely to be Prime Minister in less than three months' time.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/ed-miliband/11444049/Ed-Miliband-only-fourth-most-influential-person-in-Doncaster-local-newspaper-concludes.html
I'm sure the greens will find some way to complain about it... the Severn Barrage stays moribund because of wading birds. No doubt there will be an unacceptable carbon footprint for all the concrete being used.
They've adjusted their weighting twice this cycle I believe to bump up UKIP a touch.
"Lord Ashcroft: Con Lead 4% (but could be anything let's face it)"
A cop out - unlike you GIN!"
I fancy a Labour lead of 3. (Known around these parts as 'the kiss of death'.)
EDIT. Even after the result is known I got it wrong. Expect several good Labour polls. The Tories are being seriously out-manoeuvred
I agree.
Raise the height of the Thames barrier and turn London from a festering swamp into a tidal lagoon.
If we assume Galloway gets back in that is 624, NI is 18 and speaker is 1 = 643.
Give the missing seats to the SNP methinks.
However, it is very important to understand that the personal vote of incumbents is already in the 2010 starting figures. So it may not provide as much comfort as the LibDems hope.
366 -> 211 !!
http://www.populus.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/OmOnline_Vote_24-10-2014_BPC.pdf
Things that aren't their fault : -
1. They found an opportunity for coalition at a time when the government was always going to be unpopular.
2. The only realistic option was the Tories who would be toxic to swathes of their support.
2. It's happened at a time when a genuine challenge for third party developed in UKIP.
4. It's happened at a time when a genuine appeal to many of their core voters has appeared relevant in the Greens.
5. They are massively over-represented in Scotland and face the same challenge from the SNP surge that Labour do.
6. How many people in their 30s and 40s who didn't follow politics as a teenager will only know Cyril Smith as the face of Liberalism? A regular on the chat shows and celebrity appearances in the late 70s and 80s, I think the damage he is causing is not being fully considered.
On top of this they have made some serious mistakes of their own making.
1. Going for AV to gerrymander FPTP in favour of the third party instead of sticking with their supposed commitment to PR which they happily threw away.
2. Completely rejecting their long standing commitment to Federalism leading to complete irrelevance in Scotland (there are already two larger Unionist parties - there would be a gap for proper Federalists).
3. A complete failure of media management, their striking (if ridiculous) implementation of £10k tax threshold isn't visible while their backtrack on tuition fees is still at the forefront of people's minds.
There really are far too many reasons for thinking that Liberals with hopes of a representation over 20 this year are living in cloud cuckoo land.
Predictably being able to generate a large amount of electricity at 4am isn't really that useful.
Drew Hendry is the arrogant face of an even more arrogant SNP led Highland Council administration. The council is taking decision after decision which is seriously irritating the electorate e.g. threatened cutting back on road salting, closure of local schools. There has been a fair amount of internal strife within SNP circles with moderates being ousted by left-wing YES men. The imposition of average speed cameras on the A9 was a huge issue which Danny opposed and he had the backing of most locals.
In the Highlands we see the SNP becoming more and more like a Central Belt left wing mafia.
If my hunch that, after all the 'racist' smearing there are a significant number of shy kippers so UKIP should be adjusted up, the election result will be quite extraordinary with kipper candidates who only agreed to stand or were only selected because the seat was unwinnable finding themselves MPs.
That said, 14% sounds about right for UKIP - they are over-represented on Populus panel so there does need to be some adjustment downwards (Compare it to Yougov raw numbers)
(Scottish European National Union - Patriotic Front)
As others have said, the DUP wants £££ for Ulster, not Cabinet seats. Essentially I think it will turn out that the SNP wants the equivalent, plus ore devolution, for Scotland.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p02kq9z1
Back in this site's sweet spot, I guess the practical issue in the UK is how you're going to get anything substantial past the RSPB, which is a terrifying lobbying monster with over a million members, twice the total membership of all the British political parties combined.
I don't disagree with point one and I've said so on here many times. I don't really understand point 2 - I'm not sure what you mean by "Federalism". The SNP portrays anyone who doesn't support full independence as a "Unionist" (whatever that means as well) so of course the LDs are a Unionist party in that sense.
Point 3 - well, we'll see. I've often criticised Nick for the tuition fees debacle and doubtless it'll be dragged out in the campaign proper but the Party has a good story to tell on aspects of the economy and you can be sure that will be heard as well.
It's hard to see his MPs knifing him while they're still working out if they can get back into government, and a reduced number of LibDem survivors means better jobs for the ones who are left.
As has been said here before, it's all down to numbers of seats. Someone has to govern and if they need to form a coalition in order to do that, then that is what they must do.
That leaves only the LibDems. Whilst I imagine that many of the senior LibDem ministers would prefer coalition to C & S, getting any new agreement past LibDem MPs, and the party as a whole, looks very problematic. The experience of this coalition has not exactly turned out well for them (although as I've said before I think that is partly because they got their messaging wrong), so any kind of coalition probably won't appeal. Furthermore, there are very practical problems with either of the two possible partners. If they stay with the Conservatives, they risk losing even more of their distinct identity. If they switch to Labour, they look like opportunistic cynics reversing what they've just achieved, and also they shackle themselves to Ed Miliband, which would be asking for trouble.
As I've been saying for the last couple of years, there is a high probability of no viable government being possible. Although the political risk of the GE is beginning to be understood by the financial markets, they still haven't really understood the full extent of the risk.
Whether SPIN's market is the best way of playing this is another matter - I think there are better bets elesewhere.
http://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/green-science/wind-turbine-kill-birds.htm
The RSPB say:
If the LDs want to go into opposition and recuperate, but might agree on a bill by bill basis, and LAB can't make a deal with the SNP that it's backbenchers would wear, so it goes to bill-by-bill as well, its going to be a fun time with the possibility of the government falling almost every day.
Calling Nick Palmer ....
The call has gone out - "Save Scottish Viscounts"
You seemed to have missed this bit?
Industry representatives said the decline in output over the past five years was partly due to the expiration of patents on a range of money-spinning drugs, which has prompted big pharma companies to shift production to lower-cost countries.
and
However, the climate is changing. Many observers say that the introduction of the patent box in 2013 has allowed companies to retain the profits of innovation carried out in the UK.
Moreover, wage pressure in low-cost countries was “reducing the differential”, according to James Christie, of the Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry.
He pointed out that AstraZeneca and GlaxoSmithKline had recently announced new investments, indicating that the UK was once more becoming an attractive location for manufacturing.
Now potentially such circumstances could precipitate governing parties to begin to rip themselves apart if they lose discipline in the face of being frustrated by the opposition parties.
This may well be a very good election to lose.....
Have I mentioned I am the reigning TOTY .... There's nothing quite like a long reign .... ask Her Majesty the Queen.
UKIP appears to be running out of ways to say sorry – after releasing identical statements about two separate instances of homophobia (a month apart)
http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2015/03/01/is-ukip-recycling-its-apologies-for-homophobia/
'There is an almost total obsession that the vote on May 7th is about parties reinforced by the fact that almost all the polling asks WHICH you will be supporting rather than WHO.'
Last week we were advised that the Lib Dems had results from private polling they had conducted that confirmed they were 'competitive'in seats like Solihull.
Has this polling data now been published?
He's a big teaser, he took me half the way there now
It was peak Kipper, a one way ticket yeah
It took me so long to find out, but I found out
Peak Kipper
Peak Kipper yeah:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B_Fjzo-WoAAkI3L.jpg
If nobody can command the confidence of the House of Commons then there will be a new election.
All the FTPA prevents is the larger coalition partner "doing over" the junior one.
Or more mischievously, they declare a State of Emergency, then using powers in the Civil Contingencies Act (2004) they make an Order in Council to amend the FTPA or even the Representation of the People Act, and then call an election
Thank you Roger.
Lynton Crosby for all his talents is basically a hard right attack dog. It doesn't work with Cameron and it doesn't even work with the Tories because 1. UKIP will always outflank them on the right and 2. After five years we now know Cameron is a small 'l' liberal.
He needs Steve Hilton urgently if this isn't going to slip even further away. Who honestly didn't think that by now the Tories would have it done and dusted
Government: "We have No Confidence in ourselves"
Opposition: "Don't worry we have Confidence in you."
I don't believe the LDs have "complained endlessly" - there have been plenty of complaints from the Conservative side as well.
The problem has been that whatever Cameron's inate "liberal conservatism", he has been unable to control elements of his Party who believed the Party won the 2010 GE with a majority of 100 or more and wanted to govern in that fashion.
Both parties have done well to hold the Coalition together and there's a lot to be positive about but this was only going to be a limited-time offer and the convergence of LDs and Conservatives after a long period of Labour Government didn't last too long.
This has now proved to be the case with the killers of Lee Rigby, with two recent Islamist killers in Canada, with all the culprits of the recent Islamist killings in Paris, and the Copenhagen killer, Omar el-Hussein
I just thought I’d mention it. It still seems to me to be a link worth investigating. And while we investigate it, silly politicians and others who seek to weaken the already feeble laws against this allegedly soft drug should surely cancel their plans.'
http://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2015/03/no-surprise-here-jihadi-john-was-a-cannabis-smoker.html
http://www.populus.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/UKIP21.jpg
Even if UKIP fall to 9.5% that's only worth 15 seats to the Tories. As the author says, Lab-Tory floaters remain essential: with all the excitement of minor party surges/annihilations they're easy to overlook.
The SNP now have a 20.5% lead over the last six Populus polls. Five of the last six Populus LAB sub-samples in the lower 20's, rather than the uppers.
Ashcroft had them on 19 last week, same six poll pattern of almost always lower 20's.
Same six poll pattern also with Comres.
Last ICM was 21.
Yougov marginally better - 25.3 average over the last ten.
Lots of sub-samples pointing in the same direction as the worst case scenarios from the main Scotland polls.
The main difference to England staying in is that it might make it inevitable for Scotland to go down the EFTA route rather than retaining her EU membership. That might have positive long term benefits.
It was always that, or an enourmous packet of Cheetos for me. Flip of a coin.
http://sports.betfair.com/Index.do?mi=117329902&ex=1&origin=MRL
Unless a coalition of some kind is formed, all bets are scratched.
Quite why anyone would want to build up a book laying long-odds bets on this market is beyond me. Still, I can't complain about getting 100/1 with no-coalition-no-bet
He says he's done a 121 PMQs and he's only got 4 left.
I'm assuming he meant as Leader of the Opposition.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/how-homer-simpson-discovered-the-higgs-boson-over-a-decade-before-scientists-10079006.html