Howdy, Stranger!

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

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Saturday night polls have the battle very tight

2

Comments

  • Options
    SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    @bigjohnowls
    You could almost feel sorry for the blue team at times.
    But I find laughing at them far to much fun.
  • Options
    woody662woody662 Posts: 255
    Grandiose said:

    The Sunday Times

    ED MILIBAND is at “war” with the Unite union, Labour’s biggest donor, over whether the woman at the heart of the Falkirk vote-rigging row should be given the chance to become an MP.

    Senior Labour insiders fear that the showdown over Karie Murphy, a close friend of union leader Len McCluskey, could cost the party a £1.5m donation they are expecting to help bankroll the election campaign, a source revealed.

    Unite wants Murphy on the shortlist of potential Labour candidates for Halifax, where the sitting MP, Linda Riordan, is standing down. Miliband is determined to stop that happening but panicking aides are split because some fear that the party could miss out on funding, according to the senior Labour source.

    http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/news/uk_news/article1528438.ece

    I thought they'd manage to calm things before the election.

    They will probably still pay up...
    Conservatives 9-2 to take Halifax. 1400 majority, any Yorkshire people have any knowledge on whether the demographics are shifting in the seat?
  • Options
    FlightpathFlightpath Posts: 4,012

    Evening all and now we know Thursday's YouGov was the outlier it looked. No doubt TNS and Survation will skew the numbers with large Labour leads when they eventually come out.

    Just been attending A Big Dinner event run jointly by my rotary club Tain and District jointly with our neighbouring one East Sutherland for the 500 miles charity. Delighted that we raised over £700 for such an excellent cause.

    The 'blame' attributed to Cameron that Survation detect over the 'debates' is such that the Tories actually have a lead.
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    john_zims said:

    @Scott_P

    Even his own party thinks Ed is crap.

    Ed's law

    1. Ed must be allowed on TV
    2. Other people must be there
    3. MPs must put Ed on their leaflets
    4. They must not be horrid to him
    5. His brother is not allowed back in the UK
  • Options
    TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362
    Smarmeron said:

    @Tykejohnno
    It would be highly unlikely because we live in a parliamentary democracy, and such a bill would not garner the support of the house.
    I know this is complicated stuff for you, but you will hopefully learn. ( but not highly likely I am afraid)


    @Smarmeron,was I rude to you.

  • Options
    SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    "The Observer has learnt that a Labour government, in a significant constitutional move, would put the requirement to stage “fair and impartial leaders’ debates” on a statutory footing. The new system would work on similar lines to the current rules for planning the number, length and timing of party political broadcasts, under which parties are consulted but not given the power to stop them happening."
  • Options
    Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 49,361

    SeanT said:

    I actually agree with Ed's Debate Law. The Debates should be obligatory and compulsory, they are good for our sadly dying democracy.

    However by saying it now he looks flailing, and a bit needy, which is not a great look for any politician.

    And what would the penalty be for not debating?
    Mass-debating :naughty:
  • Options
    john_zimsjohn_zims Posts: 3,399
    @Scott_P

    '3. MPs must put Ed on their leaflets'


    I would imagine most Tory, SNP & Lib Dem MP's will be happy to oblige.
  • Options
    notmenotme Posts: 3,293
    woody662 said:

    SeanT said:

    Add two to the Tories, and take two from Labour, do the same for the minor parties, and right now I reckon this will be roughly the result.

    CON: 36
    Lab: 31
    LD: 10
    UKIP: 13

    Remarkably, Baxtering this sees Cameron just 6 short of an OVERALL majority.

    Factor in Scotland, and a Tory majority might be VALUE? (albeit still unlikely)

    There are still voters out there in large numbers who don't know what they want at the general election.

    There are huge numbers who know what they DON'T want. And that is Ed Miliband as Prime Minister.

    I think Rod Crosby is entirely right to focus on the qualities of the leaders as the primer for how people will vote. I reckon there are going to be very large movements at the end of the election campaign, as people finally hold their nose and vote Tory. No great enthusiasm in their vote, but the idea of Ed Miliband in Downing Street scares the bejeezus out of the voters I have been talking to today.
    Canvassing anecdotes but I had 3 households who were initally hostile and close to shutting the door but when I did manage to engage them in conversation, they may not be keen on the Conservatives, Cameron, direction ect but when you get onto Miliband, it's 'that man cannot be allowed to become Prime Minister'. Polls would not pick that upp but I would be surrised if they do not end up holding their nose to keep him out.

    For a bit of balance, a lifetime Labour voter thought Miliband was great. He may have been taking the piss though.
    There is certainly a 'miliband' factor on the doorstep. Im not keen on the vilification he is getting in the con supporting press though. It's unnecessary. He is probably a very decent individual, who just isnt up to being prime minister.

    I think the relentless character attacks on Brown in 2009/10 became counter productive. The attack on him because of the hand written note to the family of a serviceman who lost his life was probably a low point.

    From the other side of course, Hague got much worse, in the 2001 election the press on TV and in print, with the exception of the Daily Mail, was in some kind of transfix-ion with Blair and his government. Even papers that would normally be sympathetic to Hague's message ripped him apart.
  • Options
    SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    @Tykejohnno
    No, you weren't, but I thought I would get my retaliation in first, as insults are rarely far behind.
  • Options
    woody662 said:

    Grandiose said:

    The Sunday Times

    ED MILIBAND is at “war” with the Unite union, Labour’s biggest donor, over whether the woman at the heart of the Falkirk vote-rigging row should be given the chance to become an MP.

    Senior Labour insiders fear that the showdown over Karie Murphy, a close friend of union leader Len McCluskey, could cost the party a £1.5m donation they are expecting to help bankroll the election campaign, a source revealed.

    Unite wants Murphy on the shortlist of potential Labour candidates for Halifax, where the sitting MP, Linda Riordan, is standing down. Miliband is determined to stop that happening but panicking aides are split because some fear that the party could miss out on funding, according to the senior Labour source.

    http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/news/uk_news/article1528438.ece

    I thought they'd manage to calm things before the election.

    They will probably still pay up...
    Conservatives 9-2 to take Halifax. 1400 majority, any Yorkshire people have any knowledge on whether the demographics are shifting in the seat?
    I tipped it a while back, the Tory candidate is impressive (also stood here in 2010)
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,343
    So far as I can see it is a blue on blue on blue. But then if you want to have an intelligent conversation about the future of the NHS what else are you going to do? Ask Andy???
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,130
    It's Dr. Sarah Wollaston. She is a fully paid up member of the Awkward Squad. She says what she thinks needs to be said, rather than what is solely to the advantage of her party.

    Can you imagine Labour having such people in their ranks?

    No, me neither......
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,758
    Smarmeron said:

    "The Observer has learnt that a Labour government, in a significant constitutional move, would put the requirement to stage “fair and impartial leaders’ debates” on a statutory footing. The new system would work on similar lines to the current rules for planning the number, length and timing of party political broadcasts, under which parties are consulted but not given the power to stop them happening."

    shouldn't we have a judge led enquiry first ?
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,285
    At this rate, all the right wingers who want out of Europe, will end up praying to stay in to stop Ed making even more bonkers laws than the EU.
  • Options
    FlightpathFlightpath Posts: 4,012

    The Sunday Times

    ED MILIBAND is at “war” with the Unite union, Labour’s biggest donor, over whether the woman at the heart of the Falkirk vote-rigging row should be given the chance to become an MP.

    Senior Labour insiders fear that the showdown over Karie Murphy, a close friend of union leader Len McCluskey, could cost the party a £1.5m donation they are expecting to help bankroll the election campaign, a source revealed.

    Unite wants Murphy on the shortlist of potential Labour candidates for Halifax, where the sitting MP, Linda Riordan, is standing down. Miliband is determined to stop that happening but panicking aides are split because some fear that the party could miss out on funding, according to the senior Labour source.

    http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/news/uk_news/article1528438.ece

    This story is very confusing. Are you and /or The Times suggesting that a multi million pound donor to the Labour Party, a Mr McClusky, is actually demanding that certain people become candidates in return for his donations? 'Cash for MPs' and hence policy? Surely this is totally illegal.
  • Options
    SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    @Alanbrooke
    The opposition could put that point at the time of the first draft I suppose? She might even get it passed.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,285
    edited March 2015

    The Sunday Times

    ED MILIBAND is at “war” with the Unite union, Labour’s biggest donor, over whether the woman at the heart of the Falkirk vote-rigging row should be given the chance to become an MP.

    Senior Labour insiders fear that the showdown over Karie Murphy, a close friend of union leader Len McCluskey, could cost the party a £1.5m donation they are expecting to help bankroll the election campaign, a source revealed.

    Unite wants Murphy on the shortlist of potential Labour candidates for Halifax, where the sitting MP, Linda Riordan, is standing down. Miliband is determined to stop that happening but panicking aides are split because some fear that the party could miss out on funding, according to the senior Labour source.

    http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/news/uk_news/article1528438.ece

    This story is very confusing. Are you and /or The Times suggesting that a multi million pound donor to the Labour Party, a Mr McClusky, is actually demanding that certain people become candidates in return for his donations? 'Cash for MPs' and hence policy? Surely this is totally illegal.
    Careful now...remember nothing dodgy went down in Falkirk, people jumping the wrong conclusions.
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,758
    SeanT said:

    SeanT said:

    I actually agree with Ed's Debate Law. The Debates should be obligatory and compulsory, they are good for our sadly dying democracy.

    However by saying it now he looks flailing, and a bit needy, which is not a great look for any politician.

    And what would the penalty be for not debating?
    How about £5m fines for the erring party. That would concentrate minds.
    This will be a huge hostage to the law of unintended consequences.

    If Labour really are this stupid they deserve everything they get.
  • Options
    TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Cons still need the polls to swing a fair bit.

    Needs to be a corking budget.
  • Options
    weejonnieweejonnie Posts: 3,820
    It has already been noted that phone polls tend to favour the Tories and online polls Labour.
    I have also noted that the yougov poll is not a UK poll it is a sub-poll of uk residents who signed up for yougov - which to my mind would suggest a more left of centre leaning as left-of-centre voters tend to be more inclined to network whilst right-of-centre tend to be more individual.

    Now comes the crunch. How do telephone pollsters contact their telephonees? Is there a directory of mobile phone numbers? If not then surely the cohort is those people who own a fixed telephone line?

    In 2005 and 2010 it was probably true that the vast number of people had fixed telephone lines - however a substantial number these days have purely mobile numbers. These people have dropped off the map as far as pollsters are concerned.

    So who are they? Working that out could be very interesting. Are they the relatively unskilled CDEs in pit villages in County Durham? Undergraduates at Brighton University? Communication and Diversity Workers in Lambeth and Islington?
  • Options
    nigel4englandnigel4england Posts: 4,800
    I have a confession to make.

    I have never voted Tory in my life, only Labour and various incarnations of UKIP.

    However if I lived in a marginal I would vote for anyone to keep Miliband out, I am genuinely scared about what this lunatic will do to our country.
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,758
    Smarmeron said:

    @Alanbrooke
    The opposition could put that point at the time of the first draft I suppose? She might even get it passed.

    I thought Sturgeon was planning to be IN the goverment ?
  • Options
    volcanopetevolcanopete Posts: 2,078
    shadsy said:

    I contributed to a Polling Matters podcast on election betting this week
    http://kpedley.podbean.com/e/polling-matters-ep-12-political-betting-w-matt-shaddick-from-ladbrokes/

    If you've only got time to listen to one of these though, ignore mine and head straight for the one with Chris Hanretty which I found very informative.

    The 33-1 offer of a dead-heat on seat numbers for GE 2015 is an essential element to add to any portfolio to small stakes.
    I'm content with 7-1 advised on Labour minority currently still trading at 9-2 and still value.Andrew Sparrow crunched the numbers in the Grauniad.Cameron cannot get to 322.Miliband can.He will govern in coalition but not as a coalition.11-8 on Ed for PM is overpriced I agree.It looks as it will come down to about 25 marginals including Norwich North and Cambridge where it is a battle for the green vote.

  • Options
    compouter2compouter2 Posts: 2,371
    "Wollaston told the Observer that reports which had been commissioned by government and paid for by taxpayers should be made available at the earliest opportunity on matters of such clear public interest.

    “There is far too much of this going on, with uncomfortable information being withheld,” Wollaston said. “Just as with the Chilcot report into the Iraq war, it is not right that reports paid for out of public money are not made available to the public on such vital issues as soon as possible, particularly ahead of a general election.”

    Rose would not be alone in thinking that the Lansley reforms made the management of the NHS less effective and more bureaucratic. A recent report by independent thinktank the King’s Fund said the Lansley overhaul left structures so “complex, confusing and bureaucratic” that the organisation of the service “is not fit for purpose”.
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,758
    TGOHF said:

    Cons still need the polls to swing a fair bit.

    Needs to be a corking budget.

    No chance .

    Its Osborne; lots of positive spin on the day followed by "he's done what ?"
  • Options
    john_zimsjohn_zims Posts: 3,399
    @TSE

    'ED MILIBAND is at “war” with the Unite union, Labour’s biggest donor, over whether the woman at the heart of the Falkirk vote-rigging row should be given the chance to become an MP.'

    Labour party democracy in action, obey McCluskey & lose the seat or ignore him and lose a big donation, great stuff from the comrades.
  • Options
    SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,937
    God help us. Legislation to ensure debates. It is painful. The only silver lining of a Tory victory in May will be Ed's rapid demise. He is irredemably crap. Historically so.
  • Options
    DairDair Posts: 6,108

    Dair said:


    It actually does make a difference since there;s a difference in being in a currency union ( you own someone lses problems ) and being in your own. The bariiers are getting other people to agree that they want a Union with you. The only deliverable option is own currency which the SNP rejected.

    On trading blocs while the UK has been pragmatic as ever on trade, it is also part of a trading bloc the EU. The Nat assumption that they would just gain all the rights accrued to date doesn't stack up, UK opt outs would not apply to and Indy Scotland. Likewise agreements of fishing, financial services etc. would not apply to Scotland. So while trade will continue, it will not continue under the same condition and to the detriment of Scots

    So to put that in context Scotland's terms of trade with its partners will worsen.

    So again how do you pay your bills ?

    You can tell me when I get back from the pub,off out have a good evening.

    Again, when caught out your default position is to lie, lie and exaggerate.

    You can argue all you want about the EU position because the UK government REFUSED to ask for it. It is entirely speculative and with 18 months to work out the position, would not have been even remotely unachievable.

    Then you start the lies. The fishing grounds ARE SCOTTISH. It is not that Scotland needs to access EU fishing grounds it is that several EU economies are significantly reliant on being able to access Scottish Waters (around 30% of ALL EU Fish Stocks)

    It all ties back to the Little Englander mindset. England is important, everywhere else isn't. England matters, nowhere else does. England's economy makes a difference to the world, none of our partners benefit us.

    It's no wonder UKIP has such a hold in a country with these sorts of insular, xenophobic attitudes.
    Oh dear was hoping for better than that. You know like some arguments instead of a rant.

    Still how will you pay thye bills ?
    You keep insisting on that risible question.

    Scotland would pay the bills the say way the UK and every other country pays the bills. Through revenue and borrowing.

    Of course the retarded Loyalists will make up lies and nonsense how there is some reason Scotland is unique amongst the world in being unable to do so. Much laughter will ensue.
  • Options
    SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    @Alanbrooke
    Not very likely? but there would be more chance of the SNP doing confidence and supply with Ed than with Chicken Dave, which is a factor worth remembering when placing bets.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,285
    Vivienne Westwood accused of hypocrisy over offshore tax base

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/green-party/11457076/Vivienne-Westwood-accused-of-hypocrisy-over-offshore-tax-base.html

    I am shocked I tell you, shocked....and here I was thinking she was going to call for 3.0-litre V6 Mercedes S class for all...
  • Options
    TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362
    "The Observer has learnt that a Labour government, in a significant constitutional move, would put the requirement to stage “fair and impartial leaders’ debates” on a statutory footing. The new system would work on similar lines to the current rules for planning the number, length and timing of party political broadcasts, under which parties are consulted but not given the power to stop them happening."

    SeanT posted - How about £5m fines for the erring party. That would concentrate minds

    I think this answers your post sean.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,343
    edited March 2015
    Trying hard to find a point of interest in the Afghan game. So far they have managed 22/2 and 33/3. Can they also manage 44/4?

    Ok its not riveting.

    Edit, nope they missed it. Time for bed I think.
  • Options
    saddenedsaddened Posts: 2,245

    God help us. Legislation to ensure debates. It is painful. The only silver lining of a Tory victory in May will be Ed's rapid demise. He is irredemably crap. Historically so.

    No you're wrong. We're assured its a master stroke by Ed and will ensure his entry into number 10'
  • Options
    kjohnwkjohnw Posts: 1,456
    Scott_P said:

    @RupertMyers: Next, the Offences Against Appearing On The Marr Show Act 2016

    next EdM makes it illegal to make fun of him at PMQs
  • Options
    nigel4englandnigel4england Posts: 4,800

    Vivienne Westwood accused of hypocrisy over offshore tax base

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/green-party/11457076/Vivienne-Westwood-accused-of-hypocrisy-over-offshore-tax-base.html

    I am shocked I tell you, shocked....and here I was thinking she was going to call for 3.0-litre V6 Mercedes S class for all...

    Oh dear.

    More hypocrisy from the Left, will Ed legislate to stop people being mean to Lefties?
  • Options
    SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,937
    Dair said:

    Dair said:


    It actually does make a difference since there;s a difference in being in a currency union ( you own someone lses problems ) and being in your own. The bariiers are getting other people to agree that they want a Union with you. The only deliverable option is own currency which the SNP rejected.

    On trading blocs while the UK has been pragmatic as ever on trade, it is also part of a trading bloc the EU. The Nat assumption that they would just gain all the rights accrued to date doesn't stack up, UK opt outs would not apply to and Indy Scotland. Likewise agreements of fishing, financial services etc. would not apply to Scotland. So while trade will continue, it will not continue under the same condition and to the detriment of Scots

    So to put that in context Scotland's terms of trade with its partners will worsen.

    So again how do you pay your bills ?

    You can tell me when I get back from the pub,off out have a good evening.

    Again, when caught out your default position is to lie, lie and exaggerate.

    You can argue all you want about the EU position because the UK government REFUSED to ask for it. It is entirely speculative and with 18 months to work out the position, would not have been even remotely unachievable.

    Then you start the lies. The fishing grounds ARE SCOTTISH. It is not that Scotland needs to access EU fishing grounds it is that several EU economies are significantly reliant on being able to access Scottish Waters (around 30% of ALL EU Fish Stocks)

    It all ties back to the Little Englander mindset. England is important, everywhere else isn't. England matters, nowhere else does. England's economy makes a difference to the world, none of our partners benefit us.

    It's no wonder UKIP has such a hold in a country with these sorts of insular, xenophobic attitudes.
    Oh dear was hoping for better than that. You know like some arguments instead of a rant.

    Still how will you pay thye bills ?
    You keep insisting on that risible question.

    Scotland would pay the bills the say way the UK and every other country pays the bills. Through revenue and borrowing.

    Of course the retarded Loyalists will make up lies and nonsense how there is some reason Scotland is unique amongst the world in being unable to do so. Much laughter will ensue.

    Good luck with getting anyone to lend to Scotland after the UDI you were talking about earlier.

  • Options
    roserees64roserees64 Posts: 251
    Time is running out for Cameron to win over the voters.Tories need to be 6 points ahead, this seems to be an impossible task. Miliband will probably be PM with or without other parties. The numbers are hard to determine. The frenzied and desperate attacks on Miliband are counter-productive. The great British public love an underdog. As a Labour voter I am quite confident that the right choice will be made on May 7th. LABOUR IN-TORIES OUT.
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,758
    edited March 2015
    @ Dair

    At long last an actual answer.

    So where do the revenues come from and how do you borrow ?

    The oil revenues have just taken a 40% hit. So that means that the economy which 20% oil is faced with a potential contraction of 8*% if this price level holds.

    The borrowing will be expensive if oil stays down as the only real option open to you is a Scottish pound and it is now a petrocurrency.

    So how do you pay the bills ?

    PS I've generally found that people find the question "how will I pay my bills ?" anything but risible.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,285
    edited March 2015
    kjohnw said:

    Scott_P said:

    @RupertMyers: Next, the Offences Against Appearing On The Marr Show Act 2016

    next EdM makes it illegal to make fun of him at PMQs
    Eds New Law 19998665...

    All videos and pictures of Wallace and Grommit must be destroyed and Aardman Productions shut down with immediate effect.
  • Options
    SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    @Tykejohnno
    Which returns us to the point, that all parties agree that the debates are important for democracy, and as such most sensible people would think that laws to ensure impartiality would make sense given the current mess.
    Other will of course scream and stamp their feet and claim it would be silly.
  • Options
    FlightpathFlightpath Posts: 4,012

    Sarah Wollaston, a former GP who took over the chairmanship of the committee last year, said it was not reasonable or right that a report by former Marks & Spencer boss and Tory peer Stuart Rose, which was commissioned by Hunt a year ago and completed in December, was being kept from the Public
    Senior government officials have made it known that Rose’s report is strongly critical of management systems in the NHS – findings that are potentially damaging for the Tories before an election in which the NHS is centre stage.

    There are also suggestions that the report implies that the government’s own NHS reforms, steered through by Hunt’s predecessor Andrew Lansley, may have made matters worse.

    The report, or rather the reports about the report, actually 'suggests and implies' that good managers should be paid more and should be allowed to pay other people more. This 'suggests and implies' to me that other people must be paid less.
    The 'suggestions and implications' being repeated all come from a FT article and its 'suggestions' seem to be about the quality not the width.
  • Options
    TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362

    Declan Ganley @declanganley

    Miliband to pass law making those TV debates compulsory. Seriously flaming nuts. Guy can't be taken seriously & he may be PM in a few weeks

  • Options
    nigel4englandnigel4england Posts: 4,800

    Time is running out for Cameron to win over the voters.Tories need to be 6 points ahead, this seems to be an impossible task. Miliband will probably be PM with or without other parties. The numbers are hard to determine. The frenzied and desperate attacks on Miliband are counter-productive. The great British public love an underdog. As a Labour voter I am quite confident that the right choice will be made on May 7th. LABOUR IN-TORIES OUT.

    Yes the British love an underdog, which in this case could be Farage or the Greens.

    One thing they don't like is being told what to do by an idiot.
  • Options
    kjohnwkjohnw Posts: 1,456

    Time is running out for Cameron to win over the voters.Tories need to be 6 points ahead, this seems to be an impossible task. Miliband will probably be PM with or without other parties. The numbers are hard to determine. The frenzied and desperate attacks on Miliband are counter-productive. The great British public love an underdog. As a Labour voter I am quite confident that the right choice will be made on May 7th. LABOUR IN-TORIES OUT.

    the British public love an underdog, but they run a mile from a loser, a weirdo, a populist little sh*t, who jumps on every bandwagon that rolls into town. Its very simple Labour have elected a DUD, and he's definitely FIRING BLANKS
  • Options
    Britain's Chancellor, George Osborne, is planning to introduce a new "diverted profits tax" targeting multinational companies judged to have shifted profits overseas to avoid tax, the Sunday Times newspaper reported, citing government sources.

    The 25 percent levy, more than corporation tax which is set at 20 percent, would be part of the annual budget due to be presented to parliament by Osborne on March 18, the newspaper reported.

    Google Inc , Amazon.com Inc and Facebook Inc are among companies that have been widely criticised in Britain for tax avoidance and that could potentially be affected by the new levy, according to the Sunday Times.

    https://uk.news.yahoo.com/osborne-planning-diverted-profits-tax-sunday-times-224945035--business.html#4HLMftR
  • Options
    compouter2compouter2 Posts: 2,371
    edited March 2015
    If the chicken does run, the debates will be scheduled starting 2nd April and the final debate (as sponsored by Colonel Sanders) will be televised just 7 days before the election? Nah, can't see Camerons no show even being mentioned on the news at all through April.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,285
    Interesting...

    Your next phone contract might be with Google…

    http://www.cnbc.com/id/102468442
  • Options
    john_zimsjohn_zims Posts: 3,399
    edited March 2015
    @compouter2

    '“There is far too much of this going on, with uncomfortable information being withheld,”

    Unfortunately for Labour nothing can ever compete with their Mid Staffs cover-up.
  • Options
    Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039
    David Allan Green is no friend of the Tories:

    Jack of Kent ‏@JackofKent

    This is not a party political point, but on basis of this 'statutory right' to political debates on TV, please don't let Ed near law-making.
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,758
    edited March 2015
    Smarmeron said:

    @Alanbrooke
    Not very likely? but there would be more chance of the SNP doing confidence and supply with Ed than with Chicken Dave, which is a factor worth remembering when placing bets.

    Oh I can't get too exscited about the SNP at present, they're so far up their own arses you just know it will all go tits up at some point.
  • Options
    Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 49,361

    Evening all and now we know Thursday's YouGov was the outlier it looked. No doubt TNS and Survation will skew the numbers with large Labour leads when they eventually come out.

    Just been attending A Big Dinner event run jointly by my rotary club Tain and District jointly with our neighbouring one East Sutherland for the 500 miles charity. Delighted that we raised over £700 for such an excellent cause.

    Survation isn't due out for two weeks - it's TNS wot should have come out by Friday.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,285

    David Allan Green is no friend of the Tories:

    Jack of Kent ‏@JackofKent

    This is not a party political point, but on basis of this 'statutory right' to political debates on TV, please don't let Ed near law-making.

    @JackofKent it's the Cones Hotline but without the excuse of being exhausted by years in government.

    @GeneralBoles
    What are you in for?
    Murder, what about you?
    I didn't turn up to debate Ed Miliband.
  • Options
    SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    @compouter2
    It will be interesting to hear Cameron's take on legislation to put future debates on a firm legal footing?
    I wonder if it will be a bit more nuanced than the Tories on here?
    (you all just "know" the question will be asked)
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,758
    SeanT said:

    SeanT said:

    SeanT said:

    I actually agree with Ed's Debate Law. The Debates should be obligatory and compulsory, they are good for our sadly dying democracy.

    However by saying it now he looks flailing, and a bit needy, which is not a great look for any politician.

    And what would the penalty be for not debating?
    How about £5m fines for the erring party. That would concentrate minds.
    This will be a huge hostage to the law of unintended consequences.

    If Labour really are this stupid they deserve everything they get.
    People who oppose TV election debates are like those who opposed the televising of parliament. Remember them? "Oh it will ruin the whole atmosphere of the Commons, we don't need vulgar cameras in here, making MPs act up". FFS.

    We pb-ers are sitting here at laptop/iPad screens discussing democracy and politics: this is how the political world now works. Few people go to live speeches and hustings, they naturally and rightly expect the political debate to be brought to their homes by TV, cable and broadband.

    Within a few years TV general election debates will be inevitable and unavoidable and a natural part of the political ecosystem (as they have been for every OTHER major British political clash - from London mayor to indyref). All other major democracies have election TV debates, from America to France to Germany.

    The idea that Britain should be uniquely undemocratic and NOT have TV debates is insulting and absurd. Shove that. Just get on with it. Finalise a format and then let the leaders sell themselves to the great British electorate, as they should. And no turning back.
    Sean were political anoraks, really, ordinary people don't care that much.

    I have no doubt other democracies like their debates and that gradually they will become part of the electoral furniture. But a law ? It's a leftie snap reaction, it will go wrong and at some point we'll have a 2 day debate with Miliband versus David Icke, Cage and Lady Whiplash.
  • Options
    Ave_itAve_it Posts: 2,411
    All CON needs to win GE2015 is to be 3% ahead of LAB as LD vote has collapsed.

    Anyone including LD/LAB luvvies on here who think we need more is delusional!

    As polls always overstate LAB we have won already!!

    Who cares about debates?! David and Samantha can measure up the new curtains now!!!
  • Options
    SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    @Ave_it
    "David and Samantha can measure up the new curtains now!!! "
    Most people do when they move from their residence to a new place.
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,758
    Smarmeron said:

    @Ave_it
    "David and Samantha can measure up the new curtains now!!! "
    Most people do when they move from their residence to a new place.

    LOL
  • Options
    DairDair Posts: 6,108

    The Sunday Times

    ED MILIBAND is at “war” with the Unite union, Labour’s biggest donor, over whether the woman at the heart of the Falkirk vote-rigging row should be given the chance to become an MP.

    Senior Labour insiders fear that the showdown over Karie Murphy, a close friend of union leader Len McCluskey, could cost the party a £1.5m donation they are expecting to help bankroll the election campaign, a source revealed.

    Unite wants Murphy on the shortlist of potential Labour candidates for Halifax, where the sitting MP, Linda Riordan, is standing down. Miliband is determined to stop that happening but panicking aides are split because some fear that the party could miss out on funding, according to the senior Labour source.

    http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/news/uk_news/article1528438.ece

    google Karie Murphy, go to images and wish Clare Short was still an MP
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,758
    Dair said:

    The Sunday Times

    ED MILIBAND is at “war” with the Unite union, Labour’s biggest donor, over whether the woman at the heart of the Falkirk vote-rigging row should be given the chance to become an MP.

    Senior Labour insiders fear that the showdown over Karie Murphy, a close friend of union leader Len McCluskey, could cost the party a £1.5m donation they are expecting to help bankroll the election campaign, a source revealed.

    Unite wants Murphy on the shortlist of potential Labour candidates for Halifax, where the sitting MP, Linda Riordan, is standing down. Miliband is determined to stop that happening but panicking aides are split because some fear that the party could miss out on funding, according to the senior Labour source.

    http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/news/uk_news/article1528438.ece

    google Karie Murphy, go to images and wish Clare Short was still an MP
    Haven't you got some bills to pay ?
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,285
    Cabinet office in child abuse cover-up: MoS beats attempt by No10 to gag VIP file that shows Thatcher knew about paedophile MP Cyril Smith

    Downing Street tried to block release of files exposing scale of cover-up
    Cabinet Office only caved in after being threatened with High Court Action
    Papers expose how much Establishment knew about Cyril Smith's abuse
    Margaret Thatcher was told police had probed claims he abused teenagers
    She was warned that handing him knighthood risked damaging 'integrity of the honours system' - but went ahead anyway

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2984529/Cabinet-office-child-abuse-cover-MoS-beats-attempt-No10-gag-VIP-file-shows-Thatcher-knew-paedophile-MP-Cyril-Smith.html

    Tick tick tick....
  • Options
    TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362

    Nick Sutton ✔ @suttonnick

    Sunday Herald front page:
    Labour says No to Tories but pact with SNP still on table
    #tomorrowspaperstoday #scotpapers

  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,218
    I see that the Greens are going to ban horse racing.

    Imagine: in a few weeks these authoritarian loons could be propping up EdM with the SNP...........
  • Options
    scotslassscotslass Posts: 912
    Alanbrake

    Sure and Lord Ashcroft is inventing the consituency polls showing the SNP surge in Scotland and have you heard the one about the Moon landings being a fake?
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,758
    Cyclefree said:

    I see that the Greens are going to ban horse racing.

    Imagine: in a few weeks these authoritarian loons could be propping up EdM with the SNP...........

    What makes you think Labour and the SNP aren't also authoritarian loons ?
  • Options
    FlightpathFlightpath Posts: 4,012
    Scott_P said:

    glw said:

    If the voters vote Ed in, they will deserve what they get. I cannot think of anyone worse than Brown.. but Ed's making a go of it to overtake Brown in awfulness.

    I've thought for a couple of years now that Ed will make us reappraise Brown. Brown is the worst PM in living memory, but Ed's going to top him.
    @georgeeaton: Brown wanted to be shadow international development secretary under Miliband, reveals @JohnRentoul http://t.co/MUm6fjiPBa
    That article also points out that former English Labour MP and hard leftie Les Huckfield, now resident in Scotland, is hoping that Sturgeon 'leads us to independence'. The SNP is a coalition of hard lefties and its this which highlights Labour's slump.
  • Options
    AndreaParma_82AndreaParma_82 Posts: 4,714
    Sunday Times reporting the delay in Halifax Labour selection is due to Karie Murphy of Falkirk fame wanting to apply and Labour HQ trying to find a way to deal with the situation.

  • Options
    kjohnwkjohnw Posts: 1,456

    Britain's Chancellor, George Osborne, is planning to introduce a new "diverted profits tax" targeting multinational companies judged to have shifted profits overseas to avoid tax, the Sunday Times newspaper reported, citing government sources.

    The 25 percent levy, more than corporation tax which is set at 20 percent, would be part of the annual budget due to be presented to parliament by Osborne on March 18, the newspaper reported.

    Google Inc , Amazon.com Inc and Facebook Inc are among companies that have been widely criticised in Britain for tax avoidance and that could potentially be affected by the new levy, according to the Sunday Times.

    https://uk.news.yahoo.com/osborne-planning-diverted-profits-tax-sunday-times-224945035--business.html#4HLMftR

    yes while Ed concentrates on forcing US style presidential debates in a parliamentary democracy , meanwhile George Osborne concentrates on the real world of actually running the country, and keeping the economy and prosperity going. EdM is an amateur university politics student, still walking around in short trousers, Lord help us if get the keys of power
  • Options
    SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    edited March 2015
    @FrancisUrquhart
    No party is going to come out of this well.
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,758
    scotslass said:

    Alanbrake

    Sure and Lord Ashcroft is inventing the consituency polls showing the SNP surge in Scotland and have you heard the one about the Moon landings being a fake?

    Scotsass

    I have no problem with the polls saying the Nats will gains seats, it's just when they get them they'll screw up.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,285
    edited March 2015
    Smarmeron said:

    @FrancisUrquhart
    No party is going to come out of this well.

    Nope....it is going to be a total s##t storm if even a tiny percentage of the rumours are true.
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,758
    SeanT said:

    SeanT said:

    SeanT said:

    SeanT said:

    I actually agree with Ed's Debate Law. The Debates should be obligatory and compulsory, they are good for our sadly dying democracy.

    However by saying it now he looks flailing, and a bit needy, which is not a great look for any politician.

    And what would the penalty be for not debating?
    How about £5m fines for the erring party. That would concentrate minds.
    This will be a huge hostage to the law of unintended consequences.

    If Labour really are this stupid they deserve everything they get.
    People who oppose TV election debates are like those who opposed the televising of parliament. Remember them? "Oh it will ruin the whole atmosphere of the Commons, we don't need vulgar cameras in here, making MPs act up". FFS.



    The idea that Britain should be uniquely undemocratic and NOT have TV debates is insulting and absurd. Shove that. Just get on with it. Finalise a format and then let the leaders sell themselves to the great British electorate, as they should. And no turning back.
    Sean were political anoraks, really, ordinary people don't care that much.

    I have no doubt other democracies like their debates and that gradually they will become part of the electoral furniture. But a law ? It's a leftie snap reaction, it will go wrong and at some point we'll have a 2 day debate with Miliband versus David Icke, Cage and Lady Whiplash.
    Ordinary people don't care that much BECAUSE they are treated like scum by the political elite, which refuses them debates, takes their votes for granted under FPTP, relies on rotten boroughs, etc.

    Look at the turnout in the Scottish referendum: 85%. Brilliant. Electrifying. Fantastic for democracy. Almost everyone who could vote, voted.

    Recall that the Scots had two TV debates which were BOTH regarded as pivotal, crucial and seriously influential. There is no doubt that these debates were hugely important, in engaging the Scottish people.

    You want to deny the British people, as a whole, the opportunity for the same revitalisation of their democracy?

    I despise anyone, left or right, Tory, Labour UKIP or LibDem, who would deny the electorate the chance to engage via TV debates.
    Yeah all of that but why the hell would you want to pass a law ? Explain.
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @schofieldkevin: Search goes on for problem which Ed Miliband doesn't think would be solved by passing another bloody law.
  • Options
    perdixperdix Posts: 1,806

    "The Observer has learnt that a Labour government, in a significant constitutional move, would put the requirement to stage “fair and impartial leaders’ debates” on a statutory footing. The new system would work on similar lines to the current rules for planning the number, length and timing of party political broadcasts, under which parties are consulted but not given the power to stop them happening."

    SeanT posted - How about £5m fines for the erring party. That would concentrate minds

    I think this answers your post sean.

    Potential participants cannot prevent the debates from happening but could refuse to participate. Is anyone seriously thinking fines for not participating. Ed would probably ask for jail as a punishment. Typical socialist/fascist mindset.

  • Options
    SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    LATEST: (beeb)

    Police and fire service attending incident involving a man on the roof of the House of Commons
    We can only hope it is a protester and not Dave, chickens are not great fliers.
  • Options
    kjohnwkjohnw Posts: 1,456
    Ave_it said:

    All CON needs to win GE2015 is to be 3% ahead of LAB as LD vote has collapsed.

    Anyone including LD/LAB luvvies on here who think we need more is delusional!

    As polls always overstate LAB we have won already!!

    Who cares about debates?! David and Samantha can measure up the new curtains now!!!

    Lol
  • Options
    FlightpathFlightpath Posts: 4,012

    Some more ideas for Ed to fill in his blank sheet of paper...such as

    In Florida, it is illegal to pass wind in a public place after 6pm on Thursdays

    In Canada, by law, one out of every five songs on the radio must be sung by a Canadian

    Running out of petrol is illegal on Germany's autobahn, and so is walking along it

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/travel/travel_news/article-2856346/It-illegal-not-smile-Milan-no-donkeys-sleep-bath-Oklahoma-strangest-laws-word.html

    I mentioned Les Huckfield earlier. At one time he wanted to pass a law making it illegal to import cars. ''Red Robbo's Law''.
    The problem with Miliband is we will get a raft of 'Red Robbo' type laws from him.
  • Options
    TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362
    edited March 2015

    SeanT said:

    SeanT said:

    SeanT said:

    I actually agree with Ed's Debate Law. The Debates should be obligatory and compulsory, they are good for our sadly dying democracy.

    However by saying it now he looks flailing, and a bit needy, which is not a great look for any politician.

    And what would the penalty be for not debating?
    How about £5m fines for the erring party. That would concentrate minds.
    This will be a huge hostage to the law of unintended consequences.

    If Labour really are this stupid they deserve everything they get.
    People who oppose TV election debates are like those who opposed the televising of parliament. Remember them? "Oh it will ruin the whole atmosphere of the Commons, we don't need vulgar cameras in here, making MPs act up". FFS.

    We pb-ers are sitting here at laptop/iPad screens discussing democracy and politics: this is how the political world now works. Few people go to live speeches and hustings, they naturally and rightly expect the political debate to be brought to their homes by TV, cable and broadband.

    Within a few years TV general election debates will be inevitable and unavoidable and a natural part of the political ecosystem (as they have been for every OTHER major British political clash - from London mayor to indyref). All other major democracies have election TV debates, from America to France to Germany.

    The idea that Britain should be uniquely undemocratic and NOT have TV debates is insulting and absurd. Shove that. Just get on with it. Finalise a format and then let the leaders sell themselves to the great British electorate, as they should. And no turning back.
    Sean were political anoraks, really, ordinary people don't care that much.

    I have no doubt other democracies like their debates and that gradually they will become part of the electoral furniture. But a law ? It's a leftie snap reaction, it will go wrong and at some point we'll have a 2 day debate with Miliband versus David Icke, Cage and Lady Whiplash.
    Are we really bothered for a political leader to go these debates that have been coached to death for a Quick win point that for days after will take away from the rest of the GE campaign.

    All we remember from the last TV debates were Clegg looking down a camera lense and brown agreeing with nick.



  • Options
    SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    @Alanbrooke
    Because the democratically advantageous debates are at present mired in confusion?
    Ask Dave for further clarification of the "confusion"
  • Options
    JPJ2JPJ2 Posts: 378
    Alanbrooke

    "I have no problem with the polls saying the Nats will gains seats, it's just when they get them they'll screw up."

    Seem to remember the SNP victory for Holyrood in 2007 was going to show the SNP up and they would then go rapidly backwards-quite the reverse has happened.

    If the SNP achieve the balance of power at Westminster they will prove to be much more politically astute than the Lib Dem dopes.
  • Options
    Ave_itAve_it Posts: 2,411
    LOL all those bothered by debates

    CAMERON is our natural leader - no debate over that!

    * off LAB/SNP coalition!!
  • Options
    DairDair Posts: 6,108


    Good luck with getting anyone to lend to Scotland after the UDI you were talking about earlier.

    Again the Loyalist argument is based on misdirection and lies. There are few scenarios that would require UDI but one of them would be, as I said earlier, a Left/Right alliance to lock Scotland out of a voice at Westminster. As said, we are not in Castille (using the term "Spain" is nonsense). Trying the Castille model wouldn't work and would lead to UDI. But England wouldn't risk that as it would put them back in the situation of Irish bombers taking the fight to the heart of England.

    Scotland would have a fiscal surplus in the most likely scenarios. In the event it didn't, it would be an export heavy economy with vast natural resources and open to borrowing at the lowest possible rates.

    Again the Little Englander comes out, making risible comments about Scotland's ability to manage her own affairs.
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,758
    Smarmeron said:

    @Alanbrooke
    Because the democratically advantageous debates are at present mired in confusion?
    Ask Dave for further clarification of the "confusion"

    If someone wants to pass up on 4 hours of TV exposure re you going to arrest him ?
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,758
    JPJ2 said:

    Alanbrooke

    "I have no problem with the polls saying the Nats will gains seats, it's just when they get them they'll screw up."

    Seem to remember the SNP victory for Holyrood in 2007 was going to show the SNP up and they would then go rapidly backwards-quite the reverse has happened.

    If the SNP achieve the balance of power at Westminster they will prove to be much more politically astute than the Lib Dem dopes.

    Given your MP is Lorely Burt, did you vote for her ?
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,285
    Christ alive, Yakabu is supposedly only 32 years old...what age did he make his professional debut, 11?
  • Options
    anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746
    edited March 2015
    shadsy said:

    If you've only got time to listen to one of these though, ignore mine and head straight for the one with Chris Hanretty which I found very informative.

    It's difficult to understand their LD vote share prediction.

    Liberal Democrats (low) 10.5% (prediction) 13.5% (high) 16.8%

    http://electionforecast.co.uk

    The LDs best polling number since Jan 1st is 11%, but that's their 'low'.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_2015_United_Kingdom_general_election#2015
  • Options
    kjohnwkjohnw Posts: 1,456
    Ave_it said:

    LOL all those bothered by debates

    CAMERON is our natural leader - no debate over that!

    * off LAB/SNP coalition!!

    the only debate I want is do I have to pay my licence fee to watch Ed Miliband drone on and on !
  • Options
    TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362

    Smarmeron said:

    @Alanbrooke
    Because the democratically advantageous debates are at present mired in confusion?
    Ask Dave for further clarification of the "confusion"

    If someone wants to pass up on 4 hours of TV exposure re you going to arrest him ?
    Don't say that Alan,he get's insulting. ;-)

  • Options
    SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    @Alanbrooke
    It would appear that like one of the thread headers the other day, some are getting over excited about a claim made on twatter that has no basis in fact.
    I will offer you a small wager that "jail" and "fines" for non appearance only exist on that fevered medium as a possibility, and have no basis in what Ed has said?
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,758
    edited March 2015
    Dair said:


    Good luck with getting anyone to lend to Scotland after the UDI you were talking about earlier.

    Again the Loyalist argument is based on misdirection and lies. There are few scenarios that would require UDI but one of them would be, as I said earlier, a Left/Right alliance to lock Scotland out of a voice at Westminster. As said, we are not in Castille (using the term "Spain" is nonsense). Trying the Castille model wouldn't work and would lead to UDI. But England wouldn't risk that as it would put them back in the situation of Irish bombers taking the fight to the heart of England.

    Scotland would have a fiscal surplus in the most likely scenarios. In the event it didn't, it would be an export heavy economy with vast natural resources and open to borrowing at the lowest possible rates.

    Again the Little Englander comes out, making risible comments about Scotland's ability to manage her own affairs.
    Scotland will have no fiscal surplus, you're heading for a recession if the oil price doesn;t pick up.

    Chuck in a declining financial sector if you can't piggy back off a larger currency area and where does the money come from ?

  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,758
    edited March 2015
    Smarmeron said:

    @Alanbrooke
    It would appear that like one of the thread headers the other day, some are getting over excited about a claim made on twatter that has no basis in fact.
    I will offer you a small wager that "jail" and "fines" for non appearance only exist on that fevered medium as a possibility, and have no basis in what Ed has said?

    given that most of what Ed has said has no basis in reality I'll say thanks for the offer but no thanks,
  • Options
    Ave_itAve_it Posts: 2,411
    kjohnw said:

    Ave_it said:

    LOL all those bothered by debates

    CAMERON is our natural leader - no debate over that!

    * off LAB/SNP coalition!!

    the only debate I want is do I have to pay my licence fee to watch Ed Miliband drone on and on !
    :lol::lol::lol:


    Can we have Justine Thornton instead - a much better idea!!!
  • Options
    DairDair Posts: 6,108

    @ Dair

    At long last an actual answer.

    So where do the revenues come from and how do you borrow ?

    The oil revenues have just taken a 40% hit. So that means that the economy which 20% oil is faced with a potential contraction of 8*% if this price level holds.

    The borrowing will be expensive if oil stays down as the only real option open to you is a Scottish pound and it is now a petrocurrency.

    So how do you pay the bills ?

    PS I've generally found that people find the question "how will I pay my bills ?" anything but risible.

    Taxes are not the Economy.

    How stupid is your argument? Oil and Gas is around 14% of the Scottish Economy because that includes the production, wages, exports and tax. It is around 8% of the tax base. The current slump in price would be about about 2.8% contraction.

    Of course the Scottish Economy is already about 10% to 15% larger per capita than the UK economy once the VAT and Corporation Tax currently booked in London is differentiated by a tax border.

    Oops, you keep forgetting that. Tesco alone would provide about 50% of the Oil and Gas taxes to Scotland, instead of being classed as London revenue. Whisky would remove about £3bn from the exchequer and replace it with £700mn to Scotland.

    But hey, keep believing England is solvent. It might help you sleep at night. The day of Scottish Independence, you won't sleep so easy. But Scotland will sleep far easier and far richer.
  • Options
    SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    @Alanbrooke
    It is your privilege to decline without dishonour sir.
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,758
    Smarmeron said:

    @Alanbrooke
    It is your privilege to decline without dishonour sir.

    Shit, I was hoping you'd call me a scumbag
  • Options
    GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,844
    edited March 2015
    Ave_it said:

    All CON needs to win GE2015 is to be 3% ahead of LAB as LD vote has collapsed.

    Anyone including LD/LAB luvvies on here who think we need more is delusional!

    As polls always overstate LAB we have won already!!

    Who cares about debates?! David and Samantha can measure up the new curtains now!!!

    Ave it! :smiley:

  • Options
    SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    @Alanbrooke
    I could mutter it under my breath if that helps?
  • Options
    Ave_itAve_it Posts: 2,411
    Scotland = :lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

    Thanks for coming!
  • Options
    FlightpathFlightpath Posts: 4,012

    Sunday Times front page: Osborne tax bonanza for 27m voters

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B_hr3TgVEAArxMK.jpg

    That front page suggests something weird going on in the world - and I do not mean simply sending Sarah Brightman into space on top of a rocket. Blair and £30 million from the UAE? Body parts from drug addicts & rape classes for 11 year olds? The only bit that seems to be from the real world is the govt making 'internet giants' pay tax.
  • Options
    SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    @Flightpath
    Does this tax bonanza mean austerity is at an end?
This discussion has been closed.