The detail of today’s YouGov is Con 33.8% Lab 33.4% – Con lead 0.4%. Because the party shares have been rounded up and down the effect is to more than double the lead to 1%. As it happens , the Tories have benefiited a fair bit over the past week by this rounding effect. Tory leads of 3% 2% and 1% have on closer inspection been shown to be leads of 2.15% , 1.55% and today’s 0.4%. There was also a tie which was actually a Labour lead of 0.3% Surely it would make more sense to round the lead – rather than the party shares
But we all knew that, or if we didn't, we should have known.
Druids are the indigenous faith of these islands.
The druids were a bunch of Johnny Come Latelys. For a very accessible description of religion in the British Isles in early history you could do a lot worse then read "Foundations" by Peter Ackroyd.
Actually, you could do worse than read that book under any circumstances. If I had my way I'd make it essential reading for any PPC and they would have to pass a written exam (pass mark 80%) before they were allowed to stand in an election.
Mr Farron is a great campaigner though - so if the LDs need rebuilding - he's a serious contender.
Mr Clegg is dead no matter what and Mr Elder Statesman like Ming clearly don't fit with the current voter base.
I don't like Mr Farron at all and find him very shouty/superficial - but he's got box-office appeal for Lefties. IMHO - the LDs need to decide what they are. Until they do, how can they pick a leader to represent them?
I'm not even sure Tim Farron would be a good choice for next Lib Dem leader. Us political geeks know he's lefty and always been a Coalition-sceptic, but remember Joe Public still doesn't have a bloody clue who he is. And I think, given how unforgiving the electorate are going to be towards the Lib Dems for the foreseeable future, they're going to automatically assume the worst of any LibDem they don't already know.
Imo, the next leader will have to be someone the public already know AND who they trust to have some integrity. Vince Cable and Charles Kennedy are really the only candidates who fit the bill as far as I can see.
The detail of today’s YouGov is Con 33.8% Lab 33.4% – Con lead 0.4%. Because the party shares have been rounded up and down the effect is to more than double the lead to 1%. As it happens , the Tories have benefiited a fair bit over the past week by this rounding effect. Tory leads of 3% 2% and 1% have on closer inspection been shown to be leads of 2.15% , 1.55% and today’s 0.4%. There was also a tie which was actually a Labour lead of 0.3% Surely it would make more sense to round the lead – rather than the party shares
I want my I want my I want my MTV TNS
seemingly they're now called "The New Saints of Oswestry Town & Llansantffraid FC"
The huge swing disclosed in the Kirkcaldy & Cowdenbeath poll is much harder to explain, and for that reason I'm a bit suspicious of that poll as a possible outlier.)
Couldn't that simply be the unwinding of;
i) Gordon Brown's personal vote? ii) The (then) Prime Minister's vote?
"It would also give the heads of overspending departments some real responsibility wrt budget, knowing that ministers could not just chuck them money from the contingency without notice.
It would give the public something solid to vote on (as opposed to wishy-washy manifesto commitments) and give them something to measure the performance of the government and departments with."
Look at your proposal from the point of view of the Civil Service and Politicians. Do you see why it will never be adopted? People held to account for their actions? Voters given indisputable facts by which to measure performance? It would be the end of civilisation as we know it.
"It would also give the heads of overspending departments some real responsibility wrt budget, knowing that ministers could not just chuck them money from the contingency without notice.
It would give the public something solid to vote on (as opposed to wishy-washy manifesto commitments) and give them something to measure the performance of the government and departments with."
Look at your proposal from the point of view of the Civil Service and Politicians. Do you see why it will never be adopted? People held to account for their actions? Voters given indisputable facts by which to measure performance? It would be the end of civilisation as we know it.
Indeed. But I live in hope. ;-)
I haven't really been able to come up with any *sane* reasons against it (aside from people's self-protection, as you mention).
On another note, I have a military history question I'd appreciate some help with whilst you are on. I need to go out, but in short:
A couple of decades ago I read somewhere about a few UK military engineers (tanks, in this case), being embedded within Russian formations so they could examine captured German tanks and weaponry; the Russians had a few in our formations as well.
I have no idea where I read this; I *think* it was non-fiction, but might be wrong.
Do you have any ideas where I might look?
I have never heard of engineers being embedded in formations. Most of the serious examination of captured tanks took place well behind the lines (we brought them back to the UK for tests and trials). I should have thought that any sharing of information would have been through the respective Military Attaches and their staff.
I would guess the pace to look would be the National Archives but in which catalogue I couldn't say off the top of my head. Somewhere there will be a file with the correspondence and the Foreign Office papers would probably be a good place to start. The catalogues are available on line if you want to do some digging.
I'm so sorry to hear of your loss. It seems similar to MS - strikes randomly and with differing degrees. A very good friend of mine has had that for 40yrs, another was gone in 10. Hope she died peacefully.
The attention given to ALS on US TV is massive just from the shows I've watch over here. I can't recall it ever mentioned in the UK bar David Niven. That's why I noticed it so much.
Ditto Early Onset Parkinson's - without Michael J Fox, it'd never get a shout-out. He's a brilliant advocate for the condition and gets serious anti-victim screentime in the US in shows like The Good Wife.
The dwaft lobby has some serious lobbyists too - I can't think of any in recent years on UK shows - the US has many from Boston Legal to Game of Thrones to Bones. All top rated shows and no Feel-Sorry characters.
It's so weird coming across the same diseases called different things. I'm assuming that Motor-Neuron Disease is ALS or Leu Gehrig's? I'd never heard of him until watching US TV. That David Niven died of it too seems to be lost in the wash.
OT I keep tripping across references to Mono as an illness in US TV shows - is it the same thing as Scholar Fever here in the UK?
My brother's girlfriend was ill for months with Scholar Fever and it sounded horrible.
EDIT Google doesn't seem to know what I'm talking about
Glandular Fever
Or as we biochemists like to call it - Epstein-Barr Virus.
ALS, in UK, is a variation of MND. I think in the US it’s the other way round. I’m not sure of how it works, just takes longer. There are, IIRC three “varieties" of MND, the first of which kills horrifyingly quickly. Took my daughter a year ago; not possible to slow down deterioration, upport devices even if arriving promptly could be too late.
Stephen Hawking (and the DVD of the Oscar-winning film is out soon) perhaps? On British television, there is Clarissa in Silent Witness, and the sitcom Life's Too Short.
The huge swing disclosed in the Kirkcaldy & Cowdenbeath poll is much harder to explain, and for that reason I'm a bit suspicious of that poll as a possible outlier.)
Couldn't that simply be the unwinding of;
i) Gordon Brown's personal vote? ii) The (then) Prime Minister's vote?
Maybe. But it's a huge difference from everywhere else polled.
The huge swing disclosed in the Kirkcaldy & Cowdenbeath poll is much harder to explain, and for that reason I'm a bit suspicious of that poll as a possible outlier.)
Couldn't that simply be the unwinding of;
i) Gordon Brown's personal vote? ii) The (then) Prime Minister's vote?
Maybe. But it's a huge difference from everywhere else polled.
I read it first at the bus stop on the way home from college the day it broke and it knocked me sideways.
I've no idea who leaked it or the made up gory details. I hope they burn for every penny they were paid.
I've used Interferon for my kitties as an incredibly expensive experimental treatment for FIV - and have a huge respect for drug trials and the desperation of those trying to fix what's wrong.
Mr Farron is a great campaigner though - so if the LDs need rebuilding - he's a serious contender.
Mr Clegg is dead no matter what and Mr Elder Statesman like Ming clearly don't fit with the current voter base.
I don't like Mr Farron at all and find him very shouty/superficial - but he's got box-office appeal for Lefties. IMHO - the LDs need to decide what they are. Until they do, how can they pick a leader to represent them?
I'm not even sure Tim Farron would be a good choice for next Lib Dem leader. Us political geeks know he's lefty and always been a Coalition-sceptic, but remember Joe Public still doesn't have a bloody clue who he is. And I think, given how unforgiving the electorate are going to be towards the Lib Dems for the foreseeable future, they're going to automatically assume the worst of any LibDem they don't already know.
Imo, the next leader will have to be someone the public already know AND who they trust to have some integrity. Vince Cable and Charles Kennedy are really the only candidates who fit the bill as far as I can see.
A political party can be turned around by a change of leader in fairly short order. Tony Blair and New Labour or David Cameron and his de-toxification strategy did so to a certain extent. Also Alex Salmond (part 2).
The huge swing disclosed in the Kirkcaldy & Cowdenbeath poll is much harder to explain, and for that reason I'm a bit suspicious of that poll as a possible outlier.)
Couldn't that simply be the unwinding of;
i) Gordon Brown's personal vote? ii) The (then) Prime Minister's vote?
Maybe. But it's a huge difference from everywhere else polled.
Back Labour at 5-6 here ?
I'm not backing Labour anywhere in Scotland yet. they don't yet seem to have hit bottom.
Mr Farron is a great campaigner though - so if the LDs need rebuilding - he's a serious contender.
Mr Clegg is dead no matter what and Mr Elder Statesman like Ming clearly don't fit with the current voter base.
I don't like Mr Farron at all and find him very shouty/superficial - but he's got box-office appeal for Lefties. IMHO - the LDs need to decide what they are. Until they do, how can they pick a leader to represent them?
I'm not even sure Tim Farron would be a good choice for next Lib Dem leader. Us political geeks know he's lefty and always been a Coalition-sceptic, but remember Joe Public still doesn't have a bloody clue who he is. And I think, given how unforgiving the electorate are going to be towards the Lib Dems for the foreseeable future, they're going to automatically assume the worst of any LibDem they don't already know.
Imo, the next leader will have to be someone the public already know AND who they trust to have some integrity. Vince Cable and Charles Kennedy are really the only candidates who fit the bill as far as I can see.
A political party can be turned around by a change of leader in fairly short order. Tony Blair and New Labour or David Cameron and his de-toxification strategy did so to a certain extent. Also Alex Salmond (part 2).
Labour were doing very well before the death of John Smith in May 1994 - something that the uber-Blairites never want to acknowledge.
Nigel Farage (@Nigel_Farage) 08/03/2015 12:39 Apologies to the British media. I said last year 50,000 Romanians/Bulgarians would register to work in the UK. It's actually 187,370. Wow.
Of the 290k net migration 187k were from those two countries. Dave may have met his under 100k target without them. One can't help but laugh.
Another mess left by Labour. Somehow Cameron has been politically incapable of shoving the blame exactly where it lies.
The huge swing disclosed in the Kirkcaldy & Cowdenbeath poll is much harder to explain, and for that reason I'm a bit suspicious of that poll as a possible outlier.)
Couldn't that simply be the unwinding of;
i) Gordon Brown's personal vote? ii) The (then) Prime Minister's vote?
Maybe. But it's a huge difference from everywhere else polled.
Brown increased his share of the vote by +6.4% between 2005 & 2010 - maybe it was his natural charm, or maybe because he was PM - knock that of your 28.5% swing and you are in more typical territory......
Caroline Flint said on todays Marr show that the energy price freeze (remember, prices for domestic gas and electricity was always government controlled until 2002) was only ever a freeze on the increase, and that Ed Milband made it very clear when the energy price freeze was announced in 2013 that it was only ever a cap on increases and he said that it wont stop prices from coming down.
Is that true?? Or is it a porkie? I dont remember that.
Mr Farron is a great campaigner though - so if the LDs need rebuilding - he's a serious contender.
Mr Clegg is dead no matter what and Mr Elder Statesman like Ming clearly don't fit with the current voter base.
I don't like Mr Farron at all and find him very shouty/superficial - but he's got box-office appeal for Lefties. IMHO - the LDs need to decide what they are. Until they do, how can they pick a leader to represent them?
I'm not even sure Tim Farron would be a good choice for next Lib Dem leader. Us political geeks know he's lefty and always been a Coalition-sceptic, but remember Joe Public still doesn't have a bloody clue who he is. And I think, given how unforgiving the electorate are going to be towards the Lib Dems for the foreseeable future, they're going to automatically assume the worst of any LibDem they don't already know.
Imo, the next leader will have to be someone the public already know AND who they trust to have some integrity. Vince Cable and Charles Kennedy are really the only candidates who fit the bill as far as I can see.
A political party can be turned around by a change of leader in fairly short order. Tony Blair and New Labour or David Cameron and his de-toxification strategy did so to a certain extent. Also Alex Salmond (part 2).
Labour were doing very well before the death of John Smith in May 1994 - something that the uber-Blairites never want to acknowledge.
Indeed, John Smith was inspiring. Neil Kinnock was not. (Ken Livingstone said this too, so it wasn't just an appeal to the Labour right).
O/T, does anyone else have problems with W Hill in opening an account? They seem to be totally officious re. proof of age.
No other bookie has raised the slightest objection. They presumably check the electoral register ... where I've been for 43 years.
Mr Farron is a great campaigner though - so if the LDs need rebuilding - he's a serious contender.
Mr Clegg is dead no matter what and Mr Elder Statesman like Ming clearly don't fit with the current voter base.
I don't like Mr Farron at all and find him very shouty/superficial - but he's got box-office appeal for Lefties. IMHO - the LDs need to decide what they are. Until they do, how can they pick a leader to represent them?
I'm not even sure Tim Farron would be a good choice for next Lib Dem leader. Us political geeks know he's lefty and always been a Coalition-sceptic, but remember Joe Public still doesn't have a bloody clue who he is. And I think, given how unforgiving the electorate are going to be towards the Lib Dems for the foreseeable future, they're going to automatically assume the worst of any LibDem they don't already know.
Imo, the next leader will have to be someone the public already know AND who they trust to have some integrity. Vince Cable and Charles Kennedy are really the only candidates who fit the bill as far as I can see.
A political party can be turned around by a change of leader in fairly short order. Tony Blair and New Labour or David Cameron and his de-toxification strategy did so to a certain extent. Also Alex Salmond (part 2).
Labour were doing very well before the death of John Smith in May 1994 - something that the uber-Blairites never want to acknowledge.
Labour was certainly doing well under John Smith, there's no denying Lab's poll rating really took off into the stratosphere when Tony became leader;
Would John Smith have achieved the kind of leads Blair did in 1995 and 1996? We'll never know, but I struggle to think Smith would have cut through across middle England quite as well as Blair did.
Obviously Labour still would have won in 1997 under John Smith and probably with a landslide but I doubt it would have been like "an asteroid hitting the planet and destroying practically all life on Earth" as Prof Anthony King put it.
Of course, that would ultimately have been better for the UK and for Labour because you wouldn't have had a Prime Minister becoming totally out of control and getting embroiled in Iraq...
Mr Farron is a great campaigner though - so if the LDs need rebuilding - he's a serious contender.
Mr Clegg is dead no matter what and Mr Elder Statesman like Ming clearly don't fit with the current voter base.
I don't like Mr Farron at all and find him very shouty/superficial - but he's got box-office appeal for Lefties. IMHO - the LDs need to decide what they are. Until they do, how can they pick a leader to represent them?
I'm not even sure Tim Farron would be a good choice for next Lib Dem leader. Us political geeks know he's lefty and always been a Coalition-sceptic, but remember Joe Public still doesn't have a bloody clue who he is. And I think, given how unforgiving the electorate are going to be towards the Lib Dems for the foreseeable future, they're going to automatically assume the worst of any LibDem they don't already know.
Imo, the next leader will have to be someone the public already know AND who they trust to have some integrity. Vince Cable and Charles Kennedy are really the only candidates who fit the bill as far as I can see.
A political party can be turned around by a change of leader in fairly short order. Tony Blair and New Labour or David Cameron and his de-toxification strategy did so to a certain extent. Also Alex Salmond (part 2).
Labour were doing very well before the death of John Smith in May 1994 - something that the uber-Blairites never want to acknowledge.
Betting aside, who would you prefer to see as Lib Dem leader after Clegg ?
I'll counter with the Dr Ludwig in True Blood who saves Sookie after being clawed by a werewolf. She's totally awesome and in charge.
TBH, I thought the Silent Witness actress was freak show character material more suited to a horror movie. And begging for the PC vote. This nullifies any attempt to include the actors as actors. The US shows just include allsorts - and often as deliberately difficult comic foils. Denny Crane's lust for *little people* in Boston Legal being an excellent example of how to debunk PCness.
I'm so sorry to hear of your loss. It seems similar to MS - strikes randomly and with differing degrees. A very good friend of mine has had that for 40yrs, another was gone in 10. Hope she died peacefully.
The attention given to ALS on US TV is massive just from the shows I've watch over here. I can't recall it ever mentioned in the UK bar David Niven. That's why I noticed it so much.
Ditto Early Onset Parkinson's - without Michael J Fox, it'd never get a shout-out. He's a brilliant advocate for the condition and gets serious anti-victim screentime in the US in shows like The Good Wife.
The dwaft lobby has some serious lobbyists too - I can't think of any in recent years on UK shows - the US has many from Boston Legal to Game of Thrones to Bones. All top rated shows and no Feel-Sorry characters.
It's so weird coming across the same diseases called different things. I'm assuming that Motor-Neuron Disease is ALS or Leu Gehrig's? I'd never heard of him until watching US TV. That David Niven died of it too seems to be lost in the wash.
OT I keep tripping across references to Mono as an illness in US TV shows - is it the same thing as Scholar Fever here in the UK?
My brother's girlfriend was ill for months with Scholar Fever and it sounded horrible.
EDIT Google doesn't seem to know what I'm talking about
Glandular Fever
Or as we biochemists like to call it - Epstein-Barr Virus.
ALS, in UK, is a variation of MND. I think in the US it’s the other way round. I’m not sure of how it works, just takes longer. There are, IIRC three “varieties" of MND, the first of which kills horrifyingly quickly. Took my daughter a year ago; not possible to slow down deterioration, upport devices even if arriving promptly could be too late.
Stephen Hawking (and the DVD of the Oscar-winning film is out soon) perhaps? On British television, there is Clarissa in Silent Witness, and the sitcom Life's Too Short.
Caroline Flint said on todays Marr show that the energy price freeze (remember, prices for domestic gas and electricity was always government controlled until 2002) was only ever a freeze on the increase, and that Ed Milband made it very clear when the energy price freeze was announced in 2013 that it was only ever a cap on increases and he said that it wont stop prices from coming down.
Is that true?? Or is it a porkie? I dont remember that.
Flint is getting rave reviews from the political blogosphere for her interview this morning, which is not exactly something Labour shadow ministers are used to, to put it politely.
Even though she's supposedly a "Blairite", I've always thought she's been underused by Labour. Atleast she has some spunk about her and refuses to let herself be walked all over by interviewers like most of the shadow cabinet, and she atleast vaguely speaks in something approximating Human.
Here is his bit of the speech: "If we win the election 2015 the next Labour government will freeze gas and electricity prices until the start of 2017. Your bills will not rise. It will benefit millions of families and millions of businesses. That’s what I mean by a government that fights for you. That’s what I mean when I say Britain can do better than this.
Now the companies aren’t going to like this because it will cost them more but they have been overcharging people for too long because of a market that doesn’t work. It’s time to reset the market. So we will pass legislation in our first year in office to do that, and have a regulator that will genuinely be on the customers’ side but also enable the investment we need. That’s how Britain will do better than this."
Maybe he 'forgot' the bit about bills would still reduce if energy prices reduced.
Caroline Flint said on todays Marr show that the energy price freeze (remember, prices for domestic gas and electricity was always government controlled until 2002) was only ever a freeze on the increase, and that Ed Milband made it very clear when the energy price freeze was announced in 2013 that it was only ever a cap on increases and he said that it wont stop prices from coming down.
Is that true?? Or is it a porkie? I dont remember that.
Flint is getting rave reviews from the political blogosphere for her interview this morning, which is not exactly something Labour shadow ministers are used to, to put it politely.
Even though she's supposedly a "Blairite", I've always thought she's been underused by Labour. Atleast she has some spunk about her and refuses to let herself be walked all over by interviewers like most of the shadow cabinet, and she atleast vaguely speaks in something approximating Human.
Shes getting credit for sufficiently failing to answer a question. The substantive point though, was she being mischievously dishonest in her interpretation of past events?
@notme A cap is an upper limit, not a fixed number, but you know that already. The call was for a cap on increases, not a straight price fix, but if you want to twist things, no one can stop you, only point out the crassness of what you are posting.
@notme A cap is an upper limit, not a fixed number, but you know that already. The call was for a cap on increases, not a straight price fix, but if you want to twist things, no one can stop you, only point out the crassness of what you are posting.
What he said:
If we win the election 2015 the next Labour government will freeze gas and electricity prices until the start of 2017. Your bills will not rise.
@notme A cap is an upper limit, not a fixed number, but you know that already. The call was for a cap on increases, not a straight price fix, but if you want to twist things, no one can stop you, only point out the crassness of what you are posting.
Im sorry, did you see the quote, he didnt call for a cap, he called for a 'freeze'.
"If we win the election 2015 the next Labour government will freeze gas and electricity prices until the start of 2017"
How am i twisting things? I am waiting to be corrected, did Miliband either at the time, or very shortly afterwards refer to the price freeze as a cap, and that prices will come down?
Freeze doesnt imply prices will come down, or go up. They'll be stasis like kept exactly as they are.
@notme A cap is an upper limit, not a fixed number, but you know that already. The call was for a cap on increases, not a straight price fix, but if you want to twist things, no one can stop you, only point out the crassness of what you are posting.
What he said:
If we win the election 2015 the next Labour government will freeze gas and electricity prices until the start of 2017. Your bills will not rise.
Where's the bit about bills falling?
A 'freeze' means 'no change'.
Extraordinary how he lays in to me for quoting back what Ed said. The policy was certainly presented as a freeze, leaflets were distributed nation wide showing prices being frozen.
If Miliband did caveat the policy somewhere as a cap at the time, fair enough, just poor marketing. But if he didnt, and Flint is telling fibs, thats another issue.
A further issue is of course just how feeble politicians are at second guessing the market. The opposition had no comprehension that oil prices around the world could crash. Energy was supposed to be always getting more expensive, you know along with Peak Oil (gigantic lol) etc.
"The cap would apply from May 2015 until January 2017, the party said. Labour aides said the freeze would save the average household £120 over that period."
The huge swing disclosed in the Kirkcaldy & Cowdenbeath poll is much harder to explain, and for that reason I'm a bit suspicious of that poll as a possible outlier.)
Couldn't that simply be the unwinding of;
i) Gordon Brown's personal vote? ii) The (then) Prime Minister's vote?
Maybe. But it's a huge difference from everywhere else polled.
Back Labour at 5-6 here ?
I'm not backing Labour anywhere in Scotland yet. they don't yet seem to have hit bottom.
Mr Farron is a great campaigner though - so if the LDs need rebuilding - he's a serious contender.
Mr Clegg is dead no matter what and Mr Elder Statesman like Ming clearly don't fit with the current voter base.
I don't like Mr Farron at all and find him very shouty/superficial - but he's got box-office appeal for Lefties. IMHO - the LDs need to decide what they are. Until they do, how can they pick a leader to represent them?
I'm not even sure Tim Farron would be a good choice for next Lib Dem leader. Us political geeks know he's lefty and always been a Coalition-sceptic, but remember Joe Public still doesn't have a bloody clue who he is. And I think, given how unforgiving the electorate are going to be towards the Lib Dems for the foreseeable future, they're going to automatically assume the worst of any LibDem they don't already know.
Imo, the next leader will have to be someone the public already know AND who they trust to have some integrity. Vince Cable and Charles Kennedy are really the only candidates who fit the bill as far as I can see.
A political party can be turned around by a change of leader in fairly short order. Tony Blair and New Labour or David Cameron and his de-toxification strategy did so to a certain extent. Also Alex Salmond (part 2).
Labour were doing very well before the death of John Smith in May 1994 - something that the uber-Blairites never want to acknowledge.
Betting aside, who would you prefer to see as Lib Dem leader after Clegg ?
"It would also give the heads of overspending departments some real responsibility wrt budget, knowing that ministers could not just chuck them money from the contingency without notice.
It would give the public something solid to vote on (as opposed to wishy-washy manifesto commitments) and give them something to measure the performance of the government and departments with."
Look at your proposal from the point of view of the Civil Service and Politicians. Do you see why it will never be adopted? People held to account for their actions? Voters given indisputable facts by which to measure performance? It would be the end of civilisation as we know it.
"It would also give the heads of overspending departments some real responsibility wrt budget, knowing that ministers could not just chuck them money from the contingency without notice.
It would give the public something solid to vote on (as opposed to wishy-washy manifesto commitments) and give them something to measure the performance of the government and departments with."
Look at your proposal from the point of view of the Civil Service and Politicians. Do you see why it will never be adopted? People held to account for their actions? Voters given indisputable facts by which to measure performance? It would be the end of civilisation as we know it.
Indeed. But I live in hope. ;-)
I haven't really been able to come up with any *sane* reasons against it (aside from people's self-protection, as you mention).
On another note, I have a military history question I'd appreciate some help with whilst you are on. I need to go out, but in short:
A couple of decades ago I read somewhere about a few UK military engineers (tanks, in this case), being embedded within Russian formations so they could examine captured German tanks and weaponry; the Russians had a few in our formations as well.
I have no idea where I read this; I *think* it was non-fiction, but might be wrong.
Do you have any ideas where I might look?
This may not be relevant to your interest in tanks (apologies if not) but it was certainly true for the crabs.
My grandfather was an RAF mechanic and he served for a time at RAF Collyweston and Wittering as part of No.1426 (Enemy Aircraft) Flight RAF. The Septics were very involved with this, although I don't recall him mentioning any other nationalities so I've no idea about the Russian bit, sorry.
Mr Farron is a great campaigner though - so if the LDs need rebuilding - he's a serious contender.
Mr Clegg is dead no matter what and Mr Elder Statesman like Ming clearly don't fit with the current voter base.
I don't like Mr Farron at all and find him very shouty/superficial - but he's got box-office appeal for Lefties. IMHO - the LDs need to decide what they are. Until they do, how can they pick a leader to represent them?
I'm not even sure Tim Farron would be a good choice for next Lib Dem leader. Us political geeks know he's lefty and always been a Coalition-sceptic, but remember Joe Public still doesn't have a bloody clue who he is. And I think, given how unforgiving the electorate are going to be towards the Lib Dems for the foreseeable future, they're going to automatically assume the worst of any LibDem they don't already know.
Imo, the next leader will have to be someone the public already know AND who they trust to have some integrity. Vince Cable and Charles Kennedy are really the only candidates who fit the bill as far as I can see.
A political party can be turned around by a change of leader in fairly short order. Tony Blair and New Labour or David Cameron and his de-toxification strategy did so to a certain extent. Also Alex Salmond (part 2).
Labour were doing very well before the death of John Smith in May 1994 - something that the uber-Blairites never want to acknowledge.
Betting aside, who would you prefer to see as Lib Dem leader after Clegg ?
We're holding back ELBOW as long as possible to give TNS time to release their poll which surely was with fieldwork last week, but we can disclose that Lab have a 0.3% lead across all nine polls so far. This would be the lowest ever Lab lead in ELBOW since its inception in August, unless TNS come to the rescue!
Now, here's the other interesting bit:
just including the five YouGov polls this week, it's a dead heat! 33.7% each for Lab and Con!
By contrast, excluding YG and just including the four non-YG so far this week, Lab actually have a 0.7% lead!
And of course Caroline Flint should know all this, she held the shadow position at the time. Theyve realised theyve messed up and are trying to salvage the situation be implying cap was what they meant all the time.
@richardDodd Like a knight to the rescue rides Sir Richard. A freeze on "price increases" becomes a price fix and not a cap? Ask Dave about the difference when he uses the term. Have you all worked out the prison term to be applied for non attendance at a televised leaders debate yet?
Nigel Farage (@Nigel_Farage) 08/03/2015 12:39 Apologies to the British media. I said last year 50,000 Romanians/Bulgarians would register to work in the UK. It's actually 187,370. Wow.
Of the 290k net migration 187k were from those two countries. Dave may have met his under 100k target without them. One can't help but laugh.
Another mess left by Labour. Somehow Cameron has been politically incapable of shoving the blame exactly where it lies.
The figures quoted show the numbers for people who were already here and working presumably illegally in all the years before the transition arrangements ended. ''Carlos Vargas-Silva, an economist at Oxford’s Migration Observatory, said: “These figures give the impression that many of these people were here already doing something but we don’t know what that something was. There is a possibility that many of these people were in that informal economy without the proper permits to work.” ''
They do not relate to one years figures for 2014 immigration. Those figures probably are around 50,000. Meantime according to the Telegraph -- ''Desperate Polish authorities are trying to encourage the hundreds of thousands of workers who moved to the UK to return home amid fears a brain drain is leaving the country short of talent. The Warsaw government’s Powroty, or Returns, programme is aimed at persuading back the army of well educated and skilled workers who flocked to the UK when Poland joined the EU more than a decade ago.''
I see all 5 election forecasters are now predicting the Tories to be the largest party. Time for some of you with money to spend to look at Labour making a net loss of seats.
@richardDodd Like a knight to the rescue rides Sir Richard. A freeze on "price increases" becomes a price fix and not a cap? Ask Dave about the difference when he uses the term. Have you all worked out the prison term to be applied for non attendance at a televised leaders debate yet?
A freeze on increases? That wasnt in his speech. Ive quoted his speech to you.
"gas and electricity bills will be frozen" Thats what the youtube video from labour say. Doesnt mention freezing increases, or caps.
Labour got it wrong. Get over it move on, my issue was with them trying to pretend they didnt get it wrong at all, and Eurasia has always been our friend.
Smarmeron To most people the word freeze means exactly that and the word cap means something different..He said Freeze and that is what he meant..don't forget this was one of his big speeches.. the word would have been discussed incessantly.. he chose to say Freeze because that's what he meant .. only when the rest of the country laughed at him did he change it . Flint lied.
I see all 5 election forecasters are now predicting the Tories to be the largest party. Time for some of you with money to spend to look at Labour making a net loss of seats.
Strange - Labour were 1.1% ahead in the "Super-ELBOW" for January, and 1.2% ahead in the "Super-ELBOW" last month.
Have you all worked out the prison term to be applied for non attendance at a televised leaders debate yet?
No idea. We're still waiting for Ed to tell us what the penalty for not talking to him is. Perhaps he also intends a fine for anyone who changes channels or mutes his irritating nasal whining whilst he is on television too? If so then I'm in deep trouble.
@notme The policy was for a freeze on price increases, everyone bar the terminally biased knew that, even the Left Wing Torygraph had to note the difference.
Mr Farron is a great campaigner though - so if the LDs need rebuilding - he's a serious contender.
Mr Clegg is dead no matter what and Mr Elder Statesman like Ming clearly don't fit with the current voter base.
I don't like Mr Farron at all and find him very shouty/superficial - but he's got box-office appeal for Lefties. IMHO - the LDs need to decide what they are. Until they do, how can they pick a leader to represent them?
I'm not even sure Tim Farron would be a good choice for next Lib Dem leader. Us political geeks know he's lefty and always been a Coalition-sceptic, but remember Joe Public still doesn't have a bloody clue who he is. And I think, given how unforgiving the electorate are going to be towards the Lib Dems for the foreseeable future, they're going to automatically assume the worst of any LibDem they don't already know.
Imo, the next leader will have to be someone the public already know AND who they trust to have some integrity. Vince Cable and Charles Kennedy are really the only candidates who fit the bill as far as I can see.
A political party can be turned around by a change of leader in fairly short order. Tony Blair and New Labour or David Cameron and his de-toxification strategy did so to a certain extent. Also Alex Salmond (part 2).
Labour were doing very well before the death of John Smith in May 1994 - something that the uber-Blairites never want to acknowledge.
Perhaps because John Smith had nothing to do with Mandelson, Gould and all their New Labour works, after their failure to get Neil Kinnock into Number Ten.
Look at your proposal from the point of view of the Civil Service and Politicians. Do you see why it will never be adopted? People held to account for their actions? Voters given indisputable facts by which to measure performance? It would be the end of civilisation as we know it.
"It would also give the heads of overspending departments some real responsibility wrt budget, knowing that ministers could not just chuck them money from the contingency without notice.
It would give the public something solid to vote on (as opposed to wishy-washy manifesto commitments) and give them something to measure the performance of the government and departments with."
Look at your proposal from the point of view of the Civil Service and Politicians. Do you see why it will never be adopted? People held to account for their actions? Voters given indisputable facts by which to measure performance? It would be the end of civilisation as we know it.
Indeed. But I live in hope. ;-)
I haven't really been able to come up with any *sane* reasons against it (aside from people's self-protection, as you mention).
On another note, I have a military history question I'd appreciate some help with whilst you are on. I need to go out, but in short:
A couple of decades ago I read somewhere about a few UK military engineers (tanks, in this case), being embedded within Russian formations so they could examine captured German tanks and weaponry; the Russians had a few in our formations as well.
I have no idea where I read this; I *think* it was non-fiction, but might be wrong.
Do you have any ideas where I might look?
This may not be relevant to your interest in tanks (apologies if not) but it was certainly true for the crabs.
My grandfather was an RAF mechanic and he served for a time at RAF Collyweston and Wittering as part of No.1426 (Enemy Aircraft) Flight RAF. The Septics were very involved with this, although I don't recall him mentioning any other nationalities so I've no idea about the Russian bit, sorry.
Why would the UK or Americans be interested in 'embedding' with the Russians to examine captured German tanks? We had been quite capable of capturing their equipment in Tunisia and Italy and then Normandy. Furthermore we were committed to mass production of the US Sherman and were already fitting it with the 17pdr.
Smarmeron To most people the word freeze means exactly that and the word cap means something different..He said Freeze and that is what he meant..don't forget this was one of his big speeches.. the word would have been discussed incessantly.. he chose to say Freeze because that's what he meant .. only when the rest of the country laughed at him did he change it . Flint lied.
Actually i think they only changed to cap when oil prices collapsed. Over a year after the policy. What grates me about the youtube video though was the lines "david cameron stood by and did nothing as energy prices increased by £300".
That's because the ability to control domestic energy prices was removed from government in 2002.
Whether John Smith would have won against John Major we will never know. What we do know is that as Shadow Chancellor he drew up the Shadow Budget which went down in the country like a lead balloon and was credited by many as the main reason Kinnock lost in 1992.
"I see all 5 election forecasters are now predicting the Tories to be the largest party. Time for some of you with money to spend to look at Labour making a net loss of seats."
And who are they? Scotslass has taught us all that anyone supping with a Scot needs an awfully long spoon.
@notme The policy was for a freeze on price increases, everyone bar the terminally biased knew that, even the Left Wing Torygraph had to note the difference.
Aw bless, he's desperately googling, he thinks he's onto a winner. A secondary source says what he wished the primary source said, but didnt.
The primary source, Miliband said freeze. The primary source, a labour party broadcast said freeze, a primary source labour party literature and website said freeze.
But the telegraph says 'cap'. I wonder if you would be so keen to support the Telegraph's description of events if it was the other way round.
May2015 @May2015NS All five election forecasters now predict the Tories will be the largest party. #GE2015 may2015.com/category/seat-… pic.twitter.com/cp1bETH8o2
Why would the UK or Americans be interested in 'embedding' with the Russians to examine captured German tanks? We had been quite capable of capturing their equipment in Tunisia and Italy and then Normandy. Furthermore we were committed to mass production of the US Sherman and were already fitting it with the 17pdr.
Indeed. I'm not sure of the provenance of the embedded Russian story either. I was merely observing a personal connection to the multinational testing of captured aircraft.
Further reading on my tangential airborne response to the question about tanks is available from all good tax-efficient bookstores: The Race for Hitler's X-Planes: Britain's 1945 Mission to Capture Secret Luftwaffe Technology http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Race-Hitlers-X-Planes-Technology/dp/0752464574
It seems Greece refuses to vacate the headlines for all the wrong reasons. Just hours after being told by his PM to talk less and do more, Varoufakis is talking about a referendum if the government can't reach agreement with its creditors. And then this is said about Tsipras' letter to the EU:
"the proposals are amateurish and don’t signal substantial progress for Greece meeting the commitments it made on Feb. 20"
Look at your proposal from the point of view of the Civil Service and Politicians. Do you see why it will never be adopted? People held to account for their actions? Voters given indisputable facts by which to measure performance? It would be the end of civilisation as we know it.
"It would also give the heads of overspending departments some real responsibility wrt budget, knowing that ministers could not just chuck them money from the contingency without notice.
It would give the public something solid to vote on (as opposed to wishy-washy manifesto commitments) and give them something to measure the performance of the government and departments with."
Look at your proposal from the point of view of the Civil Service and Politicians. Do you see why it will never be adopted? People held to account for their actions? Voters given indisputable facts by which to measure performance? It would be the end of civilisation as we know it.
Indeed. But I live in hope. ;-)
I haven't really been able to come up with any *sane* reasons against it (aside from people's self-protection, as you mention).
On another note, I have a military history question I'd appreciate some help with whilst you are on. I need to go out, but in short:
A couple of decades ago I read somewhere about a few UK military engineers (tanks, in this case), being embedded within Russian formations so they could examine captured German tanks and weaponry; the Russians had a few in our formations as well.
I have no idea where I read this; I *think* it was non-fiction, but might be wrong.
Do you have any ideas where I might look?
This may not be relevant to your interest in tanks (apologies if not) but it was certainly true for the crabs.
My grandfather was an RAF mechanic and he served for a time at RAF Collyweston and Wittering as part of No.1426 (Enemy Aircraft) Flight RAF. The Septics were very involved with this, although I don't recall him mentioning any other nationalities so I've no idea about the Russian bit, sorry.
Why would the UK or Americans be interested in 'embedding' with the Russians to examine captured German tanks? We had been quite capable of capturing their equipment in Tunisia and Italy and then Normandy. Furthermore we were committed to mass production of the US Sherman and were already fitting it with the 17pdr.
That's a pretty stupid point. The Germans were obviously quite capable of using different kit on the Eastern front, especially as the war continued there and not in Tunis or Italy. And we needed to keep abreast on any changes that meant the Sherm and the 17pdr might become obsolete.
"I see all 5 election forecasters are now predicting the Tories to be the largest party. Time for some of you with money to spend to look at Labour making a net loss of seats."
And who are they? Scotslass has taught us all that anyone supping with a Scot needs an awfully long spoon.
Three out of five would also imply the start of some sort of Labour Government too.
The other two probably see all three leaders out before the year end and no stable Government (Probably Con minority, but not totally sure)
@notme The policy was for a freeze on price increases, everyone bar the terminally biased knew that, even the Left Wing Torygraph had to note the difference.
Aw bless, he's desperately googling, he thinks he's onto a winner. A secondary source says what he wished the primary source said, but didnt.
The primary source, Miliband said freeze. The primary source, a labour party broadcast said freeze, a primary source labour party literature and website said freeze.
But the telegraph says 'cap'. I wonder if you would be so keen to support the Telegraph's description of events if it was the other way round.
Actually the secondary source quotes Miliband as saying "...the next Labour government will freeze gas and electricity prices until the start of 2017. Your bills will be frozen..." and then uses "cap" as a synonym of "freeze". So no more than loose wording by the Tele.
"I see all 5 election forecasters are now predicting the Tories to be the largest party. Time for some of you with money to spend to look at Labour making a net loss of seats."
And who are they? Scotslass has taught us all that anyone supping with a Scot needs an awfully long spoon.
Three out of five would also imply the start of some sort of Labour Government too.
The other two probably see all three leaders out before the year end and no stable Government (Probably Con minority, but not totally sure)
Which is presumably why the spreads and other main betting markets remained unmoved.
Look at your proposal from the point of view of the Civil Service and Politicians. Do you see why it will never be adopted? People held to account for their actions? Voters given indisputable facts by which to measure performance? It would be the end of civilisation as we know it.
"It would also give the heads of overspending departments some real responsibility wrt budget, knowing that ministers could not just chuck them money from the contingency without notice.
It would give the public something solid to vote on (as opposed to wishy-washy manifesto commitments) and give them something to measure the performance of the government and departments with."
Look at your proposal from the point of view of the Civil Service and Politicians. Do you see why it will never be adopted? People held to account for their actions? Voters given indisputable facts by which to measure performance? It would be the end of civilisation as we know it.
Indeed. But I live in hope. ;-)
I haven't really been able to come up with any *sane* reasons against it (aside from people's self-protection, as you mention).
On another note, I have a military history question I'd appreciate some help with whilst you are on. I need to go out, but in short:
A couple of decades ago I read somewhere about a few UK military engineers (tanks, in this case), being embedded within Russian formations so they could examine captured German tanks and weaponry; the Russians had a few in our formations as well.
I have no idea where I read this; I *think* it was non-fiction, but might be wrong.
Do you have any ideas where I might look?
This may not be relevant to your interest in tanks (apologies if not) but it was certainly true for the crabs.
My grandfather was an RAF mechanic and he served for a time at RAF Collyweston and Wittering as part of No.1426 (Enemy Aircraft) Flight RAF. The Septics were very involved with this, although I don't recall him mentioning any other nationalities so I've no idea about the Russian bit, sorry.
Why would the UK or Americans be interested in 'embedding' with the Russians to examine captured German tanks?
The Soviets encountered & captured Tigers five months before the Allies, and Panthers a year before, so I'd guess quite interested.
"It would also give the heads of overspending departments some real responsibility wrt budget, knowing that ministers could not just chuck them money from the contingency without notice.
It would give the public something solid to vote on (as opposed to wishy-washy manifesto commitments) and give them something to measure the performance of the government and departments with."
Look at your proposal from the point of view of the Civil Service and Politicians. Do you see why it will never be adopted? People held to account for their actions? Voters given indisputable facts by which to measure performance? It would be the end of civilisation as we know it.
"It would also give the heads of overspending departments some real responsibility wrt budget, knowing that ministers could not just chuck them money from the contingency without notice.
It would give the public something solid to vote on (as opposed to wishy-washy manifesto commitments) and give them something to measure the performance of the government and departments with."
Look at your proposal from the point of view of the Civil Service and Politicians. Do you see why it will never be adopted? People held to account for their actions? Voters given indisputable facts by which to measure performance? It would be the end of civilisation as we know it.
Indeed. But I live in hope. ;-)
I haven't really been able to come up with any *sane* reasons against it (aside from people's self-protection, as you mention).
On another note, I have a military history question I'd appreciate some help with whilst you are on. I need to go out, but in short:
A couple of decades ago I read somewhere about a few UK military engineers (tanks, in this case), being embedded within Russian formations so they could examine captured German tanks and weaponry; the Russians had a few in our formations as well.
I have no idea where I read this; I *think* it was non-fiction, but might be wrong.
Do you have any ideas where I might look?
It might be worth asking at the Tank Museum at Bovington as they have a lot of stuff from wartime reports - I have seen the odd original report on German tanks captured in Russia though cannot now remember the organizational details. In particular whether there was indeed any embedding within the Red Army below, say, military attaché level in Moscow.
Re the comments, it's worth remembering that not all tanks etc went to all fronts - for instance Africa got only a few Tigers and no Panthers or Ferdinands so you'd need to keep an eye on what was happening in Russia.
@notme The policy was for a freeze on price increases, everyone bar the terminally biased knew that, even the Left Wing Torygraph had to note the difference.
I agree. Ed misspoke. Hardly a serious offence, considering Cameron at al regularly confuse deficit and debt.
We sort of knew what they meant to say.
Really? "the next Labour government will freeze gas and electricity prices until the start of 2017. Your bills will be frozen" seems pretty clear to me.
Look at your proposal from the point of view of the Civil Service and Politicians. Do you see why it will never be adopted? People held to account for their actions? Voters given indisputable facts by which to measure performance? It would be the end of civilisation as we know it.
"It would also give the heads of overspending departments some real responsibility wrt budget, knowing that ministers could not just chuck them money from the contingency without notice.
It would give the public something solid to vote on (as opposed to wishy-washy manifesto commitments) and give them something to measure the performance of the government and departments with."
Look at your proposal from the point of view of the Civil Service and Politicians. Do you see why it will never be adopted? People held to account for their actions? Voters given indisputable facts by which to measure performance? It would be the end of civilisation as we know it.
Indeed. But I live in hope. ;-)
I haven't really been able to come up with any *sane* reasons against it (aside from people's self-protection, as you mention).
On another note, I have a military history question I'd appreciate some help with whilst you are on. I need to go out, but in short:
A couple of decades ago I read somewhere about a few UK military engineers (tanks, in this case), being embedded within Russian formations so they could examine captured German tanks and weaponry; the Russians had a few in our formations as well.
I have no idea where I read this; I *think* it was non-fiction, but might be wrong.
Do you have any ideas where I might look?
This may not be relevant to your interest in tanks (apologies if not) but it was certainly true for the crabs.
My grandfather was an RAF mechanic and he served for a time at RAF Collyweston and Wittering as part of No.1426 (Enemy Aircraft) Flight RAF. The Septics were very involved with this, although I don't recall him mentioning any other nationalities so I've no idea about the Russian bit, sorry.
Why would the UK or Americans be interested in 'embedding' with the Russians to examine captured German tanks?
The Soviets encountered & captured Tigers five months before the Allies, and Panthers a year before, so I'd guess quite interested.
Indeed. I forgot to mention the Gorky Park exhibition in 1943 of captured "trophy" kit, of which a colour film was made - there are various versions on the net. Here's one:
May2015 @May2015NS All five election forecasters now predict the Tories will be the largest party. #GE2015 may2015.com/category/seat-… pic.twitter.com/cp1bETH8o2
Labour still ahead by 0.3% this week, and that's without TNS
Comments
http://newstonoone.blogspot.co.uk/2015/03/rethinking-scotland-in-wake-of-latest.html
I want my
I want my
MTVTNSActually, you could do worse than read that book under any circumstances. If I had my way I'd make it essential reading for any PPC and they would have to pass a written exam (pass mark 80%) before they were allowed to stand in an election.
Mr Clegg is dead no matter what and Mr Elder Statesman like Ming clearly don't fit with the current voter base.
I don't like Mr Farron at all and find him very shouty/superficial - but he's got box-office appeal for Lefties. IMHO - the LDs need to decide what they are. Until they do, how can they pick a leader to represent them?
It's terribly basic stuff.
Couldn't that simply be the unwinding of;
i) Gordon Brown's personal vote?
ii) The (then) Prime Minister's vote?
I would guess the pace to look would be the National Archives but in which catalogue I couldn't say off the top of my head. Somewhere there will be a file with the correspondence and the Foreign Office papers would probably be a good place to start. The catalogues are available on line if you want to do some digging.
My Uncle Brian was the first frontpage death from AIDS back in the 80s - all over the Daily Star.
I read it first at the bus stop on the way home from college the day it broke and it knocked me sideways.
I've no idea who leaked it or the made up gory details. I hope they burn for every penny they were paid.
I've used Interferon for my kitties as an incredibly expensive experimental treatment for FIV - and have a huge respect for drug trials and the desperation of those trying to fix what's wrong.
Is that true?? Or is it a porkie? I dont remember that.
O/T, does anyone else have problems with W Hill in opening an account? They seem to be totally officious re. proof of age.
No other bookie has raised the slightest objection. They presumably check the electoral register ... where I've been for 43 years.
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/historical-polls/voting-intention-1992-1997
Would John Smith have achieved the kind of leads Blair did in 1995 and 1996? We'll never know, but I struggle to think Smith would have cut through across middle England quite as well as Blair did.
Obviously Labour still would have won in 1997 under John Smith and probably with a landslide but I doubt it would have been like "an asteroid hitting the planet and destroying practically all life on Earth" as Prof Anthony King put it.
Of course, that would ultimately have been better for the UK and for Labour because you wouldn't have had a Prime Minister becoming totally out of control and getting embroiled in Iraq...
TBH, I thought the Silent Witness actress was freak show character material more suited to a horror movie. And begging for the PC vote. This nullifies any attempt to include the actors as actors. The US shows just include allsorts - and often as deliberately difficult comic foils. Denny Crane's lust for *little people* in Boston Legal being an excellent example of how to debunk PCness.
Even though she's supposedly a "Blairite", I've always thought she's been underused by Labour. Atleast she has some spunk about her and refuses to let herself be walked all over by interviewers like most of the shadow cabinet, and she atleast vaguely speaks in something approximating Human.
"If we win the election 2015 the next Labour government will freeze gas and electricity prices until the start of 2017. Your bills will not rise. It will benefit millions of families and millions of businesses. That’s what I mean by a government that fights for you. That’s what I mean when I say Britain can do better than this.
Now the companies aren’t going to like this because it will cost them more but they have been overcharging people for too long because of a market that doesn’t work. It’s time to reset the market. So we will pass legislation in our first year in office to do that, and have a regulator that will genuinely be on the customers’ side but also enable the investment we need. That’s how Britain will do better than this."
Maybe he 'forgot' the bit about bills would still reduce if energy prices reduced.
1:55PM
Yes but the SNP were going no-where fast until Salmond mark 2 in 2004. Even then it took two years to get them into a challanging condition.
A cap is an upper limit, not a fixed number, but you know that already.
The call was for a cap on increases, not a straight price fix, but if you want to twist things, no one can stop you, only point out the crassness of what you are posting.
If we win the election 2015 the next Labour government will freeze gas and electricity prices until the start of 2017. Your bills will not rise.
Where's the bit about bills falling?
A 'freeze' means 'no change'.
"If we win the election 2015 the next Labour government will freeze gas and electricity prices until the start of 2017"
How am i twisting things? I am waiting to be corrected, did Miliband either at the time, or very shortly afterwards refer to the price freeze as a cap, and that prices will come down?
Freeze doesnt imply prices will come down, or go up. They'll be stasis like kept exactly as they are.
If Miliband did caveat the policy somewhere as a cap at the time, fair enough, just poor marketing. But if he didnt, and Flint is telling fibs, thats another issue.
A further issue is of course just how feeble politicians are at second guessing the market. The opposition had no comprehension that oil prices around the world could crash. Energy was supposed to be always getting more expensive, you know along with Peak Oil (gigantic lol) etc.
My grandfather was an RAF mechanic and he served for a time at RAF Collyweston and Wittering as part of No.1426 (Enemy Aircraft) Flight RAF. The Septics were very involved with this, although I don't recall him mentioning any other nationalities so I've no idea about the Russian bit, sorry.
2 out of 10.
Now, here's the other interesting bit:
just including the five YouGov polls this week, it's a dead heat! 33.7% each for Lab and Con!
By contrast, excluding YG and just including the four non-YG so far this week, Lab actually have a 0.7% lead!
“frozen – that’s right – frozen”
And of course Caroline Flint should know all this, she held the shadow position at the time. Theyve realised theyve messed up and are trying to salvage the situation be implying cap was what they meant all the time.
Like a knight to the rescue rides Sir Richard.
A freeze on "price increases" becomes a price fix and not a cap?
Ask Dave about the difference when he uses the term.
Have you all worked out the prison term to be applied for non attendance at a televised leaders debate yet?
''Carlos Vargas-Silva, an economist at Oxford’s Migration Observatory, said: “These figures give the impression that many of these people were here already doing something but we don’t know what that something was. There is a possibility that many of these people were in that informal economy without the proper permits to work.” ''
They do not relate to one years figures for 2014 immigration. Those figures probably are around 50,000. Meantime according to the Telegraph --
''Desperate Polish authorities are trying to encourage the hundreds of thousands of workers who moved to the UK to return home amid fears a brain drain is leaving the country short of talent.
The Warsaw government’s Powroty, or Returns, programme is aimed at persuading back the army of well educated and skilled workers who flocked to the UK when Poland joined the EU more than a decade ago.''
"gas and electricity bills will be frozen" Thats what the youtube video from labour say. Doesnt mention freezing increases, or caps.
Labour got it wrong. Get over it move on, my issue was with them trying to pretend they didnt get it wrong at all, and Eurasia has always been our friend.
Flint lied.
"freeze gas and electricity prices"
Not "price increases" but "prices"
Which many of us pointed out at the time was stupid.
Perhaps he also intends a fine for anyone who changes channels or mutes his irritating nasal whining whilst he is on television too?
If so then I'm in deep trouble.
The policy was for a freeze on price increases, everyone bar the terminally biased knew that, even the Left Wing Torygraph had to note the difference.
"Labour: Miliband pledges to freeze energy prices
Energy companies would be legally barred from raising household bills under a Labour government, Ed Miliband has said. "
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/10331012/Labour-Miliband-pledges-to-freeze-energy-prices.html
Now if you children will excuse me, I need to talk to some adults OK?
I agree. Ed misspoke. Hardly a serious offence, considering Cameron at al regularly confuse deficit and debt.
We sort of knew what they meant to say.
What is more worrying is the denial, Why lie about something irrelevant? Black mark for Flint and the interviewer who should have pointed it out.
We had been quite capable of capturing their equipment in Tunisia and Italy and then Normandy. Furthermore we were committed to mass production of the US Sherman and were already fitting it with the 17pdr.
That's because the ability to control domestic energy prices was removed from government in 2002.
"I see all 5 election forecasters are now predicting the Tories to be the largest party. Time for some of you with money to spend to look at Labour making a net loss of seats."
And who are they? Scotslass has taught us all that anyone supping with a Scot needs an awfully long spoon.
The primary source, Miliband said freeze. The primary source, a labour party broadcast said freeze, a primary source labour party literature and website said freeze.
But the telegraph says 'cap'. I wonder if you would be so keen to support the Telegraph's description of events if it was the other way round.
May2015 @May2015NS
All five election forecasters now predict the Tories will be the largest party. #GE2015 may2015.com/category/seat-… pic.twitter.com/cp1bETH8o2
Further reading on my tangential airborne response to the question about tanks is available from all good tax-efficient bookstores:
The Race for Hitler's X-Planes: Britain's 1945 Mission to Capture Secret Luftwaffe Technology
http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Race-Hitlers-X-Planes-Technology/dp/0752464574
"the proposals are amateurish and don’t signal substantial progress for Greece meeting the commitments it made on Feb. 20"
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-03-08/greece-mulls-referendum-as-no-agreement-with-creditors-in-sight
I tried the link and was directed to Taylor Swift discussing her pussy. Is this what passes for politics North of the border?
https://twitter.com/taylorswift13/status/573607484889264128
The other two probably see all three leaders out before the year end and no stable Government (Probably Con minority, but not totally sure)
A party insider said: "Margaret is getting a terrible reception on the doorstep, and the more hostility she gets, the more resources she wants for a seat nobody thinks we are going to hold."
http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/home-news/labour-insiders-saving-currans-a-drain-on-resources.1425801336
Could not happen to a nastier piece of work. Funny thing is, she's only an MP as a consolation prize after voters booted her out of Holyrood.
Re the comments, it's worth remembering that not all tanks etc went to all fronts - for instance Africa got only a few Tigers and no Panthers or Ferdinands so you'd need to keep an eye on what was happening in Russia.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=a87oV3xymIw