But for the Guardian/BBC axis to ink this onto their election grid in advance and then bring this out of the drawer is tiresome when next up they will be whining about negative campaigning - its a fair enough attack but don't pretend you aren't the Mail for lefties.
Sarah Champion poppy wreath story top of the "Most read".
Thank God a non white person has said this, maybe someone will listen now. Well done Trevor Phillips... had he posted that anonymously on here he would have been smeared with all the lazy names under the sun
He is saying nothing new. ''Today, I am sending an unequivocal message that professionals who fail to protect children will be held properly accountable and council bosses who preside over such catastrophic failure will not see rewards for that failure. Offenders must no longer be able to use the system to hide their despicable activities ... It is about making sure that the professionals we charge with protecting our children – the council staff, police officer and social workers – do the jobs they are paid to do.'' (Cameron)
But then again you regularly smear Cameron with lazy names.
No I don't regularly smear Cameron with lazy names, in fact I doubt I ever have
Add to that Cameron isn't addressing the issue that Phillips talks of and I can only say...
But for the Guardian/BBC axis to ink this onto their election grid in advance and then bring this out of the drawer is tiresome when next up they will be whining about negative campaigning - its a fair enough attack but don't pretend you aren't the Mail for lefties.
Sarah Champion poppy wreath story top of the "Most read".
On the Guardian website ?
BBC
BBC detachment from their audience isn't news. This Clarkson story continues to damage the brand - then need to save Top Gear or it will seriously damage the reasons to renew the licence fee.
Yesterday evening on here it was predicted that the BBC would lead with this as it was in the in house favourite newspaper of BBC staff aka the Guardian. Lo and behold at 730am and 8am news on BBC R4 it was the lead story.....
A party chairman accused of lying about his activity while an MP seems a fairly substantial story, don't you think? It's the Times Red Box second lead as well, and the press don't usually like highlighting each others' stories.
How about Nick talking about issues that are really harming people?
Or the Labour members of the Health Select Committee attempting to block publication of a report because the evidence they have gathered contradicts their attack lines on a Weaponised NHS?
Rotherham is another seat I know well (having lived there and family still there). Its by no means as clear cut as Basildon Sth but I think UKIP have a decent chance. Even before the scandal there was adecwnt contingent of voters sick of the inept in power forever Labour group - and I'm referring to Labour voters. The poppy mini-scandal won't help her chances of keeping the seat
Hmmm: would that be Ian Luder from Bedford, by any chance? Whose daughter was at school with OGH's daughter?
Some reasons here to ignore M Smithsons tip then. Sorry Mr S'son but personal agenda doesn't go well with betting. Innocent question whether you and he are still friends and if so shouldn't you declare it if you're offering up a tip? Might look like your trying to boost his cred otherwise? Innocent q.
To all the -ves below we need to add then that he's a flip flopper - Liberal Democract, Labour, UKIP.
Its one thing to defect another to flipflop.
So re. this market, I'm out.
Hmmmm, I'm not so sure, a little inside info on a prospective bet can be a good thing.
I know that area too and with a good candidate I agree with Mike, this is a value bet
Guessing from your login that you're a ukip supporter?
Adjust accordingly.
Yes, I am.
I am also a semi professional punter and know a value bet when I see one.
I would suggest that you dislike UKIP intensely, which is fair enough, but you are letting your hatred put you off a value bet. You will never make money with that attitude.
Re Blairs lie in the HOC..apart from the tragic consequences for millions of people, which is still on going..I was personally pi%%ed off because I watched him make that speech and tell that lie..and I believed him.
Rotherham is another seat I know well (having lived there and family still there). Its by no means as clear cut as Basildon Sth but I think UKIP have a decent chance. Even before the scandal there was adecwnt contingent of voters sick of the inept in power forever Labour group - and I'm referring to Labour voters. The poppy mini-scandal won't help her chances of keeping the seat
"It emerged this weekend that Labour is considering proposals to force companies to share their profits.
Under plans being studied by the shadow cabinet, firms with more than 50 staff will be obliged to set up a profit-sharing scheme, with workers being handed a cash sum based on their employers’ financial position."
Back to the 70's with Ed - perhaps the "red" tag was more apt than some thought.
Plus some anecdotes from weekend
25 yo son seriously thinking of voting UKIP - younger girlfriend (his, not mine!) "cant vote for them"
My wife surprised me by saying that after giving it some thought she is now inclined to vote UKIP. Up ttil then she was down as a nailed on Lib Dem vote.
Me, I still cant make my mind up but will see if the conservative candidate replies to my comments on his survey.
Re Blairs lie in the HOC..apart from the tragic consequences for millions of people, which is still on going..I was personally pi%%ed off because I watched him make that speech and tell that lie..and I believed him.
Under plans being studied by the shadow cabinet, firms with more than 50 staff will be obliged to set up a profit-sharing scheme, with workers being handed a cash sum based on their employers’ financial position."
The biggest lie of recent years and made in the HOC was Blairs when he said he had seen incontrovertible evidence of WMD...He hadn't...and a lot of people paid for his lie with their lives.
You would think that people with real principles would want Blair impeached over it. The massive loss of life, limbs and billions of £ wasted. Built on lies. But instead we have Nick on here upset over an MP making a mistake as to what they did 9 - 10 years ago in running a business....
Looking at NP's voting record on inquiries into Iraq you could come away with the firm impression that he was vehemently against raking over the past. It's confusing.
Under plans being studied by the shadow cabinet, firms with more than 50 staff will be obliged to set up a profit-sharing scheme, with workers being handed a cash sum based on their employers’ financial position."
Like bank bonuses?
Like employee share ownership schemes - which Labour hacked away at under Brown ?
Under plans being studied by the shadow cabinet, firms with more than 50 staff will be obliged to set up a profit-sharing scheme, with workers being handed a cash sum based on their employers’ financial position."
Labour's top donor: Tuition fees cut will hurt British universities and will not help 'working class'
John Mills, Labour's biggest individual donor, says Ed Miliband's flagship education policy will leave universities 'less secure' and warns against doing a deal with the SNP
Re Blairs lie in the HOC..apart from the tragic consequences for millions of people, which is still on going..I was personally pi%%ed off because I watched him make that speech and tell that lie..and I believed him.
As I recall, the only man even more in favour of military action was the Conservative Party leader, Iain Duncan-Smith.
Those who were opposed and doubted Blair's decision were subject to insults and vilification including charges of not being sufficiently patriotic. That presumably included the huge numbers who marched in London almost twelve years ago to the day in opposition to military action.
As an aside, I note the BBC reporting Saddam Hussein's mausoleum has been destroyed in the fighting around Tikrit - there's an irony there somewhere but I can't quite find it.
The biggest lie of recent years and made in the HOC was Blairs when he said he had seen incontrovertible evidence of WMD...He hadn't...and a lot of people paid for his lie with their lives.
You would think that people with real principles would want Blair impeached over it. The massive loss of life, limbs and billions of £ wasted. Built on lies. But instead we have Nick on here upset over an MP making a mistake as to what they did 9 - 10 years ago in running a business....
I think Blair established beyond all doubt that lying to the House is in fact OK. If there is no comeback for lying to the House to start a war to get your name in the history books, then lying by omission by forgetting what you were doing a few years ago looks positively meritorious.
This weekend's news that Nigel Farage, like his hero, is a monorchid, explains him completely. I haven't read the articles obvs but I'm assuming it wasn't tribute surgery, like the Wacko Jacko / Diana Ross stuff.
Is it National Let's all laugh at cancer victims day? Or the ill and/or disabled more generally?
I'm more about laughing at fools who blame literally everything on immigrants.
Mr. K, although I'm far from neutral, Kraxon's a pretty cool online magazine. Free short stories, mostly stand-alone but every year there's a 12 x 1,000 word story mini-series [Zodiac Eclipse is 2015's].
Re Blairs lie in the HOC..apart from the tragic consequences for millions of people, which is still on going..I was personally pi%%ed off because I watched him make that speech and tell that lie..and I believed him.
As I recall, the only man even more in favour of military action was the Conservative Party leader, Iain Duncan-Smith.
Those who were opposed and doubted Blair's decision were subject to insults and vilification including charges of not being sufficiently patriotic. That presumably included the huge numbers who marched in London almost twelve years ago to the day in opposition to military action.
As an aside, I note the BBC reporting Saddam Hussein's mausoleum has been destroyed in the fighting around Tikrit - there's an irony there somewhere but I can't quite find it.
Seems a bit harsh on IDS - he was being fed information in " dossiers" which the Blair regime would have control over. He didn't have his own network of spies to brief him on the real situation.
The Mayoral infighting spreads: PoliticsHome @politicshome 32m32 minutes ago Zac Goldsmith has been warned off mounting a late bid for London Mayor by a potential rival http://polho.me/1Fr81mW
Just handbags?
Zac Goldsmith is a well-liked and effective MP who will be re-elected to Richmond Park with no problem.. I have £500 on him at 1-10 to give a 10% tax free return.
I don't think he has expressed any interest in running for London Mayor. I'd be surprised if it would attract him. But I can understand that he is "reportedly being urged by some Tories to enter the race". He would be an attractive candidate.
I can also understand why Ivan Massow wants Goldsmith to clarify his intentions before the GE.. Massow is also an attractive candidate (I'm on him at 28-1) who is actively and, I think, effectively pursuing his candidature as next Mayor.
This weekend's news that Nigel Farage, like his hero, is a monorchid, explains him completely. I haven't read the articles obvs but I'm assuming it wasn't tribute surgery, like the Wacko Jacko / Diana Ross stuff.
Is it National Let's all laugh at cancer victims day? Or the ill and/or disabled more generally?
I'm more about laughing at fools who blame literally everything on immigrants.
Oh, is that how it works? So for instance someone who disagreed with the pupil premium, would be justified in calling David Laws a poofter?
Re Blairs lie in the HOC..apart from the tragic consequences for millions of people, which is still on going..I was personally pi%%ed off because I watched him make that speech and tell that lie..and I believed him.
As I recall, the only man even more in favour of military action was the Conservative Party leader, Iain Duncan-Smith.
I don't believe I suggested IDS lied and that's certainly not a charge anyone could level at him in this instance.
My issue is he was ready to believe the case for military action and for British involvement in that action. Others were more sceptical about the evidence and the justification and those on the Conservative side were only too happy to join in the vilification of those arguing for Iraq not to be invaded.
To their credit, some Conservatives have come forward since 2003 and admitted their error and claimed they were misled. Indeed or at the very least presented with information whose authenticity was later brought into serious question.
That entire period, from the beginning of 2003 up to the tragic death of David Kelly, remains, to my mind, one of the worst in our recent political history. Unfortunately, I fear little or nothing has been learned from it.
Several years ago I needed to be hospitalised and because of where I lived at the time was given a choice of Chelmsford or Basildon hospitals.
Comments from people we knew made it clear to choose "anything but Basildon".
Mind you, I was not impressed by Chelmsford, especially the cleanliness of the ward.
If Basildon has been turned around that is great news.
Mind you, my local hospital is now Colchester .... which has its own problems.
Been very impressed with Chelmsford, especially, except for one person the last time I went, the courtesy and general attitude of the staff. That’s mostly out-patients admittedly; haven’t been “in” for several years.
But for the Guardian/BBC axis to ink this onto their election grid in advance and then bring this out of the drawer is tiresome when next up they will be whining about negative campaigning - its a fair enough attack but don't pretend you aren't the Mail for lefties.
Sarah Champion poppy wreath story top of the "Most read".
You have to wonder how low MP's can go , certainly lower than rattlesnakes for sure , greedy money grasping fake lowlifes.
Re Blairs lie in the HOC..apart from the tragic consequences for millions of people, which is still on going..I was personally pi%%ed off because I watched him make that speech and tell that lie..and I believed him.
As I recall, the only man even more in favour of military action was the Conservative Party leader, Iain Duncan-Smith.
Those who were opposed and doubted Blair's decision were subject to insults and vilification including charges of not being sufficiently patriotic. That presumably included the huge numbers who marched in London almost twelve years ago to the day in opposition to military action.
As an aside, I note the BBC reporting Saddam Hussein's mausoleum has been destroyed in the fighting around Tikrit - there's an irony there somewhere but I can't quite find it.
Seems a bit harsh on IDS - he was being fed information in " dossiers" which the Blair regime would have control over. He didn't have his own network of spies to brief him on the real situation.
Not "a bit harsh on IDS" at all.
Most of the Conservative parliamentary party were full tilt for the Iraq war before the dodgy dossiers made their infamous appearance. They feared being outflanked by a hawkish Blair and even criticised Blair for not undertaking military strikes earlier.
There were notable Conservative exceptions such a Ken Clarke who saw through the government bluster from the start but he was very much in the minority in the HoC.
But for the Guardian/BBC axis to ink this onto their election grid in advance and then bring this out of the drawer is tiresome when next up they will be whining about negative campaigning - its a fair enough attack but don't pretend you aren't the Mail for lefties.
Sarah Champion poppy wreath story top of the "Most read".
You have to wonder how low MP's can go , certainly lower than rattlesnakes for sure , greedy money grasping fake lowlifes.
Not as low as SNP MSP John "two wreaths" Wilson, malc:
But for the Guardian/BBC axis to ink this onto their election grid in advance and then bring this out of the drawer is tiresome when next up they will be whining about negative campaigning - its a fair enough attack but don't pretend you aren't the Mail for lefties.
Sarah Champion poppy wreath story top of the "Most read".
You have to wonder how low MP's can go , certainly lower than rattlesnakes for sure , greedy money grasping fake lowlifes.
Do MP’s fill in these forms themselves or do they have a secretarial person to do it for them? Just asking.
Re Blairs lie in the HOC..apart from the tragic consequences for millions of people, which is still on going..I was personally pi%%ed off because I watched him make that speech and tell that lie..and I believed him.
As I recall, the only man even more in favour of military action was the Conservative Party leader, Iain Duncan-Smith.
Those who were opposed and doubted Blair's decision were subject to insults and vilification including charges of not being sufficiently patriotic. That presumably included the huge numbers who marched in London almost twelve years ago to the day in opposition to military action.
As an aside, I note the BBC reporting Saddam Hussein's mausoleum has been destroyed in the fighting around Tikrit - there's an irony there somewhere but I can't quite find it.
Seems a bit harsh on IDS - he was being fed information in " dossiers" which the Blair regime would have control over. He didn't have his own network of spies to brief him on the real situation.
Not "a bit harsh on IDS" at all.
Most of the Conservative parliamentary party were full tilt for the Iraq war before the dodgy dossiers made their infamous appearance. They feared being outflanked by a hawkish Blair and even criticised Blair for not undertaking military strikes earlier.
There were notable Conservative exceptions such a Ken Clarke who saw through the government bluster from the start but he was very much in the minority in the HoC.
He usually is nowadays!
Charlie Kennedy was briefed and didn’t believe it.
Stodge.. we were discussing people who had lied in the HOC..Lots of people were taken in by Blair and his dodgy dossier..No one would believe that a PM would take the country to war on a deliberate lie..Kelly was just one of many victims of his lying
But for the Guardian/BBC axis to ink this onto their election grid in advance and then bring this out of the drawer is tiresome when next up they will be whining about negative campaigning - its a fair enough attack but don't pretend you aren't the Mail for lefties.
Sarah Champion poppy wreath story top of the "Most read".
You have to wonder how low MP's can go , certainly lower than rattlesnakes for sure , greedy money grasping fake lowlifes.
Not as low as SNP MSP John "two wreaths" Wilson, malc:
Though as this is undoubtedly something a M(S)P does in an official capacity I don't understand the fuss.
I did not differentiate , I said MP's in general , you can add MSp's etc as well , and whilst there may be a few honest conscientious ones out there regardless of party most seem to have their primary interest as filling their bank books and not using their salaries or own money for anything. Two wrongs do not make a right and I have no great opinion of SNP politicians as opposed to others. Best of a bad lot for sure but very far from ideal or perfect is best I would say.
But for the Guardian/BBC axis to ink this onto their election grid in advance and then bring this out of the drawer is tiresome when next up they will be whining about negative campaigning - its a fair enough attack but don't pretend you aren't the Mail for lefties.
Sarah Champion poppy wreath story top of the "Most read".
You have to wonder how low MP's can go , certainly lower than rattlesnakes for sure , greedy money grasping fake lowlifes.
Do MP’s fill in these forms themselves or do they have a secretarial person to do it for them? Just asking.
I thought most of them had their wives/ girlfriends running their offices. Usually claiming they are highly skilled as well. They must give some instruction , hand over the receipts to be claimed etc, I doubt the office staff rummage in a bin load of receipts to choose what is claimed. It is however usually put down to an administration / flunkey mistake when they are rumbled.
But for the Guardian/BBC axis to ink this onto their election grid in advance and then bring this out of the drawer is tiresome when next up they will be whining about negative campaigning - its a fair enough attack but don't pretend you aren't the Mail for lefties.
Sarah Champion poppy wreath story top of the "Most read".
You have to wonder how low MP's can go , certainly lower than rattlesnakes for sure , greedy money grasping fake lowlifes.
Not as low as SNP MSP John "two wreaths" Wilson, malc:
Though as this is undoubtedly something a M(S)P does in an official capacity I don't understand the fuss.
I did not differentiate , I said MP's in general , you can add MSp's etc as well , and whilst there may be a few honest conscientious ones out there regardless of party most seem to have their primary interest as filling their bank books and not using their salaries or own money for anything. Two wrongs do not make a right and I have no great opinion of SNP politicians as opposed to others. Best of a bad lot for sure but very far from ideal or perfect is best I would say.
There are just some things that you should pay for yourself regardless of legality of claiming them back. It shows a real lack of understanding / morals etc when they claim things that any normal person would know is just not proper.
Mr. Song, to be fair, trusting that the PM won't spout bullshit when presenting the case for war to Parliament should be a natural state of affairs.
'Should' is the operative word - and I can't disagree. However, most people who are interested enough to follow current affairs and politics, even posting on here must have known that Blair had already signed up to Bush's wars. He was going to say whatever was necessary to get it past the HoC. If we 'knew' that, surely every Member of Parliament must have known it too. They voted the way they did knowing, or at the very least strongly suspecting, that that was the case.
My issue is he was ready to believe the case for military action and for British involvement in that action. Others were more sceptical about the evidence and the justification and those on the Conservative side were only too happy to join in the vilification of those arguing for Iraq not to be invaded.
Former Guards officer accepts intelligence at face value and recommends military action... someone pass that bear the toilet tissue.
My issue is he was ready to believe the case for military action and for British involvement in that action. Others were more sceptical about the evidence and the justification and those on the Conservative side were only too happy to join in the vilification of those arguing for Iraq not to be invaded.
Former Guards officer accepts intelligence at face value and recommends military action... someone pass that bear the toilet tissue.
Conditioned to believe what he was told by the experts!
“Our artillery has taken out the German trenches”!
"Lab leads in Populus of 2, Ashcroft 4, ICM 5. Yougov 3"
If anyone was concentrating Labour deserve to be ahead. I thought for the first time in living memory Ed has transformed from an embryo into a semi formed human being. All this coinciding with his opponents looking rather shouty and self satisfied.
But as I'm always wrong I expect the Tories to be ahead
"Lab leads in Populus of 2, Ashcroft 4, ICM 5. Yougov 3"
If anyone was concentrating Labour deserve to be ahead. I thought for the first time in living memory Ed has transformed from an embryo into a semi formed human being. All this coinciding with his opponents looking rather shouty and self satisfied.
But as I'm always wrong I expect the Tories to be ahead
Does that mean they aren't invited to the debates that aren't happening ?
It means one Green PPB, which means my bet on the Greens outpolling the Lib Dems might just be a loser after all.
Damn you OFCOM, damn you to hell.
It'll be a loser because of the massive amount of Green support that is 18-24 and the fact they'll be squeezed by the other left parties in yellow-blue and red-blue battles methinks.
Schoolboy error committed by Conservative voters not answering opinion pollsters with "Green". A point to note for strategists next time.
The Greens will be entitled to ONE election broadcast and UKIP TWO. Almost certainly the Greens will only get the ONE (unless the broadcasters think the broadcasts will damage the Green's credibility) as anything taking votes away from Labour is a bad thing.
Note that the broadcasters may vary the coverage of the major parties.
He and the rest of the Conservative Party might as well have been. It was the decision of the Tories to back Blair and support military action that ensured the motion would pass safely through the Commons on 18 March 2003.
With a quarter of the Labour Party either opposed or abstaining as well as the entire LD cohort in opposition, had the 166 Conservatives voted against rather than for the war it might have been, to quote Wellington, a "damn close run thing".
We also know that had the vote been lost, Blair would have resigned and possibly triggered a General Election.
But for the Guardian/BBC axis to ink this onto their election grid in advance and then bring this out of the drawer is tiresome when next up they will be whining about negative campaigning - its a fair enough attack but don't pretend you aren't the Mail for lefties.
Sarah Champion poppy ry top of the "Most read".
You have to wonder how low MP's can go , certainly lower than rattlesnakes for sure , greedy money grasping fake lowlifes.
Do MP’s fill in these forms themselves or do they have a secretarial person to do it for them? Just asking.
I thought most of them had their wives/ girlfriends running their offices. Usually claiming they are highly skilled as well. They must give some instruction , hand over the receipts to be claimed etc, I doubt the office staff rummage in a bin load of receipts to choose what is claimed. It is however usually put down to an administration / flunkey mistake when they are rumbled.
Quite. In that type of job you need a pretty high level of sense, so either they have crap admin staff, who they picked, or they gave pretty blanket instructions to 'claim on all receipts' without considering there might be situations where it would look bad to do so and asking them to bring to the MP's attention any ones that are not regular.
Mr. Song, to be fair, trusting that the PM won't spout bullshit when presenting the case for war to Parliament should be a natural state of affairs.
Outright lies are, I suspect, actually pretty rare in parliament and the rest of politics. Not generally worth the risk when lying by omission, spinning or general obfuscation will do.
Mr. Song, to be fair, trusting that the PM won't spout bullshit when presenting the case for war to Parliament should be a natural state of affairs.
'Should' is the operative word - and I can't disagree. However, most people who are interested enough to follow current affairs and politics, even posting on here must have known that Blair had already signed up to Bush's wars. He was going to say whatever was necessary to get it past the HoC. If we 'knew' that, surely every Member of Parliament must have known it too. They voted the way they did knowing, or at the very least strongly suspecting, that that was the case.
I presume most of them were happy with the backup reasons provided when the primary reason used to convince the public fell through. As you say, they must have had doubts, so I presume they factored those in and still decided it was all ok.
Stodge.. we were discussing people who had lied in the HOC..Lots of people were taken in by Blair and his dodgy dossier..No one would believe that a PM would take the country to war on a deliberate lie..Kelly was just one of many victims of his lying
Supporting Iraq was for me the nadir of being a Conservative.
If anyone was concentrating Labour deserve to be ahead.
I'd have problems with the word 'deserve' personally, given the government has merely been pretty crappy, and in many ways Labour are promising to continue in the same vein. Oh sure, the details differ in some small areas, but it is not that stark of a choice.
Edit: Note this isn't a 'all main stream parties are the same' sort of situation as if they are indistinguishable. They are, just not to the degree they pretend.
Stodge.. we were discussing people who had lied in the HOC..Lots of people were taken in by Blair and his dodgy dossier..No one would believe that a PM would take the country to war on a deliberate lie..Kelly was just one of many victims of his lying
The lack of a free press in this country is disturbing.
No it isn't. Or rather it would be, if we did lack one. Perhaps the problem it is not varied enough.
The biggest lie of recent years and made in the HOC was Blairs when he said he had seen incontrovertible evidence of WMD...He hadn't...and a lot of people paid for his lie with their lives.
Then Blair got made Middle East peace ambassador - what a sick joke.
If that turns out to be correct, it's really hard to see how a government of any sort can be formed.
Continuing minority Con-LD coalition, or grand Con-Lab coalition. Someone has to govern!
I think it would be Minority Con with DUP and LD C&S. The "bedroom tax" would need to be changed, and a concession given on electoral reform for locals.
However, it'd probably hang together until after the EU referendum. Tories would match (and with the DUP outvote) the Lefties: SNP + Labour + Green + SDLP + PC combined.
The biggest lie of recent years and made in the HOC was Blairs when he said he had seen incontrovertible evidence of WMD...He hadn't...and a lot of people paid for his lie with their lives.
Then Blair got made Middle East peace ambassador - what a sick joke.
Does he still hold that position does anyone know?
I think it would be Minority Con with DUP and LD C&S. The "bedroom tax" would need to be changed, and a concession given on electoral reform for locals.
However, it'd probably hang together until after the EU referendum. Tories would match (and with the DUP outvote) the Lefties: SNP + Labour + Green + SDLP + PC combined.
Con, DUP, LD vs SNP, Lab, Green, SDLP, PC are the obvious two blocs. DUP and Lib Dems could switch to Labour but as they'll both be smaller than the SNP you don't need to begin to consider them in those blocs for PM forming purposes.
Labour must do a deal with the SNP A more social democratic Britain can be achieved, and Scottish Labour's recovery set in train, if a deal is done between Labour and the SNP.
If that turns out to be correct, it's really hard to see how a government of any sort can be formed.
Continuing minority Con-LD coalition, or grand Con-Lab coalition. Someone has to govern!
I think it would be Minority Con with DUP and LD C&S. The "bedroom tax" would need to be changed, and a concession given on electoral reform for locals.
However, it'd probably hang together until after the EU referendum. Tories would match (and with the DUP outvote) the Lefties: SNP + Labour + Green + SDLP + PC combined.
That would make sense from the Tories' point of view. However, how would the public view C&S from the LDs - isn't that practically as bad as a coalition, but without any of your policies being implemented? Isn't it still 'propping up the Tories'?
If that turns out to be correct, it's really hard to see how a government of any sort can be formed.
Continuing minority Con-LD coalition, or grand Con-Lab coalition. Someone has to govern!
Isn’t the magic number 325? Con-LD is past that, just, with a fractured and, in Labours case in the circumstances fissiparous, opposition
True, Con-LD wouldn't be a minority they'd have a wafer thin majority. Maybe Con's should lay off LDs as their best chance of retaining power ;-).
That is probably the case; whether the Tories will do of course is doubtful to say the least. Whether they should pull their punches in places such as Burnley is another matter.
Comments
Add to that Cameron isn't addressing the issue that Phillips talks of and I can only say...
Wrong again ting tong!
I am also a semi professional punter and know a value bet when I see one.
I would suggest that you dislike UKIP intensely, which is fair enough, but you are letting your hatred put you off a value bet. You will never make money with that attitude.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/11473827/Miliband-aide-Labour-could-be-extinct-in-a-decade.html
And do Labour REALLY think this is a good idea?
"It emerged this weekend that Labour is considering proposals to force companies to share their profits.
Under plans being studied by the shadow cabinet, firms with more than 50 staff will be obliged to set up a profit-sharing scheme, with workers being handed a cash sum based on their employers’ financial position."
Back to the 70's with Ed - perhaps the "red" tag was more apt than some thought.
Plus some anecdotes from weekend
25 yo son seriously thinking of voting UKIP - younger girlfriend (his, not mine!) "cant vote for them"
My wife surprised me by saying that after giving it some thought she is now inclined to vote UKIP. Up ttil then she was down as a nailed on Lib Dem vote.
Me, I still cant make my mind up but will see if the conservative candidate replies to my comments on his survey.
Does a fine job supporting our men and women in service too:
http://www.conservativehome.com/platform/2015/03/lord-ashcroft-why-we-should-all-support-a-memorial-for-those-who-served-in-the-gulf-wars-iraq-and-afghanistan.html
Surely destined to enter the pantheon of euphemisms for telling porkies - misspoke, economical with the actualité etc.
"Shapps says he "over firmly" denied continuing his writing career - under the pen name Michael Green - when he entered the Commons in 2005."
That REALLY made me laugh!!
Comments from people we knew made it clear to choose "anything but Basildon".
Mind you, I was not impressed by Chelmsford, especially the cleanliness of the ward.
If Basildon has been turned around that is great news.
Mind you, my local hospital is now Colchester .... which has its own problems.
John Mills, Labour's biggest individual donor, says Ed Miliband's flagship education policy will leave universities 'less secure' and warns against doing a deal with the SNP
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/11474284/Labours-top-donor-Tuition-fees-cut-will-hurt-British-universities-and-will-not-help-working-class.html
You wonder why some people give money to political parties when they seem to disagree with so many of their policies.
Those who were opposed and doubted Blair's decision were subject to insults and vilification including charges of not being sufficiently patriotic. That presumably included the huge numbers who marched in London almost twelve years ago to the day in opposition to military action.
As an aside, I note the BBC reporting Saddam Hussein's mausoleum has been destroyed in the fighting around Tikrit - there's an irony there somewhere but I can't quite find it.
You should probably start with part 1: http://www.kraxon.com/zodiac-eclipse-rebirth/
I've got a second, unrelated story up this month which, by chance, is on the theme of an eclipse.
[Apologies for the lengthy reply time, immediately after my first post of the day I had to leave for a while].
Edited extra bit: for those who missed it, my post-race analysis is up here:
http://enormo-haddock.blogspot.co.uk/2015/03/australia-post-race-analysis.html
Not a classic, but I do think we learnt a lot of interesting stuff.
I don't think he has expressed any interest in running for London Mayor. I'd be surprised if it would attract him. But I can understand that he is "reportedly being urged by some Tories to enter the race". He would be an attractive candidate.
I can also understand why Ivan Massow wants Goldsmith to clarify his intentions before the GE.. Massow is also an attractive candidate (I'm on him at 28-1) who is actively and, I think, effectively pursuing his candidature as next Mayor.
Labour have never had those sort of unwavering supporters and UKIPers spend all their time doing a Millwall.
Nobody likes us and we don't care
"Oh, is that how it works? So for instance someone who disagreed with the pupil premium, would be justified in calling David Laws a poofter?"
You'd have to have a heart of stone not to have found Antifrank's 'malignancy' joke funny
If it's along the lines of "found the only bit of Farage that wasn't malignant and removed it" it's plagiarised from Evelyn Waugh.
My issue is he was ready to believe the case for military action and for British involvement in that action. Others were more sceptical about the evidence and the justification and those on the Conservative side were only too happy to join in the vilification of those arguing for Iraq not to be invaded.
To their credit, some Conservatives have come forward since 2003 and admitted their error and claimed they were misled. Indeed or at the very least presented with information whose authenticity was later brought into serious question.
That entire period, from the beginning of 2003 up to the tragic death of David Kelly, remains, to my mind, one of the worst in our recent political history. Unfortunately, I fear little or nothing has been learned from it.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3466005.stm
Most of the Conservative parliamentary party were full tilt for the Iraq war before the dodgy dossiers made their infamous appearance. They feared being outflanked by a hawkish Blair and even criticised Blair for not undertaking military strikes earlier.
There were notable Conservative exceptions such a Ken Clarke who saw through the government bluster from the start but he was very much in the minority in the HoC.
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/local-news/msp-pays-back-remembrance-day-2609526
Though as this is undoubtedly something a M(S)P does in an official capacity I don't understand the fuss.
Charlie Kennedy was briefed and didn’t believe it.
Populus - Lab Lead 2%
Lord Ashcroft - Con Lead 1%
ICM - Lab Lead 1%
YouGov - Con/Lab Tie
#megapollingmonday
"If it's along the lines of "found the only bit of Farage that wasn't malignant and removed it" it's plagiarised from Evelyn Waugh."
It was. You're well read
http://media.ofcom.org.uk/news/2015/major-parties-statement/
Two wrongs do not make a right and I have no great opinion of SNP politicians as opposed to others. Best of a bad lot for sure but very far from ideal or perfect is best I would say.
However, most people who are interested enough to follow current affairs and politics, even posting on here must have known that Blair had already signed up to Bush's wars. He was going to say whatever was necessary to get it past the HoC. If we 'knew' that, surely every Member of Parliament must have known it too. They voted the way they did knowing, or at the very least strongly suspecting, that that was the case.
Conservative colleagues have voiced their support for Mr Shapps, Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt suggesting the criticism of him was "incredible".
He tweeted: "His sin not to use pseudonym but to write books about how to create wealth - shock horror."
Except that isn't what he tweeted...
Unbelievable Lab/Guard/BBC attack on @grantshapps. His sin not 2 use pseudonym but 2 write books about how 2 create wealth - shock horror...
“Our artillery has taken out the German trenches”!
Damn you OFCOM, damn you to hell.
"Lab leads in Populus of 2, Ashcroft 4, ICM 5. Yougov 3"
If anyone was concentrating Labour deserve to be ahead. I thought for the first time in living memory Ed has transformed from an embryo into a semi formed human being. All this coinciding with his opponents looking rather shouty and self satisfied.
But as I'm always wrong I expect the Tories to be ahead
Cue hysteria on CiF!
You called the Indyref spot on.
http://order-order.com/2015/03/16/al-murray-gets-cricked/
Note that the broadcasters may vary the coverage of the major parties.
With a quarter of the Labour Party either opposed or abstaining as well as the entire LD cohort in opposition, had the 166 Conservatives voted against rather than for the war it might have been, to quote Wellington, a "damn close run thing".
We also know that had the vote been lost, Blair would have resigned and possibly triggered a General Election.
If Hersh is correct at the time of the vote in the HoC the government knew it was the rebels, this was not disclosed.
http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2014/04/06/who-was-behind-the-syrian-sarin-false-flag-attack/
Questions about Libya need asking if we are to have answers.
http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2015/02/01/hillarys-war/
Then of course the ludicrous claims about the Ukraine.
http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2015/03/08/f-k-the-eu-revisited/
The lack of a free press in this country is disturbing.
Edit: Note this isn't a 'all main stream parties are the same' sort of situation as if they are indistinguishable. They are, just not to the degree they pretend.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CANn-eKWUAAH_e3.jpg
It would be tight, but either way Cameron would remain as PM.
However, it'd probably hang together until after the EU referendum. Tories would match (and with the DUP outvote) the Lefties: SNP + Labour + Green + SDLP + PC combined.
"Scotland doesn't do racism, it hasn't got the time, as we're too busy engaged in Sectarianism"
"I would love it if they did that, love it"
Labour would get smashed at the subsequent election.
Even Ed can't be unaware of that fact.
Or is it all about getting his 5 years in power and nothing about the long term viability of our country or his party?