The press front pages are pretty supportive of the budget, while even the left wing element are having difficulty drumming up a truly negative theme.
Which is why Ed has had to go on the line about "they have a Secret Plan. To destroy the NHS. It is so secret, not even the Tories know it exists. But I know it exists. Oh yes....."
Mr. Mark, if that happened it'd be a blow of Miliband.
The debates would've been redrawn, against his wishes, due to Cameron, and then axed due to Farage. Miliband would appear the victim of events rather than making his own weather.
Whilst musing on absent members of the Ancient and Most Odd Order of the PB Bar Chart Fraternity do we know whether @bookvalue still haunts our proceedings as a lurker or has he departed for a normal life among the masses ?
Adjusting for the squeeze question, the Conservatives lead Labour 38/36 in England, and in England and Wales.
Interesting. Tories less than 2% down in England on 2010GE. Labour massively up from c.28% to 36%.
It does seem like it really will come down to whether the Labour voters actually turnout and whether the Lib Dem switchers truly do 'stick' with Labour, and also turnout.
The press front pages are pretty supportive of the budget, while even the left wing element are having difficulty drumming up a truly negative theme.
Which is why Ed has had to go on the line about "they have a Secret Plan. To destroy the NHS. It is so secret, not even the Tories know it exists. But I know it exists. Oh yes....."
It sounds like it has all the hallmarks of the secret plan to reorganise the NHS last time round, in fact.
Despite the fact that it is no longer the most important issue facing Britain, data from our recent political monitor shows that it is in fact the NHS that is seen as the most important issue at the ballot box followed by economic management (38% and 31% respectively mention these issues as important in deciding who to vote for). Asylum/immigration is mentioned by a quarter (25%), and is in third place, equal with education
Whilst musing on absent members of the Ancient and Most Odd Order of the PB Bar Chart Fraternity do we know whether @bookvalue still haunts our proceedings as a lurker or has he departed for a normal life among the masses ?
Roger, there are some people who vote according to whether the country is to be governed in the interets of all, or of the fortunate. The present Conservative party comes across as very definitely governing in the interests of the latter. IMHO the problem for the LD’s is that they used to be tjhought of as being in the "interests of all” camp but keeping company with the Tories is ruining that perception!
Indeed. The LDs have lost half their supporters to Labour not because they went into coalition with the Tories but because they've allowed the Tories to behave as if they have a majority.
The LDs have lost half their supporters to Labour not because they went into coalition with the Tories but because they've allowed the Tories to behave as if they have a majority.
Spot on.
Lib Dem economic policy is pretty much the same as Conservatives. Free markets, free trade, individual freedom (which means people running their own lives not the government).
Even on welfare it is only a matter of degree between Lib Dem and Conservatives plus Conservatives have adopted Lib Dem values on lesbian gay etc issues.
Of course here are ex socialist SDP members who joined the Liberals and have tried to change Liberal traditions but many have now gone back to Labour or Green.
There are still some differences between the radical liberals and the conservatively inclined such as the policies on drugs and climate change. But Lib Dems should be looking to convert one nation Conservatives to Lib Dem rather than Greens or Labour.
The press front pages are pretty supportive of the budget, while even the left wing element are having difficulty drumming up a truly negative theme.
Which is why Ed has had to go on the line about "they have a Secret Plan. To destroy the NHS. It is so secret, not even the Tories know it exists. But I know it exists. Oh yes....."
It sounds like it has all the hallmarks of the secret plan to reorganise the NHS last time round, in fact.
Farage was in 2 events and he's still in 2 events - not sure what the problem is.
You are right in the sense that Scott P called it hopelessly wrong when saying repeatedly Farage won't be in the debates despite swerving the bet
But Dave said if we are going to have minor parties like the lib dems involved then all have to be involved didn't he? He said this in the house of commons
"This would be followed by the debate Downing St announced Cameron had agreed to earlier in the week: a seven person debate on April 2nd featuring Cameron and Miliband, but also the leaders of UKIP, the Green Party, the SNP, Plaid Cymru and the DUP. It does not seem that the Lib Dems have agreed to appear."
I find that hard to believe - why wouldn't Clegg turn up for that ?
Farage should say to the greens SNP and DUP that he will swerve the challengers debate if they sit out of the seven way
Given UKIP are now classified as a major party, they surely have grounds to be in whatever 'debate' the big three are in.
Difficult to see how the beeb can justify a three way QT style thing given ofcom
UKIP's lawyers could scupper the debates....
That show wouldn't be a debate between the leaders but a Q&A w an audience... Impossible to see how it can include Clegg and not Farage unless he is getting a half hour show of his own that the others don't
Best way for Ukip to play it is to not accept the invitation to the challengers debate as part if a deal where the other challengers don't attend the 7 way
Why on earth would the Greens, SNP and Plaid accept that offer?
The 7-way debate will clearly have more public interest, so withdrawing from that debate will cost them a large amount of public exposure. Having Farage withdraw from the Challengers debate would give them more screen time in that debate, but most likely in front of a much smaller audience.
There's absolutely nothing in it for the leaders of the SNP, Greens and Plaid.
It's Tabman! The thinking man's Lib Dem. Good to see you posting again.
JohnO and I are old enough to remember when the PBLib Dems were more than just Mark Senior
Hello Roger ... I'm back out of retirement for the GE
There aren't many of us LDs left these days ...
What constituency pavements will your sandals be pounding in the coming weeks ?
I'm an armchair general this time round.
Living the good life under the Coalition has clearly made you soft.
You should pounding the streets with a slew of "Focus News" tucked under you arm in an effort to ensure my "JackW Dozen" prediction of Huppert holding Cambridge comes to fruition.
"This would be followed by the debate Downing St announced Cameron had agreed to earlier in the week: a seven person debate on April 2nd featuring Cameron and Miliband, but also the leaders of UKIP, the Green Party, the SNP, Plaid Cymru and the DUP. It does not seem that the Lib Dems have agreed to appear."
I find that hard to believe - why wouldn't Clegg turn up for that ?
Farage should say to the greens SNP and DUP that he will swerve the challengers debate if they sit out of the seven way
Given UKIP are now classified as a major party, they surely have grounds to be in whatever 'debate' the big three are in.
Difficult to see how the beeb can justify a three way QT style thing given ofcom
UKIP's lawyers could scupper the debates....
That show wouldn't be a debate between the leaders but a Q&A w an audience... Impossible to see how it can include Clegg and not Farage unless he is getting a half hour show of his own that the others don't
Best way for Ukip to play it is to not accept the invitation to the challengers debate as part if a deal where the other challengers don't attend the 7 way
Why on earth would the Greens, SNP and Plaid accept that offer?
The 7-way debate will clearly have more public interest, so withdrawing from that debate will cost them a large amount of public exposure. Having Farage withdraw from the Challengers debate would give them more screen time in that debate, but most likely in front of a much smaller audience.
There's absolutely nothing in it for the leaders of the SNP, Greens and Plaid.
Their sense of right and wrong should play a part, but that's a rare thing when self interest is involved
Maybe the extra airtime they'd get without Farage? The challengers debate just seems stupid really, especially when one if the parties will likely get more votes than the others combined
I see that NP is a blood orange juice fan. Good man. I acquired a blood orange plant recently - www.plants4presents.co.uk - and it is gorgeous with the flowers just starting. I'm looking forward to eating the oranges.
Apparently the "blood" aspect is caused by the presence of of anthocyanin, an antioxidant pigment which develops when there is a big difference between the daytime and nighttime temperatures. That's why they grow so successfully on the slopes of Mount Etna. And also why they are so good for you!
There was an article in the Economist last week pointing out that French Workers could take every Friday off and they'd be as productive on a 4 day week as British workers are on 5.
"This would be followed by the debate Downing St announced Cameron had agreed to earlier in the week: a seven person debate on April 2nd featuring Cameron and Miliband, but also the leaders of UKIP, the Green Party, the SNP, Plaid Cymru and the DUP. It does not seem that the Lib Dems have agreed to appear."
I find that hard to believe - why wouldn't Clegg turn up for that ?
Farage should say to the greens SNP and DUP that he will swerve the challengers debate if they sit out of the seven way
Given UKIP are now classified as a major party, they surely have grounds to be in whatever 'debate' the big three are in.
Difficult to see how the beeb can justify a three way QT style thing given ofcom
UKIP's lawyers could scupper the debates....
That show wouldn't be a debate between the leaders but a Q&A w an audience... Impossible to see how it can include Clegg and not Farage unless he is getting a half hour show of his own that the others don't
Best way for Ukip to play it is to not accept the invitation to the challengers debate as part if a deal where the other challengers don't attend the 7 way
Why on earth would the Greens, SNP and Plaid accept that offer?
The 7-way debate will clearly have more public interest, so withdrawing from that debate will cost them a large amount of public exposure. Having Farage withdraw from the Challengers debate would give them more screen time in that debate, but most likely in front of a much smaller audience.
There's absolutely nothing in it for the leaders of the SNP, Greens and Plaid.
Their sense of right and wrong should play a part, but that's a rare thing when self interest is involved
Maybe the extra airtime they'd get without Farage? The challengers debate just seems stupid really, especially when one if the parties will likely get more votes than the others combined
The TV companies have got themselves into an appalling mess because they decided to pander to Cameron's cheap posturing and the debates now are a biased farce as a result which whatever way they turn out are likely to breach Ofcom rules.
They should've stuck to the rules and told Cameron to go hang. Now the The TV companies with their arrogant 'we can do as we like' attitudes are just damaging our political system further.
"This would be followed by the debate Downing St announced Cameron had agreed to earlier in the week: a seven person debate on April 2nd featuring Cameron and Miliband, but also the leaders of UKIP, the Green Party, the SNP, Plaid Cymru and the DUP. It does not seem that the Lib Dems have agreed to appear."
I find that hard to believe - why wouldn't Clegg turn up for that ?
Farage should say to the greens SNP and DUP that he will swerve the challengers debate if they sit out of the seven way
Given UKIP are now classified as a major party, they surely have grounds to be in whatever 'debate' the big three are in.
Difficult to see how the beeb can justify a three way QT style thing given ofcom
UKIP's lawyers could scupper the debates....
That show wouldn't be a debate between the leaders but a Q&A w an audience... Impossible to see how it can include Clegg and not Farage unless he is getting a half hour show of his own that the others don't
Best way for Ukip to play it is to not accept the invitation to the challengers debate as part if a deal where the other challengers don't attend the 7 way
Why on earth would the Greens, SNP and Plaid accept that offer?
The 7-way debate will clearly have more public interest, so withdrawing from that debate will cost them a large amount of public exposure. Having Farage withdraw from the Challengers debate would give them more screen time in that debate, but most likely in front of a much smaller audience.
There's absolutely nothing in it for the leaders of the SNP, Greens and Plaid.
Their sense of right and wrong should play a part, but that's a rare thing when self interest is involved
Maybe the extra airtime they'd get without Farage? The challengers debate just seems stupid really, especially when one if the parties will likely get more votes than the others combined
The TV companies have got themselves into an appalling mess because they decided to pander to Cameron's cheap posturing and the debates now are a biased farce as a result which whatever way they turn out are likely to breach Ofcom rules.
If the 7 way is two hours long it should involve all 7 for 40 mins, Cameron, Miliband , Clegg & Farage for 40 and just Dave and Ed for 40
"This would be followed by the debate Downing St announced Cameron had agreed to earlier in the week: a seven person debate on April 2nd featuring Cameron and Miliband, but also the leaders of UKIP, the Green Party, the SNP, Plaid Cymru and the DUP. It does not seem that the Lib Dems have agreed to appear."
I find that hard to believe - why wouldn't Clegg turn up for that ?
Farage should say to the greens SNP and DUP that he will swerve the challengers debate if they sit out of the seven way
Given UKIP are now classified as a major party, they surely have grounds to be in whatever 'debate' the big three are in.
Difficult to see how the beeb can justify a three way QT style thing given ofcom
UKIP's lawyers could scupper the debates....
That show wouldn't be a debate between the leaders but a Q&A w an audience... Impossible to see how it can include Clegg and not Farage unless he is getting a half hour show of his own that the others don't
Best way for Ukip to play it is to not accept the invitation to the challengers debate as part if a deal where the other challengers don't attend the 7 way
Why on earth would the Greens, SNP and Plaid accept that offer?
The 7-way debate will clearly have more public interest, so withdrawing from that debate will cost them a large amount of public exposure. Having Farage withdraw from the Challengers debate would give them more screen time in that debate, but most likely in front of a much smaller audience.
There's absolutely nothing in it for the leaders of the SNP, Greens and Plaid.
SNP and Plaid should never have been part of a national debate anyway. Who want that, apart from Cameron??
I find that hard to believe - why wouldn't Clegg turn up for that ?
Farage should say to the greens SNP and DUP that he will swerve the challengers debate if they sit out of the seven way
Given UKIP are now classified as a major party, they surely have grounds to be in whatever 'debate' the big three are in.
Difficult to see how the beeb can justify a three way QT style thing given ofcom
UKIP's lawyers could scupper the debates....
That show wouldn't be a debate between the leaders but a Q&A w an audience... Impossible to see how it can include Clegg and not Farage unless he is getting a half hour show of his own that the others don't
Best way for Ukip to play it is to not accept the invitation to the challengers debate as part if a deal where the other challengers don't attend the 7 way
Why on earth would the Greens, SNP and Plaid accept that offer?
The 7-way debate will clearly have more public interest, so withdrawing from that debate will cost them a large amount of public exposure. Having Farage withdraw from the Challengers debate would give them more screen time in that debate, but most likely in front of a much smaller audience.
There's absolutely nothing in it for the leaders of the SNP, Greens and Plaid.
Their sense of right and wrong should play a part, but that's a rare thing when self interest is involved
Maybe the extra airtime they'd get without Farage? The challengers debate just seems stupid really, especially when one if the parties will likely get more votes than the others combined
The Challengers debate is daft, because all the parties in it will be more interested in criticising Labour and the Conservatives who won't be there. Thus you'd expect it to receive few viewers, so the extra airtime will be of little benefit.
In terms of right and wrong, the SNP and the Greens will both point to their higher membership figures, the SNP are likely to win many more MPs than UKIP, and the Greens were able to elect an MP in 2010, which UKIP were not.
There simply isn't an obvious clear delineation that you can make to determine which parties should be in the debate. In any case the debate proceeds on the basis that it might change people's minds, so the entire concept of making prejudgements on who people will vote for to determine the membership of that debate is suspect.
While we all know that 40% of the electorate will not decide to vote Green in May, the broadcasters shouldn't really be making that judgement on behalf of the voters in advance of the voters making their decision.
Mr. Dadge, Cameron never asked for the nationalists, he asked for the Greens. Why the broadcasters invited nationalists is something they alone can answer.
Adjusting for the squeeze question, the Conservatives lead Labour 38/36 in England, and in England and Wales.
Interesting. Tories less than 2% down in England on 2010GE. Labour massively up from c.28% to 36%.
It does seem like it really will come down to whether the Labour voters actually turnout and whether the Lib Dem switchers truly do 'stick' with Labour, and also turnout.
Pretty consistently, close to 50% of English and Welsh voters support either the Conservatives or UKIP. Much turns on how they split.
I find that hard to believe - why wouldn't Clegg turn up for that ?
Farage should say to the greens SNP and DUP that he will swerve the challengers debate if they sit out of the seven way
Given UKIP are now classified as a major party, they surely have grounds to be in whatever 'debate' the big three are in.
UKIP's lawyers could scupper the debates....
That the 7 way
Why on earth would the Greens, SNP and Plaid accept that offer?
The 7-way debate will clearly have more public interest, so withdrawing from that debate will cost them a large amount of public exposure. Having Farage withdraw from the Challengers debate would give them more screen time in that debate, but most likely in front of a much smaller audience.
There's absolutely nothing in it for the leaders of the SNP, Greens and Plaid.
Their sense of right and wrong should play a part, but that's t Farage? The challengers debate just seems stupid really, especially when one if the parties will likely get more votes than the others combined
The Challengers debate is daft, because all the parties in it will be more interested in criticising Labour and the Conservatives who won't be there. Thus you'd expect it to receive few viewers, so the extra airtime will be of little benefit.
In terms of
There simply isn't an obvious clear delineation that you can .
While we all know that 40% of the electorate will not decide to vote Green in May, the broadcasters shouldn't really be making that judgement on behalf of the voters in advance of the voters making their decision.
Of course there is a clear and obvious delineation... The opinion polls combined with by election results, euro results and the 2010 general election. Throw in a bit of common sense and it can't go wrong
Parties getting 5% in opinion polls, losing deposits in by elections and coming 4th or worse in euros simply have no place at the top table, unless they are currently in govt in which case they should be allowed to defend their record. I'd say the same if it were Ukip in that position, but it isn't
Even if we have the nonsense of a 7 way, it should be structured so that the minor parties get less time than the major (ofcom) parties and the lib dems and Ukip should get less time than labour and conservative
Let the SNP have a debate in Scotland where they are standing. I can't even vote fir them if I wanted to, nor can anyone else in England so why bother having them on?
If the 7 way is two hours long it should involve all 7 for 40 mins, Cameron, Miliband , Clegg & Farage for 40 and just Dave and Ed for 40
Your suggestion is unworkable and grossly unfair. What is it that Cameron and Miliband have to discuss that UKIP and the Libdems (who are still a major party for the time being) should not comment on. Cabinet seating arrangements? The name of the Downing Street cat? The most improper part of this whole shambles is the concept of the 'Dumb & Dumber' show. No doubt the smaller parties would say exactly the same about the big 4 getting all the say but at least Ofcom have provided that with some credibility. The TV companies have managed to bring the whole thing into utter disrepute even before the first event.
Furthermore, they needed 3 x 90 minute debates in 2010 for three candidates to cover the full spectrum of government issues. That was basically 90 minutes per party. Now they are proposing one 2 hour debate to do the same for 7 parties. That's less than 20 minutes each to put across their whole proposals. Its a complete nonsense.
I see that NP is a blood orange juice fan. Good man. I acquired a blood orange plant recently - www.plants4presents.co.uk - and it is gorgeous with the flowers just starting. I'm looking forward to eating the oranges.
Apparently the "blood" aspect is caused by the presence of of anthocyanin, an antioxidant pigment which develops when there is a big difference between the daytime and nighttime temperatures. That's why they grow so successfully on the slopes of Mount Etna. And also why they are so good for you!
The 45p rate shows the Tories value people who get on. The 50p rate shows Labour are determined that we're all in it together. Tories claim that the lower rate actually brings in more tax, Labour are financing their plans on the extra money it brings in.
Neither can show any scientific proof, but both want their version to be true, Therefore it is true.
Politics of the schoolyard.
I don't believe for a moment that the top rate of tax will be 50p. If Labour get in I think it will likely be higher because the mansion tax and the bankers' bonus taxes will not bring in the revenues Labour have forecast. And/or, possibly, the mansion tax will be imposed on houses worth considerably less than £2 million.
If the 7 way is two hours long it should involve all 7 for 40 mins, Cameron, Miliband , Clegg & Farage for 40 and just Dave and Ed for 40
Your suggestion is unworkable and grossly unfair. What is it that Cameron and Miliband have to discuss that UKIP and the Libdems (who are still a major party for the time being) should not comment on. Cabinet seating arrangements? The name of the Downing Street cat? The most improper part of this whole shambles is the concept of the 'Dumb & Dumber' show. No doubt the smaller parties would say exactly the same about the big 4 getting all the say but at least Ofcom have provided that with some credibility. The TV companies have managed to bring the whole thing into utter disrepute even before the first event.
Furthermore, they needed 3 x 90 minute debates in 2010 for three candidates to cover the full spectrum of government issues. That was basically 90 minutes per party. Now they are proposing one 2 hour debate to do the same for 7 parties. That's less than 20 minutes each to put across their whole proposals. Its a complete nonsense.
People should see the two runners for PM in a head to head. Ukip and lib dems aren't going to provide that so why should farage and Clegg get as much airtime as Cameron and Miliband?
This is all about Cameron running scared of Farage. Embarrassing for him given his eagerness to debate in 2010
Adjusting for the squeeze question, the Conservatives lead Labour 38/36 in England, and in England and Wales.
Interesting. Tories less than 2% down in England on 2010GE. Labour massively up from c.28% to 36%.
It does seem like it really will come down to whether the Labour voters actually turnout and whether the Lib Dem switchers truly do 'stick' with Labour, and also turnout.
Pretty consistently, close to 50% of English and Welsh voters support either the Conservatives or UKIP. Much turns on how they split.
..in the marginals. I've decided against it for now, but if I was still floating I wouldn't risk voting UKIP in a marginal, unless the choice was to vote for a europhile Tory.
But then you and I are probably in the minority in exercising that degree of discretion.
OK, into the final phase of adjusting my affairs to make them as Miliband-proof as possible. In my company pension fund I've just sold the last remaining housebuilding firm (Persimmon, a superb company whose shares have performed very well indeed, but housebuilders must be one of the prime risk areas for a sudden loss of confidence in 7 weeks' time), and the FTSE 250 index fund (too much exposure to the UK domestic economy to risk Lab minority propped up by the SNP). That pretty much completes my strategy of de-Milibandisation.
Do your own research, this is not investment advice, etc etc.
But do think about the risks of a chaotic Miliband-led government, especially a minority government, and try to mitigate the damage as much as you can.
OK, into the final phase of adjusting my affairs to make them as Miliband-proof as possible. In my company pension fund I've just sold the last remaining housebuilding firm (Persimmon, a superb company whose shares have performed very well indeed, but housebuilders must be one of the prime risk areas for a sudden loss of confidence in 7 weeks' time), and the FTSE 250 index fund (too much exposure to the UK domestic economy to risk Lab minority propped up by the SNP). That pretty much completes my strategy of de-Milibandisation.
Do your own research, this is not investment advice, etc etc.
But do think about the risks of a chaotic Miliband-led government, especially minority government, and try to mitigate the damage as much as you can.
Possible wise words but irrelevant to probably 99% of the population, normal people who are 'unimaginative savers'
If Cameron or Osborne made those comments in public it would lose them the election
@timothy_stanley: Lib Dems presenting an alternative budget to an empty Commons reminds me of a child sitting in the driving seat & going "vroom vroom!"
Even Lib Dem SPADS are on Twitter noting how bad an idea this was
OK, into the final phase of adjusting my affairs to make them as Miliband-proof as possible. In my company pension fund I've just sold the last remaining housebuilding firm (Persimmon, a superb company whose shares have performed very well indeed, but housebuilders must be one of the prime risk areas for a sudden loss of confidence in 7 weeks' time), and the FTSE 250 index fund (too much exposure to the UK domestic economy to risk Lab minority propped up by the SNP). That pretty much completes my strategy of de-Milibandisation.
Do your own research, this is not investment advice, etc etc.
But do think about the risks of a chaotic Miliband-led government, especially a minority government, and try to mitigate the damage as much as you can.
Alternatively Richard, you could keep your investments and hedge a Miliband/leftie government.
You never know, both sides of the bet might win....
OK, into the final phase of adjusting my affairs to make them as Miliband-proof as possible. In my company pension fund I've just sold the last remaining housebuilding firm (Persimmon, a superb company whose shares have performed very well indeed, but housebuilders must be one of the prime risk areas for a sudden loss of confidence in 7 weeks' time), and the FTSE 250 index fund (too much exposure to the UK domestic economy to risk Lab minority propped up by the SNP). That pretty much completes my strategy of de-Milibandisation.
Do your own research, this is not investment advice, etc etc.
But do think about the risks of a chaotic Miliband-led government, especially a minority government, and try to mitigate the damage as much as you can.
US stocks. Easiest diversification out there. Look to Japan as well, some of the indicators have turned around recently and the economy may be growing at around 3% YoY again. Performance is up and Japanese bellwether companies are finally showing signs of turning around with Panasonic, Sony, Toyota and Canon all looking good for profitability even if the Yen were to unexpectedly strengthen and Abe is finally pushing through labour market reforms and other supply side reforms.
If the 7 way is two hours long it should involve all 7 for 40 mins, Cameron, Miliband , Clegg & Farage for 40 and just Dave and Ed for 40
Your suggestion is unworkable and grossly unfair. What is it that Cameron and Miliband have to discuss that UKIP and the Libdems (who are still a major party for the time being) should not comment on. Cabinet seating arrangements? The name of the Downing Street cat? The most improper part of this whole shambles is the concept of the 'Dumb & Dumber' show. No doubt the smaller parties would say exactly the same about the big 4 getting all the say but at least Ofcom have provided that with some credibility. The TV companies have managed to bring the whole thing into utter disrepute even before the first event.
Furthermore, they needed 3 x 90 minute debates in 2010 for three candidates to cover the full spectrum of government issues. That was basically 90 minutes per party. Now they are proposing one 2 hour debate to do the same for 7 parties. That's less than 20 minutes each to put across their whole proposals. Its a complete nonsense.
People should see the two runners for PM in a head to head. Ukip and lib dems aren't going to provide that so why should farage and Clegg get as much airtime as Cameron and Miliband?
This is all about Cameron running scared of Farage. Embarrassing for him given his eagerness to debate in 2010
But we've seen that week in week out for five years. I'm sick to death of seeing dumb and dumber play their games. We know pretty much exactly what they are going to say and that is basically what the Tories and Labour have been saying about each other for the past 50 years. Putting the two of them against each other tells us virtually nothing we didn't already know.
What we do not know in any such detail is how they will respond to the others. That's where the interest will be. That's where they will be challenged. After all in the previous debates it wasn't Brown or Cameron in 2010 who caught the imagination now was it? In a democracy people need to be exposed to all that's on offer not the same old closed shop!
Perhaps that noted feminist, Ms Harman, on her pink van tour, can protest at this prominent Tory siding with someone so against women's rights. Or might one have to wait a long time for feminists to protest against this sort of misogyny? For him to say something really outrageous like, ooh, I don't know, that women don't clean behind the fridge, that sort of thing?
"This would be followed by the debate Downing St announced Cameron had agreed to earlier in the week: a seven person debate on April 2nd featuring Cameron and Miliband, but also the leaders of UKIP, the Green Party, the SNP, Plaid Cymru and the DUP. It does not seem that the Lib Dems have agreed to appear."
I find that hard to believe - why wouldn't Clegg turn up for that ?
Farage should say to the greens SNP and DUP that he will swerve the challengers debate if they sit out of the seven way
Given UKIP are now classified as a major party, they surely have grounds to be in whatever 'debate' the big three are in.
Difficult to see how the beeb can justify a three way QT style thing given ofcom
UKIP's lawyers could scupper the debates....
That show wouldn't be a debate between the leaders but a Q&A w an audience... Impossible to see how it can include Clegg and not Farage unless he is getting a half hour show of his own that the others don't
Best way for Ukip to play it is to not accept the invitation to the challengers debate as part if a deal where the other challengers don't attend the 7 way
Why on earth would the Greens, SNP and Plaid accept that offer?
The 7-way debate will clearly have more public interest, so withdrawing from that debate will cost them a large amount of public exposure. Having Farage withdraw from the Challengers debate would give them more screen time in that debate, but most likely in front of a much smaller audience.
There's absolutely nothing in it for the leaders of the SNP, Greens and Plaid.
SNP and Plaid should never have been part of a national debate anyway. Who want that, apart from Cameron??
Thy would have sued the broadcasters because the Greens don't have major party status and were invited.
Adjusting for the squeeze question, the Conservatives lead Labour 38/36 in England, and in England and Wales.
Interesting. Tories less than 2% down in England on 2010GE. Labour massively up from c.28% to 36%.
It does seem like it really will come down to whether the Labour voters actually turnout and whether the Lib Dem switchers truly do 'stick' with Labour, and also turnout.
Pretty consistently, close to 50% of English and Welsh voters support either the Conservatives or UKIP. Much turns on how they split.
..in the marginals. I've decided against it for now, but if I was still floating I wouldn't risk voting UKIP in a marginal, unless the choice was to vote for a europhile Tory.
But then you and I are probably in the minority in exercising that degree of discretion.
In a non-safe seat, I'd vote for whichever right wing candidate was best placed to defeat Labour or Lib Dems. In a Con/Lab marginal, that will almost always be Conservative (but there are exceptions like Thurrock, or Cannock Chase).
Alternatively Richard, you could keep your investments and hedge a Miliband/leftie government.
You never know, both sides of the bet might win....
Don't worry, I'm on that as well!
In all seriousness, though, it strikes me as a no-brainer to move investments out of dependence on the UK economy in the run-up to the election. There are plenty of other places in the world you can invest, or you can simply remain in the UK stock market but shift to companies which are not dependent on the UK economy. There doesn't seem to be much of a downside to such a strategy, IMO.
There was an article in the Economist last week pointing out that French Workers could take every Friday off and they'd be as productive on a 4 day week as British workers are on 5.
The trick is to make people who are only capable of doing low-productivity jobs unemployed instead so they don't drag down the average.
US stocks. Easiest diversification out there. Look to Japan as well, some of the indicators have turned around recently and the economy may be growing at around 3% YoY again. .
I shifted heavily to the US over the last couple of years, and very successful that has been. Valuations look a bit high now, but in an uncertain world it's probably still the safest option. There are opportunies in Europe as well, of course.
I find Japan very hard to assess, so I haven't jumped in too much.
@timothy_stanley: Lib Dems presenting an alternative budget to an empty Commons reminds me of a child sitting in the driving seat & going "vroom vroom!"
Even Lib Dem SPADS are on Twitter noting how bad an idea this was
Looks like the Lib Dems halve the depth of the Rollercoaster. Killjoys.
The workers united will never be defeated.....Sounds like the BBC will have to find 3 new hosts.
While the current three will move to Sky 1 at 8pm on Sundays no doubt...
Hammond has a broad BBC portfolio though; will he really chuck in all of that for one show?
Actually most of the stuff Hammond did has come to an end, e.g Wipeout, and he has already worked for Sky and ITV. In recent years, it is actually James May who has a number of active series going with Man Lab and Things You Need To Know, but I think they have come to an end now to.
But definitely both of them have been "go to" guys for science type programs for the BBC. I think the question is do they really pay big money and do they enjoy making them? One thing you have to remember for those to, so far they only get a fraction of the kind of wages Clarkson gets for Top Gear and they didn't own any stake in Bedder6 (I believe they have a small stake now from BBC worldwide in the spin off activities).
If I was them, I think I would probably take the opportunity to say to Clarkson, we will come with you to Sky, but we want a big chunk of everything.
The workers united will never be defeated.....Sounds like the BBC will have to find 3 new hosts.
While the current three will move to Sky 1 at 8pm on Sundays no doubt...
Hammond has a broad BBC portfolio though; will he really chuck in all of that for one show?
I don't see that he would have to, Hammond probably has a contract separately for Top Gear with the production company rather than with the BBC directly.
I can't imagine the Lib Dems I Can't Believe It's A Budget will harm them. Any remaining supporters must be either die-hards or tactical.
With apologies to "The Vicar of Dibley"
Danny A: You know the budget that we're now debating at the House of Commons?
George O: I think so
Danny A: I Can't Believe It's Not The Budget.
George O: Oh, yeah.
Danny A: Well, you know, I can't believe it's not the budget.
George O: Yeah, well, I believe that is the idea, yeah.
Danny A: Then yesterday I went to a LibDem meeting and I got this other stuff, like a sort of home brand budget, you know.
George O: Yes?
Danny A: And, you know, I can't believe it's not I Can't Believe It's Not The Budget.
George O : Mmmm?
[pause]
George O: I'm losing you now.
Danny A: Oh, right. Well, you know I Can't Believe It's Not The Budget?
George O: Yeah, yeah, yeah, you think it is the budget.
Danny A: No, no. I mean, you know the stuff that I can't believe is not the budget is called I Can't Believe It's Not The Budget?
George O: Probably, yeah, yeah.
Danny A: Well, I can't believe the stuff that is not I Can't Believe It's Not The Budget is not I Can't Believe It's Not The Budget. And I can't believe that both I Can't Believe It's Not The Budget and the stuff that I can't believe is not I Can't Believe It's Not The Budget are both, in fact, not the budget. And I believe... they both might be the budget ... in a cunning disguise. And, in fact, there's a lot more budgets around than we all thought there were.
George O: Yeah. You see, I don't know what you're talking about, but I'm sure voters do and are intrigued by the whole thing.
OK, into the final phase of adjusting my affairs to make them as Miliband-proof as possible. In my company pension fund I've just sold the last remaining housebuilding firm (Persimmon, a superb company whose shares have performed very well indeed, but housebuilders must be one of the prime risk areas for a sudden loss of confidence in 7 weeks' time), and the FTSE 250 index fund (too much exposure to the UK domestic economy to risk Lab minority propped up by the SNP). That pretty much completes my strategy of de-Milibandisation.
Do your own research, this is not investment advice, etc etc.
But do think about the risks of a chaotic Miliband-led government, especially a minority government, and try to mitigate the damage as much as you can.
If I wasn't so emotionally tied to this green and pleasant land, I'd emigrate for 5-10 years.
As it is I'll just hunker down and take each day as it comes.
The workers united will never be defeated.....Sounds like the BBC will have to find 3 new hosts.
While the current three will move to Sky 1 at 8pm on Sundays no doubt...
Hammond has a broad BBC portfolio though; will he really chuck in all of that for one show?
Actually most of the stuff Hammond did has come to an end, e.g Wipeout, and he has already worked for Sky and ITV. In recent years, it is actually James May who has a number of active series going with Man Lab and Things You Need To Know, but I think they have come to an end now to.
But definitely both of them have been "go to" guys for science type programs for the BBC. I think the question is do they really pay big money and do they enjoy making them? One thing you have to remember for those to, so far they only get a fraction of the kind of wages Clarkson gets for Top Gear and they don't own any stake in all the spin off stuff.
If I was them, I think I would probably take the opportunity to say to Clarkson, we will come with you to Sky, but we want a big chunk of everything.
I'm sure I've seen him do a lot of stuff recently re weather etc - my kids watch a lot of rubbish
I've been catching BBC 2 by accident recently and can't get over how dumbed down it is. It reminds me of school programmes I saw in 1975. With peculiar EMpharSIS by the narrators.
The workers united will never be defeated.....Sounds like the BBC will have to find 3 new hosts.
While the current three will move to Sky 1 at 8pm on Sundays no doubt...
Hammond has a broad BBC portfolio though; will he really chuck in all of that for one show?
Actually most of the stuff Hammond did has come to an end, e.g Wipeout, and he has already worked for Sky and ITV. In recent years, it is actually James May who has a number of active series going with Man Lab and Things You Need To Know, but I think they have come to an end now to.
But definitely both of them have been "go to" guys for science type programs for the BBC. I think the question is do they really pay big money and do they enjoy making them? One thing you have to remember for those to, so far they only get a fraction of the kind of wages Clarkson gets for Top Gear and they don't own any stake in all the spin off stuff.
If I was them, I think I would probably take the opportunity to say to Clarkson, we will come with you to Sky, but we want a big chunk of everything.
I'm sure I've seen him do a lot of stuff recently re weather etc - my kids watch a lot of rubbish
There was an article in the Economist last week pointing out that French Workers could take every Friday off and they'd be as productive on a 4 day week as British workers are on 5.
The trick is to make people who are only capable of doing low-productivity jobs unemployed instead so they don't drag down the average.
But it's worth noting that France with it's 35 hour working week has roughly the same GDP per capita as the UK. The right in the UK constantly bashes France for beig sclerotic etc but we've surrendered our rights and security in the workplace for almost no benefit whatsoever to ourselves. It has perhaps benefitted young unemloyed people from southern Europe who can take advantage of our flexible labour market. That won't be worth any votes in the general election though.
The Telegraph had an interesting take on the the productivity puzzle/jobs miracle. The endless supply of cheap labour helps businesses keep costs down and they don't feel the need to invest in better machinery, skills and so on. Hence productivity is stagnant. In France given the labour restrictions they've got no choice but to try and boost productivity.
The workers united will never be defeated.....Sounds like the BBC will have to find 3 new hosts.
While the current three will move to Sky 1 at 8pm on Sundays no doubt...
Hammond has a broad BBC portfolio though; will he really chuck in all of that for one show?
Actually most of the stuff Hammond did has come to an end, e.g Wipeout, and he has already worked for Sky and ITV. In recent years, it is actually James May who has a number of active series going with Man Lab and Things You Need To Know, but I think they have come to an end now to.
But definitely both of them have been "go to" guys for science type programs for the BBC. I think the question is do they really pay big money and do they enjoy making them? One thing you have to remember for those to, so far they only get a fraction of the kind of wages Clarkson gets for Top Gear and they don't own any stake in all the spin off stuff.
If I was them, I think I would probably take the opportunity to say to Clarkson, we will come with you to Sky, but we want a big chunk of everything.
I'm sure I've seen him do a lot of stuff recently re weather etc - my kids watch a lot of rubbish
I believe Hammond did one thing on weather yes. Other stuff, Repeats? He has done stuff, but the big things has finished e.g Wipeout.
Until the last deal, May and Hammond actually didn't earn much from Top Gear at all (in the world of telly), somewhere around £150-200k a year. Current deal is thought to be £500k a year for Top Gear and other projects (very nice), but when you stack that up against the money Clarkson makes and the Top Gear brand, they still get the small edge of a massive wedge.
I am sure Sky or ITV can find more than £500k a year for them if they wanted, especially if they can get them to do other stuff as well for the big bucks. However, that doesn't always work out as intended, cough cough Adrian Chiles...thank god he isn't doing the footy anymore !!!!
Comments
There aren't many of us LDs left these days ...
The debates would've been redrawn, against his wishes, due to Cameron, and then axed due to Farage. Miliband would appear the victim of events rather than making his own weather.
It does seem like it really will come down to whether the Labour voters actually turnout and whether the Lib Dem switchers truly do 'stick' with Labour, and also turnout.
https://www.ipsos-mori.com/researchpublications/researcharchive/3542/EconomistIpsos-MORI-March-2015-Issues-Index.aspx
Ed Miliband only trusted in a crisis by 18% v. Cameron's 41%
Even on welfare it is only a matter of degree between Lib Dem and Conservatives plus Conservatives have adopted Lib Dem values on lesbian gay etc issues.
Of course here are ex socialist SDP members who joined the Liberals and have tried to change Liberal traditions but many have now gone back to Labour or Green.
There are still some differences between the radical liberals and the conservatively inclined such as the policies on drugs and climate change. But Lib Dems should be looking to convert one nation Conservatives to Lib Dem rather than Greens or Labour.
@SunNation: The #Budget2015 shows voters have a choice between facts and scary fairy tales: http://t.co/obM2aMuikY #SunNation http://t.co/qLhzRYpGnX
But Dave said if we are going to have minor parties like the lib dems involved then all have to be involved didn't he? He said this in the house of commons
So if Cleggs in, farage has to be in
The 7-way debate will clearly have more public interest, so withdrawing from that debate will cost them a large amount of public exposure. Having Farage withdraw from the Challengers debate would give them more screen time in that debate, but most likely in front of a much smaller audience.
There's absolutely nothing in it for the leaders of the SNP, Greens and Plaid.
You should pounding the streets with a slew of "Focus News" tucked under you arm in an effort to ensure my "JackW Dozen" prediction of Huppert holding Cambridge comes to fruition.
Maybe the extra airtime they'd get without Farage? The challengers debate just seems stupid really, especially when one if the parties will likely get more votes than the others combined
I see that NP is a blood orange juice fan. Good man. I acquired a blood orange plant recently - www.plants4presents.co.uk - and it is gorgeous with the flowers just starting. I'm looking forward to eating the oranges.
Apparently the "blood" aspect is caused by the presence of of anthocyanin, an antioxidant pigment which develops when there is a big difference between the daytime and nighttime temperatures. That's why they grow so successfully on the slopes of Mount Etna. And also why they are so good for you!
Scary fairy Stories.
By the Brothers Eds Grimm
They should've stuck to the rules and told Cameron to go hang. Now the The TV companies with their arrogant 'we can do as we like' attitudes are just damaging our political system further.
In terms of right and wrong, the SNP and the Greens will both point to their higher membership figures, the SNP are likely to win many more MPs than UKIP, and the Greens were able to elect an MP in 2010, which UKIP were not.
There simply isn't an obvious clear delineation that you can make to determine which parties should be in the debate. In any case the debate proceeds on the basis that it might change people's minds, so the entire concept of making prejudgements on who people will vote for to determine the membership of that debate is suspect.
While we all know that 40% of the electorate will not decide to vote Green in May, the broadcasters shouldn't really be making that judgement on behalf of the voters in advance of the voters making their decision.
The nation is agog !!
Parties getting 5% in opinion polls, losing deposits in by elections and coming 4th or worse in euros simply have no place at the top table, unless they are currently in govt in which case they should be allowed to defend their record. I'd say the same if it were Ukip in that position, but it isn't
Even if we have the nonsense of a 7 way, it should be structured so that the minor parties get less time than the major (ofcom) parties and the lib dems and Ukip should get less time than labour and conservative
Let the SNP have a debate in Scotland where they are standing. I can't even vote fir them if I wanted to, nor can anyone else in England so why bother having them on?
If the 7 way is two hours long it should involve all 7 for 40 mins, Cameron, Miliband , Clegg & Farage for 40 and just Dave and Ed for 40
Your suggestion is unworkable and grossly unfair. What is it that Cameron and Miliband have to discuss that UKIP and the Libdems (who are still a major party for the time being) should not comment on. Cabinet seating arrangements? The name of the Downing Street cat? The most improper part of this whole shambles is the concept of the 'Dumb & Dumber' show. No doubt the smaller parties would say exactly the same about the big 4 getting all the say but at least Ofcom have provided that with some credibility. The TV companies have managed to bring the whole thing into utter disrepute even before the first event.
Furthermore, they needed 3 x 90 minute debates in 2010 for three candidates to cover the full spectrum of government issues. That was basically 90 minutes per party. Now they are proposing one 2 hour debate to do the same for 7 parties. That's less than 20 minutes each to put across their whole proposals. Its a complete nonsense.
This is all about Cameron running scared of Farage. Embarrassing for him given his eagerness to debate in 2010
But then you and I are probably in the minority in exercising that degree of discretion.
James May and Richard Hammond were offered the chance to front the motoring show during Clarkson’s suspension, according to a BBC executive.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/celebritynews/11482025/James-May-and-Richard-Hammond-refuse-to-film-Top-Gear-without-Jeremy-Clarkson.html
The workers united will never be defeated.....Sounds like the BBC will have to find 3 new hosts.
Do your own research, this is not investment advice, etc etc.
But do think about the risks of a chaotic Miliband-led government, especially a minority government, and try to mitigate the damage as much as you can.
I can't imagine the Lib Dems I Can't Believe It's A Budget will harm them. Any remaining supporters must be either die-hards or tactical.
(*&^%$
If Cameron or Osborne made those comments in public it would lose them the election
Nice to meet you the other night by the way
Even Lib Dem SPADS are on Twitter noting how bad an idea this was
You never know, both sides of the bet might win....
And great to meet you - people never look as I expect them to look!
What we do not know in any such detail is how they will respond to the others. That's where the interest will be. That's where they will be challenged. After all in the previous debates it wasn't Brown or Cameron in 2010 who caught the imagination now was it? In a democracy people need to be exposed to all that's on offer not the same old closed shop!
Perhaps that noted feminist, Ms Harman, on her pink van tour, can protest at this prominent Tory siding with someone so against women's rights. Or might one have to wait a long time for feminists to protest against this sort of misogyny? For him to say something really outrageous like, ooh, I don't know, that women don't clean behind the fridge, that sort of thing?
Meanwhile Tunisians protest at the latest grim atrocity- http://hurryupharry.org/2015/03/18/tunisians-protest-terror-attack/
Very worrying at the way these attacks are moving from Syria across the Maghreb and, no doubt, across the Mediterranean before long.
In all seriousness, though, it strikes me as a no-brainer to move investments out of dependence on the UK economy in the run-up to the election. There are plenty of other places in the world you can invest, or you can simply remain in the UK stock market but shift to companies which are not dependent on the UK economy. There doesn't seem to be much of a downside to such a strategy, IMO.
@jessicaelgot: He looks the picture of embarrassment RT @MichaelPDeacon: This is a thing that is actually happening http://t.co/1lo34jehm7
I find Japan very hard to assess, so I haven't jumped in too much.
Miss Cyclefree, politicians and media need to be more robust tackling Islamists head on and standing up for the likes of Jesus and Mo.
@Morris-Dancer yes you're correct re May, I'd forgotten.
@EllieJPrice: This is @dannyalexander alternative budget box. It's wooden. And I'm told the lettering took hours to stick on. http://t.co/x741lBXY7D
But definitely both of them have been "go to" guys for science type programs for the BBC. I think the question is do they really pay big money and do they enjoy making them? One thing you have to remember for those to, so far they only get a fraction of the kind of wages Clarkson gets for Top Gear and they didn't own any stake in Bedder6 (I believe they have a small stake now from BBC worldwide in the spin off activities).
If I was them, I think I would probably take the opportunity to say to Clarkson, we will come with you to Sky, but we want a big chunk of everything.
File under "Aw, bless...."
'That’s why I was disappointed to see some of the responses to my colleague, Rachel Reeves’ interview in the Guardian earlier this week.'
Danny A: You know the budget that we're now debating at the House of Commons?
George O: I think so
Danny A: I Can't Believe It's Not The Budget.
George O: Oh, yeah.
Danny A: Well, you know, I can't believe it's not the budget.
George O: Yeah, well, I believe that is the idea, yeah.
Danny A: Then yesterday I went to a LibDem meeting and I got this other stuff, like a sort of home brand budget, you know.
George O: Yes?
Danny A: And, you know, I can't believe it's not I Can't Believe It's Not The Budget.
George O : Mmmm?
[pause]
George O: I'm losing you now.
Danny A: Oh, right. Well, you know I Can't Believe It's Not The Budget?
George O: Yeah, yeah, yeah, you think it is the budget.
Danny A: No, no. I mean, you know the stuff that I can't believe is not the budget is called I Can't Believe It's Not The Budget?
George O: Probably, yeah, yeah.
Danny A: Well, I can't believe the stuff that is not I Can't Believe It's Not The Budget is not I Can't Believe It's Not The Budget. And I can't believe that both I Can't Believe It's Not The Budget and the stuff that I can't believe is not I Can't Believe It's Not The Budget are both, in fact, not the budget. And I believe... they both might be the budget ... in a cunning disguise. And, in fact, there's a lot more budgets around than we all thought there were.
George O: Yeah. You see, I don't know what you're talking about, but I'm sure voters do and are intrigued by the whole thing.
As it is I'll just hunker down and take each day as it comes.
@MaxWindCowie: It does feel just a teensy-weensy bit like Danny Alexander is doing all of this for a dare.
Have they been to the Peston Elocution Academy?
The Telegraph had an interesting take on the the productivity puzzle/jobs miracle. The endless supply of cheap labour helps businesses keep costs down and they don't feel the need to invest in better machinery, skills and so on. Hence productivity is stagnant. In France given the labour restrictions they've got no choice but to try and boost productivity.
Until the last deal, May and Hammond actually didn't earn much from Top Gear at all (in the world of telly), somewhere around £150-200k a year. Current deal is thought to be £500k a year for Top Gear and other projects (very nice), but when you stack that up against the money Clarkson makes and the Top Gear brand, they still get the small edge of a massive wedge.
I am sure Sky or ITV can find more than £500k a year for them if they wanted, especially if they can get them to do other stuff as well for the big bucks. However, that doesn't always work out as intended, cough cough Adrian Chiles...thank god he isn't doing the footy anymore !!!!
Is Danny Alexander a good bet to retain his seat in May?
http://ow.ly/KwXtY
Not at 9 to bloody 2 lol