Sir Alan Beith (standing down, replacement Julie Pörksen) Duncan Hames Mike Hancock (expelled from party, replacement Gerald Vernon-Jackson) Sir Nick Harvey Michael Moore Viscount John Thurso
At risk (1/2 to evens)
Paul Burstow Andrew George John Hemming Julian Huppert Mark Hunter Charles Kennedy Stephen Lloyd Dan Rogerson Adrian Sanders Mike Thornton Mark Williams Roger Williams Stephen Williams
Safe (1/2 or shorter)
Norman Baker Tom Brake Vince Cable Alistair Carmichael Nick Clegg Edward Davey Tim Farron Don Foster (standing down, replacement Steve Bradley) Martin Horwood Simon Hughes Norman Lamb David Laws Greg Mulholland John Pugh Bob Russell Sir Andrew Stunell (standing down, replacement Lisa Smart) Steve Webb
I think Vince Cable and Simon Hughes might both lose their seats, but I'd be reasonably comfortable that Huppert will hold his . It's also possible that the Viscount's personal vote will get him over the edge.
If you want a complete flyer on the LibDems doing slightly better than expected, than can I suggest Bradford East?
I gather Lib Dems in Yorkshire are confident of holding all three seats - Hallam, Leeds NW and Bradford East.
Telegraph Politics (@TelePolitics) 23/03/2015 11:16 Why is Nigel Farage considered fair game? tgr.ph/1HrAg6U
'I’ve often worried about Farage’s safety. British politics is tense at the moment: this achingly dull election campaign masks inequality, racial tension, cultural anxiety and real hate. Politicians have been attacked: George Galloway was assaulted. Farage was forced to hide from a mob during the Scottish election campaign – and the reaction to that episode was oddly tolerant. Sarah Champion MP described the fact that a crowd "trapped" him inside a Ukip shop when touring Rotherham as "hilarious". There’s a feeling among some that Farage sort of brings this on himself, while the various causes of those who shout him down are so right-on, so compassionate, so supercalifragilisticexpialidocious that sympathy has often fallen with the protestors rather than the man with an elected office trying to exercise his right to canvass.
And what exactly is he supposed to have done to attract such bile? Nigel Farage is guilty of the crime of having an opinion. But even if you find his opinion to be offensive, it’s still odd to want to drive this man in particular off the national stage. A) Farage has absolutely no institutional power whatsoever in Britain and so hounding him is like kicking a puppy. And b) most of his rhetoric and policies have been taken up by Labour and the Tories – people with genuine power yet who don’t grace the Far Left’s hit list. And if the families of Miliband and Cameron were so targeted, we’d all be talking about a "crisis in our democracy". Not so when it’s the Farages. The whisper will be going around London right now: “He created this political atmosphere. It’s sort of his fault”.'
No one in Europe will be chucked out of anywhere.. it has always been possible to live in a European country...you simply register your presence with the local police station.
But there's an odd inconsistency here. The Kippers claim that there will be zero effect on British citizens wanting to live in continental European countries, whilst simultaneously claiming the the UK will 'have full control of its borders' and be able to decide which EU citizens live here.
These two propositions can't both be true.
I suppose it might reduce the number of unemployed moving to Spain.
The kippers in essence want to stop people moving to the UK if they are not going economically useful, or if they are going to be arriving in socially divisive numbers. Spain has always been happy for British pensioners to go there and spend their pensions into the local economy. I suspect they are rather less happy about our unemployed sponging off their state and rightly so.
What would really put the cat among the pigeons is the Conservatives withdrawing their candidate from Gordon. Only the Lib Dems can beat Salmond there (and they're not far off as it stands according to electionforecast as shown below). It might even help the Tories in England by strengthening the "we're the party to keep the SNP out" line they've been pushing in recent weeks.
And let's be clear, Salmond losing in Gordon might not alter the overall number of seats held by the SNP much, but it would be a brutal blow to their momentum. All it will take is a small number of Tory voters backing the Lib Dems:
SNP: 36% Lib Dem: 30% Tories: 16% Labour: 14%
You're using the gerrymandered and broken Lib Dem private polling which used multi-stage leading questions.
Ashcroft numbers : -
SNP 43% Libs 26% Lab 14% Tory 11%
Also the Greens aren't standing so a big chunk of the 6% other will go to the SNP. If both Tory and Labour withdrew, stay at homes would still leave the Liberals short (and that's without considering SNP second preferences).
Boo hoo - poor Nige - he's so hard done by - he should be allowed to pick on all these people , throw bricks at them and have no comeback.
Don't worry about Nigel, UKIP's BFFs Britain First are going to sort out anyone who attacks Farage.
@V4VixVendetta: #BritainFirst Going to intimidate families in their own homes by showing them that intimidating families is wrong http://t.co/LROjxReCUu
Clearly it suits the Tories to talk up Salmond controlling Miliband, just as it suits Labour to talk up the Tories raising VAT.
One has a basis in fact, the other is just a groundless Labour smear....
Groundless in the sense that the last two times the Tories won an election they put up VAT after saying that they wouldn't?
In the same way that every Labour government has left office with a high national debt than when it came to power, and worse unemployment.
I would expect the Tories to make such points strongly.
The difference is one is a generic "competence" argument, the other is a specific accusation that they are continuing to make despite denials: i.e. they are claiming that the Tories have a ultra secret plan and are lying to the electorate about it.
@ScottyNational: Immigration: Serious questions being asked as senior Labour politician sneaks across border without seeking permission from Alex Salmond.
"7. Better dress in theatres "Ukip will encourage a return to proper dress for major hotels, restaurants and theatres – smarter dress is part of Britishness, although it is also a British virtue to encourage innovation in fashion.". (2010 manifesto)"
'I am sick to death of people trying to force me who [not] to vote for. It’s patronising. I had no intention of voting for UKIP. All these people are doing – and particularly the idiots ‘protesting’ yesterday – is making me stubbornly want to piss them off.
Aside from anything else, people voting for Mr Farage’s party are just going to knuckle down even more stubbornly and vote for their guy. And incidents like yesterday trying to put people off? Congratulations guys, you just made me want to vote UKIP.'
Clearly it suits the Tories to talk up Salmond controlling Miliband, just as it suits Labour to talk up the Tories raising VAT.
One has a basis in fact, the other is just a groundless Labour smear....
Groundless in the sense that the last two times the Tories won an election they put up VAT after saying that they wouldn't?
In the same way that every Labour government has left office with a high national debt than when it came to power, and worse unemployment.
Not in the same way at all, even if your charges are accepted, because the Conservatives must have known they were planning to put up VAT, and must therefore have been economical with the actualite during the campaign. Twice.
All you can reasonably claim is disingenuous.
I believe the phrase was "no current plans" - so not a strict denial, but certainly misleading
Boo hoo - poor Nige - he's so hard done by - he should be allowed to pick on all these people , throw bricks at them and have no comeback.
Don't worry about Nigel, UKIP's BFFs Britain First are going to sort out anyone who attacks Farage.
@V4VixVendetta: #BritainFirst Going to intimidate families in their own homes by showing them that intimidating families is wrong http://t.co/LROjxReCUu
I wasn't aware it was Conservative policy to condone harassment of parliamentary candidates for promoting the platform of their (legal) party. By all means harangue him, heckle him, and take him to task for his views. People that attempt to assault politicians of any party should be put before the beak.
1. Household debt deleveraging appears to be over. Now stands at around 145% of income, and has been stable at that level for at least a year I think.
2. The OBR forecasts a large increase in household debt, to above the pre-crisis peak by 2020.
The second point is interesting, because the very first forecasts from the OBR in 2010 also involved UK GDP growth being driven by an increase in household debt, which did not come to pass, probably explaining quite a bit of the failure of Osborne's deficit reduction.
Thus the economic outlook for the UK appears to stand on a choice between increasing household debt, or increasing government debt. This is not a healthy situation.
A report published today by the Public Administration Select Committee has found that CCHQ were wrong to ask Special Advisers to campaign for the party in the Rochester by-election. Theresa May’s SpAd Nick Timothy was dropped from the candidates list in a major internal Tory row after he argued that demands from Grant Shapps for SpAds to take part in telephone canvassing were against their Code of Conduct. The report finds:
“We therefore conclude that any direction to a Special Adviser to conduct telephone canvassing was misguided, and that advice that such a direction or such canvassing was permitted under their Code and contract of employment was wrong in law… We recommend that Special Advisers should never again be confronted with directions or informal pressure that puts them in breach of the Code and of their contracts of employment.”
"7. Better dress in theatres "Ukip will encourage a return to proper dress for major hotels, restaurants and theatres – smarter dress is part of Britishness, although it is also a British virtue to encourage innovation in fashion.". (2010 manifesto)"
And that is a reasonable excuse to interrupt his family dinner or chase him down the street ? I think your moral compass might need some fine tuning.
Boo hoo - poor Nige - he's so hard done by - he should be allowed to pick on all these people , throw bricks at them and have no comeback.
Don't worry about Nigel, UKIP's BFFs Britain First are going to sort out anyone who attacks Farage.
@V4VixVendetta: #BritainFirst Going to intimidate families in their own homes by showing them that intimidating families is wrong http://t.co/LROjxReCUu
I wasn't aware it was Conservative policy to condone harassment of parliamentary candidates for promoting the platform of their (legal) party. By all means harangue him, heckle him, and take him to task for his views. People that attempt to assault politicians of any party should be put before the beak.
It isn't. Yesterday we saw idiots being violent and undemocratic.
The disturbing thing is UKIP are attracting similar idiots
"7. Better dress in theatres "Ukip will encourage a return to proper dress for major hotels, restaurants and theatres – smarter dress is part of Britishness, although it is also a British virtue to encourage innovation in fashion.". (2010 manifesto)"
And that is a reasonable excuse to interrupt his family dinner or chase him down the street ? I think your moral compass might need some fine tuning.
He takes votes that "belong" to the Conservative Party. That's his offence.
No one in Europe will be chucked out of anywhere.. it has always been possible to live in a European country...you simply register your presence with the local police station.
But there's an odd inconsistency here. The Kippers claim that there will be zero effect on British citizens wanting to live in continental European countries, whilst simultaneously claiming the the UK will 'have full control of its borders' and be able to decide which EU citizens live here.
These two propositions can't both be true.
I'd have thought that existing British citizens that are resident in EU countries would not be affected, and granted some sort of residency permit.
It might affect future Britons who wished to live overseas in the rest of the EU. Probably some sort of income test would be applied for retirees and points system for workers.
Anyone else worried that Ed Miliband might outperform expectations in the first "debate" on Thursday?
I am sure he will be perfectly fine in all of them. He will have prepped up to the eyeballs and we have few political journos who can cut through the BS, really know the ins and outs (most are totally economically illiterate) and ask really probing questions on the fly.
Paxman towards the end of his time on Newsnight, I don't think he bothered to read up about anything. He wasn't on top of his brief at all.
Now, it's possible that a UK government might introduce laws that were similar to those that emanate from Bruseels; or it might not. But, either way, the decision would be in the hands of people who were accountable to the British electorate.
The problem I have with this is that it underestimates both the inclination of pols to agree with each, and their scope not to do so.
John Major's government, for example, didn't sign up to the Social Chapter, and he didn't have to leave the EU in consequence. Blair's capitulard government promptly did so and gained nothing. It's clear that both decisions, on an EU matter, were unaffected by our EU membership.
Likewise Lawson and Major's governments weren't signed up to the euro, but both came a hideous cropper from implementing the EU's exchange rate policy.
Things like the CAP are features of EU membership, so it's clear that absent the latter, there wouldn't be the former. I would call those treaty obligations, though, that kinda follow from the treaty.
Eg the Treaty of Tilsit reduced Prussia to 5 million heads and limited the army to 42,000 men. The statutes reducing the army to that size weren't French-decreed laws but consequences of the Treaty.
Is there anything in the way of domestic legislation that the EU has led and that a Westminster government would not eventually have adopted anyway? I struggle to think of many. Looking at the Tories, Labour and the LibDems, which of them opposes and would never have implemented the EU's green agenda or its human rights agenda? The instant any non-UKIP-inclined party got into power we'd have been signed up to the lot.
I haven't studied the matter at length but I suspect that this has always been the case EU or no EU. An obvious example of pols basing laws on what other pols think is the abolition of the death penalty, where there is no party one can vote for that would bring it back. I wouldn't choose to but many would, to whom no political party is listening.
Sir Alan Beith (standing down, replacement Julie Pörksen) Duncan Hames Mike Hancock (expelled from party, replacement Gerald Vernon-Jackson) Sir Nick Harvey Michael Moore Viscount John Thurso
At risk (1/2 to evens)
Paul Burstow Andrew George John Hemming Julian Huppert Mark Hunter Charles Kennedy Stephen Lloyd Dan Rogerson Adrian Sanders Mike Thornton Mark Williams Roger Williams Stephen Williams
Safe (1/2 or shorter)
Norman Baker Tom Brake Vince Cable Alistair Carmichael Nick Clegg Edward Davey Tim Farron Don Foster (standing down, replacement Steve Bradley) Martin Horwood Simon Hughes Norman Lamb David Laws Greg Mulholland John Pugh Bob Russell Sir Andrew Stunell (standing down, replacement Lisa Smart) Steve Webb
I think Vince Cable and Simon Hughes might both lose their seats, but I'd be reasonably comfortable that Huppert will hold his . It's also possible that the Viscount's personal vote will get him over the edge.
If you want a complete flyer on the LibDems doing slightly better than expected, than can I suggest Bradford East?
I gather Lib Dems in Yorkshire are confident of holding all three seats - Hallam, Leeds NW and Bradford East.
1. Household debt deleveraging appears to be over. Now stands at around 145% of income, and has been stable at that level for at least a year I think.
2. The OBR forecasts a large increase in household debt, to above the pre-crisis peak by 2020.
The second point is interesting, because the very first forecasts from the OBR in 2010 also involved UK GDP growth being driven by an increase in household debt, which did not come to pass, probably explaining quite a bit of the failure of Osborne's deficit reduction.
Thus the economic outlook for the UK appears to stand on a choice between increasing household debt, or increasing government debt. This is not a healthy situation.
Government debt-to-GDP is going to start falling sooner than people expect, as:
1. GDP is tracking higher 2. The sale of stakes in Lloyds and RBS, continued unwind of nationalised assets 3. The pro-cyclical effect of growth reducing spending, and increasing the tax take
Boo hoo - poor Nige - he's so hard done by - he should be allowed to pick on all these people , throw bricks at them and have no comeback.
Don't worry about Nigel, UKIP's BFFs Britain First are going to sort out anyone who attacks Farage.
@V4VixVendetta: #BritainFirst Going to intimidate families in their own homes by showing them that intimidating families is wrong http://t.co/LROjxReCUu
I wasn't aware it was Conservative policy to condone harassment of parliamentary candidates for promoting the platform of their (legal) party. By all means harangue him, heckle him, and take him to task for his views. People that attempt to assault politicians of any party should be put before the beak.
It isn't. Yesterday we saw idiots being violent and undemocratic.
The disturbing thing is UKIP are attracting similar idiots
And they will continue to while they are shrugged off as "Farage is bringing it on himself" or whatever, he has an absolute right to promote his party lawfully and without interference, those idiots should have been put before the beak for assault and breach of the peace, not smiled at approvingly by a liberal media and approving politicians.
Neither Cameron or Miliband are used to being interviewed by someone like Paxman, it's potentially dangerous for both of them. The Q & A part of the show will be fine.
Miliband ridiculing Salmond:` I gather he has a book to sell`
That should drive the NATS crazy.
I think the main person being wound up by Salmond's book is Nigel Farage whose own tome - judging by the Amazon Charts - is being hammered by Salmond's sales.
Neither Cameron or Miliband are used to being interviewed by someone like Paxman, it's potentially dangerous for both of them. The Q & A part of the show will be fine.
Paxman isn't the interviewer he used to be. You have to really live and breath the politics, know all the facts and figures in order to be able to catch out well briefed and prepped politicians. The last year on Newsnight, he was a shadow of his former self.
@tnewtondunn: Revealing column by @Kevin_Maguire today; risk-averse Mili now happy to come 2nd at #GE2015 and take No10 when Cam's Queen's Speech falls.
Boo hoo - poor Nige - he's so hard done by - he should be allowed to pick on all these people , throw bricks at them and have no comeback.
Don't worry about Nigel, UKIP's BFFs Britain First are going to sort out anyone who attacks Farage.
@V4VixVendetta: #BritainFirst Going to intimidate families in their own homes by showing them that intimidating families is wrong http://t.co/LROjxReCUu
I wasn't aware it was Conservative policy to condone harassment of parliamentary candidates for promoting the platform of their (legal) party. By all means harangue him, heckle him, and take him to task for his views. People that attempt to assault politicians of any party should be put before the beak.
It isn't. Yesterday we saw idiots being violent and undemocratic.
The disturbing thing is UKIP are attracting similar idiots
Strange, you're link has nothing to do with precedents or the use thereof with an unwritten constitution. Precedent is not Convention.
I notice you prefer to overlook that primary legislation trumps precedent, inconvenient I know, but that's life.
You were quite happy to tell us how the new GAAR law (primary legislation) overcame decades of precedent on tax inquiry and status investigations.
No, I merely treated it with the contempt it deserved, leaving it for any reader coming across your claim to laugh at the utter stupidity of the idea that a democratic process by the people of Scotland could be pre-empted by primary legislation at Westminster to replace an already established precedent in a country with an unwritten constitution.
Clearly it suits the Tories to talk up Salmond controlling Miliband, just as it suits Labour to talk up the Tories raising VAT.
One has a basis in fact, the other is just a groundless Labour smear....
Groundless in the sense that the last two times the Tories won an election they put up VAT after saying that they wouldn't?
In the same way that every Labour government has left office with a high national debt than when it came to power, and worse unemployment.
I would expect the Tories to make such points strongly.
The difference is one is a generic "competence" argument, the other is a specific accusation that they are continuing to make despite denials: i.e. they are claiming that the Tories have a ultra secret plan and are lying to the electorate about it.
You mean the way they denied it in 1992 and 2010?
Presumably, on the same basis we can expect the Tories not to claim that Labour will do stuff they have specifically denied they will do.
Miliband ridiculing Salmond:` I gather he has a book to sell`
That should drive the NATS crazy.
I think the main person being wound up by Salmond's book is Nigel Farage whose own tome - judging by the Amazon Charts - is being hammered by Salmond's sales.
100K SNP members will have just ordered the book of the messiah, give it a few days to settle down.
Boo hoo - poor Nige - he's so hard done by - he should be allowed to pick on all these people , throw bricks at them and have no comeback.
Don't worry about Nigel, UKIP's BFFs Britain First are going to sort out anyone who attacks Farage.
@V4VixVendetta: #BritainFirst Going to intimidate families in their own homes by showing them that intimidating families is wrong http://t.co/LROjxReCUu
I wasn't aware it was Conservative policy to condone harassment of parliamentary candidates for promoting the platform of their (legal) party. By all means harangue him, heckle him, and take him to task for his views. People that attempt to assault politicians of any party should be put before the beak.
It isn't. Yesterday we saw idiots being violent and undemocratic.
The disturbing thing is UKIP are attracting similar idiots
well if the Law is a la carte why wouldn't they ?
Look on the bright side. England is becoming more like Northern Ireland every day.
If we want to make a trade treaty with an country outside the EU, we can't, we have to wait for endless negotiations with the EU to take place, and then follow the terms of that agreement with only minor input to them, rather than negotiating our own trade agreements
What a laughably facile "drawback". Is that really the best you can do?
Does it not occur to you that there might be countries who'd sign a free trade agreement with 27 countries in one go but who wouldn't bother doing so with just one?
Boo hoo - poor Nige - he's so hard done by - he should be allowed to pick on all these people , throw bricks at them and have no comeback.
Don't worry about Nigel, UKIP's BFFs Britain First are going to sort out anyone who attacks Farage.
@V4VixVendetta: #BritainFirst Going to intimidate families in their own homes by showing them that intimidating families is wrong http://t.co/LROjxReCUu
I wasn't aware it was Conservative policy to condone harassment of parliamentary candidates for promoting the platform of their (legal) party. By all means harangue him, heckle him, and take him to task for his views. People that attempt to assault politicians of any party should be put before the beak.
It isn't. Yesterday we saw idiots being violent and undemocratic.
The disturbing thing is UKIP are attracting similar idiots
well if the Law is a la carte why wouldn't they ?
Look on the bright side. England is becoming more like Northern Ireland every day.
I'll buy you a bowler hat and we can pick on Neil.
Boo hoo - poor Nige - he's so hard done by - he should be allowed to pick on all these people , throw bricks at them and have no comeback.
Don't worry about Nigel, UKIP's BFFs Britain First are going to sort out anyone who attacks Farage.
@V4VixVendetta: #BritainFirst Going to intimidate families in their own homes by showing them that intimidating families is wrong http://t.co/LROjxReCUu
I wasn't aware it was Conservative policy to condone harassment of parliamentary candidates for promoting the platform of their (legal) party. By all means harangue him, heckle him, and take him to task for his views. People that attempt to assault politicians of any party should be put before the beak.
It isn't. Yesterday we saw idiots being violent and undemocratic.
The disturbing thing is UKIP are attracting similar idiots
well if the Law is a la carte why wouldn't they ?
Look on the bright side. England is becoming more like Northern Ireland every day.
I'll buy you a bowler hat and we can pick on Neil.
I have a bowler hat. Definitely my worst fashion faux pas
It looks like after the next GE it will only be the Tories that oppose it.
Why would the SNP want it? Who on the left will argue that UKIP should get 65-130 MPs?
The end game here is clear and has been since last September.
Super Devomax (short of independence) + EV4EL
A Tory/SNP carve up.
Shortly after I joined PB - may be 2 years ago - I wrote a header on that very basis: the way to save the union was to learn the lessons of Ireland and make a full and final settlement rather than grudgingly fight for every inch.
Anyone else worried that Ed Miliband might outperform expectations in the first "debate" on Thursday?
Miliband has always been good at Q and A.
The only worry is he is bring interviewed by a Tory.
Indeed. Surely Dave should be interviewed by a self-confessed Labour supporter. The bias in the current arrangement is outrageous.
It is hosted by Paxman and Burley it is not? Kay Burley spent many a weekend at Chequers when Tony Blair was in power.
I personally wouldn't have had Paxman, not only because of all this rumbling about being Tory candidate for mayor, but he is past his peak / lost his interest in the game.
If we want to make a trade treaty with an country outside the EU, we can't, we have to wait for endless negotiations with the EU to take place, and then follow the terms of that agreement with only minor input to them, rather than negotiating our own trade agreements
What a laughably facile "drawback". Is that really the best you can do?
Does it not occur to you that there might be countries who'd sign a free trade agreement with 27 countries in one go but who wouldn't bother doing so with just one?
When the "just one" is the world's sixth largest economy? Are you serious?
Boo hoo - poor Nige - he's so hard done by - he should be allowed to pick on all these people , throw bricks at them and have no comeback.
Don't worry about Nigel, UKIP's BFFs Britain First are going to sort out anyone who attacks Farage.
@V4VixVendetta: #BritainFirst Going to intimidate families in their own homes by showing them that intimidating families is wrong http://t.co/LROjxReCUu
I wasn't aware it was Conservative policy to condone harassment of parliamentary candidates for promoting the platform of their (legal) party. By all means harangue him, heckle him, and take him to task for his views. People that attempt to assault politicians of any party should be put before the beak.
It isn't. Yesterday we saw idiots being violent and undemocratic.
The disturbing thing is UKIP are attracting similar idiots
well if the Law is a la carte why wouldn't they ?
Look on the bright side. England is becoming more like Northern Ireland every day.
I'll buy you a bowler hat and we can pick on Neil.
I have a bowler hat. Definitely my worst fashion faux pas
If we want to make a trade treaty with an country outside the EU, we can't, we have to wait for endless negotiations with the EU to take place, and then follow the terms of that agreement with only minor input to them, rather than negotiating our own trade agreements
What a laughably facile "drawback". Is that really the best you can do?
Does it not occur to you that there might be countries who'd sign a free trade agreement with 27 countries in one go but who wouldn't bother doing so with just one?
" Speaking of tricky situations - Ed Miliband is in Scotland this morning. He'll no doubt be question on the Salmond remarks (jumped on by the right-wing press) that the SNP would try and get concessions to a Labour budget, and back Labour on a vote by vote basis. One things Salmond wants is for HS2 to start in Scotland, but using infrastructure projects as bartering chips seems like the opposite of good government. And it's worth noting - again - that the SNP worked with the Tories from 2007-2011 in the Scottish Parliament, and that between 2005 and 2010, SNP MPs voted with the Tories on 88% of Finance Bills.
I'm not saying they're Tartan Tories - but I am saying that the idea that they won't work with the Tories is fanciful. And Anthony Painter outlined an all too-plausible Tory/SNP deal this weekend. A new ICM poll this morning shows just how far Scottish Labour have fallen, with the SNP still holding a 16 point lead."
There is no chance whatsoever of the SNP propping up the Conservatives in Westminster.
- Sturgeon has explicitly ruled it out. - It would in a stroke alienate all the culturally anti-Tory voters they've just picked up from Labour. - It would run counter to all their current policy direction. - They'd take a load of flack for the austerity measures (they'd get this to an extent from propping up Labour but nothing like as much).
There is all the difference in the world between being a SNP government that does deals with the Tories and being an SNP minority party that does deals with a Tory government.
I'd agree with you in general re: propping up a government
However, I could see a one-time SuperMax/EVEL deal being acceptable to SNP voters: they get the best deal for themselves that they could possibly negotiate.
Anyone else worried that Ed Miliband might outperform expectations in the first "debate" on Thursday?
Miliband has always been good at Q and A.
The only worry is he is bring interviewed by a Tory.
Indeed. Surely Dave should be interviewed by a self-confessed Labour supporter. The bias in the current arrangement is outrageous.
It is hosted by Paxman and Burley it is not? Kay Burley spent many a weekend at Chequers when Tony Blair was in power.
I personally wouldn't have had Paxman, not only because of all this rumbling about being Tory candidate for mayor, but he is past his peak / lost his interest in the game.
Has Kay Burley said she is a Labour supporter? If so, that would balance out Paxman.
Anyone else worried that Ed Miliband might outperform expectations in the first "debate" on Thursday?
Miliband has always been good at Q and A.
The only worry is he is bring interviewed by a Tory.
Indeed. Surely Dave should be interviewed by a self-confessed Labour supporter. The bias in the current arrangement is outrageous.
It is hosted by Paxman and Burley it is not? Kay Burley spent many a weekend at Chequers when Tony Blair was in power.
I personally wouldn't have had Paxman, not only because of all this rumbling about being Tory candidate for mayor, but he is past his peak / lost his interest in the game.
Has Kay Burley said she is a Labour supporter? If so, that would balance out Paxman.
She is / was a huge fan of Tony Blair....
"Kay Burley is very proud of her former friendships in the corridors of power. ‘We were as likely to have the Prime Minister on the phone as the window cleaner saying he wanted to come round,’ the Sky News presenter boasts. ‘We’d get invited to Chequers for the weekend or we’d be in Downing Street.’ "
You can go and check for yourself how many weekends she spent at Chequers, its not a huge secret.
I personally would prefer the best interviewers to do the job. Neither Paxman nor Burley are, regardless of their political leanings.
" Speaking of tricky situations - Ed Miliband is in Scotland this morning. He'll no doubt be question on the Salmond remarks (jumped on by the right-wing press) that the SNP would try and get concessions to a Labour budget, and back Labour on a vote by vote basis. One things Salmond wants is for HS2 to start in Scotland, but using infrastructure projects as bartering chips seems like the opposite of good government. And it's worth noting - again - that the SNP worked with the Tories from 2007-2011 in the Scottish Parliament, and that between 2005 and 2010, SNP MPs voted with the Tories on 88% of Finance Bills.
I'm not saying they're Tartan Tories - but I am saying that the idea that they won't work with the Tories is fanciful. And Anthony Painter outlined an all too-plausible Tory/SNP deal this weekend. A new ICM poll this morning shows just how far Scottish Labour have fallen, with the SNP still holding a 16 point lead."
There is no chance whatsoever of the SNP propping up the Conservatives in Westminster.
- Sturgeon has explicitly ruled it out. - It would in a stroke alienate all the culturally anti-Tory voters they've just picked up from Labour. - It would run counter to all their current policy direction. - They'd take a load of flack for the austerity measures (they'd get this to an extent from propping up Labour but nothing like as much).
There is all the difference in the world between being a SNP government that does deals with the Tories and being an SNP minority party that does deals with a Tory government.
I'd agree with you in general re: propping up a government
However, I could see a one-time SuperMax/EVEL deal being acceptable to SNP voters: they get the best deal for themselves that they could possibly negotiate.
You need to get out of the mentality of viewing various deals in reasonable terms.
Anything which keeps Dave in won't be done by the Nats, even another referendum in 2016 combined with FFA (Which won't be offered).
Labour are more likely to abstain the Queen's speech with a "Conservatives have more seats, we lost; it's time to take our defeat with good grace" than the SNP.
"7. Better dress in theatres "Ukip will encourage a return to proper dress for major hotels, restaurants and theatres – smarter dress is part of Britishness, although it is also a British virtue to encourage innovation in fashion.". (2010 manifesto)"
Would you like a wager that this will NOT appear in the 2015 manifesto?
Boo hoo - poor Nige - he's so hard done by - he should be allowed to pick on all these people , throw bricks at them and have no comeback.
Don't worry about Nigel, UKIP's BFFs Britain First are going to sort out anyone who attacks Farage.
@V4VixVendetta: #BritainFirst Going to intimidate families in their own homes by showing them that intimidating families is wrong http://t.co/LROjxReCUu
I wasn't aware it was Conservative policy to condone harassment of parliamentary candidates for promoting the platform of their (legal) party. By all means harangue him, heckle him, and take him to task for his views. People that attempt to assault politicians of any party should be put before the beak.
It isn't. Yesterday we saw idiots being violent and undemocratic.
The disturbing thing is UKIP are attracting similar idiots
well if the Law is a la carte why wouldn't they ?
Look on the bright side. England is becoming more like Northern Ireland every day.
I'll buy you a bowler hat and we can pick on Neil.
I have a bowler hat. Definitely my worst fashion faux pas
@tnewtondunn: Revealing column by @Kevin_Maguire today; risk-averse Mili now happy to come 2nd at #GE2015 and take No10 when Cam's Queen's Speech falls.
This would take any (faint) pressure of the SNP. They would no longer be handing power to the Tories by voting down a Labour government, they would in effect be calling a new election. Effectively Miliband would be playing with his weak hand visible to Nicola Sturgeon.
Actually at what point do Labour (In Scotland) change their line from "The biggest party forms the Government" to "We won't form a Government if we aren't the biggest party"...
Boo hoo - poor Nige - he's so hard done by - he should be allowed to pick on all these people , throw bricks at them and have no comeback.
Don't worry about Nigel, UKIP's BFFs Britain First are going to sort out anyone who attacks Farage.
@V4VixVendetta: #BritainFirst Going to intimidate families in their own homes by showing them that intimidating families is wrong http://t.co/LROjxReCUu
I wasn't aware it was Conservative policy to condone harassment of parliamentary candidates for promoting the platform of their (legal) party. By all means harangue him, heckle him, and take him to task for his views. People that attempt to assault politicians of any party should be put before the beak.
It isn't. Yesterday we saw idiots being violent and undemocratic.
The disturbing thing is UKIP are attracting similar idiots
well if the Law is a la carte why wouldn't they ?
Look on the bright side. England is becoming more like Northern Ireland every day.
I'll buy you a bowler hat and we can pick on Neil.
I have a bowler hat. Definitely my worst fashion faux pas
Was it a Clockwork Orange fancy dress ?
You know me so well.
It was the chance to wear a codpiece and make-up that gave it away. :-)
@georgeeaton Posted at 12:03 tweets: Worrying for the Tories that the Budget hasn't resulted in even the temporary poll bounce that they won in 2013 and 2014.
1. Household debt deleveraging appears to be over. Now stands at around 145% of income, and has been stable at that level for at least a year I think.
2. The OBR forecasts a large increase in household debt, to above the pre-crisis peak by 2020.
The second point is interesting, because the very first forecasts from the OBR in 2010 also involved UK GDP growth being driven by an increase in household debt, which did not come to pass, probably explaining quite a bit of the failure of Osborne's deficit reduction.
Thus the economic outlook for the UK appears to stand on a choice between increasing household debt, or increasing government debt. This is not a healthy situation.
Government debt-to-GDP is going to start falling sooner than people expect, as:
1. GDP is tracking higher 2. The sale of stakes in Lloyds and RBS, continued unwind of nationalised assets 3. The pro-cyclical effect of growth reducing spending, and increasing the tax take
My naive reading though is that the OBR are expecting household debt and household incomes to both grow strongly. If they don't then that puts 1 and 3 in your list at risk, and government debt keeps on rising, does it not?
If they do then we're just replacing government debt with household debt, and that didn't work out too well for us in earlier years.
It isn't necessary to remember Sheffield. Salmond organized street parties celebrating a Yes victory days before his historic defeat.
Also worth noting that the SNP are polling in the high 40's. The majority of Scots do not support the SNP, it is the FPTP system that will deliver the seats.
An absolute majority of Scotland votes for a Pro-Independence party now. Every poll demonstrates this - SNP + Green + SSP + Solidarity is over 50%.
Six months too late! Couldn't persuade them for the vote of a lifetime.
It's certainly delayed the inevitable but nothing is lost and the second referendum is just around the corner.
It will be interesting to see if the SNP use the momentum to call the second referendum in 2017 or if they wait till 18 or 19. Personally I prefer 2017 as the demographics alone will already be a Yes win even before you factor in the continued polling growth.
I suspect they will probably go for 2018 though.
This second referendum will be one not sanctioned by London?
Interesting.....
There will not be a second referendum.
There is no mechanism and no method by which you can stop it.
The precedent has already been set. And in the UK, with an unwritten constitution, precedent is everything.
The precedent is that Westminster has to agree to a referendum. Obviously, one can be organised without Westminster co-operation, but the result then has to be implemented. And there is no way that can be done without Westminster.
You're not thinking through what your saying. Your own sentence tells the answer even though it's not what you mean.
The precedent is that Westminster has to agree to a referendum.
Say it with the right stress on the right words. has to
This may help with your understanding of precedent
" Speaking of tricky situations - Ed Miliband is in Scotland this morning. He'll no doubt be question on the Salmond remarks (jumped on by the right-wing press) that the SNP would try and get concessions to a Labour budget, and back Labour on a vote by vote basis. One things Salmond wants is for HS2 to start in Scotland, but using infrastructure projects as bartering chips seems like the opposite of good government. And it's worth noting - again - that the SNP worked with the Tories from 2007-2011 in the Scottish Parliament, and that between 2005 and 2010, SNP MPs voted with the Tories on 88% of Finance Bills.
I'm not saying they're Tartan Tories - but I am saying that the idea that they won't work with the Tories is fanciful. And Anthony Painter outlined an all too-plausible Tory/SNP deal this weekend. A new ICM poll this morning shows just how far Scottish Labour have fallen, with the SNP still holding a 16 point lead."
There is no chance whatsoever of the SNP propping up the Conservatives in Westminster.
- Sturgeon has explicitly ruled it out. - It would in a stroke alienate all the culturally anti-Tory voters they've just picked up from Labour. - It would run counter to all their current policy direction. - They'd take a load of flack for the austerity measures (they'd get this to an extent from propping up Labour but nothing like as much).
There is all the difference in the world between being a SNP government that does deals with the Tories and being an SNP minority party that does deals with a Tory government.
I'd agree with you in general re: propping up a government
However, I could see a one-time SuperMax/EVEL deal being acceptable to SNP voters: they get the best deal for themselves that they could possibly negotiate.
You need to get out of the mentality of viewing various deals in reasonable terms.
Anything which keeps Dave in won't be done by the Nats, even another referendum in 2016 combined with FFA (Which won't be offered).
Labour are more likely to abstain the Queen's speech with a "Conservatives have more seats, we lost; it's time to take our defeat with good grace" than the SNP.
Anyone else worried that Ed Miliband might outperform expectations in the first "debate" on Thursday?
Miliband has always been good at Q and A.
The only worry is he is bring interviewed by a Tory.
Indeed. Surely Dave should be interviewed by a self-confessed Labour supporter. The bias in the current arrangement is outrageous.
It is hosted by Paxman and Burley it is not? Kay Burley spent many a weekend at Chequers when Tony Blair was in power.
I personally wouldn't have had Paxman, not only because of all this rumbling about being Tory candidate for mayor, but he is past his peak / lost his interest in the game.
Has Kay Burley said she is a Labour supporter? If so, that would balance out Paxman.
She is / was a huge fan of Tony Blair....
"Kay Burley is very proud of her former friendships in the corridors of power. ‘We were as likely to have the Prime Minister on the phone as the window cleaner saying he wanted to come round,’ the Sky News presenter boasts. ‘We’d get invited to Chequers for the weekend or we’d be in Downing Street.’ "
You can go and check for yourself how many weekends she spent at Chequers, its not a huge secret.
I personally would prefer the best interviewers to do the job. Neither Paxman nor Burley are, regardless of their political leanings.
Kay Burley was literally having an orgasm when broadcasting the Brown-Duffy episode.
Populus: Sampling Fri-Sun. Labour slightly flattered this time by higher certainty to vote, but basically it's a tie/tiny Lab lead as per usual. Intrigued by the 1% who are voting for someone other than Con, Lab, LD, UKIP, Green, SNP, Plaid, or BNP - some people are just so hard to please. Respect? Monster Raving Loony? Merbyon?
Like many journalists, I'm puzzled by Ed Miliband's decision to take part in the 16h April debate with Nigel Farage, Natalie Bennett, Leanne Wood and Nicola Sturgeon. I'd have thought that would be a format he'd want to avoid at all costs, especially at a critical time in the campaign.
A remark which shows you've not thought about the matter.
Leaving the EU but selling, for example, financial services into it will require observance of all regulations and standards applicable in the EU. Just like now, except that we won't be able to contribute to what goes in the standard.
If the EU comes up with some standard that makes, oh, commodity futures markets basically unworkable - which is quite possible since the other 26 countries have perhaps 2 or 3 commodity futures markets so nobody much will care if their commodities industry disappeared - then that bit of our economy is out of business.
Likewise anything else we wanted to sell.
British citizens retired to Spain will find themselves chucked out like Italian bankers will be chucked out of the City. Unless, of course, the free movement of peoples bit continues.
This is a good example of what will likely happen in your commodity business example.
Anyone else worried that Ed Miliband might outperform expectations in the first "debate" on Thursday?
Miliband has always been good at Q and A.
The only worry is he is bring interviewed by a Tory.
Indeed. Surely Dave should be interviewed by a self-confessed Labour supporter. The bias in the current arrangement is outrageous.
It is hosted by Paxman and Burley it is not? Kay Burley spent many a weekend at Chequers when Tony Blair was in power.
I personally wouldn't have had Paxman, not only because of all this rumbling about being Tory candidate for mayor, but he is past his peak / lost his interest in the game.
Has Kay Burley said she is a Labour supporter? If so, that would balance out Paxman.
She is / was a huge fan of Tony Blair....
"Kay Burley is very proud of her former friendships in the corridors of power. ‘We were as likely to have the Prime Minister on the phone as the window cleaner saying he wanted to come round,’ the Sky News presenter boasts. ‘We’d get invited to Chequers for the weekend or we’d be in Downing Street.’ "
You can go and check for yourself how many weekends she spent at Chequers, its not a huge secret.
I personally would prefer the best interviewers to do the job. Neither Paxman nor Burley are, regardless of their political leanings.
Kay Burley was literally having an orgasm when broadcasting the Brown-Duffy episode.
She knows which side of her bread is buttered.
By the same token, I can link to a million youtube clips of Paxman completely destroying Tories.
It a dull argument, as neither should be doing the debates, as they aren't the best people for the job.
Like many journalists, I'm puzzled by Ed Miliband's decision to take part in the 16h April debate with Nigel Farage, Natalie Bennett, Leanne Wood and Nicola Sturgeon. I'd have thought that would be a format he'd want to avoid at all costs, especially at a critical time in the campaign.
It's a win-win.
They all get the chance to shout evil Tory and then Ed goes for the sympathy vote as Nicola orders him around.
Anyone else worried that Ed Miliband might outperform expectations in the first "debate" on Thursday?
Miliband has always been good at Q and A.
The only worry is he is bring interviewed by a Tory.
Indeed. Surely Dave should be interviewed by a self-confessed Labour supporter. The bias in the current arrangement is outrageous.
It is hosted by Paxman and Burley it is not? Kay Burley spent many a weekend at Chequers when Tony Blair was in power.
I personally wouldn't have had Paxman, not only because of all this rumbling about being Tory candidate for mayor, but he is past his peak / lost his interest in the game.
Has Kay Burley said she is a Labour supporter? If so, that would balance out Paxman.
She is / was a huge fan of Tony Blair....
"Kay Burley is very proud of her former friendships in the corridors of power. ‘We were as likely to have the Prime Minister on the phone as the window cleaner saying he wanted to come round,’ the Sky News presenter boasts. ‘We’d get invited to Chequers for the weekend or we’d be in Downing Street.’ "
You can go and check for yourself how many weekends she spent at Chequers, its not a huge secret.
I personally would prefer the best interviewers to do the job. Neither Paxman nor Burley are, regardless of their political leanings.
Pretty much the entire Tory high command are huge fans of Tony Blair. It does not make them Labour supporters. Paxman, though, is a self-confessed Tory.
Anyone else worried that Ed Miliband might outperform expectations in the first "debate" on Thursday?
Miliband has always been good at Q and A.
The only worry is he is bring interviewed by a Tory.
Indeed. Surely Dave should be interviewed by a self-confessed Labour supporter. The bias in the current arrangement is outrageous.
It is hosted by Paxman and Burley it is not? Kay Burley spent many a weekend at Chequers when Tony Blair was in power.
I personally wouldn't have had Paxman, not only because of all this rumbling about being Tory candidate for mayor, but he is past his peak / lost his interest in the game.
Has Kay Burley said she is a Labour supporter? If so, that would balance out Paxman.
She is / was a huge fan of Tony Blair....
"Kay Burley is very proud of her former friendships in the corridors of power. ‘We were as likely to have the Prime Minister on the phone as the window cleaner saying he wanted to come round,’ the Sky News presenter boasts. ‘We’d get invited to Chequers for the weekend or we’d be in Downing Street.’ "
You can go and check for yourself how many weekends she spent at Chequers, its not a huge secret.
I personally would prefer the best interviewers to do the job. Neither Paxman nor Burley are, regardless of their political leanings.
Kay Burley was literally having an orgasm when broadcasting the Brown-Duffy episode.
She knows which side of her bread is buttered.
By the same token, I can link to a million youtube clips of Paxman completely destroying Tories.
It a dull argument, as neither should be doing the debates, as they aren't the best people for the job.
Kay Burley is a floating voter.
She just floats to whichever side her boss supports.
1. Household debt deleveraging appears to be over. Now stands at around 145% of income, and has been stable at that level for at least a year I think.
2. The OBR forecasts a large increase in household debt, to above the pre-crisis peak by 2020.
The second point is interesting, because the very first forecasts from the OBR in 2010 also involved UK GDP growth being driven by an increase in household debt, which did not come to pass, probably explaining quite a bit of the failure of Osborne's deficit reduction.
Thus the economic outlook for the UK appears to stand on a choice between increasing household debt, or increasing government debt. This is not a healthy situation.
But isn't it just the mathematical consequence of running a BOP deficit?
Intrigued by the 1% who are voting for someone other than Con, Lab, LD, UKIP, Green, SNP, Plaid, or BNP - some people are just so hard to please. Respect? Monster Raving Loony? Merbyon?
Anyone else worried that Ed Miliband might outperform expectations in the first "debate" on Thursday?
Miliband has always been good at Q and A.
The only worry is he is bring interviewed by a Tory.
Indeed. Surely Dave should be interviewed by a self-confessed Labour supporter. The bias in the current arrangement is outrageous.
It is hosted by Paxman and Burley it is not? Kay Burley spent many a weekend at Chequers when Tony Blair was in power.
I personally wouldn't have had Paxman, not only because of all this rumbling about being Tory candidate for mayor, but he is past his peak / lost his interest in the game.
Has Kay Burley said she is a Labour supporter? If so, that would balance out Paxman.
She is / was a huge fan of Tony Blair....
"Kay Burley is very proud of her former friendships in the corridors of power. ‘We were as likely to have the Prime Minister on the phone as the window cleaner saying he wanted to come round,’ the Sky News presenter boasts. ‘We’d get invited to Chequers for the weekend or we’d be in Downing Street.’ "
You can go and check for yourself how many weekends she spent at Chequers, its not a huge secret.
I personally would prefer the best interviewers to do the job. Neither Paxman nor Burley are, regardless of their political leanings.
Pretty much the entire Tory high command are huge fans of Tony Blair. It does not make them Labour supporters. Paxman, though, is a self-confessed Tory.
Does that mean you'll interrupt his Sunday lunch or something.
If we ban presenters for their political views there'll be nobody on TV.
Like many journalists, I'm puzzled by Ed Miliband's decision to take part in the 16h April debate with Nigel Farage, Natalie Bennett, Leanne Wood and Nicola Sturgeon. I'd have thought that would be a format he'd want to avoid at all costs, especially at a critical time in the campaign.
Self-awareness is not Ed's greatest strength. I guess he believes he can out-debate Bennett and Sturgeon, and so win a few votes back from the SNP and the Greens.
Like many journalists, I'm puzzled by Ed Miliband's decision to take part in the 16h April debate with Nigel Farage, Natalie Bennett, Leanne Wood and Nicola Sturgeon. I'd have thought that would be a format he'd want to avoid at all costs, especially at a critical time in the campaign.
It's a win-win.
They all get the chance to shout evil Tory and then Ed goes for the sympathy vote as Nicola orders him around.
Hmm, maybe. More likely they all get the chance to shout 'evil Tory cuts' (with Nige grinning in the background and looking avuncular), and then Natalie, Leanne and Nicola gang up on Ed pointing out that Labour would do much the same. Admittedly Ms Bennett might make Ed look vaguely sensible but Nicola is a different kettle of fishwife altogether.
1. Household debt deleveraging appears to be over. Now stands at around 145% of income, and has been stable at that level for at least a year I think.
2. The OBR forecasts a large increase in household debt, to above the pre-crisis peak by 2020.
The second point is interesting, because the very first forecasts from the OBR in 2010 also involved UK GDP growth being driven by an increase in household debt, which did not come to pass, probably explaining quite a bit of the failure of Osborne's deficit reduction.
Thus the economic outlook for the UK appears to stand on a choice between increasing household debt, or increasing government debt. This is not a healthy situation.
But isn't it just the mathematical consequence of running a BOP deficit?
How about the radical thought of working and having a positive BOP ?
Clearly it suits the Tories to talk up Salmond controlling Miliband, just as it suits Labour to talk up the Tories raising VAT.
One has a basis in fact, the other is just a groundless Labour smear....
Groundless in the sense that the last two times the Tories won an election they put up VAT after saying that they wouldn't?
In the same way that every Labour government has left office with a high national debt than when it came to power, and worse unemployment.
I would expect the Tories to make such points strongly.
The difference is one is a generic "competence" argument, the other is a specific accusation that they are continuing to make despite denials: i.e. they are claiming that the Tories have a ultra secret plan and are lying to the electorate about it.
You mean the way they denied it in 1992 and 2010?
Presumably, on the same basis we can expect the Tories not to claim that Labour will do stuff they have specifically denied they will do.
The Tories said they had 'no plans'. Certainly disingenious, but not possible to prove it was a lie.
Comments
23/03/2015 11:16
Why is Nigel Farage considered fair game? tgr.ph/1HrAg6U
'I’ve often worried about Farage’s safety. British politics is tense at the moment: this achingly dull election campaign masks inequality, racial tension, cultural anxiety and real hate. Politicians have been attacked: George Galloway was assaulted. Farage was forced to hide from a mob during the Scottish election campaign – and the reaction to that episode was oddly tolerant. Sarah Champion MP described the fact that a crowd "trapped" him inside a Ukip shop when touring Rotherham as "hilarious". There’s a feeling among some that Farage sort of brings this on himself, while the various causes of those who shout him down are so right-on, so compassionate, so supercalifragilisticexpialidocious that sympathy has often fallen with the protestors rather than the man with an elected office trying to exercise his right to canvass.
And what exactly is he supposed to have done to attract such bile? Nigel Farage is guilty of the crime of having an opinion. But even if you find his opinion to be offensive, it’s still odd to want to drive this man in particular off the national stage. A) Farage has absolutely no institutional power whatsoever in Britain and so hounding him is like kicking a puppy. And b) most of his rhetoric and policies have been taken up by Labour and the Tories – people with genuine power yet who don’t grace the Far Left’s hit list. And if the families of Miliband and Cameron were so targeted, we’d all be talking about a "crisis in our democracy". Not so when it’s the Farages. The whisper will be going around London right now: “He created this political atmosphere. It’s sort of his fault”.'
The kippers in essence want to stop people moving to the UK if they are not going economically useful, or if they are going to be arriving in socially divisive numbers. Spain has always been happy for British pensioners to go there and spend their pensions into the local economy. I suspect they are rather less happy about our unemployed sponging off their state and rightly so.
Bradford East though ?!
Ashcroft numbers : -
SNP 43%
Libs 26%
Lab 14%
Tory 11%
Also the Greens aren't standing so a big chunk of the 6% other will go to the SNP. If both Tory and Labour withdrew, stay at homes would still leave the Liberals short (and that's without considering SNP second preferences).
@V4VixVendetta: #BritainFirst
Going to intimidate families in their own homes by showing them that intimidating families is wrong http://t.co/LROjxReCUu
Also lest we forget..
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/ukip/11489357/10-policies-Ukip-would-prefer-to-forget.html
"7. Better dress in theatres
"Ukip will encourage a return to proper dress for major hotels, restaurants and theatres – smarter dress is part of Britishness, although it is also a British virtue to encourage innovation in fashion.". (2010 manifesto)"
Aside from anything else, people voting for Mr Farage’s party are just going to knuckle down even more stubbornly and vote for their guy. And incidents like yesterday trying to put people off? Congratulations guys, you just made me want to vote UKIP.'
http://www.schpunk.co.uk/by-telling-me-not-to-vote-ukip-youre-making-me-vote-ukip/
I believe the phrase was "no current plans" - so not a strict denial, but certainly misleading
1. Household debt deleveraging appears to be over. Now stands at around 145% of income, and has been stable at that level for at least a year I think.
2. The OBR forecasts a large increase in household debt, to above the pre-crisis peak by 2020.
The second point is interesting, because the very first forecasts from the OBR in 2010 also involved UK GDP growth being driven by an increase in household debt, which did not come to pass, probably explaining quite a bit of the failure of Osborne's deficit reduction.
Thus the economic outlook for the UK appears to stand on a choice between increasing household debt, or increasing government debt. This is not a healthy situation.
“We therefore conclude that any direction to a Special Adviser to conduct telephone canvassing was misguided, and that advice that such a direction or such canvassing was permitted under their Code and contract of employment was wrong in law… We recommend that Special Advisers should never again be confronted with directions or informal pressure that puts them in breach of the Code and of their contracts of employment.”
http://order-order.com/2015/03/23/top-may-ally-cleared-pasc-rules-tory-spad-telecanvassing-was-unlawful/
The disturbing thing is UKIP are attracting similar idiots
It might affect future Britons who wished to live overseas in the rest of the EU. Probably some sort of income test would be applied for retirees and points system for workers.
Paxman towards the end of his time on Newsnight, I don't think he bothered to read up about anything. He wasn't on top of his brief at all.
John Major's government, for example, didn't sign up to the Social Chapter, and he didn't have to leave the EU in consequence. Blair's capitulard government promptly did so and gained nothing. It's clear that both decisions, on an EU matter, were unaffected by our EU membership.
Likewise Lawson and Major's governments weren't signed up to the euro, but both came a hideous cropper from implementing the EU's exchange rate policy.
Things like the CAP are features of EU membership, so it's clear that absent the latter, there wouldn't be the former. I would call those treaty obligations, though, that kinda follow from the treaty.
Eg the Treaty of Tilsit reduced Prussia to 5 million heads and limited the army to 42,000 men. The statutes reducing the army to that size weren't French-decreed laws but consequences of the Treaty.
Is there anything in the way of domestic legislation that the EU has led and that a Westminster government would not eventually have adopted anyway? I struggle to think of many. Looking at the Tories, Labour and the LibDems, which of them opposes and would never have implemented the EU's green agenda or its human rights agenda? The instant any non-UKIP-inclined party got into power we'd have been signed up to the lot.
I haven't studied the matter at length but I suspect that this has always been the case EU or no EU. An obvious example of pols basing laws on what other pols think is the abolition of the death penalty, where there is no party one can vote for that would bring it back. I wouldn't choose to but many would, to whom no political party is listening.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-32015394
That's not to say they won't retain some seats with a healthy majority, but we just can't be certain of which ones.
The only worry is he is bring interviewed by a Tory.
1. GDP is tracking higher
2. The sale of stakes in Lloyds and RBS, continued unwind of nationalised assets
3. The pro-cyclical effect of growth reducing spending, and increasing the tax take
Presumably, on the same basis we can expect the Tories not to claim that Labour will do stuff they have specifically denied they will do.
Tic toc for alot of SLAB MPs...
Does it not occur to you that there might be countries who'd sign a free trade agreement with 27 countries in one go but who wouldn't bother doing so with just one?
23/03/2015 11:44
Today's @timesredbox poll: Tactical voting could help Lib Dems and UKIP - y-g.co/1xcNaST pic.twitter.com/jRLwGZOrWS
*burnishes crystal ball*
I personally wouldn't have had Paxman, not only because of all this rumbling about being Tory candidate for mayor, but he is past his peak / lost his interest in the game.
You really are scraping the barrel.
/twitter.com/BDStanley/status/579971853877415936/photo/1
Visual disturbance...
However, I could see a one-time SuperMax/EVEL deal being acceptable to SNP voters: they get the best deal for themselves that they could possibly negotiate.
"Kay Burley is very proud of her former friendships in the corridors of power. ‘We were as likely to have the Prime Minister on the phone as the window cleaner saying he wanted to come round,’ the Sky News presenter boasts. ‘We’d get invited to Chequers for the weekend or we’d be in Downing Street.’ "
You can go and check for yourself how many weekends she spent at Chequers, its not a huge secret.
I personally would prefer the best interviewers to do the job. Neither Paxman nor Burley are, regardless of their political leanings.
They need to 'man up'
Anything which keeps Dave in won't be done by the Nats, even another referendum in 2016 combined with FFA (Which won't be offered).
Labour are more likely to abstain the Queen's speech with a "Conservatives have more seats, we lost; it's time to take our defeat with good grace" than the SNP.
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/politics/politics-headlines/miliband-rules-out-forming-a-government-2015031796342 probably more close to the truth than the Mash realises !
@LadPolitics Any chance of any markets on who will "win" the debates?
Ladbrokes Politics @LadPolitics · 1m1 minute ago
@AlastairMeeks Yep, will be there shortly. We settle on immediate YouGov debate polling.
@georgeeaton
Posted at 12:03
tweets: Worrying for the Tories that the Budget hasn't resulted in even the temporary poll bounce that they won in 2013 and 2014.
If they do then we're just replacing government debt with household debt, and that didn't work out too well for us in earlier years.
3 years of studying constitutional government helped me understand the different
http://wingsoverscotland.com/more-free-help-for-the-uk-press/#more-68721
She knows which side of her bread is buttered.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eurodollar
Commodity futures have an important role to play in the industry, and so will continue to exist.
People who wouldn't want a 2nd GE = SNP with 54/56 seats.
It a dull argument, as neither should be doing the debates, as they aren't the best people for the job.
They all get the chance to shout evil Tory and then Ed goes for the sympathy vote as Nicola orders him around.
She just floats to whichever side her boss supports.
If we ban presenters for their political views there'll be nobody on TV.
No ?
Osbornite.