If we're scratching around for unlikely Lib Dem holds, Argyll & Bute would be my thought. A high No vote means that the unionist challenger to the SNP should give a good account of himself or herself, and the Lib Dem incumbent should establish himself in that role. There are worse long shots.
If we're scratching around for unlikely Lib Dem holds, Argyll & Bute would be my thought. A high No vote means that the unionist challenger to the SNP should give a good account of himself or herself, and the Lib Dem incumbent should establish himself in that role. There are worse long shots.
Mind you, I expect him to lose.
A and B is a place where losing Trident counts against the SNP more than usual.
Can somebody please explain what the hell the Tories are doing with this paid leave for volunteering pledge?
I don't exactly know who it's appealing to, but if the Tories carry on with this bland, uninspiring, non-campaign I'll increasingly be un-arsed if they do lose!
As things stand, you'd have to say Ed deserves his crack at it because he at least is offering some sort of vision and prospectus for power, flawed though it is...
At the moment, David Cameron gives no impression that he even cares whether or not he wins. Ed Milliband does care.
Exactly how I see it currently.
I will be seething with anger for 5 years at Red Ed being PM, but at least he is showing fight and passion, and the voters are responding.
If the polls tonight remain as previous (or worse), and why wouldn't they, then surely the press will over the weekend be reporting on disgruntled Tory MPs plotting and scheming, even if none puts their head above the parapet yet. Or perhaps they might be prepared to do so - the odd whackjob, and let's face it, there's plenty of them on the Tory benches....
Does Dave know he's lost, the UKIP bubble having failed to burst, and that no amount of last-minute cramming can as a result save his bacon this time (compared to in 2010, which just about got him over the line with the LDs' help)?
Only one poll tonight, I think, Yougov. I don't know what we'll get on Sunday, apart from Yougov and Opinium.
I'm in the centre of town, although due to daft electoral geography it's actually Edinburgh East. My previous comment was referring more to people living in Edinburgh SW though, although I could guess it applies to parts of W and S also.
Like I said, anecdotal though.
@Plato: no need to welcome, I've been here since 2004 :-)
Could the LibDems get 5 Scottish seats, as Moneyweek is predicting?
Probably not.
But if they did, which would be the five?
I'd go for:
1. Orkney & Shetland 2. Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross 3. Ross, Skye and Lochebar 4. Inverness & Nairn 5. Gordon
Why?
Well, despite the views of some of the Nats on here, I think Alistair Carmichael has a strong personal vote, and the SNP did very poorly in O&S. Scotland-gate resonates with... people who would have voted Nationalist anyway, so I think it will have a much smaller effect than people think.
Viscount Thurso has tirelessly worked Caithness, and is genuinely popular. He is probably the only LibDem who will pick up some (grudging) "yes" voters. Although he is notionally less safe than Charles Kennedy, I think he is more likely to win his seat.
I suspect Charles Kennedy will lose on the night. He is yesterday's man, and I think he will soon be out of a job. But, if the LibDems did get five Scottish seats, this would be one.
Inverness. What am I thinking? I think Danny will benefit from Conservative tactical voting, and will hold more of his LibDem base than some. The ire of the Nats is so great, I wonder if he might just hold on. (I've not actually bet on him, even at current odds. But I do wonder...)
Gordon. Gordon??? If there is one thing that might motivate anti-SNP tactical voting it's Alex Salmond. I therefore cautiously make that the fifth improbable LibDem hold in Scotland.
I would go with Dunbartonshire EAst as a certain LD hold. Just to piss on the chips of all those people who had the smegging good fortune and sense to listen to antifrank back in August.
If I was living in a LD-SNP marginal,as a Lab member I could vote tactically. Would it be: a) A vote for the LibDems, to bolster the chances of the Con-LD coalition continuing? b) A vote for the SNP, who have vowed to support a Labour minority government?
Bit obvious, innit?
It would depend how strongly that voter felt about Scotland remaining in the UK.
Mr. Me, the electoral system should aim to (as often as possible) provide the best result for the country, not pander to the 'all must have prizes' approach of modern day school sports days.
Can somebody please explain what the hell the Tories are doing with this paid leave for volunteering pledge?
I don't exactly know who it's appealing to, but if the Tories carry on with this bland, uninspiring, non-campaign I'll increasingly be un-arsed if they do lose!
As things stand, you'd have to say Ed deserves his crack at it because he at least is offering some sort of vision and prospectus for power, flawed though it is...
I don't get it either.
Nor me forcing business and the public sector to volunteer seems odd. But then again from a Conservative point of view does freezing prices.
Electric freezes bad rail freezes good.
Hows about the forced volunteering then ?
Do you agree with business and the public sector been forced to do that. How much will it cost ? If labour had come out with that , it would have been derided on here..
Tories desperately trying to liberate pandas from Edinburgh Zoo
132 elected Tories in Scotland!!!
The Scottish Conservative vote looks like it could be one of the most hopelessly inefficient ever at this GE.
I think FPTP is now a dead duck, and this will be its last GE (unless we end up having a second GE in 2015 or in 2016).
I've heard that guff at every election since 1979...
It will only change when those in power see it as being to their advantage, say for example when a Labour party sees it's heartlands turning against it in droves ;-).
Whilst either of the big two think they can win a majority it won't change.
it will only change when there have been no winners for sufficiently long enough that its in everyone's advantage. The problem being the FPTP can still turn up a majority with a very low vote percentage in a multi party system.
Agreed, but there have been no winners in 2010, probably in 2015. How long is long enough? Of course FPTP is now the friend of the SNP and probably now doesn't make a huge difference to the LibDems. Labour and the Tories might like to be genuinely national parties at some stage, but their current MPs would have been elected under FPTP and so would lose out even if their party gained from a change.
Can somebody please explain what the hell the Tories are doing with this paid leave for volunteering pledge?
I don't exactly know who it's appealing to, but if the Tories carry on with this bland, uninspiring, non-campaign I'll increasingly be un-arsed if they do lose!
As things stand, you'd have to say Ed deserves his crack at it because he at least is offering some sort of vision and prospectus for power, flawed though it is...
I don't get it either.
Nor me forcing business and the public sector to volunteer seems odd. But then again from a Conservative point of view does freezing prices.
Electric freezes bad rail freezes good.
Hows about the forced volunteering then ?
Do you agree with business and the public sector been forced to do that. How much will it cost ? If labour had come out with that , it would have been derided on here..
Tories desperately trying to liberate pandas from Edinburgh Zoo
132 elected Tories in Scotland!!!
The Scottish Conservative vote looks like it could be one of the most hopelessly inefficient ever at this GE.
I think FPTP is now a dead duck, and this will be its last GE (unless we end up having a second GE in 2015 or in 2016).
I've heard that guff at every election since 1979...
It will only change when those in power see it as being to their advantage, say for example when a Labour party sees it's heartlands turning against it in droves ;-).
Whilst either of the big two think they can win a majority it won't change.
it will only change when there have been no winners for sufficiently long enough that its in everyone's advantage. The problem being the FPTP can still turn up a majority with a very low vote percentage in a multi party system.
Agreed, but there have been no winners in 2010, probably in 2015. How long is long enough? Of course FPTP is now the friend of the SNP and probably now doesn't make a huge difference to the LibDems. Labour and the Tories might like to be genuinely national parties at some stage, but their current MPs would have been elected under FPTP and so would lose out even if their party gained from a change.
Of course, the ultimate irony is that had AV passed - and boy did I oppose it at the time and still do - we would probably be talking about Dave remaining PM!
Can somebody please explain what the hell the Tories are doing with this paid leave for volunteering pledge?
I don't exactly know who it's appealing to, but if the Tories carry on with this bland, uninspiring, non-campaign I'll increasingly be un-arsed if they do lose!
As things stand, you'd have to say Ed deserves his crack at it because he at least is offering some sort of vision and prospectus for power, flawed though it is...
I don't get it either.
Nor me forcing business and the public sector to volunteer seems odd. But then again from a Conservative point of view does freezing prices.
Electric freezes bad rail freezes good.
Hows about the forced volunteering then ?
Do you agree with business and the public sector been forced to do that. How much will it cost ? If labour had come out with that , it would have been derided on here..
It's a load of bollocks.
It may not help in the NHS if I decide to go to Scout Camp rather than clinic.
Mr. Me, the electoral system should aim to (as often as possible) provide the best result for the country, not pander to the 'all must have prizes' approach of modern day school sports days.
Mr. Andrew, welcome to the site.
While that's true, it should also be seen to give a result that is fair.
A situation where Labour (or whoever) gained an absolute majority of seats in the HoC on 25% of the votes would not be seen to be fair.
And I know you think coalitions are the work of the devil, but at a certain level of voter fragmentation they become necessary. (As an aside, there doesn't seem to be any correlation between quality of government and likelihood of single party rule worldwide.)
Can somebody please explain what the hell the Tories are doing with this paid leave for volunteering pledge?
I don't exactly know who it's appealing to, but if the Tories carry on with this bland, uninspiring, non-campaign I'll increasingly be un-arsed if they do lose!
As things stand, you'd have to say Ed deserves his crack at it because he at least is offering some sort of vision and prospectus for power, flawed though it is...
I don't get it either.
Nor me forcing business and the public sector to volunteer seems odd. But then again from a Conservative point of view does freezing prices.
Electric freezes bad rail freezes good.
Hows about the forced volunteering then ?
Do you agree with business and the public sector been forced to do that. How much will it cost ? If labour had come out with that , it would have been derided on here..
It's a load of bollocks.
It may not help in the NHS if I decide to go to Scout Camp rather than clinic.
I fear Cameron's back off pretending he's Hugh Grant in Love Actually.
I've only caught a bit of the coverage - but it has Hollywood Blockbuster written all over it as a heist. Sky tried to drill through as many inches of concrete this morning and got nowhere. It really did take the whole Easter weekend to do it.
It is already a (rather good) film with Jason Statham.
Tories desperately trying to liberate pandas from Edinburgh Zoo
132 elected Tories in Scotland!!!
The Scottish Conservative vote looks like it could be one of the most hopelessly inefficient ever at this GE.
I think FPTP is now a dead duck, and this will be its last GE (unless we end up having a second GE in 2015 or in 2016).
I've heard that guff at every election since 1979...
It will only change when those in power see it as being to their advantage, say for example when a Labour party sees it's heartlands turning against it in droves ;-).
Whilst either of the big two think they can win a majority it won't change.
it will only change when there have been no winners for sufficiently long enough that its in everyone's advantage. The problem being the FPTP can still turn up a majority with a very low vote percentage in a multi party system.
Agreed, but there have been no winners in 2010, probably in 2015. How long is long enough? Of course FPTP is now the friend of the SNP and probably now doesn't make a huge difference to the LibDems. Labour and the Tories might like to be genuinely national parties at some stage, but their current MPs would have been elected under FPTP and so would lose out even if their party gained from a change.
As long as the LDs, Labour, or the SNP see Tories+UKIP possibly being above 50%, it is NEVER going to change.
Mr. Me, the electoral system should aim to (as often as possible) provide the best result for the country, not pander to the 'all must have prizes' approach of modern day school sports days.
Mr. Andrew, welcome to the site.
But in whose opinion is it to be the best result? Why not in the opinion of the voters themselves, who are unable usually to make an overwhelming choice one way or the other? What is so difficult about fair representation? We've had a hung parliament since 2010 and a coalition government. The sky didn't fall in. On the contrary, many people would acknowledge it's been remarkably successful.
Can somebody please explain what the hell the Tories are doing with this paid leave for volunteering pledge?
I don't exactly know who it's appealing to, but if the Tories carry on with this bland, uninspiring, non-campaign I'll increasingly be un-arsed if they do lose!
As things stand, you'd have to say Ed deserves his crack at it because he at least is offering some sort of vision and prospectus for power, flawed though it is...
I don't get it either.
Nor me forcing business and the public sector to volunteer seems odd. But then again from a Conservative point of view does freezing prices.
Electric freezes bad rail freezes good.
Hows about the forced volunteering then ?
Do you agree with business and the public sector been forced to do that. How much will it cost ? If labour had come out with that , it would have been derided on here..
I think it is voluntary - BBC did a report on it this afternoon and it is amazing that over 15 million people already volunteer for charity work, school governors, and local community groups though taking time off for union work would not be allowed. The CBI have welcomed it but like all policies the detail is lacking just as Ed Miliband said he was scrapping non doms when in fact he is not, mainly adjusting some of the anomalies. The whole campaign from all sides seems very superficial at present
Mr. 1000, coalitions by necessity result in manifesto commitments becoming optional extras, and (excepting cases where there's only one valid coalition) parties deciding who governs, rather than the electorate.
Dr. Prasannan, they're still showing Battlestar Galactica. It used to be on at a reasonable time (9pm or 10pm, I think). Then they shifted it back, and now it starts at 1am, for some bizarre reason.
The recent version of Hawaii 5-0 starts on Monday, for those interested.
Mr. 1000, coalitions by necessity result in manifesto commitments becoming optional extras, and (excepting cases where there's only one valid coalition) parties deciding who governs, rather than the electorate.
But that's just fluff.
Manifesto commitments are often ignored, and things not in the manifesto introduced regardless. People often vote for a party despite its manifesto....
Eureka is. I've been enjoying it again. It's a great fun series/drama that BBT doesn't do. I didn't much like Colin in Haven much. I'm looking forward to Mr Shatner in Haven S5 second half.
I've only caught a bit of the coverage - but it has Hollywood Blockbuster written all over it as a heist. Sky tried to drill through as many inches of concrete this morning and got nowhere. It really did take the whole Easter weekend to do it.
It is already a (rather good) film with Jason Statham.
Mr. Me, the electoral system should aim to (as often as possible) provide the best result for the country, not pander to the 'all must have prizes' approach of modern day school sports days.
And I don't think that FPTP delivers the best result for the country, not least because it (a) encourages much of the electorate to vote dishonestly against a party, rather than for their preferred representative, and (b) results in regions being represented at Westminster by a single party, encouraging the parties to give up on areas they are not competitive in (see Labour in the rural Home Counties and the Conservatives in northern inner cities).
This is not about "all must have prizes", it's about recognising the glaring defects of FPTP and providing better incentives to the parties to compete for votes across the country.
Dr. Prasannan, they're still showing Battlestar Galactica. It used to be on at a reasonable time (9pm or 10pm, I think). Then they shifted it back, and now it starts at 1am, for some bizarre reason.
The recent version of Hawaii 5-0 starts on Monday, for those interested.
Tories desperately trying to liberate pandas from Edinburgh Zoo
132 elected Tories in Scotland!!!
The Scottish Conservative vote looks like it could be one of the most hopelessly inefficient ever at this GE.
I think FPTP is now a dead duck, and this will be its last GE (unless we end up having a second GE in 2015 or in 2016).
I've heard that guff at every election since 1979...
It will only change when those in power see it as being to their advantage, say for example when a Labour party sees it's heartlands turning against it in droves ;-).
Whilst either of the big two think they can win a majority it won't change.
it will only change when there have been no winners for sufficiently long enough that its in everyone's advantage. The problem being the FPTP can still turn up a majority with a very low vote percentage in a multi party system.
Agreed, but there have been no winners in 2010, probably in 2015. How long is long enough? Of course FPTP is now the friend of the SNP and probably now doesn't make a huge difference to the LibDems. Labour and the Tories might like to be genuinely national parties at some stage, but their current MPs would have been elected under FPTP and so would lose out even if their party gained from a change.
Of course, the ultimate irony is that had AV passed - and boy did I oppose it at the time and still do - we would probably be talking about Dave remaining PM!
Wait and see what happens.
In 2010 the LDs lost 3% in the last 24 hours.
It's entirely possible UKIP could fall very significantly at the very last minute - at least in Con/Lab marginals, ie seats where UKIP has no chance.
I'mm thinking of a slight issue with Channel 4's tactical question...
Presumably the Conservatives will be from places like Edinburgh, Stirling where there are enough of them to make it appear as if they have half a shot... (We know they don't but 'ahead of the SNP here' or close to kind of makes it appear you do.
So you are then asking them what would they do in Coatbridge or Glasgow NE where the perceived chance for the Conservatives is absolutely zero...
Could the LibDems get 5 Scottish seats, as Moneyweek is predicting?
Probably not.
But if they did, which would be the five?
I'd go for:
1. Orkney & Shetland 2. Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross 3. Ross, Skye and Lochebar 4. Inverness & Nairn 5. Gordon
[snip]
Swap in Fife NE for Inverness and I think you have it right.
Edit: or maybe Dunbartonshire East. Really not sure how lack of incumbency will play out in Fife.
I would have Dunbartonshire East in there too.
In Glasgow North which adjuncts to Dunbartonshire East and had a 31% Liberal vote in 2010, the Liberal share was down to 4%.
Put simply, Swinson is gone. No if's no buts. I don't think we can even expect it to be close in 2010 it was Liberal 39%, Labour 34%, Tory 15%. SNP 10% but the scale of the movement is such that the result will be SNP around 45% and Labour around 25%, Tory 15% (because Tory votes don't change in Scotland) and Liberals on 10% higher than the Liberal average due to Swinson's incumbency.
The 10% might be high
Tactical voting will not be much of an issue but where it is, it is just as likely you get situations like Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale & Tweeddale Labour voters backing the SNP to kick out the Tories as you will get people voting tactically to "stop the SNP".
Tactical voting isn't relevant in 90% of the Scottish seats where the SNP will record in excess of 45% of the vote. In reality Tactical Voting stops being relevant around 40% vote share and the SNP are well beyond there in most constituencies.
Could the LibDems get 5 Scottish seats, as Moneyweek is predicting?
Probably not.
But if they did, which would be the five?
I'd go for:
1. Orkney & Shetland 2. Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross 3. Ross, Skye and Lochebar 4. Inverness & Nairn 5. Gordon
[snip]
Swap in Fife NE for Inverness and I think you have it right.
Edit: or maybe Dunbartonshire East. Really not sure how lack of incumbency will play out in Fife.
Why is no-one talking about Edinburgh West? The LDs built their vote up to ~50% in 2005.
Crockart took a big hit in 2010 as a new candidate, but in ordinary circumstances would be expecting a large boost at this election. Surely it's safer than it looks on paper?
I have spoken to 2 different Lib Dem activists who are quite optimistic about hanging on to that seat.
They are wrong of course but it may be closer than is being assumed.
If we're scratching around for unlikely Lib Dem holds, Argyll & Bute would be my thought. A high No vote means that the unionist challenger to the SNP should give a good account of himself or herself, and the Lib Dem incumbent should establish himself in that role. There are worse long shots.
Mind you, I expect him to lose.
I think the Lib Dem may well come 4th in that seat. It is a classic case of the Unionist vote being split 3 ways and the SNP coming through. You can make a better case for either Labour or the Tories being the Unionist champion than the Lib Dems on current polling.
Could the LibDems get 5 Scottish seats, as Moneyweek is predicting?
Probably not.
But if they did, which would be the five?
I'd go for:
1. Orkney & Shetland 2. Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross 3. Ross, Skye and Lochebar 4. Inverness & Nairn 5. Gordon
[snip]
Swap in Fife NE for Inverness and I think you have it right.
Edit: or maybe Dunbartonshire East. Really not sure how lack of incumbency will play out in Fife.
Why is no-one talking about Edinburgh West? The LDs built their vote up to ~50% in 2005.
Crockart took a big hit in 2010 as a new candidate, but in ordinary circumstances would be expecting a large boost at this election. Surely it's safer than it looks on paper?
Tories desperately trying to liberate pandas from Edinburgh Zoo
132 elected Tories in Scotland!!!
The Scottish Conservative vote looks like it could be one of the most hopelessly inefficient ever at this GE.
With Ed getting 5 years as PM on the back of a probably equal par vote share with (or probably slightly less than) the Tories, I suspect I won't be the only Tory supporting electoral reform after May 7th.
I think FPTP is now a dead duck, and this will be its last GE (unless we end up having a second GE in 2015 or in 2016).
Given the split that now exists on the Right, those of us of a centre-right inclination NEED electoral reform to happen in order not to be disenfranchised from UK politics for possibly the rest of our lives!
Is that the distant clip-clop of the bolting horse to be heard beneath the squeak of the stable door being bolted?
Many on the left said the same from 1979 to 1997. I think a clamour for voting reform should now come from both sides, including UKIP.
The Electoral Reform Society claims that over 50% of voters are disenfranchised by living in safe seats. I've been disenfranchised for over 40 years.
Well you could always move - if you think it that important.
Personally I wouldn't say that the voters are disenfranchised. In safe seats the overwhelming MAJORITY vote for a candidate and that is the one they get. Surely that is Democracy at its best?
If we're scratching around for unlikely Lib Dem holds, Argyll & Bute would be my thought. A high No vote means that the unionist challenger to the SNP should give a good account of himself or herself, and the Lib Dem incumbent should establish himself in that role. There are worse long shots.
Mind you, I expect him to lose.
A and B is a place where losing Trident counts against the SNP more than usual.
Faslane is in West Dunbartonshire - which voted Yes despite the 400 jobs at risk.
The worst case of disenfranchisement happened in Inverness in 1992 - when 74% of the electorate were disenfranchised - this was a 4-way marginal - hardly a safe seat!
I've only caught a bit of the coverage - but it has Hollywood Blockbuster written all over it as a heist. Sky tried to drill through as many inches of concrete this morning and got nowhere. It really did take the whole Easter weekend to do it.
It is already a (rather good) film with Jason Statham.
Great post from Miles King exploring the Implications of the Tories interest in 'volunteering'. As a volunteer myself I'm not sure that these proposals really are for volunteering. Just more fluff and nonsense.
Comments
Mind you, I expect him to lose.
Or am I mixing up Kulaks and Daleks again?
Only one poll tonight, I think, Yougov. I don't know what we'll get on Sunday, apart from Yougov and Opinium.
Like I said, anecdotal though.
@Plato: no need to welcome, I've been here since 2004 :-)
Mr. Andrew, welcome to the site.
Do you agree with business and the public sector been forced to do that.
How much will it cost ?
If labour had come out with that , it would have been derided on here..
Of course FPTP is now the friend of the SNP and probably now doesn't make a huge difference to the LibDems.
Labour and the Tories might like to be genuinely national parties at some stage, but their current MPs would have been elected under FPTP and so would lose out even if their party gained from a change.
A situation where Labour (or whoever) gained an absolute majority of seats in the HoC on 25% of the votes would not be seen to be fair.
And I know you think coalitions are the work of the devil, but at a certain level of voter fragmentation they become necessary. (As an aside, there doesn't seem to be any correlation between quality of government and likelihood of single party rule worldwide.)
We've had a hung parliament since 2010 and a coalition government. The sky didn't fall in. On the contrary, many people would acknowledge it's been remarkably successful.
The recent version of Hawaii 5-0 starts on Monday, for those interested.
Manifesto commitments are often ignored, and things not in the manifesto introduced regardless. People often vote for a party despite its manifesto....
This is not about "all must have prizes", it's about recognising the glaring defects of FPTP and providing better incentives to the parties to compete for votes across the country.
I saw the pilot and the next show and deleted it. It's terrible! I know it's getting regularly renewed so what am I missing?
PS Get a TVR box - I watch everything not-live and see all sorts of great stuff.
In 2010 the LDs lost 3% in the last 24 hours.
It's entirely possible UKIP could fall very significantly at the very last minute - at least in Con/Lab marginals, ie seats where UKIP has no chance.
Presumably the Conservatives will be from places like Edinburgh, Stirling where there are enough of them to make it appear as if they have half a shot... (We know they don't but 'ahead of the SNP here' or close to kind of makes it appear you do.
So you are then asking them what would they do in Coatbridge or Glasgow NE where the perceived chance for the Conservatives is absolutely zero...
Put simply, Swinson is gone. No if's no buts. I don't think we can even expect it to be close in 2010 it was Liberal 39%, Labour 34%, Tory 15%. SNP 10% but the scale of the movement is such that the result will be SNP around 45% and Labour around 25%, Tory 15% (because Tory votes don't change in Scotland) and Liberals on 10% higher than the Liberal average due to Swinson's incumbency.
The 10% might be high
Tactical voting will not be much of an issue but where it is, it is just as likely you get situations like Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale & Tweeddale Labour voters backing the SNP to kick out the Tories as you will get people voting tactically to "stop the SNP".
Tactical voting isn't relevant in 90% of the Scottish seats where the SNP will record in excess of 45% of the vote. In reality Tactical Voting stops being relevant around 40% vote share and the SNP are well beyond there in most constituencies.
new thread
They are wrong of course but it may be closer than is being assumed.
Personally I wouldn't say that the voters are disenfranchised. In safe seats the overwhelming MAJORITY vote for a candidate and that is the one they get. Surely that is Democracy at its best?
Defiance is much better (effectively the same show but the arc seems better planned).
http://order-order.com/2015/04/10/farage-labour-hate-england/#_@/v_A880PN2E8Ltw
https://anewnatureblog.wordpress.com/2015/04/10/pickles-gets-in-a-pickle-over-voluntary-volunteering-days/