Major implications for the next parliament, if true. A Carswell led UKIP would be very different. Glad I got on the Tories last year.
Or perhaps it's just a Tory double-bluff to panic UKIP and suck in more UKIP resource and attention from other seats.
The FT published a quote from Mr Farage's book the other day. Their Thanet campaign looks pretty thorough.
"On January 18, we bussed in about 500 Ukip activists and canvassed the whole constituency – street by street, houseby house. On that day, we garnered basic, but crucial, voter data. Who were hard-line Tories? Which households were possible Ukip voters? Which ones were solid Ukip and where were the Labour supporters? Equally important, however, was information about the issues that most worried them. Was it immigration, the NHS or the local airport?"
Major implications for the next parliament, if true. A Carswell led UKIP would be very different. Glad I got on the Tories last year.
Or perhaps it's just a Tory double-bluff to panic UKIP and suck in more UKIP resource and attention from other seats.
The FT published a quote from Mr Farage's book the other day. Their Thanet campaign looks pretty thorough.
"On January 18, we bussed in about 500 Ukip activists and canvassed the whole constituency – street by street, houseby house. On that day, we garnered basic, but crucial, voter data. Who were hard-line Tories? Which households were possible Ukip voters? Which ones were solid Ukip and where were the Labour supporters? Equally important, however, was information about the issues that most worried them. Was it immigration, the NHS or the local airport?"
Major implications for the next parliament, if true. A Carswell led UKIP would be very different. Glad I got on the Tories last year.
Or perhaps it's just a Tory double-bluff to panic UKIP and suck in more UKIP resource and attention from other seats.
The FT published a quote from Mr Farage's book the other day. Their Thanet campaign looks pretty thorough.
"On January 18, we bussed in about 500 Ukip activists and canvassed the whole constituency – street by street, houseby house. On that day, we garnered basic, but crucial, voter data. Who were hard-line Tories? Which households were possible Ukip voters? Which ones were solid Ukip and where were the Labour supporters? Equally important, however, was information about the issues that most worried them. Was it immigration, the NHS or the local airport?"
That article goes on to show how UKIP are relying on identifying and turning out their hardcore to win in Thanet South.
Identifying them is the easy part. Getting people who have given up on voting out to the polling stations is another.
It would be interesting to hear how good UKIP activists have been at signing up new postal votes. Anybody got access to the postal vote totals for 2010 and for 2015?
The Foleshill Road (Coventry), which must be one of the most Sikh areas in the whole of England does return the occasional Conservative councillor.
As do parts of West London. There is quite a strong level of Conservative support amongst the Sikhs.
Non-Muslim Asians are quite happy to support the Conservatives since Dave and some of the disgraceful Labour positions on Islamic fundamentalists have driven a lot of votes for the Tories. My guess is that Labour see Muslims as a much larger group in the future so want to bank on that support. Look at that terrible BAME manifesto yesterday, not a single person I have spoken to among Indians have taken to it, but I think Muslim communities will lap it up.
Yes, the propensity to vote Labour is higher among the Muslim community. However, every segment of the Asian community will disproportionately vote Labour (that's not in question). It may not be to the same extent as 2010 but it will happen.
And just to balance things out, many of my Asian friends (Muslim, Indian and Sri Lankan) actually were quite positive about Labour's BAME manifesto.
To me at least, it's a powerful message. Given the history of the EU, people have a perfect right to be concerned about where it is heading.
Yes, that is probably what the message will be. And the message on the other side will NOT be about the minutiae of the renegotiation: it will be 'If we leave millions of jobs will be lost'. That argument will be coming from industry, the CBI, the unions, the City, the BBC, most politicians, and even (discretely) from US politicians.
Irrespective of the reality, the latter argument will win. In fact, the Stay In side don't even need to win the argument, they just need to sow enough doubt. That's why I have consistently maintained, since I started posting here in 2009, that an Out vote is unattainable.
[For the avoidance of doubt, since the Kippers will go berserk at my making this point, I'm not saying the jobs argument is valid. Just that it will be very persuasive.]
I'm not sure the jobs argument will win. It's been used before, and has been widely debunked. In fact, it is easy to paint as hysterical. "If we leave the EU we're all going to die!"
It is one of the pathetic arguments that has pushed me slightly off the fence.
I would love any vote to be based on fact. Unfortunately, there will be massive amounts of uncertainty and FUD thrown about. That is not to say the BOOers should not develop a positive vision, and at least try to say what we would and would not be members of. It is just that, unlike the jobs FUD, the direction of the travel in the EU is provable by means of both past performance and record.
This is why I have repeatedly said that the BOO campaign should be based around moving - in the near-term - to a rejoining of EFTA. Yes, it does mean that there is still some freedom of labour issues, which a lot of BOOers hate, but it keeps us in the SEA, minimises disruption for business, lowers what we send to Brussels dramatically, and frees us from a huge amount of red tape.
And longer-term, there is always the option to go it (completely) alone.
Isn't free movement part of the EEA, rather than EFTA? Almost all members of EFTA are members of both, which might fug the difference, but I'm not sure the UK would have to be:
As an aside, I think UKIP is the worst thing that could have happened to "Out". In people's minds, leaving the EU is associated with opposition to gay marriage and the like.
The only literature I've received has been from Simon Marcus, the Conservative candidate - and we've gotten about three or pieces (one personalised) from him.
There are exactly zero posters for any political parties anywhere in Hampstead, as far as I can tell.
I can confirm the same, Robert, though naturally my observations are confined to the posher bits around The High Street and Vale of Wealth.
Isn't the Vale of Health one of the poorer/cheaper parts of Hampstead? (Although that still means it's 10x as expensive as the rest of the country...)
Are there any "vales" at all in London ?
Flat as a pancake every bit I've ever seen.
Try walking from farringdon, up farringdon road past mount pleasant towards kings cross, one long uphill slog before it turns down again.
As an aside, I think UKIP is the worst thing that could have happened to "Out". In people's minds, leaving the EU is associated with opposition to gay marriage and the like.
Yeah. I want net immigration drastically reduced. But I'm starting to wonder if the best thing for UKIP now and promoting the cause of the UK leaving the EU is for Farage to lose, and Carswell to become leader.
The only literature I've received has been from Simon Marcus, the Conservative candidate - and we've gotten about three or pieces (one personalised) from him.
There are exactly zero posters for any political parties anywhere in Hampstead, as far as I can tell.
I can confirm the same, Robert, though naturally my observations are confined to the posher bits around The High Street and Vale of Wealth.
Isn't the Vale of Health one of the poorer/cheaper parts of Hampstead? (Although that still means it's 10x as expensive as the rest of the country...)
Are there any "vales" at all in London ?
Flat as a pancake every bit I've ever seen.
Try walking from farringdon, up farringdon road past mount pleasant towards kings cross, one long uphill slog before it turns down again.
Turn right at Mount Pleasant, up through Islington to Holloway Road and follow that to Highgate - it's pretty much uphill all the way.
PT 51-49 would be mine, UKIP voters and a majority of Tories will be voting out as will about 1/3 of Labour voters and even some SNP. Anti EU activists are just as fanatical as Scottish nationalists, certainly more than the rather wet pro AV lot of metropolitan liberals
As an aside, I think UKIP is the worst thing that could have happened to "Out". In people's minds, leaving the EU is associated with opposition to gay marriage and the like.
Yeah. I want net immigration drastically reduced. But I'm starting to wonder if the best thing for UKIP now and promoting the cause of the UK leaving the EU is for Farage to lose, and Carswell to become leader.
Good luck to him - I wouldn't fancy being in a potential gang of one in Westminster, with Nigel MEP leading the pack in Brussels.
20 odd days to go and negative canvassing reports still on zero
Because we have no SLAB posters who report back?
Previous sudden by elections in SLAB seats have shown that very little canvassing was done. Many reports of "no data" in these seats. So why would there be a sudden appearance of SLAB canvassers?
''The big barrier which Plaid need to overcome is that too many English speakers see them as a party of the Welsh speakers rather than for the whole of Wales.''
Plaid Cymru are a joke party with a leader who reminds me of one of the stupider junior school teachers of my boyhood.
Their entire policy seems to revolve around trying to screw more money out of a much much larger country they at the same time utterly despise.
No plan for self sufficiency. No plan to make Wales pay its own way. What a contemptible bunch.
Major implications for the next parliament, if true. A Carswell led UKIP would be very different. Glad I got on the Tories last year.
Or perhaps it's just a Tory double-bluff to panic UKIP and suck in more UKIP resource and attention from other seats.
Masterful strategy by the Tories.
The Tories are like Basil II at Kleidion.
Nigel Farage = Samuel
I think Farage needs to go heavily on his local background and local issues to win. He'll get his hardcore of 25-30% in any event, but to get to 35%+ (and get a victory) he needs to win over some floating voters from Con/Lab who currently aren't sure about him.
Take a leaf from Carswell's book, in other words.
I still Farage will win.
I'm not sure. There seems to be a bedrock of Conservative votes there of around 38-40% that's been there for a very long time, and the Tories have picked a candidate who can talk soft UKIP and win over waverers.
RCS1000 If there is a substantial renegotiation then a bigger In margin becomes likely, as No would have won more comfortably in Scotland had there been full devomax beforehand, but we know a full renegotiation is unlikely, probably more tinkering at the edges
Isn't free movement part of the EEA, rather than EFTA? Almost all members of EFTA are members of both, which might fug the difference, but I'm not sure the UK would have to be:
IIRC from Richard_Tyndall's posts, in Norway any business can employ anyone from across the SEA. However, if you are not Norwegian, you are not eligible for any benefits, you need to register with the police, and there are restrictions on how long you can stay if you're not employed.
In the polling disaster of 1992, the pollster that was the most accurate, shortly after ceased to do polling in the UK. Will success be rewarded and failure punished this time around? Yougov presumably has the most to lose or keep?
Major implications for the next parliament, if true. A Carswell led UKIP would be very different. Glad I got on the Tories last year.
Or perhaps it's just a Tory double-bluff to panic UKIP and suck in more UKIP resource and attention from other seats.
Masterful strategy by the Tories.
The Tories are like Basil II at Kleidion.
Nigel Farage = Samuel
I think Farage needs to go heavily on his local background and local issues to win. He'll get his hardcore of 25-30% in any event, but to get to 35%+ (and get a victory) he needs to win over some floating voters from Con/Lab who currently aren't sure about him.
Take a leaf from Carswell's book, in other words.
I still Farage will win.
I'm not sure. There seems to be a bedrock of Conservative votes there of around 38-40% that's been there for a very long time, and the Tories have picked a candidate who can talk soft UKIP and win over waverers.
Very close, I think.
Didn't Ukip piss up there in the euros and locals?
PT No way, most polls for the EU referendum have shown it would be even tighter than Scotland, even if In scrape home
YouGov have asked two questions on an EU referendum regularly, for some time.
On the question "If there was a referendum on Britain's membership of the European Union, how would you vote?" the results are normally very close, with IN and OUT both holding leads in the last six months (though In is currently at +10).
On the question "Imagine the British government under David Cameron renegotiated our relationship with Europe and said that Britain's interests were now protected, and David Cameron recommended that Britain remain a member of the European Union on the new terms. How would you then vote in a referendum on the issue?" the results are not at all close. IN generally wins by 2:1.
Unfortunately, YouGov have not asked the question "Imagine the British government under David Cameron attempted to renegotiate our relationship with Europe, but said that these negotiations had failed, and David Cameron recommended that Britain leave the European Union. How would you then vote in a referendum on the issue?"
The SNP position in particular would be ALOT weaker under AV imo.
Their first round ballot is heavy enough in most places they only need 10% or so of each drop out. Hence they are cleaning up on Local by-elections which are Single Outcome STV = AV.
“Are you going to make sure the Sikh vote turns out for us?”
Labour's entitlement summed up in one sentence.
It's actually a very racist statement from Miliband. Assuming that there is a "Sikh vote" whether true or not, expressing it publicly says the wrong thing about Miliband. I would pick him up on that if I were an interviewer.
Oblitus Indeed, but polls in Scotland also showed a comfortable majority for full devomax rather than independence and we know a full renegotation is unlikely to be achieved, just some elements of it at best
As an aside, I think UKIP is the worst thing that could have happened to "Out". In people's minds, leaving the EU is associated with opposition to gay marriage and the like.
Yeah. I want net immigration drastically reduced. But I'm starting to wonder if the best thing for UKIP now and promoting the cause of the UK leaving the EU is for Farage to lose, and Carswell to become leader.
The SNP position in particular would be ALOT weaker under AV imo.
Their first round ballot is heavy enough in most places they only need 10% or so of each drop out. Hence they are cleaning up on Local by-elections which are Single Outcome STV = AV.
True. On the flip side they'd get a heavy green transfer too.
As an aside, I think UKIP is the worst thing that could have happened to "Out". In people's minds, leaving the EU is associated with opposition to gay marriage and the like.
Yeah. I want net immigration drastically reduced. But I'm starting to wonder if the best thing for UKIP now and promoting the cause of the UK leaving the EU is for Farage to lose, and Carswell to become leader.
Good luck to him - I wouldn't fancy being in a potential gang of one in Westminster, with Nigel MEP leading the pack in Brussels.
UKIP led by Carswell would be a much more credible party. But would it even need to exist, Carswell should never have left the Tories.
Isn't the Vale of Health one of the poorer/cheaper parts of Hampstead? (Although that still means it's 10x as expensive as the rest of the country...)
RCS1000 - it should be one of the most expensive parts given its location. But there is a big travellers' camp right in the middle of it, up against the Heath. The story goes that, in the 1960s or 70s, the residents successfully campaigned against a developer who wanted to build a block of luxury flats; in revenge, the developer then let the travellers park on the land to p1ss off the neighbours and they have been there ever since. Not sure how true, but a good story.
Ps hope I have done this copy quote thing right - it looks odd on the screen
The SNP position in particular would be ALOT weaker under AV imo.
Their first round ballot is heavy enough in most places they only need 10% or so of each drop out. Hence they are cleaning up on Local by-elections which are Single Outcome STV = AV.
True. On the flip side they'd get a heavy green transfer too.
I note the Greens are helpfully not standing in Gordon
I'll be going through each of the parties in turn this week for the final run-up to the election.
As an aside, I see only five certain LibDem -> Lab seats in there: Brent East, Redcar, Burnley, Manchester Withington, and Norwich South.
After that we get Bradford East, Hornsey & Wood Green and Cardiff South. It's possible that the LibDems hold the former two, and I don't know anything about Cardiff South.
As an aside, I think UKIP is the worst thing that could have happened to "Out". In people's minds, leaving the EU is associated with opposition to gay marriage and the like.
Yeah. I want net immigration drastically reduced. But I'm starting to wonder if the best thing for UKIP now and promoting the cause of the UK leaving the EU is for Farage to lose, and Carswell to become leader.
To me at least, it's a powerful message. Given the history of the EU, people have a perfect right to be concerned about where it is heading.
Yes, that is probably what the message will be. And the message on the other side will NOT be about the minutiae of the renegotiation: it will be 'If we leave millions of jobs will be lost'. That argument will be coming from industry, the CBI, the unions, the City, the BBC, most politicians, and even (discretely) from US politicians.
Irrespective of the reality, the latter argument will win. In fact, the Stay In side don't even need to win the argument, they just need to sow enough doubt. That's why I have consistently maintained, since I started posting here in 2009, that an Out vote is unattainable.
[For the avoidance of doubt, since the Kippers will go berserk at my making this point, I'm not saying the jobs argument is valid. Just that it will be very persuasive.]
I'm not sure the jobs argument will win. It's been used before, and has been widely debunked. In fact, it is easy to paint as hysterical. "If we leave the EU we're all going to die!"
It is one of the pathetic arguments that has pushed me slightly off the fence.
I would love any vote to be based on fact. Unfortunately, there will be massive amounts of uncertainty and FUD thrown about. That is not to say the BOOers should not develop a positive vision, and at least try to say what we would and would not be members of. It is just that, unlike the jobs FUD, the direction of the travel in the EU is provable by means of both past performance and record.
This is why I have repeatedly said that the BOO campaign should be based around moving - in the near-term - to a rejoining of EFTA. Yes, it does mean that there is still some freedom of labour issues, which a lot of BOOers hate, but it keeps us in the SEA, minimises disruption for business, lowers what we send to Brussels dramatically, and frees us from a huge amount of red tape.
And longer-term, there is always the option to go it (completely) alone.
Isn't free movement part of the EEA, rather than EFTA? Almost all members of EFTA are members of both, which might fug the difference, but I'm not sure the UK would have to be:
Yes that is true but in practical terms EFTA membership - whilst a requirement for EEA membership - does raise a lot more issues about trade. It is certainly not the free trade status that we would have if we were in the EEA.
Mr. Isam, not sure I agree on military intervention. Eritrea is a military dictatorship and Somalia's a poster boy for failed states. Neither is our fault.
As an aside, I think UKIP is the worst thing that could have happened to "Out". In people's minds, leaving the EU is associated with opposition to gay marriage and the like.
Yeah. I want net immigration drastically reduced. But I'm starting to wonder if the best thing for UKIP now and promoting the cause of the UK leaving the EU is for Farage to lose, and Carswell to become leader.
Good luck to him - I wouldn't fancy being in a potential gang of one in Westminster, with Nigel MEP leading the pack in Brussels.
UKIP led by Carswell would be a much more credible party. But would it even need to exist, Carswell should never have left the Tories.
I do wonder how often in the next Parliament Carswell will vote differently to the Tory whip?
I'll be going through each of the parties in turn this week for the final run-up to the election.
As an aside, I see only five certain LibDem -> Lab seats in there: Brent East, Redcar, Burnley, Manchester Withington, and Norwich South.
After that we get Bradford East, Hornsey & Wood Green and Cardiff South. It's possible that the LibDems hold the former two, and I don't know anything about Cardiff South.
Beyond that, it's really tough.
Worth a punt on the Greens in Norwich South, I think they may fall short but they are very strong and the student vote is strongly green. Wright for the Lib Dems is in a fight for 3,4 and 5 with Con and Kip
I'll be going through each of the parties in turn this week for the final run-up to the election.
As an aside, I see only five certain LibDem -> Lab seats in there: Brent East, Redcar, Burnley, Manchester Withington, and Norwich South.
After that we get Bradford East, Hornsey & Wood Green and Cardiff South. It's possible that the LibDems hold the former two, and I don't know anything about Cardiff South.
Beyond that, it's really tough.
Worth a punt on the Greens in Norwich South, I think they may fall short but they are very strong and the student vote is strongly green. Wright for the Lib Dems is in a fight for 3,4 and 5 with Con and Kip
Perhaps I should have said I saw 5 certain LibDem losses :-)
The SNP position in particular would be ALOT weaker under AV imo.
Their first round ballot is heavy enough in most places they only need 10% or so of each drop out. Hence they are cleaning up on Local by-elections which are Single Outcome STV = AV.
True. On the flip side they'd get a heavy green transfer too.
I note the Greens are helpfully not standing in Gordon
I'll be going through each of the parties in turn this week for the final run-up to the election.
As an aside, I see only five certain LibDem -> Lab seats in there: Brent East, Redcar, Burnley, Manchester Withington, and Norwich South.
After that we get Bradford East, Hornsey & Wood Green and Cardiff South. It's possible that the LibDems hold the former two, and I don't know anything about Cardiff South.
Beyond that, it's really tough.
Worth a punt on the Greens in Norwich South, I think they may fall short but they are very strong and the student vote is strongly green. Wright for the Lib Dems is in a fight for 3,4 and 5 with Con and Kip
Perhaps I should have said I saw 5 certain LibDem losses :-)
Indeed! 5 big losses there, I could see Wright sub 10% in Nch South
I'll be going through each of the parties in turn this week for the final run-up to the election.
As an aside, I see only five certain LibDem -> Lab seats in there: Brent East, Redcar, Burnley, Manchester Withington, and Norwich South.
After that we get Bradford East, Hornsey & Wood Green and Cardiff South. It's possible that the LibDems hold the former two, and I don't know anything about Cardiff South.
Beyond that, it's really tough.
Worth a punt on the Greens in Norwich South, I think they may fall short but they are very strong and the student vote is strongly green. Wright for the Lib Dems is in a fight for 3,4 and 5 with Con and Kip
Perhaps I should have said I saw 5 certain LibDem losses :-)
If you're backing Ward in Bradford East then by the same logic... (I think) Thurso is great value at 15-8 in Caithness.
You're placing a huge emphasis on personal vote.
Would you back Ward or Labour at Evens in a match bet is what I'm interested to know.
"Cameron - we will negotiate in 2017 and then offer a referendum on the concessions" "Farage - if UKIP can't win we would prefer you vote Tory to keep out Miliband and get the referendum" "Junker - the EU isn't going to negotiate anyway"
If Cameron's pledge is now null and void there would seem to be less motivation for kippers to vote Tory - which can only help Miliband.
NHS funding by party leaders reminds me of Dr. Evil getting his millions and billions confused.
Though to be fair there seems to be a remarkable consensus. The NHS needs more money, better integration with social care, shift of work to primary care and that privatisation has gone far enough and no major reorganisation is warranted. All the big 4 in England are signed up to that.
Mr. Isam, not sure I agree on military intervention. Eritrea is a military dictatorship and Somalia's a poster boy for failed states. Neither is our fault.
Libya is the victim of our military intervention and that has allowed the rest of Africa a route to Italy via a lawless state
Mr. Isam, not sure I agree on military intervention. Eritrea is a military dictatorship and Somalia's a poster boy for failed states. Neither is our fault.
Libya is the victim of our military intervention and that has allowed the rest of Africa a route to Italy via a lawless state
Both Libya and Syria were heading to be failed states. There was only a slim hope of salvaging anything from either. British Foreign and Military involvement was not at fault; a bunch of bearded barbarian loonies are the problem. Peace will only come to the Middle East when its people recognise Islam is the problem not the solution.
Lets not conflate what we are deciding next month versus what will be decided in two years. Next month we can either have a government that will attempt to address both issues and then let the public decide, or we won't. If we get one that tries then in two years time we can discuss whether the negotiations are a success or failure.
On your two issues.
1: Many major changes could be implemented without treaty reform, but with a change of practices and policies - eg as said above the Germans are very much in favour of reforms so that benefits are paid to those who have paid in rather than people who've just moved. So too would be much of the country. This doesn't require a treaty change, it requires a change in policies and practices.
As for any changes (if negotiated) that would require a treaty change, I think your panel notion is seriously overcomplicating issues. The SNP ran a Yes campaign based on a unilateral set of changes they decided simply were going to happen even with the UK government saying "oh no they won't". If Cameron can come back with some negotiations and say "we're going to change this" and Merkel spoke up saying "yes that's going to change" then I think it's sufficient to put to the people to decide. If the people decide that's not good enough that's their choice, if the people decide they're happy with that it's again their choice.
2: Maybe change is impossible. In which case after negotaitions fail we should vote accordingly. However that's pre-empting the negotiations.
The problem is Philip that changes made without treaty reform are basically not worth the paper they are written on. Someone mistakenly claimed yesterday evening that the ECJ only overturns stuff that illegal. That is not the case. The ECJ has a long history of extending its jurisdiction into areas it didn't previously have competence and then making judgements that materially affect agreements that we had thought were watertight. As such we would be mad to accept anything less than a treaty as an assurance that things would not be changed again later to our disadvantage.
Of course for people like me this is moot anyway as we do not believe that Cameron is serious in his attempts (non existent so far) to get meaningful renegotiation nor that he would ever recommend leaving the EU even if it was clear he had achieved nothing.
"Cameron - we will negotiate in 2017 and then offer a referendum on the concessions" "Farage - if UKIP can't win we would prefer you vote Tory to keep out Miliband and get the referendum" "Junker - the EU isn't going to negotiate anyway"
If Cameron's pledge is now null and void there would seem to be less motivation for kippers to vote Tory - which can only help Miliband.
If Cameron cant get negotiation he will recommend withdrawal from EU
I'll be going through each of the parties in turn this week for the final run-up to the election.
As an aside, I see only five certain LibDem -> Lab seats in there: Brent East, Redcar, Burnley, Manchester Withington, and Norwich South.
After that we get Bradford East, Hornsey & Wood Green and Cardiff South. It's possible that the LibDems hold the former two, and I don't know anything about Cardiff South.
Beyond that, it's really tough.
Worth a punt on the Greens in Norwich South, I think they may fall short but they are very strong and the student vote is strongly green. Wright for the Lib Dems is in a fight for 3,4 and 5 with Con and Kip
Perhaps I should have said I saw 5 certain LibDem losses :-)
Thurso is great value at 15-8 in Caithness.
According to our very own @Easterross the good Viscount is the only player bothering at the moment.
John Thurso - 95% of the vote .... As @Aveit would say - "Nailed On"
"Cameron - we will negotiate in 2017 and then offer a referendum on the concessions" "Farage - if UKIP can't win we would prefer you vote Tory to keep out Miliband and get the referendum" "Junker - the EU isn't going to negotiate anyway"
If Cameron's pledge is now null and void there would seem to be less motivation for kippers to vote Tory - which can only help Miliband.
If Cameron cant get negotiation he will recommend withdrawal from EU
As an aside, I think UKIP is the worst thing that could have happened to "Out". In people's minds, leaving the EU is associated with opposition to gay marriage and the like.
Yeah. I want net immigration drastically reduced. But I'm starting to wonder if the best thing for UKIP now and promoting the cause of the UK leaving the EU is for Farage to lose, and Carswell to become leader.
Good luck to him - I wouldn't fancy being in a potential gang of one in Westminster, with Nigel MEP leading the pack in Brussels.
UKIP led by Carswell would be a much more credible party. But would it even need to exist, Carswell should never have left the Tories.
The current Tories are nearly as statist as Labour, everything needs more laws not less. Whatever happened to that Great Repeal Act, I know the LDs wouldn't have been fans, but it didn't make it into this manifesto either. One might hope that a Carswell led UKIP would become a more libertarian party and even if it didn't win buckets of seats at least would consistently put that view, and hopefully change some of the terms of the discussion.
Lets not conflate what we are deciding next month versus what will be decided in two years. Next month we can either have a government that will attempt to address both issues and then let the public decide, or we won't. If we get one that tries then in two years time we can discuss whether the negotiations are a success or failure.
On your two issues.
1: Many major changes could be implemented without treaty reform, but with a change of practices and policies - eg as said above the Germans are very much in favour of reforms so that benefits are paid to those who have paid in rather than people who've just moved. So too would be much of the country. This doesn't require a treaty change, it requires a change in policies and practices.
As for any changes (if negotiated) that would require a treaty change, I think your panel notion is seriously overcomplicating issues. The SNP ran a Yes campaign based on a unilateral set of changes they decided simply were going to happen even with the UK government saying "oh no they won't". If Cameron can come back with some negotiations and say "we're going to change this" and Merkel spoke up saying "yes that's going to change" then I think it's sufficient to put to the people to decide. If the people decide that's not good enough that's their choice, if the people decide they're happy with that it's again their choice.
2: Maybe change is impossible. In which case after negotaitions fail we should vote accordingly. However that's pre-empting the negotiations.
The problem is Philip that changes made without treaty reform are basically not worth the paper they are written on. Someone mistakenly claimed yesterday evening that the ECJ only overturns stuff that illegal. That is not the case. The ECJ has a long history of extending its jurisdiction into areas it didn't previously have competence and then making judgements that materially affect agreements that we had thought were watertight. As such we would be mad to accept anything less than a treaty as an assurance that things would not be changed again later to our disadvantage.
Of course for people like me this is moot anyway as we do not believe that Cameron is serious in his attempts (non existent so far) to get meaningful renegotiation nor that he would ever recommend leaving the EU even if it was clear he had achieved nothing.
Are you confusing the ECJ with the ECHR? Mr Thompson is fundamentally right. Without Cameron there is no chance of a referendum. With Cameron we get one.
Isn't the Vale of Health one of the poorer/cheaper parts of Hampstead? (Although that still means it's 10x as expensive as the rest of the country...)
RCS1000 - it should be one of the most expensive parts given its location. But there is a big travellers' camp right in the middle of it, up against the Heath. The story goes that, in the 1960s or 70s, the residents successfully campaigned against a developer who wanted to build a block of luxury flats; in revenge, the developer then let the travellers park on the land to p1ss off the neighbours and they have been there ever since. Not sure how true, but a good story.
Ps hope I have done this copy quote thing right - it looks odd on the screen
I think it may well be true. When I was kid there was a permanent fairground where the camp now is. We used to go there on Saturdays.
That said, I would not call it poor or cheap. The houses are huge and many have gardens that back onto the Vale of Health pond.
Mr. Isam, not sure I agree on military intervention. Eritrea is a military dictatorship and Somalia's a poster boy for failed states. Neither is our fault.
Libya is the victim of our military intervention and that has allowed the rest of Africa a route to Italy via a lawless state
Both Libya and Syria were heading to be failed states. There was only a slim hope of salvaging anything from either. British Foreign and Military involvement was not at fault; a bunch of bearded barbarian loonies are the problem. Peace will only come to the Middle East when its people recognise Islam is the problem not the solution.
Historical ignorance with a good slice of bigotry thrown in. It's a winning combination.
"Cameron - we will negotiate in 2017 and then offer a referendum on the concessions" "Farage - if UKIP can't win we would prefer you vote Tory to keep out Miliband and get the referendum" "Junker - the EU isn't going to negotiate anyway"
If Cameron's pledge is now null and void there would seem to be less motivation for kippers to vote Tory - which can only help Miliband.
He is playing politics, but its all hot air, the EU isn't a signatory it just has to implement what the member countries agree in the treaties.
I'll be going through each of the parties in turn this week for the final run-up to the election.
As an aside, I see only five certain LibDem -> Lab seats in there: Brent East, Redcar, Burnley, Manchester Withington, and Norwich South.
After that we get Bradford East, Hornsey & Wood Green and Cardiff South. It's possible that the LibDems hold the former two, and I don't know anything about Cardiff South.
Beyond that, it's really tough.
Worth a punt on the Greens in Norwich South, I think they may fall short but they are very strong and the student vote is strongly green. Wright for the Lib Dems is in a fight for 3,4 and 5 with Con and Kip
Perhaps I should have said I saw 5 certain LibDem losses :-)
Thurso is great value at 15-8 in Caithness.
According to our very own @Easterross the good Viscount is the only player bothering at the moment.
John Thurso - 95% of the vote .... As @Aveit would say - "Nailed On"
No SNP activity visible on my ground game app up in the far north of Scotland, tonnes around the west of Glasgow.
The Green Party are going to the ends of the earth in the pursuit of votes.
The Australian Green party has written to its members in support of its UK counterpart, asking them if they can vote for Natalie Bennett and her colleagues.
Nearly 20,000 Britons emigrate Down Under every year.
On top of that, the 60,000 Australians living in the UK can vote in British elections - as can one million other Commonwealth nationals from India, Canada and South Africa.
They include Natalie Bennett, who moved to Britain from New South Wales.
An email sent by the Australian Greens on Bennett's behalf seen by me reads:
"Greetings from London, where we Greens are in the final weeks of our biggest-ever national election campaign.
"Did you know that all Australian adults currently in the UK are eligible to vote in British elections?
"It’s true. So are most British citizens living in Australia. The UK elections on May 7 are the most important in a generation — and a Green vote has never been more powerful.
"British politics is broken. 3.5 million children live in poverty but the old parties all support huge cuts to public services. The Conservative government here is slashing clean energy and expanding fracking across the country — just like Tony Abbott."
If you see similar attempts from the other parties to mobilise voters overseas, do get in touch.
Mr. Isam, not sure I agree on military intervention. Eritrea is a military dictatorship and Somalia's a poster boy for failed states. Neither is our fault.
Libya is the victim of our military intervention and that has allowed the rest of Africa a route to Italy via a lawless state
Both Libya and Syria were heading to be failed states. There was only a slim hope of salvaging anything from either. British Foreign and Military involvement was not at fault; a bunch of bearded barbarian loonies are the problem. Peace will only come to the Middle East when its people recognise Islam is the problem not the solution.
Correct Gadaffi was all set to massacre heaven knows how many in Benghazi, that's his own citizens. How anyone can say Gadaffi was 'legal' defeats me.
Mr. Isam, ah, I thought you were referring to the two east African nations.
Libya's in a terrible state. It's debatable as to whether it'd be better or worse off had we not intervened.
No sorry it seemed that way
The dead people are Etrieans and Somalians. They see an escape to Europe via Libya. I don't think that was as easy for them in the Gaddafi era. Once they're in Italy they might as well be in the uk
Revealing my ignorance now but if billion dollar cities can be built in Las Vegas and Dubai, is there a possibility that in 20 years or so there will be Europeans/Americans doing the same in Central Africa?
The problem is Philip that changes made without treaty reform are basically not worth the paper they are written on. Someone mistakenly claimed yesterday evening that the ECJ only overturns stuff that illegal. That is not the case. The ECJ has a long history of extending its jurisdiction into areas it didn't previously have competence and then making judgements that materially affect agreements that we had thought were watertight. As such we would be mad to accept anything less than a treaty as an assurance that things would not be changed again later to our disadvantage.
Of course for people like me this is moot anyway as we do not believe that Cameron is serious in his attempts (non existent so far) to get meaningful renegotiation nor that he would ever recommend leaving the EU even if it was clear he had achieved nothing.
Since you're set against anyway then the surest path (in my eyes) for you is to want to get Cameron elected, wait til 2017, campaign and vote for Out? That way you get what you want?
However I disagree on your logic. On the topic of the ECJ that's always going to be an on-going issue as long as it exists (which no treaty will ever change) I suspect regardless of any treaties or the lack thereof (see SCOTUS in the USA). I don't see any treaty ever possibly changing that.
The changes that we get could always change back in the future, but that's unlikely - if Merkel etc agree to changes that they want too, why would they reverse it. Plus surely then that's the time to argue for a new referendum.
I'll be going through each of the parties in turn this week for the final run-up to the election.
As an aside, I see only five certain LibDem -> Lab seats in there: Brent East, Redcar, Burnley, Manchester Withington, and Norwich South.
After that we get Bradford East, Hornsey & Wood Green and Cardiff South. It's possible that the LibDems hold the former two, and I don't know anything about Cardiff South.
Beyond that, it's really tough.
Worth a punt on the Greens in Norwich South, I think they may fall short but they are very strong and the student vote is strongly green. Wright for the Lib Dems is in a fight for 3,4 and 5 with Con and Kip
Perhaps I should have said I saw 5 certain LibDem losses :-)
If you're backing Ward in Bradford East then by the same logic... (I think) Thurso is great value at 15-8 in Caithness.
You're placing a huge emphasis on personal vote.
Would you back Ward or Labour at Evens in a match bet is what I'm interested to know.
I'm on both, actually. But at odds longer than the current ones...
On behalf of the Daily Mirror. Survation will be launching a post-debate poll at the conclusion of tomorrow's 5 leader "Challenger" debate, 8-9.30pm on BBC1
Methodology will be comparable to our "7 Leaders" debate poll - whilst being the views of those have seen or heard the debate live, it will weighted to be broadly representative of the Great Britain as a whole
Initially reported sample size: - Not known at present.
As an aside, I think UKIP is the worst thing that could have happened to "Out". In people's minds, leaving the EU is associated with opposition to gay marriage and the like.
Yeah. I want net immigration drastically reduced. But I'm starting to wonder if the best thing for UKIP now and promoting the cause of the UK leaving the EU is for Farage to lose, and Carswell to become leader.
Good luck to him - I wouldn't fancy being in a potential gang of one in Westminster, with Nigel MEP leading the pack in Brussels.
UKIP led by Carswell would be a much more credible party. But would it even need to exist, Carswell should never have left the Tories.
Well, precisely. A UKIP that didn't sound completely deranged, wasn't full of weirdoes and had something sane and rational to say on immigration would be Cameron's Conservative party. I.e. eurosceptic, but without the BNP element.
Probably the optimal outcome for Cameron is for the clown Farage to remain an MEP, for UKIP to detox the Tories by attracting all the wingnuts, and for UKIP to have no MPs and no traction in GEs. He may be almost there.
Carswell just looks like someone with astonishingly poor judgement.
Comments
Even without it, the polls of late have shown a surprisingly strong move towards "In". (See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proposed_referendum_on_United_Kingdom_membership_of_the_European_Union)
It would be interesting to hear how good UKIP activists have been at signing up new postal votes. Anybody got access to the postal vote totals for 2010 and for 2015?
Yes, the propensity to vote Labour is higher among the Muslim community. However, every segment of the Asian community will disproportionately vote Labour (that's not in question). It may not be to the same extent as 2010 but it will happen.
And just to balance things out, many of my Asian friends (Muslim, Indian and Sri Lankan) actually were quite positive about Labour's BAME manifesto.
http://www.efta.int/eea/policy-areas/persons
The NHS is / no better than / Russell Brand
The BBC is / a propaganda tool for / sluts
People on benefits are / turning our grandchildren into / Germans
Whitehall is / selling your future to / gypsies
Gay marriage is / responsible for / floods
OK, I admit it - the last is a genuine UKIP soundbite.
70 hours
Farage 7/4
Sturgeon 2/1
Miliband 5/2
Wood 10/1
Bennett 12/1
Many reports of "no data" in these seats. So why would there be a sudden appearance of SLAB canvassers?
Plaid Cymru are a joke party with a leader who reminds me of one of the stupider junior school teachers of my boyhood.
Their entire policy seems to revolve around trying to screw more money out of a much much larger country they at the same time utterly despise.
No plan for self sufficiency. No plan to make Wales pay its own way. What a contemptible bunch.
Very close, I think.
That sounds perfectly reasonable to me.
'All over Battersea, some hope and some despair'
Regardless Farage 7/4 looks absolutely stonking.
100% book pretty much on the 3 possible winners with over-round on the rank outsiders.
No bet for the moment.
I played a cup final there a few years ago, it's the Essex combination leagues Wembley!
The disparity between the odds on Lab Maj and individual seats is staggering.
Back Con (or LD/SNP as appropriate) in a basket of seats Labour would need to get a majority and take out a saver on Lab Maj?
I did that and reduced my winnings by a bit but the bets I'd placed earlier delivered about 70 quid I think.
On the question "If there was a referendum on Britain's membership of the European Union, how would you vote?" the results are normally very close, with IN and OUT both holding leads in the last six months (though In is currently at +10).
On the question "Imagine the British government under David Cameron renegotiated our relationship with Europe and said that Britain's interests were now protected, and David Cameron recommended that Britain remain a member of the European Union on the new terms. How would you then vote in a referendum on the issue?" the results are not at all close. IN generally wins by 2:1.
Unfortunately, YouGov have not asked the question "Imagine the British government under David Cameron attempted to renegotiate our relationship with Europe, but said that these negotiations had failed, and David Cameron recommended that Britain leave the European Union. How would you then vote in a referendum on the issue?"
The side effects of military intervention and uncontrolled immigration
Isn't the Vale of Health one of the poorer/cheaper parts of Hampstead?
(Although that still means it's 10x as expensive as the rest of the country...)
RCS1000 - it should be one of the most expensive parts given its location. But there is a big travellers' camp right in the middle of it, up against the Heath. The story goes that, in the 1960s or 70s, the residents successfully campaigned against a developer who wanted to build a block of luxury flats; in revenge, the developer then let the travellers park on the land to p1ss off the neighbours and they have been there ever since. Not sure how true, but a good story.
Ps hope I have done this copy quote thing right - it looks odd on the screen
After that we get Bradford East, Hornsey & Wood Green and Cardiff South. It's possible that the LibDems hold the former two, and I don't know anything about Cardiff South.
Beyond that, it's really tough.
This is getting silly now.
Edit: and the same in Folkestone. It does look good, but you might as well wait until after the debate, just in case...
Labours ethnic quotas
The money sent over hadrians wall for free prescriptions and tuition fees for scots while ours go through the roof?
You're placing a huge emphasis on personal vote.
Would you back Ward or Labour at Evens in a match bet is what I'm interested to know.
"Cameron - we will negotiate in 2017 and then offer a referendum on the concessions"
"Farage - if UKIP can't win we would prefer you vote Tory to keep out Miliband and get the referendum"
"Junker - the EU isn't going to negotiate anyway"
If Cameron's pledge is now null and void there would seem to be less motivation for kippers to vote Tory - which can only help Miliband.
Libya's in a terrible state. It's debatable as to whether it'd be better or worse off had we not intervened.
Taking the UK out of UKIP?
Of course for people like me this is moot anyway as we do not believe that Cameron is serious in his attempts (non existent so far) to get meaningful renegotiation nor that he would ever recommend leaving the EU even if it was clear he had achieved nothing.
John Thurso - 95% of the vote .... As @Aveit would say - "Nailed On"
Mr. Pulpstar, unfair.
Without Gaddafi committing genocide, there was a chance of something better. With him, none. And we did prevent a genocide.
Tunisia is doing much better. Egypt has more order. It was certainly not inevitable that Libya would become as bad as it presently is.
Mr Thompson is fundamentally right. Without Cameron there is no chance of a referendum. With Cameron we get one.
Ps hope I have done this copy quote thing right - it looks odd on the screen
I think it may well be true. When I was kid there was a permanent fairground where the camp now is. We used to go there on Saturdays.
That said, I would not call it poor or cheap. The houses are huge and many have gardens that back onto the Vale of Health pond.
Gadaffi was all set to massacre heaven knows how many in Benghazi, that's his own citizens. How anyone can say Gadaffi was 'legal' defeats me.
The dead people are Etrieans and Somalians. They see an escape to Europe via Libya. I don't think that was as easy for them in the Gaddafi era. Once they're in Italy they might as well be in the uk
Revealing my ignorance now but if billion dollar cities can be built in Las Vegas and Dubai, is there a possibility that in 20 years or so there will be Europeans/Americans doing the same in Central Africa?
However I disagree on your logic. On the topic of the ECJ that's always going to be an on-going issue as long as it exists (which no treaty will ever change) I suspect regardless of any treaties or the lack thereof (see SCOTUS in the USA). I don't see any treaty ever possibly changing that.
The changes that we get could always change back in the future, but that's unlikely - if Merkel etc agree to changes that they want too, why would they reverse it. Plus surely then that's the time to argue for a new referendum.
I think Ward is a 50/50 shot in Bradford East.
Methodology will be comparable to our "7 Leaders" debate poll - whilst being the views of those have seen or heard the debate live, it will weighted to be broadly representative of the Great Britain as a whole
Initially reported sample size: - Not known at present.
Final reported sample size: Minimum 1000 persons.
Probably the optimal outcome for Cameron is for the clown Farage to remain an MEP, for UKIP to detox the Tories by attracting all the wingnuts, and for UKIP to have no MPs and no traction in GEs. He may be almost there.
Carswell just looks like someone with astonishingly poor judgement.
Bit of cloud in Scotland but the weather looks set very fair indeed for Election day.