I would much rather they stayed in power and led SLAB into what promises to be a brutal campaign for Holyrood 2016, as it stands SLAB would loose virtually all of its constituency seats and be under real pressure at a regional level.
If SLAB wants to have any hope of salvaging as much as possible in 2016 they need a completely different approach, they need to learn lessons from Nicola Sturgeon. Reading Jackie Baillie's comments is depressing, SLAB just don't seem to get it. As ever they need to first release their membership numbers, so that we can see how bad things have got, sadly a fair chunk of SLAB's current membership will be BT Tories who signed up for £1 memberships to help vote Jim Murphy in !!
Best thing for Scotland would be to extinguish SLAB and have SNP vs Tories for the Unionists. A healthy and stable democracy has left v right, not left v left.
I think that process is well under way, seeing as "stopping the Tories" seemed to be SLAB's only message, now the de facto vote to "stop the Tories" is the SNP - SLAB will become an irrelevance. The Scot Cons have a point, and role.
That's the bit I never got with SLAB. They have been fighting the wrong enemy for the last 3 elections, were they really that stupid ?
For example Cameron wants to remove the UK from ECHR and instead have UK courts reviewing Human Rights under a UK bill of rights. Being a member of ECHR is a requirement of all EU member states and this will not be something than can be negotiated away. What happens then ? Will Michael Gove still try to get a UK bill of rights through parliament ? I think it is very unlikely that both Houses of Parliament will vote in favour of such a bill, if it tries to sideline the ECHR. If the Tories cannot get this bill through parliament, then I am not sure where the Tories will be. They will have many Tory backbenchers and Lords deeply unhappy.
The solution is to pass a weird fudge that doesn't make sense, but sort-of turns European rights into British rights, and sort-of makes some claim about the relationship with the Strasbourg court that doesn't mean much in practice. This is what Grayling proposed and it'll worry a few lawyerly types, but it won't particularly exercise the voters of Nuneaton.
i'm not sure you really have the finger on the pulse of Nuneaton all the way over in Japan...
If Tory anti-strike laws are seen as too draconian they give all the Labour leadership candidates the scope to oppose them without it doing any damage beyond the Labour party.
Any further restriction on the right to strike will be too draconian. The current laws have already stopped workers from striking in some cases in the face of decisive ballot results in favour of action. Any potential Labour leader going along with any further restrictions should seriously consider whether he or she is even in the right political party.
If Tory anti-strike laws are seen as too draconian they give all the Labour leadership candidates the scope to oppose them without it doing any damage beyond the Labour party.
Also gives them an easy way to keep the unions paying the bills even as Labour snuggle up to the centre on tax and spending etc.
For example Cameron wants to remove the UK from ECHR and instead have UK courts reviewing Human Rights under a UK bill of rights. Being a member of ECHR is a requirement of all EU member states and this will not be something than can be negotiated away. What happens then ? Will Michael Gove still try to get a UK bill of rights through parliament ? I think it is very unlikely that both Houses of Parliament will vote in favour of such a bill, if it tries to sideline the ECHR. If the Tories cannot get this bill through parliament, then I am not sure where the Tories will be. They will have many Tory backbenchers and Lords deeply unhappy.
The solution is to pass a weird fudge that doesn't make sense, but sort-of turns European rights into British rights, and sort-of makes some claim about the relationship with the Strasbourg court that doesn't mean much in practice. This is what Grayling proposed and it'll worry a few lawyerly types, but it won't particularly exercise the voters of Nuneaton.
i'm not sure you really have the finger on the pulse of Nuneaton all the way over in Japan...
You're probably right.
But what I'm suggesting is that swing voters won't end up knowing much more about the detail of this than 1) The government did something to reduce European human rights and bring in some new British rights. 2) Euro-sceptics didn't think it went far enough.
Wondering how many defeated MPs will appear on reality TV this winter.
Vince Cable is surely a given for Strictly. Could we see Ed Balls in the Jungle?
Because Big Brother worked so well for Gorgeous George.....
Someone amongst the myriad of defeated MPs is going to do it. Some will need the cash. There will also be a programme called "What happened to the LDs".
An interestimg point on cabinet ministers is the advance of the cabinet office.
The chief secretary to the treasury is no longer a full cabinet minister, so the chancellor of the exchequer is the only full cabinet minister in the treasury. When was the last time this happened?
It would appear that the cabinet office has two cabinet ministers, the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and the Paymaster General (which used to be the no 3 role at the treasury but now is at the cabinet office).
Does this mean that there will be a different central co-ordination of policy given that the quod no longer exists?
On a point of order, the PM is first Lord of the Treasury.
Agreed, but is he in the treasury? He is not listed as a treasury minister.
For example Cameron wants to remove the UK from ECHR and instead have UK courts reviewing Human Rights under a UK bill of rights. Being a member of ECHR is a requirement of all EU member states and this will not be something than can be negotiated away. What happens then ? Will Michael Gove still try to get a UK bill of rights through parliament ? I think it is very unlikely that both Houses of Parliament will vote in favour of such a bill, if it tries to sideline the ECHR. If the Tories cannot get this bill through parliament, then I am not sure where the Tories will be. They will have many Tory backbenchers and Lords deeply unhappy.
The solution is to pass a weird fudge that doesn't make sense, but sort-of turns European rights into British rights, and sort-of makes some claim about the relationship with the Strasbourg court that doesn't mean much in practice. This is what Grayling proposed and it'll worry a few lawyerly types, but it won't particularly exercise the voters of Nuneaton.
i'm not sure you really have the finger on the pulse of Nuneaton all the way over in Japan...
You're probably right.
But what I'm suggesting is that swing voters won't end up knowing much more about the detail of this than 1) The government did something to reduce European human rights and bring in some new British rights. 2) Euro-sceptics didn't think it went far enough.
Anybody disagree?
What people will be interested in is whether some terrorist in benefits or rapist or murderer who is not a British citizen can be deported rather than be able to claim that he has a human right to live in this country.
That may have helped detoxify the Tories. But Labour need some of those UKIP voters to vote Labour. Calling them names won't help.
Indeed Labour have to get out of the habit of using insults as a substitute for argument and debate.
Anecdote
4-5 years ago I studied humanities at Brighton uni as a mature student. During one seminar a tutor used a guardian article as evidence for one of her left wing claims. This was obviously considered ok.
Later in the discussion I disagreed with her on something and she said 'ugh you sound just like a daily mail reader'
Bearing in mind this was a course in critical thinking, where acceptance of dogma and blind faith were the enemy, I thought it was quite revealing and literally laughed in her face. But this was typical of the mindset (appropriate description) of the staff there (who to be fair were more swp hope not hate and green than labour)
Morally superior because they're left wing... A hard habit to break
For example Cameron wants to remove the UK from ECHR and instead have UK courts reviewing Human Rights under a UK bill of rights. Being a member of ECHR is a requirement of all EU member states and this will not be something than can be negotiated away. What happens then ? Will Michael Gove still try to get a UK bill of rights through parliament ? I think it is very unlikely that both Houses of Parliament will vote in favour of such a bill, if it tries to sideline the ECHR. If the Tories cannot get this bill through parliament, then I am not sure where the Tories will be. They will have many Tory backbenchers and Lords deeply unhappy.
The solution is to pass a weird fudge that doesn't make sense, but sort-of turns European rights into British rights, and sort-of makes some claim about the relationship with the Strasbourg court that doesn't mean much in practice. This is what Grayling proposed and it'll worry a few lawyerly types, but it won't particularly exercise the voters of Nuneaton.
I am sure that you are correct that the Tories will try this. They will timetable a bill through the HOC, so MP's have limited time to debate it and then the HOL's will tear it apart applying loads of amendments, which will end up in parliamentary ping pong. Strasbourg will continue to be the final court in the process, but the UK Supreme court judgements will be given a higher standing under a UK bill of rights for Strasbourg to consider. This means that the UK will still be members of the ECHR's and this is not something that Cameron would negotitate on.
I am not sure exactly what Cameron intends to reneogtiate with the EU, if the right of free movement is not going to be one of the issues.
What is for sure is that some Tory backbenchers are not going to be very happy and Cameron will have to decide where his party stands on EU membership.
This election you'd have done best of all ignoring the polls entirely and going completely off of mood music.
The polls on "who do you trust to run the economy" and "who would be the best Prime Minister worked well actually. It was the headline figures that were messed up. The detail showed time and again that Miliband and Balls weren't trusted.
I know very little about Labour Party internal politics. None of the prospective candidates bowl me over but, as a Tory, the selection of either Liz Kendal or Yvette Cooper would probably worry me the most.
Ideally, they should find a leadership candidate who's worked in the private sector, outside London, with no connection to the unions, public policy think-tank merry-go-round or the third sector.
I think only that sort of candidate would truly be able to think and understand 'normal'.
I analysed the local Labour candidate's Election Manifesto in Staffordshire Moorlands. She needed to win 3,500 votes from Conservative to overturn a Tory majority of 6,000.
A seat where the last mines closed 30 years ago: light engineering, new houses and parents with kids and cars..
The Labour message form local Trudie McGuiness was – andIi quote in order on her leaflet:
“Fairness A fairer economy. Living Wage for all NHS free at point of need. Protect from privatisation”
A total irrelevance. Most (66%) of the electorate earn more than the Living Wage – as she admitted! No-one has committed to charge for the NHS. Who cares about privatisation apart from NHS staff..
Her message was targetted specifically – at NHS staff and the poor. who account for less than half the electorate.
Needless to say there was a swing to Conservative and the majority increased from 6,000 to 10,000.
I take it that her election strategy was not based on targetting, and she does not do sums..
I seem to remember that Gove was one of the very few that stood up for free speech before the Leveson inquiry. It was an excellent contribution.
I have my reservations about this but the problems with the Convention are not with the words of the Convention but the way that the ECtHR has put arms and legs on it. So, for example, they determined that penalties imposed on a criminal not only had to be proportionate but directed at the offending behaviour. So taking away their right to vote was disproportionate and therefore illegal. There is nothing in the Convention about that. It is Judge made law, inherently undemocratic (since it is contrary to the will of the majority and their elected representatives) and just, to use a technical phrase, bloody annoying.
Whether that understandable irritation justifies the solution proposed is not clear. There are limits to which we can opt out of the ECHR as the EU is a signatory to it and the ECJ is obliged to apply it in the interpretation of EU law. I also anticipate that if the Human Rights Act was repealed the Scottish Parliament might make it a part of domestic Scots law anyway. How that would affect Immigration matters ( a non delegated function) before the Scottish courts could keep lawyers gainfully employed for years.
'Trust' is a funny commodity. That was the reason, and the only reason, just given by Strauss for refusing to consider KP for England this Summer. 'There is no trust between the ECB and KP', he said. Probably true, but irrelevant. KP's role is to score runs for England, not to have a 'trusting' relationship with the ECB.
For example Cameron wants to remove the UK from ECHR and instead have UK courts reviewing Human Rights under a UK bill of rights. Being a member of ECHR is a requirement of all EU member states and this will not be something than can be negotiated away. What happens then ? Will Michael Gove still try to get a UK bill of rights through parliament ? I think it is very unlikely that both Houses of Parliament will vote in favour of such a bill, if it tries to sideline the ECHR. If the Tories cannot get this bill through parliament, then I am not sure where the Tories will be. They will have many Tory backbenchers and Lords deeply unhappy.
The solution is to pass a weird fudge that doesn't make sense, but sort-of turns European rights into British rights, and sort-of makes some claim about the relationship with the Strasbourg court that doesn't mean much in practice. This is what Grayling proposed and it'll worry a few lawyerly types, but it won't particularly exercise the voters of Nuneaton.
i'm not sure you really have the finger on the pulse of Nuneaton all the way over in Japan...
You're probably right.
But what I'm suggesting is that swing voters won't end up knowing much more about the detail of this than 1) The government did something to reduce European human rights and bring in some new British rights. 2) Euro-sceptics didn't think it went far enough.
Anybody disagree?
What people will be interested in is whether some terrorist in benefits or rapist or murderer who is not a British citizen can be deported rather than be able to claim that he has a human right to live in this country.
They'll be able to say, truthfully, that under the new law you can't block deportation because you have a cat.
That may have helped detoxify the Tories. But Labour need some of those UKIP voters to vote Labour. Calling them names won't help.
Indeed Labour have to get out of the habit of using insults as a substitute for argument and debate.
Anecdote
4-5 years ago I studied humanities at Brighton uni as a mature student. During one seminar a tutor used a guardian article as evidence for one of her left wing claims. This was obviously considered ok.
Later in the discussion I disagreed with her on something and she said 'ugh you sound just like a daily mail reader'
Bearing in mind this was a course in critical thinking, where acceptance of dogma and blind faith were the enemy, I thought it was quite revealing and literally laughed in her face. But this was typical of the mindset (appropriate description) of the staff there (who to be fair were more swp hope not hate and green than labour)
Morally superior because they're left wing... A hard habit to break
Yes - I dislike people like that too. There are people who have "received opinions" and simply cannot or won't think for themselves.
Candidates in the next Labour leadership election will probably have one less affiliate to court: BECTU likely to disaffiliate as a result of a potential merger with another trade union (as opposed to storming off in a huff over policy).
For example Cameron wants to remove the UK from ECHR and instead have UK courts reviewing Human Rights under a UK bill of rights. Being a member of ECHR is a requirement of all EU member states and this will not be something than can be negotiated away. What happens then ? Will Michael Gove still try to get a UK bill of rights through parliament ? I think it is very unlikely that both Houses of Parliament will vote in favour of such a bill, if it tries to sideline the ECHR. If the Tories cannot get this bill through parliament, then I am not sure where the Tories will be. They will have many Tory backbenchers and Lords deeply unhappy.
The solution is to pass a weird fudge that doesn't make sense, but sort-of turns European rights into British rights, and sort-of makes some claim about the relationship with the Strasbourg court that doesn't mean much in practice. This is what Grayling proposed and it'll worry a few lawyerly types, but it won't particularly exercise the voters of Nuneaton.
I am sure that you are correct that the Tories will try this. They will timetable a bill through the HOC, so MP's have limited time to debate it and then the HOL's will tear it apart applying loads of amendments, which will end up in parliamentary ping pong. Strasbourg will continue to be the final court in the process, but the UK Supreme court judgements will be given a higher standing under a UK bill of rights for Strasbourg to consider. This means that the UK will still be members of the ECHR's and this is not something that Cameron would negotitate on.
I am not sure exactly what Cameron intends to reneogtiate with the EU, if the right of free movement is not going to be one of the issues.
What is for sure is that some Tory backbenchers are not going to be very happy and Cameron will have to decide where his party stands on EU membership.
People will have the right to move for work but not for benefits. If people want to come and contribute then good on them, if that's now what they're looking for then that's different ... the Germans are very open to agreeing with us on that.
'Trust' is a funny commodity. That was the reason, and the only reason, just given by Strauss for refusing to consider KP for England this Summer. 'There is no trust between the ECB and KP', he said. Probably true, but irrelevant. KP's role is to score runs for England, not to have a 'trusting' relationship with the ECB.
Cricket is a game of teamwork and not just individual play. You need to be able to trust your teammates and have a team that is more than the sum of its parts.
That may have helped detoxify the Tories. But Labour need some of those UKIP voters to vote Labour. Calling them names won't help.
Indeed Labour have to get out of the habit of using insults as a substitute for argument and debate.
Anecdote
4-5 years ago I studied humanities at Brighton uni as a mature student...
I would venture that you might just have expected to encounter a few entrenched left wing views here.
Naively I thought they would be open minded
I thought I was a lefty when I started the course! In fairness it was a worthwhile experience as it opened my mind and ultimately made me realise I wasn't thinking logically or being true to myself in voting labour ... I wanted them to be something they just aren't anymore
'Trust' is a funny commodity. That was the reason, and the only reason, just given by Strauss for refusing to consider KP for England this Summer. 'There is no trust between the ECB and KP', he said. Probably true, but irrelevant. KP's role is to score runs for England, not to have a 'trusting' relationship with the ECB.
And yet he trusted him enough to offer him an advisory role on one-day cricket! Absolutely amateur from the ECB. Making people feel sympathy for Kevin Pietersen is an astonishing achievement.
Scottish National Party MPs are already plotting to bring down flagship Conservative legislation by courting Tory backbenchers, The Telegraph can disclose.
Nicola Sturgeon's Westminster MPs want to block the so-called Snoopers' Charter by courting "libertarian" Tories who have previously opposed Theresa May's terrorist surveillance plans.
They also believe they can gather enough cross-party support to kill off Tory plans to repeal the Human Rights Act and replace it with a British Bill of Rights.
David Davis was named as a senior Tory backbencher they could court after he triggered a by-election in 2008 over plans for 42-day detention of terrorist suspects without trial.
Civil liberties issues without a European dimension could be tricky for Labour - they traditionally agree with Theresa May, but are they going to let themselves be seen supporting the government while the SNP opposes?
Glenn Campbell @GlennBBC 12 mins12 minutes ago Labour MSP Alex Rowley has quit as party's local govt spokesman at Holyrood, urging @JimForScotland to stand down as leader
Wondering how many defeated MPs will appear on reality TV this winter.
Vince Cable is surely a given for Strictly. Could we see Ed Balls in the Jungle?
Because Big Brother worked so well for Gorgeous George.....
Someone amongst the myriad of defeated MPs is going to do it. Some will need the cash. There will also be a programme called "What happened to the LDs".
I'm hoping it will be more along the lines of The Hunger Games....
That may have helped detoxify the Tories. But Labour need some of those UKIP voters to vote Labour. Calling them names won't help.
Indeed Labour have to get out of the habit of using insults as a substitute for argument and debate.
Anecdote
4-5 years ago I studied humanities at Brighton uni as a mature student. During one seminar a tutor used a guardian article as evidence for one of her left wing claims. This was obviously considered ok.
Later in the discussion I disagreed with her on something and she said 'ugh you sound just like a daily mail reader'
Bearing in mind this was a course in critical thinking, where acceptance of dogma and blind faith were the enemy, I thought it was quite revealing and literally laughed in her face. But this was typical of the mindset (appropriate description) of the staff there (who to be fair were more swp hope not hate and green than labour)
Morally superior because they're left wing... A hard habit to break
Yes - I dislike people like that too. There are people who have "received opinions" and simply cannot or won't think for themselves.
She also wet herself when she saw someone reading the communist manifesto, talked about Cuba a lot, and used 'false consciousness' as a reason for people not sharing her world view
For example Cameron wants to remove the UK from ECHR and instead have UK courts reviewing Human Rights under a UK bill of rights. Being a member of ECHR is a requirement of all EU member states and this will not be something than can be negotiated away. What happens then ? Will Michael Gove still try to get a UK bill of rights through parliament ? I think it is very unlikely that both Houses of Parliament will vote in favour of such a bill, if it tries to sideline the ECHR. If the Tories cannot get this bill through parliament, then I am not sure where the Tories will be. They will have many Tory backbenchers and Lords deeply unhappy.
The solution is to pass a weird fudge that doesn't make sense, but sort-of turns European rights into British rights, and sort-of makes some claim about the relationship with the Strasbourg court that doesn't mean much in practice. This is what Grayling proposed and it'll worry a few lawyerly types, but it won't particularly exercise the voters of Nuneaton.
i'm not sure you really have the finger on the pulse of Nuneaton all the way over in Japan...
You're probably right.
But what I'm suggesting is that swing voters won't end up knowing much more about the detail of this than 1) The government did something to reduce European human rights and bring in some new British rights. 2) Euro-sceptics didn't think it went far enough.
Anybody disagree?
What people will be interested in is whether some terrorist in benefits or rapist or murderer who is not a British citizen can be deported rather than be able to claim that he has a human right to live in this country.
They'll be able to say, truthfully, that under the new law you can't block deportation because you have a cat.
People who have committed serious crimes or are a threat to us should be deported. It is an absurdity to say that there is a human right to threaten us or that we should be obliged - against our wishes - to provide a home to those who have come here and broken our laws.
That may have helped detoxify the Tories. But Labour need some of those UKIP voters to vote Labour. Calling them names won't help.
Indeed Labour have to get out of the habit of using insults as a substitute for argument and debate.
Anecdote
4-5 years ago I studied humanities at Brighton uni as a mature student. During one seminar a tutor used a guardian article as evidence for one of her left wing claims. This was obviously considered ok.
Later in the discussion I disagreed with her on something and she said 'ugh you sound just like a daily mail reader'
Bearing in mind this was a course in critical thinking, where acceptance of dogma and blind faith were the enemy, I thought it was quite revealing and literally laughed in her face. But this was typical of the mindset (appropriate description) of the staff there (who to be fair were more swp hope not hate and green than labour)
Morally superior because they're left wing... A hard habit to break
Yes - I dislike people like that too. There are people who have "received opinions" and simply cannot or won't think for themselves.
She also wet herself when she saw someone reading the communist manifesto, talked about Cuba a lot, and used 'false consciousness' as a reason for people not sharing her world view
'Scottish National Party MPs are already plotting to bring down flagship Conservative legislation by courting Tory backbenchers, The Telegraph can disclose.'
Hello again, everyone. Long time no see. My job and my commute means I have very little time for online posting, other than on Twitter. I wanted to come and see where the fallout was being felt. Because the abysmal polling effort also makes a hell of a lot of what we have discussed on here redundant. We spent ten years poring over polls and we might as well have discussed soup recipes.
Just a little report from my Fermanagh home. The UUP are definitely on the up. There's a real feeling in the air that the bounce that came in the council polls is being built upon. The next Assembly elections will be hard-fought.
TKC If Labour voters did not go to UKIP after Miliband's leadership they never will, it is Tory Out voters who will be more likely to go to UKIP in 2020. As Blair discovered having a bit of a row with the unions need not be devastating, as Miliband discovered embracing them does no favours
Hello again, everyone. Long time no see. My job and my commute means I have very little time for online posting, other than on Twitter. I wanted to come and see where the fallout was being felt. Because the abysmal polling effort also makes a hell of a lot of what we have discussed on here redundant. We spent ten years poring over polls and we might as well have discussed soup recipes.
Just a little report from my Fermanagh home. The UUP are definitely on the up. There's a real feeling in the air that the bounce that came in the council polls is being built upon. The next Assembly elections will be hard-fought.
That may have helped detoxify the Tories. But Labour need some of those UKIP voters to vote Labour. Calling them names won't help.
Indeed Labour have to get out of the habit of using insults as a substitute for argument and debate.
Anecdote
4-5 years ago I studied humanities at Brighton uni as a mature student. During one seminar a tutor used a guardian article as evidence for one of her left wing claims. This was obviously considered ok.
Later in the discussion I disagreed with her on something and she said 'ugh you sound just like a daily mail reader'
Bearing in mind this was a course in critical thinking, where acceptance of dogma and blind faith were the enemy, I thought it was quite revealing and literally laughed in her face. But this was typical of the mindset (appropriate description) of the staff there (who to be fair were more swp hope not hate and green than labour)
Morally superior because they're left wing... A hard habit to break
Yes - I dislike people like that too. There are people who have "received opinions" and simply cannot or won't think for themselves.
It's worse than that. These are people for whom their politics is an extension of their identity and what sort of person they think they are. They have not thought deeply about their beliefs because to do so would call into question their own identity, which they are very insecure about.
So rather than have their views and opinions challenged, they shut out dissenting voices and abuse them, just like Rebecca Roache, because it helps them anchor that security in an uncertain and changing world.
'Trust' is a funny commodity. That was the reason, and the only reason, just given by Strauss for refusing to consider KP for England this Summer. 'There is no trust between the ECB and KP', he said. Probably true, but irrelevant. KP's role is to score runs for England, not to have a 'trusting' relationship with the ECB.
And yet he trusted him enough to offer him an advisory role on one-day cricket! Absolutely amateur from the ECB. Making people feel sympathy for Kevin Pietersen is an astonishing achievement.
Absolutely. He's jumped through all their hoops with gay abandon. While the team struggles. They now look like bare-faced liars.
Survation: - “there was just a very late swing.” A simple way of checking that is to go and survey now a large sample of the postal voters in a thorough way. If the postal voters (weighted by demographics and past vote etc) were already voting in a way different to the way the demographic polls were predicting then there was no late swing. Labourlist had a source that indicated some samples of the postal votes were not in line with the polls.
Depends how you define "late" - if the swinging happened on the last day when people actually came to vote, then you may have had the same phenomenon with the postal votes, only earlier.
I analysed the local Labour candidate's Election Manifesto in Staffordshire Moorlands. She needed to win 3,500 votes from Conservative to overturn a Tory majority of 6,000.
A seat where the last mines closed 30 years ago: light engineering, new houses and parents with kids and cars..
The Labour message form local Trudie McGuiness was – andIi quote in order on her leaflet:
“Fairness A fairer economy. Living Wage for all NHS free at point of need. Protect from privatisation”
A total irrelevance. Most (66%) of the electorate earn more than the Living Wage – as she admitted! No-one has committed to charge for the NHS. Who cares about privatisation apart from NHS staff..
Her message was targetted specifically – at NHS staff and the poor. who account for less than half the electorate.
Needless to say there was a swing to Conservative and the majority increased from 6,000 to 10,000.
I take it that her election strategy was not based on targetting, and she does not do sums..
IMHO as a Labour voter (reluctantly at the last election) what they need to do is drop the whole "privitisation bad" stuff. People care about outcomes and value, who delivers services in the public sector should be driven by who can provide the best outcomes for the best value for money. Too many Right wingers think that's only possible in the private sector and visa versa for Left wingers in the public sector.
I guess that'd be an incredibally tough sell to the vested interests on both sides (unions, outsource organisations ect).
Anyone been reading comments threads across the blogosphere just lately? There seems to be a broad and huge rash of 'lefties are nasty and intolerant' articles as the wailing and gnashing launches into top gear. Even the Grauniad is today replete with such stuff. Has this election result finally popped the lefty moral superiority bubble? Probably not - but I think it has popped the 'we mustn't call bullshit when we see it' bubble re the same. I think the 'I'm a lefty therefore I'm right, moral and better than you' meme just caught a virus. Well done Ed!
Scottish National Party MPs are already plotting to bring down flagship Conservative legislation by courting Tory backbenchers, The Telegraph can disclose.
Nicola Sturgeon's Westminster MPs want to block the so-called Snoopers' Charter by courting "libertarian" Tories who have previously opposed Theresa May's terrorist surveillance plans.
They also believe they can gather enough cross-party support to kill off Tory plans to repeal the Human Rights Act and replace it with a British Bill of Rights.
David Davis was named as a senior Tory backbencher they could court after he triggered a by-election in 2008 over plans for 42-day detention of terrorist suspects without trial.
Civil liberties issues without a European dimension could be tricky for Labour - they traditionally agree with Theresa May, but are they going to let themselves be seen supporting the government while the SNP opposes?
Civil liberties seems to be the sort of thing that Labour can use to show it has changed as a party, but not in a way that sends them back to the days of Blair. I wouldn't be surprised if a few leadership challengers come out to oppose the new charter.
'Scottish National Party MPs are already plotting to bring down flagship Conservative legislation by courting Tory backbenchers, The Telegraph can disclose.'
Oh dear SNP now in fantasy land.
Errm Yes, How will that one work ?
Surely long filibustering sessions for the Nats will be the best tactic - I can't see amendments getting too far with a CON majority.
I also didn't comment on a feeling for the Conservatives on the day. There was a blue teller [I think, never seen one before] outside the polling station, which was led to by Conservative posters. There wasn't a single Labour poster, placard or suchlike on the way there.
I've got to say others were more confident of Jenkyns' prospects than me. I knew there was an outside chance but I was still significantly surprised.
'Scottish National Party MPs are already plotting to bring down flagship Conservative legislation by courting Tory backbenchers, The Telegraph can disclose.'
Oh dear SNP now in fantasy land.
Errm Yes, How will that one work ?
Surely long filibustering sessions for the Nats will be the best tactic - I can't see amendments getting too far with a CON majority.
Hello again, everyone. Long time no see. My job and my commute means I have very little time for online posting, other than on Twitter. I wanted to come and see where the fallout was being felt. Because the abysmal polling effort also makes a hell of a lot of what we have discussed on here redundant. We spent ten years poring over polls and we might as well have discussed soup recipes.
Just a little report from my Fermanagh home. The UUP are definitely on the up. There's a real feeling in the air that the bounce that came in the council polls is being built upon. The next Assembly elections will be hard-fought.
If you see anyone again, direct them to me on Twitter? I will try take a look later at work.
I must admit, this weekend has made me glad I work for a paper that swings with the times. The Mirror has been stuffed with sour grapes. They are setting up a situation where anything less than a cull of first-born children will be a shock to their readers.
Rory Stewart becomes Parliamentary Under Secretary of State at Defra.
I know he is in a rural constituency. But we have the rise of Islamic terrorism, civil wars in Syria, Iraq, Libya, etc.....A man who really understands a lot of the drivers underneath this, they have put to talk about sheep dips.
Hello again, everyone. Long time no see. My job and my commute means I have very little time for online posting, other than on Twitter. I wanted to come and see where the fallout was being felt. Because the abysmal polling effort also makes a hell of a lot of what we have discussed on here redundant. We spent ten years poring over polls and we might as well have discussed soup recipes.
Just a little report from my Fermanagh home. The UUP are definitely on the up. There's a real feeling in the air that the bounce that came in the council polls is being built upon. The next Assembly elections will be hard-fought.
If you see anyone again, direct them to me on Twitter? I will try take a look later at work.
I must admit, this weekend has made me glad I work for a paper that swings with the times. The Mirror has been stuffed with sour grapes. They are setting up a situation where anything less than a cull of first-born children will be a shock to their readers.
I also didn't comment on a feeling for the Conservatives on the day. There was a blue teller [I think, never seen one before] outside the polling station, which was led to by Conservative posters. There wasn't a single Labour poster, placard or suchlike on the way there.
I've got to say others were more confident of Jenkyns' prospects than me. I knew there was an outside chance but I was still significantly surprised.
Do you live in a Labour or Conservative ward in M&O ?
The Labour posters near my manor were deafening by their absence
'Trust' is a funny commodity. That was the reason, and the only reason, just given by Strauss for refusing to consider KP for England this Summer. 'There is no trust between the ECB and KP', he said. Probably true, but irrelevant. KP's role is to score runs for England, not to have a 'trusting' relationship with the ECB.
And yet he trusted him enough to offer him an advisory role on one-day cricket! Absolutely amateur from the ECB. Making people feel sympathy for Kevin Pietersen is an astonishing achievement.
Absolutely. He's jumped through all their hoops with gay abandon. While the team struggles. They now look like bare-faced liars.
Are you a teacher now? I seem to recall that was what you wanted to do.
No. I am still at the Sun. But I have management responsibilities and I live in Fermanagh and commute to my flat in Herts. I may well revisit the teaching option if I get sick of the Ryanair bus or Morgan sorts out the teacher recruitment policies!
How was election night on here? I guess you guys all realised a Tory majority was on the cards once the English seats started coming in? That's when I cracked the fizz on the cruise ship I was enjoying it on. But the swines closed the bar before I got Tom Elliott's news!
Mr. Pulpstar, not sure, but I'd guess Conservative. [One of the reasons I was less forthright than I might've been is that I really don't pay that much attention to politics locally, and I didn't want to lead anyone astray on the day].
How was election night on here? I guess you guys all realised a Tory majority was on the cards once the English seats started coming in? That's when I cracked the fizz on the cruise ship I was enjoying it on. But the swines closed the bar before I got Tom Elliott's news!
Yes, it was when John Curtice kept popping up on R4 to say that the swings to the Conservatives in places like Nuneaton were slightly better than the exit poll predicted that Tory Maj looked in reach. It was quite a night!
For example Cameron wants to remove the UK from ECHR and instead have UK courts reviewing Human Rights under a UK bill of rights. Being a member of ECHR is a requirement of all EU member states and this will not be something than can be negotiated away. What happens then ? Will Michael Gove still try to get a UK bill of rights through parliament ? I think it is very unlikely that both Houses of Parliament will vote in favour of such a bill, if it tries to sideline the ECHR. If the Tories cannot get this bill through parliament, then I am not sure where the Tories will be. They will have many Tory backbenchers and Lords deeply unhappy.
The solution is to pass a weird fudge that doesn't make sense, but sort-of turns European rights into British rights, and sort-of makes some claim about the relationship with the Strasbourg court that doesn't mean much in practice. This is what Grayling proposed and it'll worry a few lawyerly types, but it won't particularly exercise the voters of Nuneaton.
i'm not sure you really have the finger on the pulse of Nuneaton all the way over in Japan...
You're probably right.
But what I'm suggesting is that swing voters won't end up knowing much more about the detail of this than 1) The government did something to reduce European human rights and bring in some new British rights. 2) Euro-sceptics didn't think it went far enough.
Anybody disagree?
What people will be interested in is whether some terrorist in benefits or rapist or murderer who is not a British citizen can be deported rather than be able to claim that he has a human right to live in this country.
They'll be able to say, truthfully, that under the new law you can't block deportation because you have a cat.
People who have committed serious crimes or are a threat to us should be deported. It is an absurdity to say that there is a human right to threaten us or that we should be obliged - against our wishes - to provide a home to those who have come here and broken our laws.
If they've committed serious crimes and they're still a threat then they should be in prison.
By not naming candidates, I was told, I was understating the importance of incumbency and therefore seriously underestimating the number of Lib Dem MPs who would be re-elected. So much for that.
Very interesting. A little bit defensive from Lord A at the start (he got dozens and dozens of Lib Dem held and Conservative held marginals wrong) but the rest of the article and analysis is sound and provides real and valuable insights, and food for thought.
Comments
Well it worked for Dave!
Vince Cable is surely a given for Strictly.
Could we see Ed Balls in the Jungle?
The Parliamentary representative for Twitter?
He was "surprised as anyone" when it was rejected.
But what I'm suggesting is that swing voters won't end up knowing much more about the detail of this than
1) The government did something to reduce European human rights and bring in some new British rights.
2) Euro-sceptics didn't think it went far enough.
Anybody disagree?
meow
Indeed Labour have to get out of the habit of using insults as a substitute for argument and debate.
4-5 years ago I studied humanities at Brighton uni as a mature student. During one seminar a tutor used a guardian article as evidence for one of her left wing claims. This was obviously considered ok.
Later in the discussion I disagreed with her on something and she said 'ugh you sound just like a daily mail reader'
Bearing in mind this was a course in critical thinking, where acceptance of dogma and blind faith were the enemy, I thought it was quite revealing and literally laughed in her face. But this was typical of the mindset (appropriate description) of the staff there (who to be fair were more swp hope not hate and green than labour)
Morally superior because they're left wing... A hard habit to break
I am not sure exactly what Cameron intends to reneogtiate with the EU, if the right of free movement is not going to be one of the issues.
What is for sure is that some Tory backbenchers are not going to be very happy and Cameron will have to decide where his party stands on EU membership.
Ideally, they should find a leadership candidate who's worked in the private sector, outside London, with no connection to the unions, public policy think-tank merry-go-round or the third sector.
I think only that sort of candidate would truly be able to think and understand 'normal'.
A seat where the last mines closed 30 years ago: light engineering, new houses and parents with kids and cars..
The Labour message form local Trudie McGuiness was – andIi quote in order on her leaflet:
“Fairness
A fairer economy.
Living Wage for all
NHS free at point of need.
Protect from privatisation”
A total irrelevance. Most (66%) of the electorate earn more than the Living Wage – as she admitted!
No-one has committed to charge for the NHS.
Who cares about privatisation apart from NHS staff..
Her message was targetted specifically – at NHS staff and the poor. who account for less than half the electorate.
Needless to say there was a swing to Conservative and the majority increased from 6,000 to 10,000.
I take it that her election strategy was not based on targetting, and she does not do sums..
I have my reservations about this but the problems with the Convention are not with the words of the Convention but the way that the ECtHR has put arms and legs on it. So, for example, they determined that penalties imposed on a criminal not only had to be proportionate but directed at the offending behaviour. So taking away their right to vote was disproportionate and therefore illegal. There is nothing in the Convention about that. It is Judge made law, inherently undemocratic (since it is contrary to the will of the majority and their elected representatives) and just, to use a technical phrase, bloody annoying.
Whether that understandable irritation justifies the solution proposed is not clear. There are limits to which we can opt out of the ECHR as the EU is a signatory to it and the ECJ is obliged to apply it in the interpretation of EU law. I also anticipate that if the Human Rights Act was repealed the Scottish Parliament might make it a part of domestic Scots law anyway. How that would affect Immigration matters ( a non delegated function) before the Scottish courts could keep lawyers gainfully employed for years.
https://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/a-e82c-Another-five-years-presents-gloomy-prospect-of-merger#.VVHSCY5VhBc
I thought I was a lefty when I started the course! In fairness it was a worthwhile experience as it opened my mind and ultimately made me realise I wasn't thinking logically or being true to myself in voting labour ... I wanted them to be something they just aren't anymore
Labour MSP Alex Rowley has quit as party's local govt spokesman at Holyrood, urging @JimForScotland to stand down as leader
Boo, don't you listen to the doubters Jim.
It was like being in a viz cartoon
'Scottish National Party MPs are already plotting to bring down flagship Conservative legislation by courting Tory backbenchers, The Telegraph can disclose.'
Oh dear SNP now in fantasy land.
Just a little report from my Fermanagh home. The UUP are definitely on the up. There's a real feeling in the air that the bounce that came in the council polls is being built upon. The next Assembly elections will be hard-fought.
Great to see you around even if very briefly.
So rather than have their views and opinions challenged, they shut out dissenting voices and abuse them, just like Rebecca Roache, because it helps them anchor that security in an uncertain and changing world.
Stockton North:
Lab majority 8,300
Stockton South:
Con majority 5,000
Anyone care to hazard a wild guess which constituency the featured road is in? :-)
Great to hear from you!
Are you a teacher now? I seem to recall that was what you wanted to do.
https://yougov.co.uk/news/2015/05/08/general-election-opinion-polls-brief-post-mortem/
IMHO as a Labour voter (reluctantly at the last election) what they need to do is drop the whole "privitisation bad" stuff. People care about outcomes and value, who delivers services in the public sector should be driven by who can provide the best outcomes for the best value for money. Too many Right wingers think that's only possible in the private sector and visa versa for Left wingers in the public sector.
I guess that'd be an incredibally tough sell to the vested interests on both sides (unions, outsource organisations ect).
Surely long filibustering sessions for the Nats will be the best tactic - I can't see amendments getting too far with a CON majority.
I also didn't comment on a feeling for the Conservatives on the day. There was a blue teller [I think, never seen one before] outside the polling station, which was led to by Conservative posters. There wasn't a single Labour poster, placard or suchlike on the way there.
I've got to say others were more confident of Jenkyns' prospects than me. I knew there was an outside chance but I was still significantly surprised.
I must admit, this weekend has made me glad I work for a paper that swings with the times. The Mirror has been stuffed with sour grapes. They are setting up a situation where anything less than a cull of first-born children will be a shock to their readers.
I know he is in a rural constituency. But we have the rise of Islamic terrorism, civil wars in Syria, Iraq, Libya, etc.....A man who really understands a lot of the drivers underneath this, they have put to talk about sheep dips.
When Tony won in 1997 - I don't recall it being 90% crying Tories. It was full of very chuffed Lefties.
I can't watch/listen to the BBC at all. It's just too painful. Get them a wall to wail at.
@rcs1000 - can you help @Lucian_Fletcher find this post? It was within the last 4 days IIRC. They were trying to settle a bet with him.
http://lordashcroftpolls.com/2015/05/reflections-on-the-election-polls-and-creating-a-conservative-party-people-need-not-be-shy-about-supporting/?utm_source=Lord+Ashcroft+Polls&utm_campaign=69d8089e21-RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_b70c7aec0a-69d8089e21-71623245
The Labour posters near my manor were deafening by their absence
How was election night on here? I guess you guys all realised a Tory majority was on the cards once the English seats started coming in? That's when I cracked the fizz on the cruise ship I was enjoying it on. But the swines closed the bar before I got Tom Elliott's news!
'Theres no given that there had to be a Labour Party in the 21st century'
First thoughtful or sensible thing I ever heard her say
'I would love a modern politician to make the case for why managed immigration can be a good thing'
O Flynn, Carswell, Farage have all done that but he doesn't like the messenger
the polls indicated a much higher level of expected turn-out than actually came to pass.
And guess which voters didn't turn out..