If it's bad now, imagine the squealing once EVEL passes and then Cameron allows a free-vote on repeal/reform of the Hunting Act with a c. 80+ seat majority.
Nothing wrong with the fact that Farage didn't go to university, but if his people really want to attack others for having a 'single-tier education' it deserves noting...
From reading the (highly unrepresentative) facebook and Twitter, the Left seem to be mobilising very quickly to resist the repeal of the Human Rights Act as their casus belli. They are choosing their battles.
Are the Tories prepared for this?
There is a PR battle to be won, and they need to start making the case or I could easily see getting picked apart in committee by the SNP and the Lords grinding it to a halt.
Yes, because far too many people are focussing upon the repeal of the Human Rights Act, and not on the other part, which is to replace it with a British Bill of Rights.
I understand Dominic Grieve will be consulted on this.
If Dave can win his, Ken Clarke's and a few other Tories who like the Human Rights Act then he should be ok.
And I say that as a strong advocate of the ECHR.
The BoR will as I understand it incorporate the ECoHR word for word. This should not be surprising as we helped write it in 1950-ish) The BoR will give parliament the ability to over rule the Court on some issues - I imagine on issues like voting rights for prisoners. But I do not believe we are withdrawing the right for UK citizens to take their claims to the ECHR, but it would not mean, as now with the HRA, our own judges putting their own gloss on the wording of the Convention - with the regularly reported absurdities we have seen.
That makes sense. It's putting boundaries on international extra-judicial activism that seems key to me here.
That strikes me as quite reasonable if put like that, but it seems too easy for it to be portrayed poorly or misunderstood, with unclear to define gains, that I cannot see it passing
Tom Newton Dunn @tnewtondunn - Why can't parties politely wait in turn for their civil wars, rather than waging simultaneously? Don't they know lobby hacks are knackered?
If it's bad now, imagine the squealing once EVEL passes and then Cameron allows a free-vote on repeal/reform of the Hunting Act with a c. 80+ seat majority.
That would require the use of the Parliament Act to get through the Lords. A terrible priority. I'd hope enough Tory MPs vote down a repeal on a free vote to prevent it.
As for the short money, I thought it was an MPs job to improve the life of his constituents? And if they spend money on staff that make that more likely who are we to sniff? I thought Carswell wanted 'change' and he thinks the people if clacton voted for him because they did too. So ask them if they'd prefer change to political procedure or change to the awful conditions they live in and then decide
In general yes, but the Short Money is *specifically* to assist the parliamentary party in holding the government to account: to use it for other purposes would be dishonest.
You could probably stretch it to fund a policy team focused on developing a Life After Out platform, but tough to go much beyond that
If Ukip were denounced by the other parties for taking money from Westmjnster and spending it on the poorest people in Britain I think it would be a net win for them with the public even if it's dishonest
Its not just a case of being denounced. Its a case of being prosecuted. I am sure that Farage might have mixed feelings about the party's only MP being done for fraud. It might look bad on the party but at least from his point of view he would be rid of (yet another) possible challenger to his position.
Would Farage be that bothered? There have been enough controversies over his own 'expenses', allowances, whatever, over the years. Huge sums towards "running machines" and "banks of computers" in rent free sheds. Whatever happened to the audit he promised in 2014?
If it's bad now, imagine the squealing once EVEL passes and then Cameron allows a free-vote on repeal/reform of the Hunting Act with a c. 80+ seat majority.
That would require the use of the Parliament Act to get through the Lords. A terrible priority. I'd hope enough Tory MPs vote down a repeal on a free vote to prevent it.
I hope for the exact opposite. It's a terrible law, and I hope repeal passes.
The Lords rejected the ban when it was first proposed for very good reasons.
If it's bad now, imagine the squealing once EVEL passes and then Cameron allows a free-vote on repeal/reform of the Hunting Act with a c. 80+ seat majority.
From reading the (highly unrepresentative) facebook and Twitter, the Left seem to be mobilising very quickly to resist the repeal of the Human Rights Act as their casus belli. They are choosing their battles.
Are the Tories prepared for this?
There is a PR battle to be won, and they need to start making the case or I could easily see getting picked apart in committee by the SNP and the Lords grinding it to a halt.
Yes, because far too many people are focussing upon the repeal of the Human Rights Act, and not on the other part, which is to replace it with a British Bill of Rights.
I understand Dominic Grieve will be consulted on this.
If Dave can win his, Ken Clarke's and a few other Tories who like the Human Rights Act then he should be ok.
And I say that as a strong advocate of the ECHR.
The BoR will as I understand it incorporate the ECoHR word for word. This should not be surprising as we helped write it in 1950-ish) The BoR will give parliament the ability to over rule the Court on some issues - I imagine on issues like voting rights for prisoners. But I do not believe we are withdrawing the right for UK citizens to take their claims to the ECHR, but it would not mean, as now with the HRA, our own judges putting their own gloss on the wording of the Convention - with the regularly reported absurdities we have seen.
That makes sense. It's putting boundaries on international extra-judicial activism that seems key to me here.
That strikes me as quite reasonable if put like that, but it seems too easy for it to be portrayed poorly or misunderstood, with unclear to define gains, that I cannot see it passing
That's why I think the Tories are currently losing the PR war, and need to act quickly.
They clearly didn't expect to win, nor be in a position to implement most of their manifesto. So I don't think much thinking or groundwork has gone into how to make these major reforms take effect.
Paul Waugh @paulwaugh 49s49 seconds ago Blimey, now Stuart Wheeler tells BBC5Live that Farage should step down. And if he wants to become leader to submit himself to election
@PickardJE: Arron Banks, Ukip mega-donor, tells @robinbrant that Patrick O'Flynn was "weak performer" in the election.
Are UKIP going to split?
Nige gets to keep the name, Carswell gets to keep the seat and the cash...
It's similar to the various 80's pop groups who fell out with each other, split and reformed as separate bands in the 21st century to raise a bit of cash towards their retirement.
There could be 'Carswell's UKIP', and 'Farage's UKIP' both appearing this Summer at the Pavillion Theatre, Cromer but on different dates.
Like. To make the comparison exact, you would need something like "George Galloway's UKIP", or "Lembit Opik's SNP", where some has-been who was never in the band at the time has nevertheless later won ownership in court, viz. "David Van Day's Bucks Fizz".
Like. To make the comparison exact, you would need something like "George Galloway's UKIP", or "Lembit Opik's SNP", where some has-been who was never in the band at the time has nevertheless later won ownership in court, viz. "David Van Day's Bucks Fizz".
If David Lee Carswell quits, can Nigel still call the band Van Halen?
Like. To make the comparison exact, you would need something like "George Galloway's UKIP", or "Lembit Opik's SNP", where some has-been who was never in the band at the time has nevertheless later won ownership in court, viz. "David Van Day's Bucks Fizz".
If David Lee Carswell quits, can Nigel still call the band Van Halen?
If it's bad now, imagine the squealing once EVEL passes and then Cameron allows a free-vote on repeal/reform of the Hunting Act with a c. 80+ seat majority.
Scottish votes for Scottish foxes !
The Act only applied to England and Wales. Scottish MPs did help in getting it passed through.
That won't be the case next time. I'd say 285-260 votes for repeal in E&W and possibly a bigger margin if the bill is for a move to a licenced regime.
The Conservatives need to shift the argument from "taking away rights" to "strengthening rights". If the new British Bill of Rights strengthened the right to free speech or the right to privacy, that's where the conversation would go. Of course, this would need to rebalance the platform more generally towards the more liberal wing of the party. Perhaps Carswell could be tempted back!
Me too; I went to see him give a talk on risk at the RI last year. Giving the public a proper understanding of risk & uncertainty is a really difficult challenge.
Like. To make the comparison exact, you would need something like "George Galloway's UKIP", or "Lembit Opik's SNP", where some has-been who was never in the band at the time has nevertheless later won ownership in court, viz. "David Van Day's Bucks Fizz".
If David Lee Carswell quits, can Nigel still call the band Van Halen?
We could have Nigel's Referendum Party coming up against Zac Goldsmith's revival of the original as the Heathrow Referendum Party.
@PickardJE: Arron Banks, Ukip mega-donor, tells @robinbrant that Patrick O'Flynn was "weak performer" in the election.
Are UKIP going to split?
Nige gets to keep the name, Carswell gets to keep the seat and the cash...
It's similar to the various 80's pop groups who fell out with each other, split and reformed as separate bands in the 21st century to raise a bit of cash towards their retirement.
There could be 'Carswell's UKIP', and 'Farage's UKIP' both appearing this Summer at the Pavillion Theatre, Cromer but on different dates.
Like. To make the comparison exact, you would need something like "George Galloway's UKIP", or "Lembit Opik's SNP", where some has-been who was never in the band at the time has nevertheless later won ownership in court, viz. "David Van Day's Bucks Fizz".
Bucks Fizz won Eurovision. Not a good analogy for UKIP.
It looks as though the main party that will be fighting for out is more concerned with fighting itself.
This is surely inevitable though. Isn't it in the nature of the beast?
It's a bit like Napoleon regretting he never got around to having Fouché shot. But Fouché was head of the secret police so obviously he was going to be untrustworthy. It's what secret policemen do.
@PickardJE: Arron Banks, Ukip mega-donor, tells @robinbrant that Patrick O'Flynn was "weak performer" in the election.
Are UKIP going to split?
Nige gets to keep the name, Carswell gets to keep the seat and the cash...
It's similar to the various 80's pop groups who fell out with each other, split and reformed as separate bands in the 21st century to raise a bit of cash towards their retirement.
There could be 'Carswell's UKIP', and 'Farage's UKIP' both appearing this Summer at the Pavillion Theatre, Cromer but on different dates.
Like. To make the comparison exact, you would need something like "George Galloway's UKIP", or "Lembit Opik's SNP", where some has-been who was never in the band at the time has nevertheless later won ownership in court, viz. "David Van Day's Bucks Fizz".
Bucks Fizz won Eurovision. Not a good analogy for UKIP.
Why not? UKIP won Euroelections. So both Buck's Fizz and UKIP won the fake version of success.
Just to confirm to Squareroot - £40 (+£10 Giftaid) has gone to Lupus as per our bet. Sorry it took so long - my laptop is being fixed so waited to get a chance to do it from work. Their donation process is not very helpful - if you click on Donate Now, their irritating JustGiving page kicks in to invite you to donate by phone or direct debit, but if you try a phone donation it then refuses to accept anything over £10. Spotted the entirely separate credit card donation section of their site in the end...
@PickardJE: Arron Banks, Ukip mega-donor, tells @robinbrant that Patrick O'Flynn was "weak performer" in the election.
Are UKIP going to split?
Nige gets to keep the name, Carswell gets to keep the seat and the cash...
It's similar to the various 80's pop groups who fell out with each other, split and reformed as separate bands in the 21st century to raise a bit of cash towards their retirement.
There could be 'Carswell's UKIP', and 'Farage's UKIP' both appearing this Summer at the Pavillion Theatre, Cromer but on different dates.
Like. To make the comparison exact, you would need something like "George Galloway's UKIP", or "Lembit Opik's SNP", where some has-been who was never in the band at the time has nevertheless later won ownership in court, viz. "David Van Day's Bucks Fizz".
Bucks Fizz won Eurovision. Not a good analogy for UKIP.
Of course it is, Ukip won the euros. Have you gone mad?
Wow - what an extraordinary downward spiral. If (big 'if') Carswell ditches then UKIP, while not over, are massively diminished and look ever more like the protest group that their critics paint them as rather than a serious political party.
What a base they had to become a genuine, longstanding political force in this country. All potentially thrown away by the ego (or the id?) of the man who brought them to the brink.
This past week has been a dream for us PB Tories hasn't it?
Everything we dreamed would happen, is is happening.
All we need now is for Nicola Sturgeon and Alex Salmond to defect to the Tories.
You must be in seventh heaven TSE. Won't last though, nothing does. Sigh!!
Yup, I'm enjoying it whilst it lasts.
I think this is very wise. Labour may well elect someone half sensible and might might might stop their weaponising and daemonising tactics. Might. However opportunities present themselves for the Tories just as UKIP have marched themselves down a blind alley and the left have fractured asunder in Scotland. Basically though the Tories must just pursue their policies and leave their opponents to their own devices with minimum hubris.
The Conservatives need to shift the argument from "taking away rights" to "strengthening rights". If the new British Bill of Rights strengthened the right to free speech or the right to privacy, that's where the conversation would go. Of course, this would need to rebalance the platform more generally towards the more liberal wing of the party. Perhaps Carswell could be tempted back!
Spot on. Ironically, for a party led by a communications guy, the Tories are fairly crap at PR of their brand, and get caught out and put on the defensive by the Left time and time again.
Yes yes, we've just won a majority. But how much of that was in spite of the Tories brand, rather than because of it?
We need to become more than just competent economic stewards with a well-rated PM, who won't sell out to the SNP, if we are to win in 2020. Particularly since the leader may be different, and who knows about the economic cycle then?
Wow - what an extraordinary downward spiral. If (big 'if') Carswell ditches then UKIP, while not over, are massively diminished and look ever more like the protest group that their critics paint them as rather than a serious political party.
What a base they had to become a genuine, longstanding political force in this country. All potentially thrown away by the ego (or the id?) of the man who brought them to the brink.
Bizarre and fascinating.
It would be a senseless waste of potential for them were that to occur. Ok, they didn't win as many seats as hoped, but things were still looking pretty good, there has been no need for this, but the number of Kippers involvedin the spat shows it is not an invention of the media.
Richard out of curiosity what do you think the scenarios for Eurosceptics are following the referendum?
I currently see a few scenarios 1: Out wins. We leave, its over. There is no way there'd be a second vote to stay in. 2: England votes out, but Scotland votes in. Constitutional havoc ensues regardless of what the total is. 3: Narrow in vote. Eurosceptics keep pushing for "one more push" SNP style. 4: A significant in victory, say anything over 60%. This is what I see as most likely, but not sure how eurosceptics would respond?
If there's a significant in victory, would you consider the matter resolved for now, or would you keep agitating for out straight away?
I wouldn't agitate for Out straight away if there had been a big In victory. It would be pointless.
I would continue to campaign for us to leave and would wait for the inevitable EU moves to closer Union and the realisation that Cameron had got nothing substantial from his renegotiatin as it all falls apart over the following few years.
I would probably also watch and enjoy the sight of the Tory party fracturing as Cameron becomes regarded as a copy of Heath.
Thanks for the response. I respect you and that's what I thought you might say, just wanted to see.
I think for the same sensible reason you won't agaitate the Tory party won't fracture either. I suspect anyone who was going to leave would have left already by now, those who are still in the party may care as passionately for wanting to leave as you do but if that's not on the table then it'd be better to concentrate on other priorities for now and wait for a better time to bring this back up.
The exception would be if Cameron attempted to whip people into campaigning for In. That would be suicide.
I think the difficulty for the Tories is that both IN and OUT will be waging Project Fear campaigns, I guess 2/3 of Tories will be IN and 1/3 for OUT. The right wing MSM will be split, given the example of Scotland, which ever side loses the battles will likely rage on. Indeed even in Scotland you will have Unionists splitting between IN and OUT, and SNP splitting as well. This will also be a war waged on social media.
Me too; I went to see him give a talk on risk at the RI last year. Giving the public a proper understanding of risk & uncertainty is a really difficult challenge.
It is, and he does a good job (though as I'm a More Or Less listener he's preaching to the choir as far as I'm concerned).
Nice quote in there on the hitherto-infallible Nate Silver - like so many in the aftermath of the bonfire-of-the-(non-Tory)-egos that was GE2015: human after all.
From reading the (highly unrepresentative) facebook and Twitter, the Left seem to be mobilising very quickly to resist the repeal of the Human Rights Act as their casus belli. They are choosing their battles.
Are the Tories prepared for this?
There is a PR battle to be won, and they need to start making the case or I could easily see getting picked apart in committee by the SNP and the Lords grinding it to a halt.
Your first line answers your question. Lefties , and rather too many other people on here get totally misled by Twitter and FB somehow having fingers on the political pulse. They don't - last Thursday showed that far more eloquently than any words of mine. You might as reliably follow CiF !!!
Your first line answers your question. Lefties , and rather too many other people on here get totally misled by Twitter and FB somehow having fingers on the political pulse. They don't - last Thursday showed that far more eloquently than any words of mine. You might as reliably follow CiF !!!
Richard out of curiosity what do you think the scenarios for Eurosceptics are following the referendum?
I currently see a few scenarios 1: Out wins. We leave, its over. There is no way there'd be a second vote to stay in. 2: England votes out, but Scotland votes in. Constitutional havoc ensues regardless of what the total is. 3: Narrow in vote. Eurosceptics keep pushing for "one more push" SNP style. 4: A significant in victory, say anything over 60%. This is what I see as most likely, but not sure how eurosceptics would respond?
If there's a significant in victory, would you consider the matter resolved for now, or would you keep agitating for out straight away?
I wouldn't agitate for Out straight away if there had been a big In victory. It would be pointless.
I would continue to campaign for us to leave and would wait for the inevitable EU moves to closer Union and the realisation that Cameron had got nothing substantial from his renegotiatin as it all falls apart over the following few years.
I would probably also watch and enjoy the sight of the Tory party fracturing as Cameron becomes regarded as a copy of Heath.
Thanks for the response. I respect you and that's what I thought you might say, just wanted to see.
I think for the same sensible reason you won't agaitate the Tory party won't fracture either. I suspect anyone who was going to leave would have left already by now, those who are still in the party may care as passionately for wanting to leave as you do but if that's not on the table then it'd be better to concentrate on other priorities for now and wait for a better time to bring this back up.
The exception would be if Cameron attempted to whip people into campaigning for In. That would be suicide.
I think the difficulty for the Tories is that both IN and OUT will be waging Project Fear campaigns, I guess 2/3 of Tories will be IN and 1/3 for OUT. The right wing MSM will be split, given the example of Scotland, which ever side loses the battles will likely rage on. Indeed even in Scotland you will have Unionists splitting between IN and OUT, and SNP splitting as well. This will also be a war waged on social media.
Shadow farming minister steps down to return to backbenches to play a full and constructive role in the rebuilding of the Labour party in Wales and the UK.
They are selecting Greater Manchester's Interim Mayor...Lord Smith (Wigan Council Leader) vs Tony Lloyd (Manchester PPC)
Yes and I expect so. Too early to say who though. Quite an open field. Balls last time.
How do you rate the various candidates' chances?
In my largely uninformed opinion it will be between Andy Burnham and one other, whoever breaks through from the rest.
My preference would have been a senior bod (say AJ), cast in the Michael Howard role, to nurture a winner (from a set of hopefuls) and give air cover for a genuine policy rethink.
Wow - what an extraordinary downward spiral. If (big 'if') Carswell ditches then UKIP, while not over, are massively diminished and look ever more like the protest group that their critics paint them as rather than a serious political party.
What a base they had to become a genuine, longstanding political force in this country. All potentially thrown away by the ego (or the id?) of the man who brought them to the brink.
Bizarre and fascinating.
Bizarre, but not as unusual as you'd think. My organizational behaviour prof at INSEAD wrote a very entertaining book on this phenomenon, "Unstable at the Top" (Manfred Kets de Vries), which catalogues powerful innovators who built empires doomed to collapse, or at least undergo major ructions, upon their departure.
I think even Isam would agree that Nigel is going to have to give up the leadership. It would seem to be all over bar the shouting.
I shouldn't think so. If he does he would walk an election contest so there is no point.
My prediction is they will lose Kassam and the other bod.
I mean give up and not stand again (for a good while). If he gave his blessing, Thatcher and Major style, his preferred candidate would still probably win.
As for the short money, I thought it was an MPs job to improve the life of his constituents? And if they spend money on staff that make that more likely who are we to sniff? I thought Carswell wanted 'change' and he thinks the people if clacton voted for him because they did too. So ask them if they'd prefer change to political procedure or change to the awful conditions they live in and then decide
In general yes, but the Short Money is *specifically* to assist the parliamentary party in holding the government to account: to use it for other purposes would be dishonest.
You could probably stretch it to fund a policy team focused on developing a Life After Out platform, but tough to go much beyond that
If Ukip were denounced by the other parties for taking money from Westmjnster and spending it on the poorest people in Britain I think it would be a net win for them with the public even if it's dishonest
Its not just a case of being denounced. Its a case of being prosecuted. I am sure that Farage might have mixed feelings about the party's only MP being done for fraud. It might look bad on the party but at least from his point of view he would be rid of (yet another) possible challenger to his position.
Would Farage be that bothered? There have been enough controversies over his own 'expenses', allowances, whatever, over the years. Huge sums towards "running machines" and "banks of computers" in rent free sheds. Whatever happened to the audit he promised in 2014?
He lied.
Follow the money. Remember the fiddle over the UKIP dinner bill? I suspect Carswell has picked up the scent of UKIPs contempt for public money.
This past week has been a dream for us PB Tories hasn't it?
Everything we dreamed would happen, is is happening.
All we need now is for Nicola Sturgeon and Alex Salmond to defect to the Tories.
You must be in seventh heaven TSE. Won't last though, nothing does. Sigh!!
Yup, I'm enjoying it whilst it lasts.
I think this is very wise. Labour may well elect someone half sensible and might might might stop their weaponising and daemonising tactics. Might. However opportunities present themselves for the Tories just as UKIP have marched themselves down a blind alley and the left have fractured asunder in Scotland. Basically though the Tories must just pursue their policies and leave their opponents to their own devices with minimum hubris.
Twitting of disappointed lefties aside, the reason Tories are feeling quite chipper is that the size of the swing required for Labour to get back in is unprecented and that unlike 1992 the Tories face only a divided opposition. So the likelihood and consequences of mis-steps leading to any such swing feel relatively less now than then.
It is also worth noting that Labour has a 40-year near-perfect record of electing total duds as leader. You have to go back to Wislon to find the last one before Blair who was able to win elections.
Nothing about Labour today suggests they have either the means or the choices to elect anyone any better than Callaghan, Foot, Kinnock, Smith, Brown, or Miliband. The candidates must all be MPs and Labour's MPs are broadly either quota women and minorities or union hacks. It's not as if they have a meritocratic approach to MP selection and it's not even as if they're seeking the new Blair. If there were a new Blair they's hate him for being too Blairite.
The Conservatives need to shift the argument from "taking away rights" to "strengthening rights". If the new British Bill of Rights strengthened the right to free speech or the right to privacy, that's where the conversation would go. Of course, this would need to rebalance the platform more generally towards the more liberal wing of the party. Perhaps Carswell could be tempted back!
I think he'd have to come back as a supplicant. Can't imagine an invitation. Even then, does Cameron need him? He has his majority, Agent Carswell isn't going to oppose Cameron on much and if he did come back how could Cameron promote him in preference to someone else who hasn't exhibited flakiness and disloyalty?
Yes and I expect so. Too early to say who though. Quite an open field. Balls last time.
How do you rate the various candidates' chances?
In my largely uninformed opinion it will be between Andy Burnham and one other, whoever breaks through from the rest.
My preference would have been a senior bod (say AJ), cast in the Michael Howard role, to nurture a winner (from a set of hopefuls) and give air cover for a genuine policy rethink.
How does the deputy leader work? Id that a separate election or is it the winner of the shad cab poll? In either event how does Labour ensure a woman gets one or the other?
Sadly, Farage made a schoolboy error in announcing he would quit as leader if not elected MP. This no doubt gave his detractors even more of a reason to work to see him defeated. I think his announcement to take a summer break before standing for re-election in the autumn was a sensible one. It allowed him to "save face" and also gave him and the party time to reflect on the small matter of "where do we go from here". If he had stuck to that it would have given others in the party a chance to build their profile and show that the party is more than a one-man-band. If he is as popular as he and his supporters believe, he would have been re-elected anyway. In short, I think Farage needs at the very least to go back to Plan B (summer "break"). Probably do both him and Ukip the world of good. And the whole lot of them need to stop fighting like the proverbial ferrets in a sack. With almost 4 million votes and Labour badly bruised, damaged and in denial, the party could be on the brink of a big breakthrough - but they really need to get their act together, fast.
Me too; I went to see him give a talk on risk at the RI last year. Giving the public a proper understanding of risk & uncertainty is a really difficult challenge.
It is, and he does a good job (though as I'm a More Or Less listener he's preaching to the choir as far as I'm concerned).
Nice quote in there on the hitherto-infallible Nate Silver - like so many in the aftermath of the bonfire-of-the-(non-Tory)-egos that was GE2015: human after all.
Risk is hard to understand and very hard to teach (it's pretty much what I do). Even harder for the public to understanding is knowledge - what do and what can we know. Many people believe they understand from statistics far more than they actually can possibly know.
On epistemology, I like the work of Andy Sterling at Brighton, and the sections of Nasim Taleb's book Black Swan that deal with analyzing past data - how each set of data can support whole families of internally consistent explanations, but how you cannot know which is the correct one.
Nate Silver has always been pretty up front that he is not a political pundit, but a number cruncher pure and simple. If the input numbers are wrong, his analysis will be. I have always cautioned against taking his word as gospel, because inevitably at some unknowable points the numbers will be wrong.
A bit fanciful really. Murray's intervention was always a publicity stunt. The BBC love lefty comedians for sure and it looks possible to its joy that the next labour leader might actually have to marry one. However just what is there secret about it when it was always likely that a tv programme about the election was going to go out on the BBC?
As for the short money, I thought it was an MPs job to improve the life of his constituents? And if they spend money on staff that make that more likely who are we to sniff? I thought Carswell wanted 'change' and he thinks the people if clacton voted for him because they did too. So ask them if they'd prefer change to political procedure or change to the awful conditions they live in and then decide
In general yes, but the Short Money is *specifically* to assist the parliamentary party in holding the government to account: to use it for other purposes would be dishonest.
You could probably stretch it to fund a policy team focused on developing a Life After Out platform, but tough to go much beyond that
If Ukip were denounced by the other parties for taking money from Westmjnster and spending it on the poorest people in Britain I think it would be a net win for them with the public even if it's dishonest
Its not just a case of being denounced. Its a case of being prosecuted. I am sure that Farage might have mixed feelings about the party's only MP being done for fraud. It might look bad on the party but at least from his point of view he would be rid of (yet another) possible challenger to his position.
Would Farage be that bothered? There have been enough controversies over his own 'expenses', allowances, whatever, over the years. Huge sums towards "running machines" and "banks of computers" in rent free sheds. Whatever happened to the audit he promised in 2014?
He lied.
Follow the money. Remember the fiddle over the UKIP dinner bill? I suspect Carswell has picked up the scent of UKIPs contempt for public money.
No doubt. A year or so ago I predicted on here another UKIP expense fiddling scanfal before the GE and sure enough one came along.
If your party is founded on the principle that you object to the EU and therefore it's OK to rip it off, it must be a very short step to concluding that GEs are unfair to UKIP and therefore it's OK to rip off the expenses there too.
So the LD,s have gone..The Labour party is a huge headless chicken, UKIP appears to be losing its only MP..and the SNP is about as dangerous as a fart in a hurricane...been a good week for Cammo.
Yvette Cooper on WATO on R4 being very evasive and going on and on and on and on talking over the interviewer. Will be a great choice for Labour Leader from A Conservative point of view. Just imagine HIPS on the scale of a Govt? Kendall is the only one that frightens me.
Comments
http://www.conservativehome.com/highlights/2015/05/interview-gavin-barwell-the-ultimate-tory-proof-of-how-incumbency-can-be-made-to-work.html
http://conservativewoman.co.uk/david-keighley-pub-landlord-did-not-act-alone-against-farage-he-got-a-little-help-from-bbc-friends/
The Lords rejected the ban when it was first proposed for very good reasons.
@IsabelHardman: @Sean_Kemp this many http://t.co/yyvx7DlIZy
They clearly didn't expect to win, nor be in a position to implement most of their manifesto. So I don't think much thinking or groundwork has gone into how to make these major reforms take effect.
http://understandinguncertainty.org/was-anyone-right-about-pre-election-polls
Blimey, now Stuart Wheeler tells BBC5Live that Farage should step down. And if he wants to become leader to submit himself to election
@WillHeaven: I think Laura might have been on to something... https://t.co/jXJgGtPjNk
That won't be the case next time. I'd say 285-260 votes for repeal in E&W and possibly a bigger margin if the bill is for a move to a licenced regime.
The Conservatives need to shift the argument from "taking away rights" to "strengthening rights". If the new British Bill of Rights strengthened the right to free speech or the right to privacy, that's where the conversation would go. Of course, this would need to rebalance the platform more generally towards the more liberal wing of the party. Perhaps Carswell could be tempted back!
It's a bit like Napoleon regretting he never got around to having Fouché shot. But Fouché was head of the secret police so obviously he was going to be untrustworthy. It's what secret policemen do.
Watch yourself
What a base they had to become a genuine, longstanding political force in this country. All potentially thrown away by the ego (or the id?) of the man who brought them to the brink.
Bizarre and fascinating.
However opportunities present themselves for the Tories just as UKIP have marched themselves down a blind alley and the left have fractured asunder in Scotland.
Basically though the Tories must just pursue their policies and leave their opponents to their own devices with minimum hubris.
Yes yes, we've just won a majority. But how much of that was in spite of the Tories brand, rather than because of it?
We need to become more than just competent economic stewards with a well-rated PM, who won't sell out to the SNP, if we are to win in 2020. Particularly since the leader may be different, and who knows about the economic cycle then?
Nice quote in there on the hitherto-infallible Nate Silver - like so many in the aftermath of the bonfire-of-the-(non-Tory)-egos that was GE2015: human after all.
CU 2.96
AB 3.7
YB-C 5.8
LK 8.8
My prediction is they will lose Kassam and the other bod.
"Project Fear " : tick
You missed out "Sevco"
They are selecting Greater Manchester's Interim Mayor...Lord Smith (Wigan Council Leader) vs Tony Lloyd (Manchester PPC)
My preference would have been a senior bod (say AJ), cast in the Michael Howard role, to nurture a winner (from a set of hopefuls) and give air cover for a genuine policy rethink.
4/6 Yes 11/10 No perhaps?
https://books.google.com/books/about/Unstable_at_the_top.html?id=X_TsAAAAMAAJ&hl=en
Remember the fiddle over the UKIP dinner bill? I suspect Carswell has picked up the scent of UKIPs contempt for public money.
It is also worth noting that Labour has a 40-year near-perfect record of electing total duds as leader. You have to go back to Wislon to find the last one before Blair who was able to win elections.
Nothing about Labour today suggests they have either the means or the choices to elect anyone any better than Callaghan, Foot, Kinnock, Smith, Brown, or Miliband. The candidates must all be MPs and Labour's MPs are broadly either quota women and minorities or union hacks. It's not as if they have a meritocratic approach to MP selection and it's not even as if they're seeking the new Blair. If there were a new Blair they's hate him for being too Blairite. I think he'd have to come back as a supplicant. Can't imagine an invitation. Even then, does Cameron need him? He has his majority, Agent Carswell isn't going to oppose Cameron on much and if he did come back how could Cameron promote him in preference to someone else who hasn't exhibited flakiness and disloyalty?
Arron Banks: "Carswell got 25,000 votes but Nigel got 4m. Nigel got 99.6% of the votes to Carswell’s 0.4%." http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/b76e454e-fa06-11e4-b432-00144feab7de.html?siteedition=uk#axzz3ZgHEjB3y …
De-lud-ed
I think his announcement to take a summer break before standing for re-election in the autumn was a sensible one. It allowed him to "save face" and also gave him and the party time to reflect on the small matter of "where do we go from here".
If he had stuck to that it would have given others in the party a chance to build their profile and show that the party is more than a one-man-band. If he is as popular as he and his supporters believe, he would have been re-elected anyway.
In short, I think Farage needs at the very least to go back to Plan B (summer "break"). Probably do both him and Ukip the world of good. And the whole lot of them need to stop fighting like the proverbial ferrets in a sack. With almost 4 million votes and Labour badly bruised, damaged and in denial, the party could be on the brink of a big breakthrough - but they really need to get their act together, fast.
On epistemology, I like the work of Andy Sterling at Brighton, and the sections of Nasim Taleb's book Black Swan that deal with analyzing past data - how each set of data can support whole families of internally consistent explanations, but how you cannot know which is the correct one.
Nate Silver has always been pretty up front that he is not a political pundit, but a number cruncher pure and simple. If the input numbers are wrong, his analysis will be. I have always cautioned against taking his word as gospel, because inevitably at some unknowable points the numbers will be wrong.
However just what is there secret about it when it was always likely that a tv programme about the election was going to go out on the BBC?
If your party is founded on the principle that you object to the EU and therefore it's OK to rip it off, it must be a very short step to concluding that GEs are unfair to UKIP and therefore it's OK to rip off the expenses there too.
Why am I seeing all the steps in a set of comments?
I looked at my profile on here and it is set to just one depth.