RobD The difference was in 2010 the Coalition was left a huge deficit and the eurozone crisis also did not help and the economy grew from the recession of 2010, by 2020 with the Parliament starting with a growing economy and several years of cuts already having occurred there will be no excuse
Felix However Osborne will have to have produced a surplus by 2018/19 or the Tories are likely to be thrown out in 2020. Most of the leadership contendors are making noises to suggest that Labour spent too much towards the end of the Brown years anyway, while they need to make moves on that on tax there is no reason they cannot keep their policy to restore the 50% top tax rate for now, popular with voters, and back tax cuts only for middle and low income earners
Possibly true - but we hear a lot of such doom and gloom forecasts from Labour and unfortunately it reads like wishful thinking - there is no positive and believable Labour offer because they reject all meaningful cuts, and want to spend more. I think relying on polling which says people favour other people paying more tax, into actual votes is not an easy sell. They tried it a few weeks ago.
SquareRoot I don't think Kendall makes much difference, in any case if there is no surplus by 2020 the Tories lose anyway, if there is issues like post EU ref are likely to be more prominent and potential Tory splits while voters may want a change after years of austerity
That is factually true that it didn't start with Brown in 1997, but Lawson in 1986. The blame for the financial crisis can go straight to Lawson, he started the ball rolling with the deregulation of finance and loans. An exact replica of the bubble and the financial crisis but in a smaller scale happened between 1986 and 1995 thanks to Lawson's reforms.
Whatever circle Labour try to square its going to be one hell of a job. The narrative that the mess we are in was caused by the Labour party who didn't save when the sun was shining and spent wildly after the crash is engrained. It doesn't matter what the truth actually is nor what Labour say(unless they do a mea culpa), the electorate will not believe them
Only by skipping a generation to someone like Kendal who can avoid the worst of any of the blame game do they stand a chance, otherwise its going to be a long hard road...
The truth is quite complicated and there are valid arguments on each side. But most people do not understand the issue and as you say "It doesn't matter what the truth actually is" - most people have bought the Tory lie of the "Great Labour Recession".
I don't accept that that is not reversible. What Labour need to do is keep talking about the "The Big Tory Lie about the "Great Labour Recession" and point out that it was a world recession that started in the US and was not caused by Labour. Period.
No excuses. No apologies. It doesn't matter that the Tories are not now claiming that Labour caused the recsssion. You need to counter one big lie with another one. It needs to be simple, believable and repeated over and over. It needs to obliterate the Tory narrative and substitute one about Tory lies.
Whatever circle Labour try to square its going to be one hell of a job. The narrative that the mess we are in was caused by the Labour party who didn't save when the sun was shining and spent wildly after the crash is engrained. It doesn't matter what the truth actually is nor what Labour say(unless they do a mea culpa), the electorate will not believe them
Only by skipping a generation to someone like Kendal who can avoid the worst of any of the blame game do they stand a chance, otherwise its going to be a long hard road...
The truth is quite complicated and there are valid arguments on each side. But most people do not understand the issue and as you say "It doesn't matter what the truth actually is" - most people have bought the Tory lie of the "Great Labour Recession".
I don't accept that that is not reversible. What Labour need to do is keep talking about the "The Big Tory Lie about the "Great Labour Recession" and point out that it was a world recession that started in the US and was not caused by Labour. Period.
No excuses. No apologies. It doesn't matter that the Tories are not now claiming that Labour caused the recsssion. You need to counter one big lie with another one. It needs to be simple, believable and repeated over and over. It needs to obliterate the Tory narrative and substitute one about Tory lies.
Border Force 'unable to cope' with the influx of migrants, says former immigration chief Former chief inspector of immigration John Vine says Border Force losing its most experienced officers, robbing the country of their expertise in spotting stowaway migrants
It doesn't matter that the Tories are not now claiming that Labour caused the recsssion. You need to counter one big lie with another one. It needs to be simple, believable and repeated over and over. It needs to obliterate the Tory narrative and substitute one about Tory lies.
A suggestion for the big lie based on arguments I've seen on the internet: you could say that Labour weren't really in power between 97 and 2010 because Blair and co. were really Tories, ergo any problems were caused by Tory policies!
SquareRoot I don't think Kendall makes much difference, in any case if there is no surplus by 2020 the Tories lose anyway, if there is issues like post EU ref are likely to be more prominent and potential Tory splits while voters may want a change after years of austerity
It's not the deficit that's going to kill the Tories, it's the unbalanced economy that's on the verge of crashing and the internal policy war between the liberal wing and the conservative wing. It is like 1992, the Tories are a Black Wednesday and a Maastricht Treaty away from collapse.
Actions speak louder than words. Confessions of past errors will only be believed if the public thinks that the confession is being made by a penitent. If it is coupled with an attack on new cuts, the public will conclude that the confession is not sincere. Meanwhile, the words will be used by the Comservatives to beat Labour around the head.
Labour would do better not to dwell on the past but to show financial rectitude for the future, accepting that the public decisively voted for the Conservatives' austerity and only opposing cuts and privatisations if it can replace them with fully costed alternatives. It should press for early full fiscal autonomy for Scotland and enhanced fiscal autonomy for London and Wales.
And instead it should focus its efforts to support the poor on improving the starting conditions for children in poverty and those in low paid work and improving the lives of ordinary folk by encouraging social behaviour and discouraging anti-social behaviour.
Oh, and addressing the crisis of productivity should be a Labour theme. What better subject for the party of labour than investigating how labour should be enabled to work more effectively?
Felix However, if a surplus has been produced by 2020 Labour will not be elected to cut spending but to implement a balanced and more prudent investment in public services, if a surplus has not been produced Labour will likely win whatever they say. Labour did not lose because of the 50% tax rate, neither did the Tories lose the 2001 election because of opposing the Euro, but other factors
Cameron might have pleged to stop the Tories "banging on about Europe" - but it seems that's the only thing the Tory awkward squad go on about. There is no great civil liberty wing, or socially conservative right. Perhaps they will find their voice in this parliament, but for the time being they are silent.
Speedy If making billions from kitsch hotels counts as the 'most successful' man to run for the presidency, pity the former Supreme judges, professors, surgeons and even Russ Perot who also did so, and was arguably a far more successful businessman. Trump may have made a lot of money, but he started off inheriting a fair whack anyway
Border Force 'unable to cope' with the influx of migrants, says former immigration chief Former chief inspector of immigration John Vine says Border Force losing its most experienced officers, robbing the country of their expertise in spotting stowaway migrants
Whatever circle Labour try to square its going to be one hell of a job. The narrative that the mess we are in was caused by the Labour party who didn't save when the sun was shining and spent wildly after the crash is engrained. It doesn't matter what the truth actually is nor what Labour say(unless they do a mea culpa), the electorate will not believe them
Only by skipping a generation to someone like Kendal who can avoid the worst of any of the blame game do they stand a chance, otherwise its going to be a long hard road...
It was a world recession that started in the US and was not caused by Labour. Period.
Of course it was, bloody Americans coming over here and queuing outside Northern Rock in 2007... let down by its dreadful supervision by the New York Fed... their deposits secured against junk mortgages on homes in the mid-west... Nothing to do with Labour, no sir... nothing to do with eight years of doomed monetary policy failure and wholly ineffective regulation
Border Force 'unable to cope' with the influx of migrants, says former immigration chief Former chief inspector of immigration John Vine says Border Force losing its most experienced officers, robbing the country of their expertise in spotting stowaway migrants
That is factually true that it didn't start with Brown in 1997, but Lawson in 1986. The blame for the financial crisis can go straight to Lawson, he started the ball rolling with the deregulation of finance and loans. An exact replica of the bubble and the financial crisis but in a smaller scale happened between 1986 and 1995 thanks to Lawson's reforms.
The crisis (global and local) was a crisis from 2000/1 onwards. It doesnt really go back much further than that. It is possible to make arguments about the coercion of the us federal gvt into sub prime lending.
Border Force 'unable to cope' with the influx of migrants, says former immigration chief Former chief inspector of immigration John Vine says Border Force losing its most experienced officers, robbing the country of their expertise in spotting stowaway migrants
Here's the solution: get rid of the border controls.
Save us wasting a huge amount of money on unnecessary public sector employees.
and when most of the third world promptly relocates to the UK and signs on for JSA and Child Benefit, and sends their kids to our schools and their ill to our hospitals...
Border Force 'unable to cope' with the influx of migrants, says former immigration chief Former chief inspector of immigration John Vine says Border Force losing its most experienced officers, robbing the country of their expertise in spotting stowaway migrants
Here's the solution: get rid of the border controls.
Save us wasting a huge amount of money on unnecessary public sector employees.
and when most of the third world promptly relocates to the UK and signs on for JSA and Child Benefit, and sends their kids to our schools and their ill to our hospitals...
We'll be able to pay for it because migrants are the ones who pay most net contributions to our budget. We'll be able to fill the vacancies in the health service because of migrants.
JSA is no issue whatsoever because the kind of people who have the get-up-and-go drive to relocate to find a better life for themselves and their family aren't the kind to sit at home on the dole.
I don't think we disagree on that much, actually. Both of us are know Greece should never have joined the Euro, and that they should have taken either of the opportunities that existed to exit.
However, I think you underestimate the disruption to Greece of a disorderly exit from the Eurozone. And I think you ignore the fact that (usually left wing) governments have managed to avoid reform through perpetual devaluation of the currency for seemingly indefinite periods.
Regarding the immediate impact on the Greek economy of a disorderly exit. Remember:
1. Greek firms with Euro denominated liabilities to firms in the rest of the Eurozone would now have liabilties that cost 2x what they did previously. If you owe an invoice to a German supplier for €1,000, and the Euro value of your bank account is now only half what it was a little while back you would be in serious trouble.
2. The Greeks would still owe the money. They can default all they like, but until they have settled their account with the IMF, then there will be no private sector credit for them. Worse: under the terms of the IMF loans, they can have Greek state assets seized abroad. A Greek naval ship docking in Bari could be impounded and sold to meet IMF debts. Of course, this will be negotiated away in time, but this will not be painless, and Greece will not be debt free.
3. The real purchasing power of Euros held in bank accounts will have been cut by 50% or so. Given this, the effect of Grexit is pretty much the same as a 50% tax on all bank accounts in Greece to pay off the Greek national debt. Essentially the cost of exit is being born by the savers of Greece.
4. Greece is a massive importer of staple products. When the British pound collapsed in the mid 1980s, we were cushioned by the fact that we were net exporters of energy, and had only a modest food deficit. These things are not true for Greece: coal, gas, oil would all double in price (and so, therefore, would electricity). Greece is a big importer of food too: less than 50% of calories consumed in Greece are growth there. Food prices would leap. In other words, poorer Greeks would find they had much less money than before. It's
5. The Greek government would not suddenly become economically rational. Venezuela, Argentina, etc. have not becomes bastions of free market sanity. More likely there would be devaluation upon devaluation to pay for government largess, with each decline in the value of the currency paid for by the prudent savers of Greece.
Border Force 'unable to cope' with the influx of migrants, says former immigration chief Former chief inspector of immigration John Vine says Border Force losing its most experienced officers, robbing the country of their expertise in spotting stowaway migrants
The crisis (global and local) was a crisis from 2000/1 onwards. It doesnt really go back much further than that. It is possible to make arguments about the coercion of the us federal gvt into sub prime lending.
Agreed. The monetary policy reaction to the dot-com crash (exacerbated by the panic after 9/11) was at the root of it.
Border Force 'unable to cope' with the influx of migrants, says former immigration chief Former chief inspector of immigration John Vine says Border Force losing its most experienced officers, robbing the country of their expertise in spotting stowaway migrants
Here's the solution: get rid of the border controls.
Save us wasting a huge amount of money on unnecessary public sector employees.
and when most of the third world promptly relocates to the UK and signs on for JSA and Child Benefit, and sends their kids to our schools and their ill to our hospitals...
Border Force 'unable to cope' with the influx of migrants, says former immigration chief Former chief inspector of immigration John Vine says Border Force losing its most experienced officers, robbing the country of their expertise in spotting stowaway migrants
Felix However, if a surplus has been produced by 2020 Labour will not be elected to cut spending but to implement a balanced and more prudent investment in public services, if a surplus has not been produced Labour will likely win whatever they say. Labour did not lose because of the 50% tax rate, neither did the Tories lose the 2001 election because of opposing the Euro, but other factors
Rofl - nominated for the most delude post of the year - heads I win and tails you lose
Border Force 'unable to cope' with the influx of migrants, says former immigration chief Former chief inspector of immigration John Vine says Border Force losing its most experienced officers, robbing the country of their expertise in spotting stowaway migrants
Border Force 'unable to cope' with the influx of migrants, says former immigration chief Former chief inspector of immigration John Vine says Border Force losing its most experienced officers, robbing the country of their expertise in spotting stowaway migrants
Border Force 'unable to cope' with the influx of migrants, says former immigration chief Former chief inspector of immigration John Vine says Border Force losing its most experienced officers, robbing the country of their expertise in spotting stowaway migrants
Here's the solution: get rid of the border controls.
Save us wasting a huge amount of money on unnecessary public sector employees.
A true libertarian solution, let people decide where they want to live not nations.
And let people decide what taxes they will pay to support others?
Taxes are used to pay to support citizens. Problem solved.
Are we not all EU 'citizens' now?
As you know, I am a supporter of EFTA/EEA as a destination for the UK. I would prefer it to be combined with Schengen membership, but I realise I am probably in a minority of one.
I'm a lefty, but I fully acknowledge that deficit spending is only needed in an emergency or else the economy suffers in the long term and if there is a crisis you won't have many resources if you are already in debt. That's the lesson many learned personally after the financial crisis: debt = bad.
Labour should go for a balanced budget amendment for times of peace and prosperity, but changing the spending priorities to choose where to spend the money more wisely. You can still spend it on schools and hospitals but you have to take it from somewhere else in the budget.
There have been few years since World War 2 when there was not deficit spending. It's been much more a matters of the size of that deficit. Beyond a negative PSBR under Lawson in the late 1980s when the Treasury was flushed with the proceeds of North Sea Oil and Privatisation a surplus has been rare.
I'm a lefty, but I fully acknowledge that deficit spending is only needed in an emergency or else the economy suffers in the long term and if there is a crisis you won't have many resources if you are already in debt. That's the lesson many learned personally after the financial crisis: debt = bad.
Labour should go for a balanced budget amendment for times of peace and prosperity, but changing the spending priorities to choose where to spend the money more wisely. You can still spend it on schools and hospitals but you have to take it from somewhere else in the budget.
There have been few years since World War 2 when there was not deficit spending. It's been much more a matters of the size of that deficit. Beyond a negative PSBR under Lawson in the late 1980s when the Treasury was flushed with the proceeds of North Sea Oil and Privatisation a surplus has been rare.
It's OK to run a small deficit. The issue is when debt as a proportion of GDP begins to soar.
Imagine you have debt-to-GDP of 60%, and you run a deficit of 2% of GDP every year, but that your economy is growing at 2.5%, and there's 1.5% inflation.
One year later... your debt-to-GDP is still 60% and all is well,
The problem is if debt-to-GDP is 140%, and you are running and a 6% budget deficit, and your economy is shrinking 2% and there is no inflation... then you're in trouble.
Thank you for the article, David. As always, there are large parts of it with which I don't entirely agree but the central argument - that Labour lacked any kind of coherent and credible economic policy alternative to the Coalition parties - is beyond dispute. It was in my view the Party's Achilles heel from 2010 onwards.
The Coalition's economic policy can and has been credibly critiqued from the free market end of the spectrum and I have serious reservations about the amount and longevity of QE and the failure to return to what I would consider normal monetary policy conditions.
I would also argue it is absurd to treat some areas of public spending as sacrosanct because they are the ones most used by your core electoral support and drastically assault others which are much less well regarded by said core support.
My criticism of Brown after 1999 was not that he increased the funding for public services but what he did was tantamount to force feeding a starving malnourished man a banquet. The atrophied public services simply could not absorb or make best use of the money they were compelled to spend and ended up making bad decisions and wasting billions.
As to the downturn itself, the problem began not when the spending increased but when economic activity slowed and the income dried up. The problems with the public finances began with the collapse in tax receipts (income tax, corporation tax and VAT in particular) and that exacerbated the amount needing to be borrowed and so borrowing skyrocketed.
My problem with the Coalition's economic remedy post 2010 was that there was far too much emphasis on cutting spending and reducing borrowing and not enough on stimulating economic activity and getting income coming in. There should have been big tax cuts in 2010 and more wide-ranging spending cuts to attack both sides of the problem.
By 2020 it will be as hard for the Conservatives to blame the Labour Government for any economic problems as it was for the Conservatives of the 1990s to blame the Winter of Discontent. It will be the Conservatives' economic record and they will have to defend it but that doesn't preclude Labour from convincing us how they would manage the economy better and that might mean being as accepting of the Osborne diagnosis and treatment as Brown was of Clarke's policies in 1997.
Just catching up with the last thread, I note there was a fair bit of debate around Cybernats. To provide a bit of balance it appears the lady who organised the petition against Orangefest has been receiving death threats, at the end of the day there are extremists on both sides but the MSM seems to only focus on the Cybernats and give the Cyberunionists a free pass:
" THE organiser of an online petition criticising today’s “Orangefest” in Glasgow has been forced to delete her Facebook and Twitter accounts after receiving death threats. Julie Philp, who started the petition on Tuesday, says that her elderly parents and siblings have also been the victims of abuse. As well as the threats, pictures of Philp’s wedding and pictures of her family have been shared on forums and in Facebook groups. The 29-year-old, who lives in Glasgow, says that even her employer, a financial services company, has been targeted. "
Calum, that will not raise a comment on here , they are myopic in the extreme
Border Force 'unable to cope' with the influx of migrants, says former immigration chief Former chief inspector of immigration John Vine says Border Force losing its most experienced officers, robbing the country of their expertise in spotting stowaway migrants
Here's the solution: get rid of the border controls.
Save us wasting a huge amount of money on unnecessary public sector employees.
A true libertarian solution, let people decide where they want to live not nations.
And let people decide what taxes they will pay to support others?
Taxes are used to pay to support citizens. Problem solved.
Are we not all EU 'citizens' now?
As you know, I am a supporter of EFTA/EEA as a destination for the UK. I would prefer it to be combined with Schengen membership, but I realise I am probably in a minority of one.
So you'd be happy to see full UK benefits paid to anyone from Europe that wants to turn up here and claim them, or you think it should be contributions-based as in many other EU countries?
Just catching up with the last thread, I note there was a fair bit of debate around Cybernats. To provide a bit of balance it appears the lady who organised the petition against Orangefest has been receiving death threats, at the end of the day there are extremists on both sides but the MSM seems to only focus on the Cybernats and give the Cyberunionists a free pass:
" THE organiser of an online petition criticising today’s “Orangefest” in Glasgow has been forced to delete her Facebook and Twitter accounts after receiving death threats. Julie Philp, who started the petition on Tuesday, says that her elderly parents and siblings have also been the victims of abuse. As well as the threats, pictures of Philp’s wedding and pictures of her family have been shared on forums and in Facebook groups. The 29-year-old, who lives in Glasgow, says that even her employer, a financial services company, has been targeted. "
Calum, that will not raise a comment on here , they are myopic in the extreme
Border Force 'unable to cope' with the influx of migrants, says former immigration chief Former chief inspector of immigration John Vine says Border Force losing its most experienced officers, robbing the country of their expertise in spotting stowaway migrants
Here's the solution: get rid of the border controls.
Save us wasting a huge amount of money on unnecessary public sector employees.
A true libertarian solution, let people decide where they want to live not nations.
And let people decide what taxes they will pay to support others?
Taxes are used to pay to support citizens. Problem solved.
Are we not all EU 'citizens' now?
As you know, I am a supporter of EFTA/EEA as a destination for the UK. I would prefer it to be combined with Schengen membership, but I realise I am probably in a minority of one.
So you'd be happy to see full UK benefits paid to anyone from Europe that wants to turn up here and claim them, or you think it should be contributions-based as in many other EU countries?
EU citizens are not eligible for benefits in EFTA countries (and vice-versa), except where there are specific bilateral provisions.
To be honest, I would tighten up benefit provision more generally. I would have a general rule that nobody would be eligible for any benefits whatsoever until they had paid three years National Insurance.
Border Force 'unable to cope' with the influx of migrants, says former immigration chief Former chief inspector of immigration John Vine says Border Force losing its most experienced officers, robbing the country of their expertise in spotting stowaway migrants
Here's the solution: get rid of the border controls.
Save us wasting a huge amount of money on unnecessary public sector employees.
A true libertarian solution, let people decide where they want to live not nations.
And let people decide what taxes they will pay to support others?
Taxes are used to pay to support citizens. Problem solved.
Are we not all EU 'citizens' now?
As you know, I am a supporter of EFTA/EEA as a destination for the UK. I would prefer it to be combined with Schengen membership, but I realise I am probably in a minority of one.
So you'd be happy to see full UK benefits paid to anyone from Europe that wants to turn up here and claim them, or you think it should be contributions-based as in many other EU countries?
Our benefits problem is more to do with the way we administer benefits. If we dont want poles to come over and earn £12k on min wage, and claim £8k of tax credits without putting anything in, then dont let our own citizens do the same.
It is up to us what we do, we just musnt treat a citizen of another EU state differently, because they are from another EU state.
Whatever circle Labour try to square its going to be one hell of a job. The narrative that the mess we are in was caused by the Labour party who didn't save when the sun was shining and spent wildly after the crash is engrained. It doesn't matter what the truth actually is nor what Labour say(unless they do a mea culpa), the electorate will not believe them
Only by skipping a generation to someone like Kendal who can avoid the worst of any of the blame game do they stand a chance, otherwise its going to be a long hard road...
It was a world recession that started in the US and was not caused by Labour. Period.
Of course it was, bloody Americans coming over here and queuing outside Northern Rock in 2007... let down by its dreadful supervision by the New York Fed... their deposits secured against junk mortgages on homes in the mid-west... Nothing to do with Labour, no sir... nothing to do with eight years of doomed monetary policy failure and wholly ineffective regulation
The deficit was caused by a massive shortfall in tax revenue caused by a worldwide recession. The Tories had been pressing Labour for even lighter regulation
On May 5th this year, Cameron was still using the phrase "Great Labour Recession" on Radio 4. John Humphries didn't pick him up on it. He should have. It was another example of the Great Tory Lie. Labour shouldn't let them get away with it.
Voices calling on Labour to apologise are equivalent to malevolent onlookers shouting "Jump" to a potential suicide.
Just catching up with the last thread, I note there was a fair bit of debate around Cybernats. To provide a bit of balance it appears the lady who organised the petition against Orangefest has been receiving death threats, at the end of the day there are extremists on both sides but the MSM seems to only focus on the Cybernats and give the Cyberunionists a free pass:
" THE organiser of an online petition criticising today’s “Orangefest” in Glasgow has been forced to delete her Facebook and Twitter accounts after receiving death threats. Julie Philp, who started the petition on Tuesday, says that her elderly parents and siblings have also been the victims of abuse. As well as the threats, pictures of Philp’s wedding and pictures of her family have been shared on forums and in Facebook groups. The 29-year-old, who lives in Glasgow, says that even her employer, a financial services company, has been targeted. "
Calum, that will not raise a comment on here , they are myopic in the extreme
You may be a little myopic yourself. I commented on calums post at 4.02.
Border Force 'unable to cope' with the influx of migrants, says former immigration chief Former chief inspector of immigration John Vine says Border Force losing its most experienced officers, robbing the country of their expertise in spotting stowaway migrants
Here's the solution: get rid of the border controls.
Save us wasting a huge amount of money on unnecessary public sector employees.
and when most of the third world promptly relocates to the UK and signs on for JSA and Child Benefit, and sends their kids to our schools and their ill to our hospitals...
We'll be able to pay for it because migrants are the ones who pay most net contributions to our budget. We'll be able to fill the vacancies in the health service because of migrants.
JSA is no issue whatsoever because the kind of people who have the get-up-and-go drive to relocate to find a better life for themselves and their family aren't the kind to sit at home on the dole.
All of them..? and when there are no jobs left and they keep coming ? I like your idealism, but being rather more acquainted with the third world than you, think you are wrong, but keep dreaming if it makes you comfortable. At the moment we get the strivers because getting here is hard, if we make getting here easy, we will get all the slackers as well.
Whatever circle Labour try to square its going to be one hell of a job. The narrative that the mess we are in was caused by the Labour party who didn't save when the sun was shining and spent wildly after the crash is engrained. It doesn't matter what the truth actually is nor what Labour say(unless they do a mea culpa), the electorate will not believe them
Only by skipping a generation to someone like Kendal who can avoid the worst of any of the blame game do they stand a chance, otherwise its going to be a long hard road...
It was a world recession that started in the US and was not caused by Labour. Period.
Of course it was, bloody Americans coming over here and queuing outside Northern Rock in 2007... let down by its dreadful supervision by the New York Fed... their deposits secured against junk mortgages on homes in the mid-west... Nothing to do with Labour, no sir... nothing to do with eight years of doomed monetary policy failure and wholly ineffective regulation
The deficit was caused by a massive shortfall in tax revenue caused by a worldwide recession. The Tories had been pressing Labour for even lighter regulation
On May 5th this year, Cameron was still using the phrase "Great Labour Recession" on Radio 4. John Humphries didn't pick him up on it. He should have. It was another example of the Great Tory Lie. Labour shouldn't let them get away with it.
Voices calling on Labour to apologise are equivalent to malevolent onlookers shouting "Jump" to a potential suicide.
Labour would be well advised not to be fighting the 2010 election again in 2020, like it did this year.
Banging on about the deficit is not going to win an election.
As someone pointed out the other day, what Labour needs more than a new leader is a new Shadow Chancellor. Someone credible and with gravitas. Unfortunately, no one springs to mind.
Border Force 'unable to cope' with the influx of migrants, says former immigration chief Former chief inspector of immigration John Vine says Border Force losing its most experienced officers, robbing the country of their expertise in spotting stowaway migrants
Here's the solution: get rid of the border controls.
Save us wasting a huge amount of money on unnecessary public sector employees.
A true libertarian solution, let people decide where they want to live not nations.
And let people decide what taxes they will pay to support others?
Taxes are used to pay to support citizens. Problem solved.
Are we not all EU 'citizens' now?
As you know, I am a supporter of EFTA/EEA as a destination for the UK. I would prefer it to be combined with Schengen membership, but I realise I am probably in a minority of one.
So you'd be happy to see full UK benefits paid to anyone from Europe that wants to turn up here and claim them, or you think it should be contributions-based as in many other EU countries?
Our benefits problem is more to do with the way we administer benefits. If we dont want poles to come over and earn £12k on min wage, and claim £8k of tax credits without putting anything in, then dont let our own citizens do the same.
It is up to us what we do, we just musnt treat a citizen of another EU state differently, because they are from another EU state.
Agree with the first point, disagree with the second.
Better to increase the minimum wage and reduce employer NI to compensate, while also reducing tax credits.
We can't treat 500 million people from poorer states than us equally, that is the crux of the issue we have with the EU and immigration.
EU citizens are not eligible for benefits in EFTA countries (and vice-versa), except where there are specific bilateral provisions.
To be honest, I would tighten up benefit provision more generally. I would have a general rule that nobody would be eligible for any benefits whatsoever until they had paid three years National Insurance.
There is nothing whatever in EU law which would prevent the UK moving to a contributions-based welfare system, and denying in-work benefits to migrants and nationals alike on the ground that they had not made sufficient qualifying contributions. What seems impermissible, without amendment of the Treaties, is discrimination on the ground of nationality between one EU citizen and another who are both in work.
I reckon the Force Indias are in with a good shot. Talented drivers and the best engine, plus Canada isn't a circuit where aerodynamics (the key Force India weakness) is critical, because it's straights and slow corners.
Backed both with Ladbrokes to reach Q3/be top 10 in qualifying at 2.75 each.
Mind you, I have had horrendous results this year, so do at your own risk.
Great tips there Morris. Lotus tips also would have come off.
Whatever circle Labour try to square its going to be one hell of a job. The narrative that the mess we are in was caused by the Labour party who didn't save when the sun was shining and spent wildly after the crash is engrained. It doesn't matter what the truth actually is nor what Labour say(unless they do a mea culpa), the electorate will not believe them
Only by skipping a generation to someone like Kendal who can avoid the worst of any of the blame game do they stand a chance, otherwise its going to be a long hard road...
It was a world recession that started in the US and was not caused by Labour. Period.
Of course it was, bloody Americans coming over here and queuing outside Northern Rock in 2007... let down by its dreadful supervision by the New York Fed... their deposits secured against junk mortgages on homes in the mid-west... Nothing to do with Labour, no sir... nothing to do with eight years of doomed monetary policy failure and wholly ineffective regulation
The deficit was caused by a massive shortfall in tax revenue caused by a worldwide recession. The Tories had been pressing Labour for even lighter regulation
On May 5th this year, Cameron was still using the phrase "Great Labour Recession" on Radio 4. John Humphries didn't pick him up on it. He should have. It was another example of the Great Tory Lie. Labour shouldn't let them get away with it.
Voices calling on Labour to apologise are equivalent to malevolent onlookers shouting "Jump" to a potential suicide.
Labour would be well advised not to be fighting the 2010 election again in 2020, like it did this year.
Banging on about the deficit is not going to win an election.
As someone pointed out the other day, what Labour needs more than a new leader is a new Shadow Chancellor. Someone credible and with gravitas. Unfortunately, no one springs to mind.
What they need more than a shadow chancellor or leader, is a purpose in a world where there isn't big piles of other peoples money to hose around. Being a social democratic party should be much more than increasing public spending and taxing the unworthy heavily.
Whatever circle Labour try to square its going to be one hell of a job. The narrative that the mess we are in was caused by the Labour party who didn't save when the sun was shining and spent wildly after the crash is engrained. It doesn't matter what the truth actually is nor what Labour say(unless they do a mea culpa), the electorate will not believe them
Only by skipping a generation to someone like Kendal who can avoid the worst of any of the blame game do they stand a chance, otherwise its going to be a long hard road...
It was a world recession that started in the US and was not caused by Labour. Period.
Of course it was, bloody Americans coming over here and queuing outside Northern Rock in 2007... let down by its dreadful supervision by the New York Fed... their deposits secured against junk mortgages on homes in the mid-west... Nothing to do with Labour, no sir... nothing to do with eight years of doomed monetary policy failure and wholly ineffective regulation
The deficit was caused by a massive shortfall in tax revenue caused by a worldwide recession. The Tories had been pressing Labour for even lighter regulation
On May 5th this year, Cameron was still using the phrase "Great Labour Recession" on Radio 4. John Humphries didn't pick him up on it. He should have. It was another example of the Great Tory Lie. Labour shouldn't let them get away with it.
Voices calling on Labour to apologise are equivalent to malevolent onlookers shouting "Jump" to a potential suicide.
Personally, I think it was a huge mistake for Labour to let the Tories label the last recession and the banking collapse as all their fault. It's just plain false. But, was this really what lost Labour last month? I think not. It was far more about fear of what a Lab government under Ed and in hock to SNP would do to swing voters personal circumstances, in the future. It seems to me that there is mounting evidence that the fear of SNP/Ed was what changed enough people's minds in marginal english seats a day or two before polling day. And you certainly can't say the Tory blaming of Lab for the Great Recession led to an SNP wipeout in Scotland.
Just catching up with the last thread, I note there was a fair bit of debate around Cybernats. To provide a bit of balance it appears the lady who organised the petition against Orangefest has been receiving death threats, at the end of the day there are extremists on both sides but the MSM seems to only focus on the Cybernats and give the Cyberunionists a free pass:
" THE organiser of an online petition criticising today’s “Orangefest” in Glasgow has been forced to delete her Facebook and Twitter accounts after receiving death threats. Julie Philp, who started the petition on Tuesday, says that her elderly parents and siblings have also been the victims of abuse. As well as the threats, pictures of Philp’s wedding and pictures of her family have been shared on forums and in Facebook groups. The 29-year-old, who lives in Glasgow, says that even her employer, a financial services company, has been targeted. "
Calum, that will not raise a comment on here , they are myopic in the extreme
You may be a little myopic yourself. I commented on calums post at 4.02.
I doubt there was the same slavering response to the Daily Heil garbage this morning. It was more true to form , the loonies were out in force.
Thanks for your link to the GDP per person graphs on the last thread:
It looks like most of the world got richer in the noughties, not just Italy on the measures.
Worth noting that Greece went from $12 000 to $26 000 per person GDP since 2000 while we went from $25 000 to $36 000. Indeed in terms of both relative and absolute terms the Eurozone countries (including the PIGS) have generally done very well on this measure.
rcs1000/LIAMT I prefer the Germany system where you get 60% of your last salary when you lose your job for up to 12 months based on your insurance contributions before moving onto a lower, basic level of benefit if you have still not found a job
Just catching up with the last thread, I note there was a fair bit of debate around Cybernats. To provide a bit of balance it appears the lady who organised the petition against Orangefest has been receiving death threats, at the end of the day there are extremists on both sides but the MSM seems to only focus on the Cybernats and give the Cyberunionists a free pass:
" THE organiser of an online petition criticising today’s “Orangefest” in Glasgow has been forced to delete her Facebook and Twitter accounts after receiving death threats. Julie Philp, who started the petition on Tuesday, says that her elderly parents and siblings have also been the victims of abuse. As well as the threats, pictures of Philp’s wedding and pictures of her family have been shared on forums and in Facebook groups. The 29-year-old, who lives in Glasgow, says that even her employer, a financial services company, has been targeted. "
Calum, that will not raise a comment on here , they are myopic in the extreme
You may be a little myopic yourself. I commented on calums post at 4.02.
I doubt there was the same slavering response to the Daily Heil garbage this morning. It was more true to form , the loonies were out in force.
I do not think it fair to blame the cybernats for Kennedy's death. He committed suicide by the glass. It sounds to me as if he probably died from oesophageal varices, a long term consequence of liver disease. Very sad that no one was able to stop him, but having experience of an alcoholic in the family has made me realise how impossible it is to get through to an alcoholic.
The stupid Lib Dems still talk about doing their "service to the country" with the Tories sniggering at the back. They can't believe their luck.
The way the Tories talk, it seems they won a landslide. Agreed Labour did badly, very badly. But there was still a 1.5% swing to Labour from the Tories in England.
Before history is re-written it should be made clear that the Tories "won" because of the above two reasons, It gave them a 67 seats advantage straightaway.
The stupid Lib Dems still talk about doing their "service to the country" with the Tories sniggering at the back. They can't believe their luck.
The way the Tories talk, it seems they won a landslide. Agreed Labour did badly, very badly. But there was still a 1.5% swing to Labour from the Tories in England.
Before history is re-written it should be made clear that the Tories "won" because of the above two reasons, It gave them a 67 seats advantage straightaway.
Even if Labour had won every seat in Scotland, we would have still had a Tory majority and Labour would have still had fewer than 300 MPs.
PS there was a 1.05% swing from Con to Lab in England.
The swing was largely confined in Lab held seats, there was stunning swings from Lab to Con in the seats where it mattered, for example the Tory majority increased in places like Warwickshire North and Stockton South, there are other examples.
I mean was it really useful for Labour's share of the vote in Manchester Gorton going up 17% or 11% in Liverpool West Derby?
17:33 Kendall says socialism is not dead, but it needs to change. We need to be as passionate about wealth creation as about inequality, she says. (There is some very quiet, murmured booing near where I’m sitting when she says this.)
The stupid Lib Dems still talk about doing their "service to the country" with the Tories sniggering at the back. They can't believe their luck.
The way the Tories talk, it seems they won a landslide. Agreed Labour did badly, very badly. But there was still a 1.5% swing to Labour from the Tories in England.
Before history is re-written it should be made clear that the Tories "won" because of the above two reasons, It gave them a 67 seats advantage straightaway.
Those are the meta-ish reasons. You could easily condense them into one: "Conservatives won because they got most seats."
You need to look at the reasons they managed to get those seats. Firstly, Labour's campaign was a basketcase. Secondly, the Lib Dems were very weak. Thirdly, Labour had spent too long ignoring their problems in Scotland, ref. Falkirk et al. Fourthly, the Conservatives campaign and set-up was far more effective, including Labour's much-vaunted 'ground campaign'. fifthly, the Conservatives were more hungry for the win and, unlike Labour, did not think they owned it.
Your posts sound as if you are rather in denial. Which might be the first reason for another Conservative win in 2020: Labour supporters did not analyse where they went wrong in 2015.
Whatever circle Labour try to square its going to be one hell of a job. The narrative that the mess we are in was caused by the Labour party who didn't save when the sun was shining and spent wildly after the crash is engrained. It doesn't matter what the truth actually is nor what Labour say(unless they do a mea culpa), the electorate will not believe them
Only by skipping a generation to someone like Kendal who can avoid the worst of any of the blame game do they stand a chance, otherwise its going to be a long hard road...
It was a world recession that started in the US and was not caused by Labour. Period.
Of course it was, bloody Americans coming over here and queuing outside Northern Rock in 2007... let down by its dreadful supervision by the New York Fed... their deposits secured against junk mortgages on homes in the mid-west... Nothing to do with Labour, no sir... nothing to do with eight years of doomed monetary policy failure and wholly ineffective regulation
The deficit was caused by a massive shortfall in tax revenue caused by a worldwide recession. The Tories had been pressing Labour for even lighter regulation
On May 5th this year, Cameron was still using the phrase "Great Labour Recession" on Radio 4. John Humphries didn't pick him up on it. He should have. It was another example of the Great Tory Lie. Labour shouldn't let them get away with it.
Voices calling on Labour to apologise are equivalent to malevolent onlookers shouting "Jump" to a potential suicide.
... As someone pointed out the other day, what Labour needs more than a new leader is a new Shadow Chancellor. Someone credible and with gravitas. Unfortunately, no one springs to mind.
Labour have a new Shadow Chancellor in the 42 year old Chris Leslie. Unfortunately his only mode of operation is just to attack whatever the Government is doing. A problem when his entire career has been as an MP from 24 yrs old. Ridiculous.
Indigo Chris Leslie did quite a good job in my view at Osborne's questions last week
He was in his usual whinging mode with an attack line that because Govt was announcing a few billion in cuts after the end of the LDs in Govt, this was a Govt panic....
Whatever circle Labour try to square its going to be one hell of a job. The narrative that the mess we are in was caused by the Labour party who didn't save when the sun was shining and spent wildly after the crash is engrained. It doesn't matter what the truth actually is nor what Labour say(unless they do a mea culpa), the electorate will not believe them
Only by skipping a generation to someone like Kendal who can avoid the worst of any of the blame game do they stand a chance, otherwise its going to be a long hard road...
It was a world recession that started in the US and was not caused by Labour. Period.
Of course it was, bloody Americans coming over here and queuing outside Northern Rock in 2007... let down by its dreadful supervision by the New York Fed... their deposits secured against junk mortgages on homes in the mid-west... Nothing to do with Labour, no sir... nothing to do with eight years of doomed monetary policy failure and wholly ineffective regulation
The deficit was caused by a massive shortfall in tax revenue caused by a worldwide recession. The Tories had been pressing Labour for even lighter regulation
On May 5th this year, Cameron was still using the phrase "Great Labour Recession" on Radio 4. John Humphries didn't pick him up on it. He should have. It was another example of the Great Tory Lie. Labour shouldn't let them get away with it.
Voices calling on Labour to apologise are equivalent to malevolent onlookers shouting "Jump" to a potential suicide.
The deficit worsened during a recession that affected some economies, a recession that was caused by a sudden freeze in interbank lending and subsequent lack of capital for businesses to invest... the 'crash' was caused by bankers, regulators and central banks believing that a long period of low borrowing costs and volatility meant that risk could be hidden (in securitised debt instruments) and then forgotten about. It couldn't. The collective hubris was a product of the efforts of many but the Labour Treasury team of 1997 - 2007 are higher up the charge sheet than most.
Border Force 'unable to cope' with the influx of migrants, says former immigration chief Former chief inspector of immigration John Vine says Border Force losing its most experienced officers, robbing the country of their expertise in spotting stowaway migrants
Comments
http://www.standard.co.uk/business/markets/ben-chu-labour-may-apologise-but-it-didnt-cause-the-financial-crisis-10295091.html
The blame for the financial crisis can go straight to Lawson, he started the ball rolling with the deregulation of finance and loans.
An exact replica of the bubble and the financial crisis but in a smaller scale happened between 1986 and 1995 thanks to Lawson's reforms.
I don't accept that that is not reversible. What Labour need to do is keep talking about the "The Big Tory Lie about the "Great Labour Recession" and point out that it was a world recession that started in the US and was not caused by Labour. Period.
No excuses. No apologies. It doesn't matter that the Tories are not now claiming that Labour caused the recsssion. You need to counter one big lie with another one. It needs to be simple, believable and repeated over and over. It needs to obliterate the Tory narrative and substitute one about Tory lies.
Former chief inspector of immigration John Vine says Border Force losing its most experienced officers, robbing the country of their expertise in spotting stowaway migrants
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/11656584/Border-Force-unable-to-cope-with-the-influx-of-migrants-says-former-immigration-chief.html?WT.mc_id=e_DM23081&WT.tsrc=email&etype=Edi_FPM_New&utm_source=email&utm_medium=Edi_FPM_New_2015_06_06&utm_campaign=DM23081
It is like 1992, the Tories are a Black Wednesday and a Maastricht Treaty away from collapse.
Labour would do better not to dwell on the past but to show financial rectitude for the future, accepting that the public decisively voted for the Conservatives' austerity and only opposing cuts and privatisations if it can replace them with fully costed alternatives. It should press for early full fiscal autonomy for Scotland and enhanced fiscal autonomy for London and Wales.
And instead it should focus its efforts to support the poor on improving the starting conditions for children in poverty and those in low paid work and improving the lives of ordinary folk by encouraging social behaviour and discouraging anti-social behaviour.
Oh, and addressing the crisis of productivity should be a Labour theme. What better subject for the party of labour than investigating how labour should be enabled to work more effectively?
good night...
Save us wasting a huge amount of money on unnecessary public sector employees.
Of course it was, bloody Americans coming over here and queuing outside Northern Rock in 2007... let down by its dreadful supervision by the New York Fed... their deposits secured against junk mortgages on homes in the mid-west... Nothing to do with Labour, no sir... nothing to do with eight years of doomed monetary policy failure and wholly ineffective regulation
and when most of the third world promptly relocates to the UK and signs on for JSA and Child Benefit, and sends their kids to our schools and their ill to our hospitals...
JSA is no issue whatsoever because the kind of people who have the get-up-and-go drive to relocate to find a better life for themselves and their family aren't the kind to sit at home on the dole.
I don't think we disagree on that much, actually. Both of us are know Greece should never have joined the Euro, and that they should have taken either of the opportunities that existed to exit.
However, I think you underestimate the disruption to Greece of a disorderly exit from the Eurozone. And I think you ignore the fact that (usually left wing) governments have managed to avoid reform through perpetual devaluation of the currency for seemingly indefinite periods.
Regarding the immediate impact on the Greek economy of a disorderly exit. Remember:
1. Greek firms with Euro denominated liabilities to firms in the rest of the Eurozone would now have liabilties that cost 2x what they did previously. If you owe an invoice to a German supplier for €1,000, and the Euro value of your bank account is now only half what it was a little while back you would be in serious trouble.
2. The Greeks would still owe the money. They can default all they like, but until they have settled their account with the IMF, then there will be no private sector credit for them. Worse: under the terms of the IMF loans, they can have Greek state assets seized abroad. A Greek naval ship docking in Bari could be impounded and sold to meet IMF debts. Of course, this will be negotiated away in time, but this will not be painless, and Greece will not be debt free.
3. The real purchasing power of Euros held in bank accounts will have been cut by 50% or so. Given this, the effect of Grexit is pretty much the same as a 50% tax on all bank accounts in Greece to pay off the Greek national debt. Essentially the cost of exit is being born by the savers of Greece.
4. Greece is a massive importer of staple products. When the British pound collapsed in the mid 1980s, we were cushioned by the fact that we were net exporters of energy, and had only a modest food deficit. These things are not true for Greece: coal, gas, oil would all double in price (and so, therefore, would electricity). Greece is a big importer of food too: less than 50% of calories consumed in Greece are growth there. Food prices would leap. In other words, poorer Greeks would find they had much less money than before. It's
5. The Greek government would not suddenly become economically rational. Venezuela, Argentina, etc. have not becomes bastions of free market sanity. More likely there would be devaluation upon devaluation to pay for government largess, with each decline in the value of the currency paid for by the prudent savers of Greece.
So what?
Problem solved.
Imagine you have debt-to-GDP of 60%, and you run a deficit of 2% of GDP every year, but that your economy is growing at 2.5%, and there's 1.5% inflation.
One year later... your debt-to-GDP is still 60% and all is well,
The problem is if debt-to-GDP is 140%, and you are running and a 6% budget deficit, and your economy is shrinking 2% and there is no inflation... then you're in trouble.
Thank you for the article, David. As always, there are large parts of it with which I don't entirely agree but the central argument - that Labour lacked any kind of coherent and credible economic policy alternative to the Coalition parties - is beyond dispute. It was in my view the Party's Achilles heel from 2010 onwards.
The Coalition's economic policy can and has been credibly critiqued from the free market end of the spectrum and I have serious reservations about the amount and longevity of QE and the failure to return to what I would consider normal monetary policy conditions.
I would also argue it is absurd to treat some areas of public spending as sacrosanct because they are the ones most used by your core electoral support and drastically assault others which are much less well regarded by said core support.
My criticism of Brown after 1999 was not that he increased the funding for public services but what he did was tantamount to force feeding a starving malnourished man a banquet. The atrophied public services simply could not absorb or make best use of the money they were compelled to spend and ended up making bad decisions and wasting billions.
As to the downturn itself, the problem began not when the spending increased but when economic activity slowed and the income dried up. The problems with the public finances began with the collapse in tax receipts (income tax, corporation tax and VAT in particular) and that exacerbated the amount needing to be borrowed and so borrowing skyrocketed.
My problem with the Coalition's economic remedy post 2010 was that there was far too much emphasis on cutting spending and reducing borrowing and not enough on stimulating economic activity and getting income coming in. There should have been big tax cuts in 2010 and more wide-ranging spending cuts to attack both sides of the problem.
By 2020 it will be as hard for the Conservatives to blame the Labour Government for any economic problems as it was for the Conservatives of the 1990s to blame the Winter of Discontent. It will be the Conservatives' economic record and they will have to defend it but that doesn't preclude Labour from convincing us how they would manage the economy better and that might mean being as accepting of the Osborne diagnosis and treatment as Brown was of Clarke's policies in 1997.
To be honest, I would tighten up benefit provision more generally. I would have a general rule that nobody would be eligible for any benefits whatsoever until they had paid three years National Insurance.
It is up to us what we do, we just musnt treat a citizen of another EU state differently, because they are from another EU state.
On May 5th this year, Cameron was still using the phrase "Great Labour Recession" on Radio 4. John Humphries didn't pick him up on it. He should have. It was another example of the Great Tory Lie. Labour shouldn't let them get away with it.
Voices calling on Labour to apologise are equivalent to malevolent onlookers shouting "Jump" to a potential suicide.
Banging on about the deficit is not going to win an election.
As someone pointed out the other day, what Labour needs more than a new leader is a new Shadow Chancellor. Someone credible and with gravitas. Unfortunately, no one springs to mind.
Better to increase the minimum wage and reduce employer NI to compensate, while also reducing tax credits.
We can't treat 500 million people from poorer states than us equally, that is the crux of the issue we have with the EU and immigration.
Shutting the door to immigrants will not make British employees more productive.
You would be on firmer ground, I think, if you argued that immigrants have pushed up the price of housing in places like London.
Thanks for your link to the GDP per person graphs on the last thread:
It looks like most of the world got richer in the noughties, not just Italy on the measures.
Worth noting that Greece went from $12 000 to $26 000 per person GDP since 2000 while we went from $25 000 to $36 000. Indeed in terms of both relative and absolute terms the Eurozone countries (including the PIGS) have generally done very well on this measure.
http://www.google.com/publicdata/explore?ds=wb-wdi&ctype=l&strail=false&bcs=d&nselm=h&met_y=ny_gdp_pcap_cd&scale_y=lin&ind_y=false&rdim=country&idim=country:ITA&ifdim=country&tstart=960246000000&tend=1275778800000&ind=false#!ctype=l&strail=false&bcs=d&nselm=h&met_y=ny_gdp_pcap_cd&scale_y=lin&ind_y=false&rdim=country&idim=country:ITA:GRC:DEU:GBR:USA:JPN:FRA:PRT:ESP&ifdim=country&tstart=960246000000&tend=1275778800000&hl=en_US&dl=en_US&ind=false
SNP took 40 seats from Labour;
The Tories demolished the Lib Dems. 27 seats.
The stupid Lib Dems still talk about doing their "service to the country" with the Tories sniggering at the back. They can't believe their luck.
The way the Tories talk, it seems they won a landslide. Agreed Labour did badly, very badly. But there was still a 1.5% swing to Labour from the Tories in England.
Before history is re-written it should be made clear that the Tories "won" because of the above two reasons, It gave them a 67 seats advantage straightaway.
PS there was a 1.05% swing from Con to Lab in England.
The swing was largely confined in Lab held seats, there was stunning swings from Lab to Con in the seats where it mattered, for example the Tory majority increased in places like Warwickshire North and Stockton South, there are other examples.
I mean was it really useful for Labour's share of the vote in Manchester Gorton going up 17% or 11% in Liverpool West Derby?
Kendall says socialism is not dead, but it needs to change. We need to be as passionate about wealth creation as about inequality, she says. (There is some very quiet, murmured booing near where I’m sitting when she says this.)
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2015/jun/06/labour-leadership-hustings-at-fabian-summer-conference-politics-live
You need to look at the reasons they managed to get those seats. Firstly, Labour's campaign was a basketcase. Secondly, the Lib Dems were very weak. Thirdly, Labour had spent too long ignoring their problems in Scotland, ref. Falkirk et al. Fourthly, the Conservatives campaign and set-up was far more effective, including Labour's much-vaunted 'ground campaign'. fifthly, the Conservatives were more hungry for the win and, unlike Labour, did not think they owned it.
Your posts sound as if you are rather in denial. Which might be the first reason for another Conservative win in 2020: Labour supporters did not analyse where they went wrong in 2015.
Just as they did not in 2010.