The eighth amendment to the US constitution: "Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted."
I suppose it's just my "bleeding heart liberal" view, but 43 years in solitary seems "cruel and unusual" to me.
It's right on the cusp of extinction. It could give them zero MSPs if the regional distribution is particularly bad or it could see them keep 5 seats if the distribution is as good as they could hope for. I suspect we're looking at 1 to 2 Liberals after 2016.
The rule last time was that you can stand on both constituency and list only if the constituency you are standing in is not Labour held. Boyack, Eleine Murray (Dumfries) and McIntosh had their seats becoming notionally SNP/Con after boundary changes. Therefore they were allowed to stand also on the list. McIntosh turned down the offer.
The rule has now been changed and they can stand in both regardless of the constituency previous result. What they have to decided is what to do with sitting list MSPs. Previous rule had them automatically at the top if re-selected by trigger ballot. They wanted to change this but they haven't done so yet. But it seems almost everyone (apart from the list MSPs) is in favour of changing this.
The paragraph at the end is pretty important to the debate. SLAB still haven't identified how they will be determining their list selection and in terms of who can hang on, it's all down to that. As I understand it all the other parties in Scotland put their continuing constituency MPs at the top of the list. This was why 2007 was so devastating to Labour in Scotland. They didn't just lose, they lost their front bench too.
I've just checked Labour's 2011 list for Lothian. Their constituency winner Malcolm Chisholm isn't on their 2011 Lothian list! I honestly thought they had changed this but No. Despite everything they still arrogantly assumed they didn't need to put their constituency MPs on the list. Bizarre. Mary Mulligan lost her seat and wasn't on the list. Sandra Boyack was on the list. I can't work out why she was and the other two weren't (the other two SNP gains from Labour were "notionals"). Perhaps only shadow cabinet constituency MSPs got a list slot?
Thanks to @DavidL and (almost) everyone else for making some interesting and sensible comments from different shades of opinion. I was particularly pleased that @Andrea_Parma82 made useful comments on a crucial issue - the SLAB constituency/seat selection process. It's possible that the rules will be changed however, as she says. Indeed I have long suspected that one reason for Mr Murphy's wish to rewrite party strategy before he leaves was to change the seat selection rules.
The eighth amendment to the US constitution: "Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted."
I suppose it's just my "bleeding heart liberal" view, but 43 years in solitary seems "cruel and unusual" to me.
The American judicial system, and the prison system in particular are absolutely horrific at times.
As the Scotland Votes seat calculator currently doesn't take account of regional splits, the above figures area at best a guide of likely trends based on current polling. Link below:
PS: Even the Guardian are writing good stories on her now. She was very very good.
I find Sturgeon as dull as ditchwater. Her success mystifies me. It can only be a matter of time before she gets found out and comes a cropper. vv overrated.
Sturgeon was the Tories' best recruiting sergeant in the general election. Won't have a word said against her.
Her strength - for the both the SNP and the Tories - is that she is so disliked in England.
Being a sometime listener to conversations, I've heard Nick Clegg disliked, Nigel Farage disliked and Ed Milliband disliked, but not Nicola S.
Of course I'm not often in the company of rabid Daily Heil types!
You should holiday in the South West then! If you'd followed my reporting back on here during the election campaign, you would have heard me relating my first-hand accounts of just how toxic Sturgeon was on the doorstep. Unprompted.
.....and "Daily Heil types"? Puh....surprisingly few Daily Mails in the recycling boxes outside the doors of Torbay. Maybe time to recalibrate your smug stereotype settings?
I'm in the East! And not in an area where the Tories were, apparently running a coach and horses through the financial provisions of the Representation of the People Act.
Strange how we never heard any complaints along these lines in the days when the LibDems would bus in hundreds to a by-election. Nor when the unions were swamping seats with their ground game.
Where did it all get to be so much of a problem, having a coach load of active Tories paying for their own accommodation whilst delivering leaflets and canvassing rising at 6.00 am and getting to bed at 11.00 pm for a week at a time?
PS: Even the Guardian are writing good stories on her now. She was very very good.
I find Sturgeon as dull as ditchwater. Her success mystifies me. It can only be a matter of time before she gets found out and comes a cropper. vv overrated.
Sturgeon was the Tories' best recruiting sergeant in the general election. Won't have a word said against her.
Her strength - for the both the SNP and the Tories - is that she is so disliked in England.
Being a sometime listener to conversations, I've heard Nick Clegg disliked, Nigel Farage disliked and Ed Milliband disliked, but not Nicola S.
Of course I'm not often in the company of rabid Daily Heil types!
You should holiday in the South West then! If you'd followed my reporting back on here during the election campaign, you would have heard me relating my first-hand accounts of just how toxic Sturgeon was on the doorstep. Unprompted.
.....and "Daily Heil types"? Puh....surprisingly few Daily Mails in the recycling boxes outside the doors of Torbay. Maybe time to recalibrate your smug stereotype settings?
I'm in the East! And not in an area where the Tories were, apparently running a coach and horses through the financial provisions of the Representation of the People Act.
Strange how we never heard any complaints along these lines in the days when the LibDems would bus in hundreds to a by-election. Nor when the unions were swamping seats with their ground game.
Where did it all get to be so much of a problem, having a coach load of active Tories paying for their own accommodation whilst delivering leaflets and canvassing rising at 6.00 am and getting to bed at 11.00 pm for a week at a time?
Some fair points, but by-election campaigns rarely last as long.
An excellent debut above the line, David. Scottish Labour are in a bad way - they don't have any particular electoral space to claim at present. If the SNP can avoid trouble for the next year (and I'm sure George Osborne will help in that regard) then I wouldn't count on Labour coming second in MSPs.
Nice one DavidL. Keep it up. As you say, an Alice in Wonderland landscape in Slab land. Or could it be "Through the Looking Glass" for potential leaders; where is Tweedledum and Tweedledee when you want them?
Mr. Eagles, you make it sound like PB would've been pro-Guy Fawkes' plot.
But only if it went off before James arrived. No value in betting on the Royal succession (and it would be in bad taste anyway).
That would have been an excellent market. James wasn't strictly speaking the legal heir (Anne Stanley was, though she had never advanced her claim), and there were others, such as Arbella Stuart, who were spoken of as potential or actual candidates.
The Labour Party has tabled some very interesting amendments to the Scotland Bill. If agreed to, they would make the commencement of Part 1 of the Bill on Constitutional Arrangements (which deals with the Sewel Convention and the Scottish Parliament's power to make provisions about elections) dependent on the report of a "Constitutional Convention", which would examine constitutional arrangements throughout the United Kingdom. Their amendments would also make the commencement of Part 2 of the Bill (on tax) dependent on the report of an "Independent Commission on Full Fiscal Autonomy". Although the amendments would oblige the Convention and Commission to report by March 2016, the Labour Party now seem to be implying that further devolution to Scotland should be dependent on UK-wide considerations. A change of position?
Come come - the PB experts have decreed that S. Khan is "nailed on".
Thank you TSE. Assuming Zac wins the nomination I would have thought he should be 6/4 or so for the big dance.
Khan v Jowell is very interesting and it would be good to have more views on that. I note the £500 trying to back Khan on betfair @ 3.65 with great interest, seeing as there is plenty of 7/2 (4.5 in new money) about with bookmakers.
Scottish Labour need to get a grip and start holding the SNP accountable for their sh*t economic record. The recent job numbers have been rubbish, that's where they should start.
I will probably buy Ronchi on the spreads today at 40.
He is in great form with 88 and 31 in the Test and 106 not out against Leics last Saturday. One negative is that if England bat first and get a low score he may not get a bat, but with 10 points for a catch and him being wicketkeeper I will take a chance.
PS: Even the Guardian are writing good stories on her now. She was very very good.
I find Sturgeon as dull as ditchwater. Her success mystifies me. It can only be a matter of time before she gets found out and comes a cropper. vv overrated.
Sturgeon was the Tories' best recruiting sergeant in the general election. Won't have a word said against her.
Her strength - for the both the SNP and the Tories - is that she is so disliked in England.
Being a sometime listener to conversations, I've heard Nick Clegg disliked, Nigel Farage disliked and Ed Milliband disliked, but not Nicola S.
Of course I'm not often in the company of rabid Daily Heil types!
You should holiday in the South West then! If you'd followed my reporting back on here during the election campaign, you would have heard me relating my first-hand accounts of just how toxic Sturgeon was on the doorstep. Unprompted.
.....and "Daily Heil types"? Puh....surprisingly few Daily Mails in the recycling boxes outside the doors of Torbay. Maybe time to recalibrate your smug stereotype settings?
I'm in the East! And not in an area where the Tories were, apparently running a coach and horses through the financial provisions of the Representation of the People Act.
Strange how we never heard any complaints along these lines in the days when the LibDems would bus in hundreds to a by-election. Nor when the unions were swamping seats with their ground game.
Where did it all get to be so much of a problem, having a coach load of active Tories paying for their own accommodation whilst delivering leaflets and canvassing rising at 6.00 am and getting to bed at 11.00 pm for a week at a time?
Some fair points, but by-election campaigns rarely last as long.
Those who live by the sword of course..........
Well indeed - given that the Tory effort was set up as a response to Labour's supposed all-conquering ground offensive. Not a bad response either - for a bunch of holograms with barely an original knee or hip between them....
I'm guessing SCons trailing well behind SLab then? The shame...
Behind but not well behind. Still flatlining in the mid-teens. Which in the face of the SNP surge is actually quite reasonable. I'd still hope that as and when the Nattophilia wears off - and all parties who achieve such heights inevitably fall back from them sooner or later - it'll be the centre-right wing of the SNP electoral coalition that will go first. And that will push the Tories into second.
I was being somewhat facetious, but yes, anything can happen when you get such a sudden implosion of a major party.
I'm still unconvinced Ruth is anything more than Aunty Bella Mk II, i.e. personally popular but adding very little to their party's vote. This polling is only MOE above the SCon 2011 result (at that point 'the Conservatives’ worst ever election result north of the Border'), and MOE below their 2007 result.
Just as SLab need to find some of that 'vision thing' to break out of their death spiral, the SCons perhaps also need something extra to get above flatlining. Of course as you suggest, flatlining is a fairly respectable achievement in the current Scottish climate.
The Labour Party has tabled some very interesting amendments to the Scotland Bill. If agreed to, they would make the commencement of Part 1 of the Bill on Constitutional Arrangements (which deals with the Sewel Convention and the Scottish Parliament's power to make provisions about elections) dependent on the report of a "Constitutional Convention", which would examine constitutional arrangements throughout the United Kingdom. Their amendments would also make the commencement of Part 2 of the Bill (on tax) dependent on the report of an "Independent Commission on Full Fiscal Autonomy". Although the amendments would oblige the Convention and Commission to report by March 2016, the Labour Party now seem to be implying that further devolution to Scotland should be dependent on UK-wide considerations. A change of position?
Labour deciding that the other parts of the UK should get a final say on Scottish constitutional matters will go down REALLY well in Scotland.....
I suspect a true figure will be high 50s rather than 60 as the Labour bubble has now completely broken, they no longer offer anything to anyone so the remainder of their soft vote (which if people remember, appeared to take them just south of 20%) has now moved over to the SNP after their final votes for Labour in the GE.
The Scottish Libs and Scottish Cons have no option but to merge into the Scottish Progressive Party (reflecting their old civic electoral alliance) and Labour... they may as well just shut the shop. They're done.
I agree with the basic point that there's not really space for four main parties in Scotland (or, perhaps, anywhere). The question is who is left without a seat when the music stops. At the moment, with the Tories not having recovered from their loss of support in c.1993, the Lib Dems still declining since falling off a cliff in 2010 and Labour seemingly incapable of arresting their decline post-Iraq (?), there is space for any two of the three to assure themselves at the expense of the third.
That said, the one to lose out will not be the Tories unless another credible centre-right party emerges (and UKIP isn't that party or at least, it's a long way from being so yet). But the Scottish Tories do have the chance to break back into the top two if they can finish off Labour - but that would require someone else to occupy the unionist / left-of-centre position. The Scottish Lib Dems, perhaps with the Greens, could theoretically do that but it'll take a lot for them to make that kind of turnaround given that they're essentially non-existent in large parts of the country and that at local level the SNP has already established itself as the left-of-centre opposition to Labour (where their nationalism isn't really an issue).
The eighth amendment to the US constitution: "Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted."
I suppose it's just my "bleeding heart liberal" view, but 43 years in solitary seems "cruel and unusual" to me.
Cruel, certainly, but perhaps not as unusual as one might have hoped.
There seems to be this assumption on this side that there is significant room for a centre-right party in Scotland. Yet, if you were to introduce the notion there was room for a centre-left party in England, you'd get laughed at. Personally, I don't see the Conservatives, particularly with the Tories being in government gaining serious success in Scotland. The SNP have framed the debate in such a way, that it's very easy - with Cameron's behaviour in GE aiding them - to frame the Tories as an 'enemy of Scotland'. The Tories still have a significant brand issue in Scotland, and Ruth Davidson hasn't really changed that, no matter how 'okay' a figure she is.
Great news for the Conservatives, I think Goldsmith could have a real chance at being elected Mayor. Much more so, than Sol Campbell whose total lack of self-awareness, and disconnect from London's voters would lead to disaster.
She provides a clear and unequivocal positive message to her constituency (the people of Scotland.) She has taken a defeat and turned it into as close to a victory as it can be and has not retreated into recrimination after the referendum but rather has looked at the positives and used that to build success.
Personally I think she is one of the most talented politicians in the UK at the moment and is only let down by the rather childish behaviour of some of her party at Westminster.
This is actually a fantastic post, one of the best I've seen on PB. There is a tendency on this site to dismiss anyone on the left. I thought Sturgeon during the GE came across as quite genuine, and passionate about what she believed in, tbh. I didn't see her as dull at her - it was Jim Murphy, who seemed to personify that.
The Labour Party has tabled some very interesting amendments to the Scotland Bill. If agreed to, they would make the commencement of Part 1 of the Bill on Constitutional Arrangements (which deals with the Sewel Convention and the Scottish Parliament's power to make provisions about elections) dependent on the report of a "Constitutional Convention", which would examine constitutional arrangements throughout the United Kingdom. Their amendments would also make the commencement of Part 2 of the Bill (on tax) dependent on the report of an "Independent Commission on Full Fiscal Autonomy". Although the amendments would oblige the Convention and Commission to report by March 2016, the Labour Party now seem to be implying that further devolution to Scotland should be dependent on UK-wide considerations. A change of position?
Labour deciding that the other parts of the UK should get a final say on Scottish constitutional matters will go down REALLY well in Scotland.....
The Labour Party has tabled some very interesting amendments to the Scotland Bill. If agreed to, they would make the commencement of Part 1 of the Bill on Constitutional Arrangements (which deals with the Sewel Convention and the Scottish Parliament's power to make provisions about elections) dependent on the report of a "Constitutional Convention", which would examine constitutional arrangements throughout the United Kingdom. Their amendments would also make the commencement of Part 2 of the Bill (on tax) dependent on the report of an "Independent Commission on Full Fiscal Autonomy". Although the amendments would oblige the Convention and Commission to report by March 2016, the Labour Party now seem to be implying that further devolution to Scotland should be dependent on UK-wide considerations. A change of position?
Labour deciding that the other parts of the UK should get a final say on Scottish constitutional matters will go down REALLY well in Scotland.....
The other parts of the Union have a perfect right to have a large say in any constitutional arrangement for Scotland, given that it affects their rights too.
What I can see riling the Scottish electorate more is what looks like nothing more than delaying tactics from Labour and a breach of what was agreed immediately after the referendum - which has to raise questions about trust.
If I was advising the government, I'd be inclined to word the bill such that Holyrood could take on (but not hand back) FFA at any time of its choosing once the Bill becomes law. No need for commissions: kick the decision into the MSPs' hands and see whether they decide to run with it or not.
The question of rebalancing the constitution needs to be answered but not necessarily at the same time.
Oddly enough I had just been adjusting my London Mayor position when the Zac announcement came through. (As things stand +£207 Tessa, +£615 Sadiq, +£317 Zac, -£10 other, which isn't too bad a book for this stage of the contest).
I agree with Tissue Price that Zac has a very good chance. I think the Richmond constituents will overwhelmingly support his candidacy, so it's highly likely he'll get the Tory nomination.
It will be a very interesting political position if we end up with a Tory government promoting expansion of Heathrow, and a Tory Mayor opposing it. This is a big headache for Cameron and Osborne.
Oddly enough I had just been adjusting my London Mayor position when the Zac announcement came through. (As things stand +£207 Tessa, +£615 Sadiq, +£317 Zac, -£10 other, which isn't too bad a book for this stage of the contest).
I agree with Tissue Price that Zac has a very good chance. I think the Richmond constituents will overwhelmingly support his candidacy, so it's highly likely he'll get the Tory nomination.
It will be a very interesting political position if we end up with a Tory government promoting expansion of Heathrow, and a Tory Mayor opposing it. This is a big headache for Cameron and Osborne.
We should have a referendum on Heathrow expansion and give the Scots a veto over it.
There seems to be this assumption on this side that there is significant room for a centre-right party in Scotland. Yet, if you were to introduce the notion there was room for a centre-left party in England, you'd get laughed at. ...
There is a centre-left party in England. It's Labour and polled 30% at the last election. The Lib Dems, depending on how they're feeling, are also frequently a centre-left party. The Greens are very much a left-of-centre party. UKIP has equally been flirting with the same economically collectivist voters. There's no shortage.
If England splits roughly 50-50 (and you can make a case for pretty much anything between 2:1 one way and much the same the other), then I don't see why Scotland should be as much as 85-15 (or, if it's argued that there's no need for a centre-right Scottish party, close to unanimity).
Indeed, it isn't. There are plenty of SNP and Lib Dem voters who are essentially economically conservative and plenty of Labour voters who are socially conservative. The biggest problem the Tories have in winning these voters over remains the brand, which is a shame as a great many of them are currently 'in play' and might be won over now or in the near future if they were willing to consider the option.
Oddly enough I had just been adjusting my London Mayor position when the Zac announcement came through. (As things stand +£207 Tessa, +£615 Sadiq, +£317 Zac, -£10 other, which isn't too bad a book for this stage of the contest).
I agree with Tissue Price that Zac has a very good chance. I think the Richmond constituents will overwhelmingly support his candidacy, so it's highly likely he'll get the Tory nomination.
It will be a very interesting political position if we end up with a Tory government promoting expansion of Heathrow, and a Tory Mayor opposing it. This is a big headache for Cameron and Osborne.
We should have a referendum on Heathrow expansion and give the Scots a veto over it.
Heathrow expansion is a betrayal of the Vow and justifies an new referendum.
Oddly enough I had just been adjusting my London Mayor position when the Zac announcement came through. (As things stand +£207 Tessa, +£615 Sadiq, +£317 Zac, -£10 other, which isn't too bad a book for this stage of the contest).
I agree with Tissue Price that Zac has a very good chance. I think the Richmond constituents will overwhelmingly support his candidacy, so it's highly likely he'll get the Tory nomination.
It will be a very interesting political position if we end up with a Tory government promoting expansion of Heathrow, and a Tory Mayor opposing it. This is a big headache for Cameron and Osborne.
We should have a referendum on Heathrow expansion and give the Scots a veto over it.
Heathrow expansion is a betrayal of the Vow and justifies an new referendum.
Ditto blocking Heathrow expansion.
Is betrayal of any other Toyah Wilcox song grounds for a new referendum as well?
Oddly enough I had just been adjusting my London Mayor position when the Zac announcement came through. (As things stand +£207 Tessa, +£615 Sadiq, +£317 Zac, -£10 other, which isn't too bad a book for this stage of the contest).
I agree with Tissue Price that Zac has a very good chance. I think the Richmond constituents will overwhelmingly support his candidacy, so it's highly likely he'll get the Tory nomination.
It will be a very interesting political position if we end up with a Tory government promoting expansion of Heathrow, and a Tory Mayor opposing it. This is a big headache for Cameron and Osborne.
We should have a referendum on Heathrow expansion and give the Scots a veto over it.
Heathrow expansion is a betrayal of the Vow and justifies an new referendum.
Ditto blocking Heathrow expansion.
Is betrayal of any other Toyah Wilcox song grounds for a new referendum as well?
@AndrewSparrow: Britain should leave EU if it cannot change rules to block EU migrants claiming benefits for 4 yrs, Boris says http://t.co/7qCTYZNLPk
Nah, its all part of the strategy. Its obvious that the benefit restrictions is a done deal, with Merkel all but publicly banging the drum for it. The Polish PM is providing the necessary covering fire so that politicians here can claim it was a tough fight but they wrestled these large and meaningful concessions (*cough*) from the Europeans.
Boris has been signed up to look like his is flirting with going with OUT, which will scare off any other senior Tories that might have been thinking of quitting to lead the out campaign, because they won't want to play second fiddle to Boris.
In a few months time Dave will annouce that the deal has been done ( as opposed for been done for ages which is conspicuously the case) and Boris will row in behind him, but it will be too late for anyone else to jump on the OUT bandwagon,
Nice one DavidL. Keep it up. As you say, an Alice in Wonderland landscape in Slab land. Or could it be "Through the Looking Glass" for potential leaders; where is Tweedledum and Tweedledee when you want them?
Scotland has rising unemployment (Uk falling), car sales falling (Uk rising), lower growth than rUk and the prospect of income tax rises next year.
Yet some posters think Nicola has abolished popularity Boom and Bust ?
That's the thing about a Nationalist party, though, isn't it; everythjing might be going down the whatsit now, but it's the fault to the hated tyrants against whom we are fighting. When we are "free", all will be well!
It is only when "freedom" comes that the cracks come, and economics and social become important rather than "getting rid if (insert relevant name).
And Malcolm before you develop hysteria, I have no problem with people governing themselves; I've been married long enough to know that the honeymoon doesn't last!
It will be a very interesting political position if we end up with a Tory government promoting expansion of Heathrow, and a Tory Mayor opposing it. This is a big headache for Cameron and Osborne.
Not really:
It's in the country's interest for airport capacity to be expanded. Heathrow is objectively the logical place. Hence it is supported by the national leadership.
It's not in the interests of west London for Heathrow to be expanded, hence it is opposed by the regional leadership
Zac Goldsmith is a decent choice for the Tories, but as one of them it is unlikely I'll vote for him. Housing is my only priority here in London. I share a four bedroom house in a decidely average part of east London, and together we pay more in rent alone (not even in bills/Council Tax) than the average wage of someone in this country.
Zac has made it clear it's not his first (Heathrow) or second (environment) priority, and since governments nor mayors of either colour have resolved the crisis, it would need to be top priority.
Nice one DavidL. Keep it up. As you say, an Alice in Wonderland landscape in Slab land. Or could it be "Through the Looking Glass" for potential leaders; where is Tweedledum and Tweedledee when you want them?
Damn. Missed that opportunity.
Arf - btw, well done DavidL on a cracking thread - keep em comming.
It will be a very interesting political position if we end up with a Tory government promoting expansion of Heathrow, and a Tory Mayor opposing it. This is a big headache for Cameron and Osborne.
Not really:
It's in the country's interest for airport capacity to be expanded. Heathrow is objectively the logical place. Hence it is supported by the national leadership.
It's not in the interests of west London for Heathrow to be expanded, hence it is opposed by the regional leadership
"It's not in the interests of west London for Heathrow to be expanded"
If the alternative was creating an entirely new hub airport elsewhere and losing entirely, then keeping Heathrow and expanding it might be in the interests of west London.
The problem seems to be that there is no adult discussion of all the pros and cons.
It will be a very interesting political position if we end up with a Tory government promoting expansion of Heathrow, and a Tory Mayor opposing it. This is a big headache for Cameron and Osborne.
Not really:
It's in the country's interest for airport capacity to be expanded. Heathrow is objectively the logical place. Hence it is supported by the national leadership.
It's not in the interests of west London for Heathrow to be expanded, hence it is opposed by the regional leadership
"It's not in the interests of west London for Heathrow to be expanded"
If the alternative was creating an entirely new hub airport elsewhere and losing entirely, then keeping Heathrow and expanding it might be in the interests of west London.
The problem seems to be that there is no adult discussion of all the pros and cons.
It's subject to Parkinson's law of triviality. More airport capacity, any which way, will be a big decision. We'd rahter debate the colour of the bikeshed.
Zac has made it clear it's not his first (Heathrow) or second (environment) priority, and since governments nor mayors of either colour have resolved the crisis, it would need to be top priority.
“London needs a Mayor who can work with Government to get the resources that London needs to deal with massive pressures on housing, transport and policing but is also strong enough to stand up to the Government when it gets things wrong,” he said.
Oddly enough I had just been adjusting my London Mayor position when the Zac announcement came through. (As things stand +£207 Tessa, +£615 Sadiq, +£317 Zac, -£10 other, which isn't too bad a book for this stage of the contest).
I agree with Tissue Price that Zac has a very good chance. I think the Richmond constituents will overwhelmingly support his candidacy, so it's highly likely he'll get the Tory nomination.
It will be a very interesting political position if we end up with a Tory government promoting expansion of Heathrow, and a Tory Mayor opposing it. This is a big headache for Cameron and Osborne.
Nice one DavidL. Keep it up. As you say, an Alice in Wonderland landscape in Slab land. Or could it be "Through the Looking Glass" for potential leaders; where is Tweedledum and Tweedledee when you want them?
Damn. Missed that opportunity.
SLABs options seem to be limited to a choice between Tweedledum and Tweedledumber....
@AndrewSparrow: Britain should leave EU if it cannot change rules to block EU migrants claiming benefits for 4 yrs, Boris says http://t.co/7qCTYZNLPk
Nah, its all part of the strategy. Its obvious that the benefit restrictions is a done deal, with Merkel all but publicly banging the drum for it. The Polish PM is providing the necessary covering fire so that politicians here can claim it was a tough fight but they wrestled these large and meaningful concessions (*cough*) from the Europeans.
Boris has been signed up to look like his is flirting with going with OUT, which will scare off any other senior Tories that might have been thinking of quitting to lead the out campaign, because they won't want to play second fiddle to Boris.
In a few months time Dave will annouce that the deal has been done ( as opposed for been done for ages which is conspicuously the case) and Boris will row in behind him, but it will be too late for anyone else to jump on the OUT bandwagon,
Changes to benefits for migrants is indeed quite doable. But the issues really resolve around the way the eurozone works within the EU.
Zac has made it clear it's not his first (Heathrow) or second (environment) priority, and since governments nor mayors of either colour have resolved the crisis, it would need to be top priority.
“London needs a Mayor who can work with Government to get the resources that London needs to deal with massive pressures on housing, transport and policing but is also strong enough to stand up to the Government when it gets things wrong,” he said.
Stopping a third runway at Heathrow airport and cleaning up London’s environment would be among key policies if he is picked as official Tory candidate... Mr Goldsmith said he would use the mayoral platform to “mend our politics”, boost High Streets, improve transport and provide a healthier environment.
That is, if anything, weaker than BoJo's commitment to housing, and that has proven lamentable.
Mr. Rog, I had similar thoughts reading the story on the BBC website.
They're banning it on the basis it might be a gateway to 'proper' smoking. But it has helped smokers to quit (a gateway, but the other direction), and by making it, or seeking to make it, as socially taboo as real smoking why wouldn't kids prefer the real deal? If vaping's seen as ok and smoking's seen as bad, those tempted might opt for vaping.
He's such a great tipper. I'm glad there's no public record of me pooh poohing his tip a few days before election day, of backing a Tory majority at 10
Mr. Rog, I had similar thoughts reading the story on the BBC website.
They're banning it on the basis it might be a gateway to 'proper' smoking. But it has helped smokers to quit (a gateway, but the other direction), and by making it, or seeking to make it, as socially taboo as real smoking why wouldn't kids prefer the real deal? If vaping's seen as ok and smoking's seen as bad, those tempted might opt for vaping.
Banning vaping is a nonsense, the argument is quite different to banning smoking where the staff may suffer from 2nd hand smoke inhalation... it's going too far.
@AndrewSparrow: Britain should leave EU if it cannot change rules to block EU migrants claiming benefits for 4 yrs, Boris says http://t.co/7qCTYZNLPk
Nah, its all part of the strategy. Its obvious that the benefit restrictions is a done deal, with Merkel all but publicly banging the drum for it. The Polish PM is providing the necessary covering fire so that politicians here can claim it was a tough fight but they wrestled these large and meaningful concessions (*cough*) from the Europeans.
Boris has been signed up to look like his is flirting with going with OUT, which will scare off any other senior Tories that might have been thinking of quitting to lead the out campaign, because they won't want to play second fiddle to Boris.
In a few months time Dave will annouce that the deal has been done ( as opposed for been done for ages which is conspicuously the case) and Boris will row in behind him, but it will be too late for anyone else to jump on the OUT bandwagon,
Absolutely!
I have zero inside knowledge but its crystal clear to me that the "deal" was outlined before the election even. Cameron announced support for a referendum and a renegotiation in 2011 and the idea he's spent the last four years without sounding out what was achievable is silly.
Clearly the deal was outlined last Parliament. Read between the lines, at the election the "goals" were said and Merkel has made clear she'd be OK with them all. Now its a case of formalising it. International agreements always get formalised with a big song and dance but the real legwork is not done at the meetings of Heads of Government and the real legwork is well underway here. Boris is no idiot and knows this.
@AndrewSparrow: Britain should leave EU if it cannot change rules to block EU migrants claiming benefits for 4 yrs, Boris says http://t.co/7qCTYZNLPk
Nah, its all part of the strategy. Its obvious that the benefit restrictions is a done deal, with Merkel all but publicly banging the drum for it. The Polish PM is providing the necessary covering fire so that politicians here can claim it was a tough fight but they wrestled these large and meaningful concessions (*cough*) from the Europeans.
Boris has been signed up to look like his is flirting with going with OUT, which will scare off any other senior Tories that might have been thinking of quitting to lead the out campaign, because they won't want to play second fiddle to Boris.
In a few months time Dave will annouce that the deal has been done ( as opposed for been done for ages which is conspicuously the case) and Boris will row in behind him, but it will be too late for anyone else to jump on the OUT bandwagon,
Changes to benefits for migrants is indeed quite doable. But the issues really resolve around the way the eurozone works within the EU.
Agreed. I don't think a deal will be forthcoming on that. Too many countries, especially those that receive payouts are quite happy to have the UK along to help pay for the ride, even if we are not in the Euro. The French are still going to want the FTT to hobble London for example, even if it seems unlikely to happen in the near future, they are not going to give up on the possibility that it might happen later.
I think Cameron will get the benefits fix, I am pretty sure he is not going to get anything meaningful on avoiding being outvoted by the Eurozone, which is going to leave him with the interesting conundrum of either trying to dress is up as unimportant, to catcalls from his Eurosceptics, or take a firm line with the EU and risk them calling his bluff, in which case he would have to either support OUT which he would hate having to do, or look like a patsy, which would be worse.
Mr. Rog, I had similar thoughts reading the story on the BBC website.
They're banning it on the basis it might be a gateway to 'proper' smoking. But it has helped smokers to quit (a gateway, but the other direction), and by making it, or seeking to make it, as socially taboo as real smoking why wouldn't kids prefer the real deal? If vaping's seen as ok and smoking's seen as bad, those tempted might opt for vaping.
I took a train into Liverpool recently and there were a group of schoolkids (in school uniform) "vaping" in the seats in front of us. You wouldn't see people smoking like that inside.
Personally I don't have a strong opinion either way, except that a lot of vapers seem to lack any common decency and think that their habit is OK under all circumstances and don't need to have the same manners as others have. I play Poker in a local pub and the other week a new player came and was vaping at the table and kept blowing his smoke across the table into my face - I find that disgusting. We've long since moved from blowing smoke into people's faces I'd hope and I wouldn't cough or sneeze into your face so why do you think its OK to blow your habit into mine? I find that filthy.
There seems to be this assumption on this side that there is significant room for a centre-right party in Scotland. Yet, if you were to introduce the notion there was room for a centre-left party in England, you'd get laughed at. ...
There is a centre-left party in England. It's Labour and polled 30% at the last election. The Lib Dems, depending on how they're feeling, are also frequently a centre-left party. The Greens are very much a left-of-centre party. UKIP has equally been flirting with the same economically collectivist voters. There's no shortage.
If England splits roughly 50-50 (and you can make a case for pretty much anything between 2:1 one way and much the same the other), then I don't see why Scotland should be as much as 85-15 (or, if it's argued that there's no need for a centre-right Scottish party, close to unanimity).
Indeed, it isn't. There are plenty of SNP and Lib Dem voters who are essentially economically conservative and plenty of Labour voters who are socially conservative. The biggest problem the Tories have in winning these voters over remains the brand, which is a shame as a great many of them are currently 'in play' and might be won over now or in the near future if they were willing to consider the option.
On England, many would say that it's a 'conservative, centre-right' country so to speak; which implies that there is not really a space for a considerable left-centre force. I've seen on this site, that Labour's shift post 1994, to the right is a testament to this. I also feel many on the left would challenge the idea as to whether Labour really are on the centre-left on politics anymore. It's very hard to pin down as to what Labour exactly is anymore. On the LDs, there's a difficult situation there too. While the party hierarchy under Clegg were more to the centre of politics, the LD party membership and grassroots are much more to the left.
Under the assumption Labour/LDs represent the 'left' in England, if they have to ask themselves why voters aren't entertaining them, then so do the Tories in Scotland. They have to ask as to why, still their brand is so toxic many voters there will not consider them.
Under the assumption Labour/LDs represent the 'left' in England, if they have to ask themselves why voters aren't entertaining them, then so do the Tories in Scotland. They have to ask as to why, still their brand is so toxic many voters there will not consider them.
Because they are unionists.
There are plenty of right leaning Scots that would vote for a centre right party in other circumstances, we have a handful on this site, but right now for around half of Scots independence is more important than left/right, and for most of the rest the benefits that can be gained for Scotland by the bolshie nationalists are worth the inconvenience of voting for them, even if they have no intention to vote for "out" in any referendum.
Oddly enough I had just been adjusting my London Mayor position when the Zac announcement came through. (As things stand +£207 Tessa, +£615 Sadiq, +£317 Zac, -£10 other, which isn't too bad a book for this stage of the contest). I agree with Tissue Price that Zac has a very good chance. I think the Richmond constituents will overwhelmingly support his candidacy, so it's highly likely he'll get the Tory nomination. It will be a very interesting political position if we end up with a Tory government promoting expansion of Heathrow, and a Tory Mayor opposing it. This is a big headache for Cameron and Osborne.
We should have a referendum on Heathrow expansion and give the Scots a veto over it.
Heathrow expansion is a betrayal of the Vow and justifies an new referendum. Ditto blocking Heathrow expansion.
The SNP can vote in Westminster on anything - including Heathrow expansion or contraction. The SNP could vote on passenger duty for English airports but all Westminster MPs including Scottish ones will soon have no vote on Scottish airport duties.
Under the assumption Labour/LDs represent the 'left' in England, if they have to ask themselves why voters aren't entertaining them, then so do the Tories in Scotland. They have to ask as to why, still their brand is so toxic many voters there will not consider them.
Because they are unionists.
There are plenty of right leaning Scots that would vote for a centre right party in other circumstances, we have a handful on this site, but right now for around half of Scots independence is more important than left/right, and for most of the rest the benefits that can be gained for Scotland by the bolshie nationalists are worth the inconvenience of voting for them, even if they have no intention to vote for "out" in any referendum.
The Conservatives have had this issue for more than twenty years though. Their unpopularity in Scotland, is not something that just arisen with the independence debate. Therefore that the Conservatives are unionists, is in itself not enough to explain why many in Scotland are reluctant to vote for them.
I'm guessing SCons trailing well behind SLab then? The shame...
Behind but not well behind. Still flatlining in the mid-teens. Which in the face of the SNP surge is actually quite reasonable. I'd still hope that as and when the Nattophilia wears off - and all parties who achieve such heights inevitably fall back from them sooner or later - it'll be the centre-right wing of the SNP electoral coalition that will go first. And that will push the Tories into second.
I was being somewhat facetious, but yes, anything can happen when you get such a sudden implosion of a major party.
I'm still unconvinced Ruth is anything more than Aunty Bella Mk II, i.e. personally popular but adding very little to their party's vote. This polling is only MOE above the SCon 2011 result (at that point 'the Conservatives’ worst ever election result north of the Border'), and MOE below their 2007 result.
Just as SLab need to find some of that 'vision thing' to break out of their death spiral, the SCons perhaps also need something extra to get above flatlining. Of course as you suggest, flatlining is a fairly respectable achievement in the current Scottish climate.
TUD , they have nothing to offer Scotland, clueless and just London lapdogs. They are going nowhere except backwards.
Comments
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-33059012
The eighth amendment to the US constitution:
"Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted."
I suppose it's just my "bleeding heart liberal" view, but 43 years in solitary seems "cruel and unusual" to me.
I see Liz K has her 35 nominations. Looks like it will be Andy vs Yvette vs Liz. Can't see the other two making it unless someone 'helps' them.
Tory MP Zac Goldsmith announces his bid to run for London Mayor
EXCLUSIVE: MP Zac Goldsmith wants to stand as successor to Boris Johnson
http://bit.ly/1AZwU9R
Isn't it more of a donkey derby?
Seems pretty good value at 10/11 for the candidacy although shame only Ladbrokes offer odds on that...
SNP 73(+4)
SLAB 25 (-12)
Tories 17(+2)
LibDem 4 (-1)
Greens 10 (+8)
UKIP 0
Total Seats 129 (65 for a majority)
As the Scotland Votes seat calculator currently doesn't take account of regional splits, the above figures area at best a guide of likely trends based on current polling. Link below:
http://www.scotlandvotes.com/holyrood
Where did it all get to be so much of a problem, having a coach load of active Tories paying for their own accommodation whilst delivering leaflets and canvassing rising at 6.00 am and getting to bed at 11.00 pm for a week at a time?
It is enough to turn us Republicans into Monarchists
Those who live by the sword of course..........
http://bit.ly/1KSJIii
Khan v Jowell is very interesting and it would be good to have more views on that. I note the £500 trying to back Khan on betfair @ 3.65 with great interest, seeing as there is plenty of 7/2 (4.5 in new money) about with bookmakers.
He is in great form with 88 and 31 in the Test and 106 not out against Leics last Saturday. One negative is that if England bat first and get a low score he may not get a bat, but with 10 points for a catch and him being wicketkeeper I will take a chance.
Looks a good bet to me.
I'm still unconvinced Ruth is anything more than Aunty Bella Mk II, i.e. personally popular but adding very little to their party's vote. This polling is only MOE above the SCon 2011 result (at that point 'the Conservatives’ worst ever election result north of the Border'), and MOE below their 2007 result.
Just as SLab need to find some of that 'vision thing' to break out of their death spiral, the SCons perhaps also need something extra to get above flatlining. Of course as you suggest, flatlining is a fairly respectable achievement in the current Scottish climate.
That said, the one to lose out will not be the Tories unless another credible centre-right party emerges (and UKIP isn't that party or at least, it's a long way from being so yet). But the Scottish Tories do have the chance to break back into the top two if they can finish off Labour - but that would require someone else to occupy the unionist / left-of-centre position. The Scottish Lib Dems, perhaps with the Greens, could theoretically do that but it'll take a lot for them to make that kind of turnaround given that they're essentially non-existent in large parts of the country and that at local level the SNP has already established itself as the left-of-centre opposition to Labour (where their nationalism isn't really an issue).
http://www.scottishreview.net/index.html
Kenneth Roy and Dominic Hinde have interesting views worth considering
@AndrewSparrow: Britain should leave EU if it cannot change rules to block EU migrants claiming benefits for 4 yrs, Boris says http://t.co/7qCTYZNLPk
What I can see riling the Scottish electorate more is what looks like nothing more than delaying tactics from Labour and a breach of what was agreed immediately after the referendum - which has to raise questions about trust.
If I was advising the government, I'd be inclined to word the bill such that Holyrood could take on (but not hand back) FFA at any time of its choosing once the Bill becomes law. No need for commissions: kick the decision into the MSPs' hands and see whether they decide to run with it or not.
The question of rebalancing the constitution needs to be answered but not necessarily at the same time.
Yet some posters think Nicola has abolished popularity Boom and Bust ?
I agree with Tissue Price that Zac has a very good chance. I think the Richmond constituents will overwhelmingly support his candidacy, so it's highly likely he'll get the Tory nomination.
It will be a very interesting political position if we end up with a Tory government promoting expansion of Heathrow, and a Tory Mayor opposing it. This is a big headache for Cameron and Osborne.
If England splits roughly 50-50 (and you can make a case for pretty much anything between 2:1 one way and much the same the other), then I don't see why Scotland should be as much as 85-15 (or, if it's argued that there's no need for a centre-right Scottish party, close to unanimity).
Indeed, it isn't. There are plenty of SNP and Lib Dem voters who are essentially economically conservative and plenty of Labour voters who are socially conservative. The biggest problem the Tories have in winning these voters over remains the brand, which is a shame as a great many of them are currently 'in play' and might be won over now or in the near future if they were willing to consider the option.
Ditto blocking Heathrow expansion.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/11661391/Driver-ran-over-drunk-student-as-he-lay-asleep-in-the-road.html
Boris has been signed up to look like his is flirting with going with OUT, which will scare off any other senior Tories that might have been thinking of quitting to lead the out campaign, because they won't want to play second fiddle to Boris.
In a few months time Dave will annouce that the deal has been done ( as opposed for been done for ages which is conspicuously the case) and Boris will row in behind him, but it will be too late for anyone else to jump on the OUT bandwagon,
It is only when "freedom" comes that the cracks come, and economics and social become important rather than "getting rid if (insert relevant name).
And Malcolm before you develop hysteria, I have no problem with people governing themselves; I've been married long enough to know that the honeymoon doesn't last!
It's in the country's interest for airport capacity to be expanded. Heathrow is objectively the logical place. Hence it is supported by the national leadership.
It's not in the interests of west London for Heathrow to be expanded, hence it is opposed by the regional leadership
Zac has made it clear it's not his first (Heathrow) or second (environment) priority, and since governments nor mayors of either colour have resolved the crisis, it would need to be top priority.
"It's not in the interests of west London for Heathrow to be expanded"
If the alternative was creating an entirely new hub airport elsewhere and losing entirely, then keeping Heathrow and expanding it might be in the interests of west London.
The problem seems to be that there is no adult discussion of all the pros and cons.
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/mayor/tory-mp-zac-goldsmith-announces-his-bid-to-run-for-london-mayor-10306819.html
https://twitter.com/PeterRNeumann/status/608221508671053824
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/sep/01/boris-johnson-third-runway-disaster
Ridiculous suggestion. I've also heard that the Welsh Assembly will legislate to make pi = 3 as it makes maths easier to understand.
Another great tip.
But as the article says: That is, if anything, weaker than BoJo's commitment to housing, and that has proven lamentable.
They're banning it on the basis it might be a gateway to 'proper' smoking. But it has helped smokers to quit (a gateway, but the other direction), and by making it, or seeking to make it, as socially taboo as real smoking why wouldn't kids prefer the real deal? If vaping's seen as ok and smoking's seen as bad, those tempted might opt for vaping.
https://twitter.com/Cuphook108/status/608221222363643905
I have zero inside knowledge but its crystal clear to me that the "deal" was outlined before the election even. Cameron announced support for a referendum and a renegotiation in 2011 and the idea he's spent the last four years without sounding out what was achievable is silly.
Clearly the deal was outlined last Parliament. Read between the lines, at the election the "goals" were said and Merkel has made clear she'd be OK with them all. Now its a case of formalising it. International agreements always get formalised with a big song and dance but the real legwork is not done at the meetings of Heads of Government and the real legwork is well underway here. Boris is no idiot and knows this.
I think Cameron will get the benefits fix, I am pretty sure he is not going to get anything meaningful on avoiding being outvoted by the Eurozone, which is going to leave him with the interesting conundrum of either trying to dress is up as unimportant, to catcalls from his Eurosceptics, or take a firm line with the EU and risk them calling his bluff, in which case he would have to either support OUT which he would hate having to do, or look like a patsy, which would be worse.
Personally I don't have a strong opinion either way, except that a lot of vapers seem to lack any common decency and think that their habit is OK under all circumstances and don't need to have the same manners as others have. I play Poker in a local pub and the other week a new player came and was vaping at the table and kept blowing his smoke across the table into my face - I find that disgusting. We've long since moved from blowing smoke into people's faces I'd hope and I wouldn't cough or sneeze into your face so why do you think its OK to blow your habit into mine? I find that filthy.
Under the assumption Labour/LDs represent the 'left' in England, if they have to ask themselves why voters aren't entertaining them, then so do the Tories in Scotland. They have to ask as to why, still their brand is so toxic many voters there will not consider them.
New Thread
There are plenty of right leaning Scots that would vote for a centre right party in other circumstances, we have a handful on this site, but right now for around half of Scots independence is more important than left/right, and for most of the rest the benefits that can be gained for Scotland by the bolshie nationalists are worth the inconvenience of voting for them, even if they have no intention to vote for "out" in any referendum.