What did shock me about the BMA representative on the tv and radio this morning, is how he used typical tactics of a politician tactics in dissembling the truth and distracting the discussion away onto a side matter or even an impossible requirement.
For example when asked about weekend working he replied "90% of doctors do work at weekends". Now what he did not say is that such working was at their discretion and some of it was in private practice and not for the NHS.... Later on he did admit that very few hospital doctors did NHS scheduled weekend work.
The BMA man also kept saying that they wanted to discuss "the wider context and issues of weekend working". It sounded reasonable but when pushed he then went on about the need for supporting services to be provided. It as if the BMA wants to insiste that all the support services are in place to their satisfaction/veto and then they will discuss agreeing to scheduled weekend working in a new contract. Why should the BMA have such a right of veto over how the rest of a hospital operates? Of course by demanding the undeliverable it just kicks the can down the road a few more years. Ooops we have to over look tens of thousands dying because of the delay....
Aw! Diddums! Can people not learn how to be media trained and just be ridden over by a Humphries wanting a headline? Must we leave it to all the Hunts to spread their own propaganda with out a chance of reply?
And I may have missed it, but since the majority of the costs in the NHS is in wages, increasing the costs of all the required changes by up to 40% means that the money has to come from somewhere.
Who is going to pay it? Anyone looked in a mirror recently?
What did shock me about the BMA representative on the tv and radio this morning, is how he used typical tactics of a politician tactics in dissembling the truth and distracting the discussion away onto a side matter or even an impossible requirement.
For example when asked about weekend working he replied "90% of doctors do work at weekends". Now what he did not say is that such working was at their discretion and some of it was in private practice and not for the NHS.... Later on he did admit that very few hospital doctors did NHS scheduled weekend work.
The BMA man also kept saying that they wanted to discuss "the wider context and issues of weekend working". It sounded reasonable but when pushed he then went on about the need for supporting services to be provided. It as if the BMA wants to insiste that all the support services are in place to their satisfaction/veto and then they will discuss agreeing to scheduled weekend working in a new contract. Why should the BMA have such a right of veto over how the rest of a hospital operates? Of course by demanding the undeliverable it just kicks the can down the road a few more years. Ooops we have to over look tens of thousands dying because of the delay....
Of course support services will need to be in place. You can't run outpatients without receptionists, and drivers for mobility-impaired patients, and so on.
But that is not the BMA's responsibility. By demanding that everything is in place they create a barrier to any change. No change suits them. Patients die.
Oh FFS. Patients die because there are not enough doctors. There are not enough doctors because successive governments haven't properly funded and correctly framed medical training in ages. Trying to blame doctors already working silly hours covering for missing staff because hospitals and practises cant get the people they need, because they don't pay enough, for patient deaths is disingenuous crap, to put it mildly.
What did shock me about the BMA representative on the tv and radio this morning, is how he used typical tactics of a politician tactics in dissembling the truth and distracting the discussion away onto a side matter or even an impossible requirement.
For example when asked about weekend working he replied "90% of doctors do work at weekends". Now what he did not say is that such working was at their discretion and some of it was in private practice and not for the NHS.... Later on he did admit that very few hospital doctors did NHS scheduled weekend work.
The BMA man also kept saying that they wanted to discuss "the wider context and issues of weekend working". It sounded reasonable but when pushed he then went on about the need for supporting services to be provided. It as if the BMA wants to insiste that all the support services are in place to their satisfaction/veto and then they will discuss agreeing to scheduled weekend working in a new contract. Why should the BMA have such a right of veto over how the rest of a hospital operates? Of course by demanding the undeliverable it just kicks the can down the road a few more years. Ooops we have to over look tens of thousands dying because of the delay....
Aw! Diddums! Can people not learn how to be media trained and just be ridden over by a Humphries wanting a headline? Must we leave it to all the Hunts to spread their own propaganda with out a chance of reply?
And I may have missed it, but since the majority of the costs in the NHS is in wages, increasing the costs of all the required changes by up to 40% means that the money has to come from somewhere.
Who is going to pay it? Anyone looked in a mirror recently?
HBNCBN
It is not a 40% increase in all costs. Providing whatever tiny % cost increase is required is the Govt's role. Not the role of the BMA.
Well, quite. The General Election was simply a rogue poll of the wider electorate with bad weighting problems, completely unrepresentative. :-)
MBO last thread:
Thanks for that, Nick. Do you feel there is a disconnect between the party "out in the wild" and on the green benches? The Labour left seems significantly less prominent in parliament than in the wider party, but I'm not sure how much of that stems from how the bulk of the party membership at large are not so active and engaged. I imagine there are a lot of "quiet centrists".
Most members who I talk to feel (a) we lost track of what we were for in 2010-2015: the party became primarily a receptacle for "Stop the Tories" votes, and in Scotland there was a more positive alternative but (b) we need to have a reasonable shot at winning. There is very little venom in the discussions - people are soberly chewing it over. Corbyn is doing well because he offers a coherent vision, and people yearn for that. He isn't in my opinion going to win, because of (b).
So is it just some of the % of voters who were outside the "very likely" category? Broxtowe should have been a nailed on win for Labour by several thousand according to the polls.
Still re-running election night? Broxtowe had a 10,000 Tory majority in 1992 and there wasn't a significant change in demography. We defied gravity for a long time, but everything comes to an end. You've had a good gloat, time to move on IMO?
Oh dear. That Luvvies Letter supposedly spontaneously supporting the TVLF was organised by the BBC's Danny Cohen and at least one of the signatories didn't see the text of it prior to publication.
What did shock me about the BMA representative on the tv and radio this morning, is how he used typical tactics of a politician tactics in dissembling the truth and distracting the discussion away onto a side matter or even an impossible requirement.
For example when asked about weekend working he replied "90% of doctors do work at weekends". Now what he did not say is that such working was at their discretion and some of it was in private practice and not for the NHS.... Later on he did admit that very few hospital doctors did NHS scheduled weekend work.
The BMA man also kept saying that they wanted to discuss "the wider context and issues of weekend working". It sounded reasonable but when pushed he then went on about the need for supporting services to be provided. It as if the BMA wants to insiste that all the support services are in place to their satisfaction/veto and then they will discuss agreeing to scheduled weekend working in a new contract. Why should the BMA have such a right of veto over how the rest of a hospital operates? Of course by demanding the undeliverable it just kicks the can down the road a few more years. Ooops we have to over look tens of thousands dying because of the delay....
Of course support services will need to be in place. You can't run outpatients without receptionists, and drivers for mobility-impaired patients, and so on.
But that is not the BMA's responsibility. By demanding that everything is in place they create a barrier to any change. No change suits them. Patients die.
Oh FFS. Patients die because there are not enough doctors. There are not enough doctors because successive governments haven't properly funded and correctly framed medical training in ages. Trying to blame doctors already working silly hours covering for missing staff because hospitals and practises cant get the people they need, because they don't pay enough, for patient deaths is disingenuous crap, to put it mildly.
Unless NHS hospital doctors agree a change in contract to more flexible working, adding more doctors on the same old terms would not fix the problem of weekend working as the new doctors can also opt out. Hunt has said that they plan to fund thousands more doctors, although that is his/NHS responsibility and not the concern of the BMA.
But that is not the BMA's responsibility. By demanding that everything is in place they create a barrier to any change. No change suits them. Patients die.
Oh FFS. Patients die because there are not enough doctors. There are not enough doctors because successive governments haven't properly funded and correctly framed medical training in ages. Trying to blame doctors already working silly hours covering for missing staff because hospitals and practises cant get the people they need, because they don't pay enough, for patient deaths is disingenuous crap, to put it mildly.
Unless NHS hospital doctors agree a change in contract to more flexible working, adding more doctors on the same old terms would not fix the problem of weekend working as the new doctors can also opt out. Hunt has said that they plan to fund thousands more doctors, although that is his/NHS problem and not the problem of the BMA.
Absolutely. But saying to doctors in practises that cant get extra staff as it is that they are going to have to cover weekends as well isn't going to work. Rural practises right now have hundreds of full funded places just begging for GPs to come and fill them, and they can't, because our international competitors offer a far more attractive package. Funding extra places wont solve that. Doctors in most of those practises are already working silly hours trying to cover for the places they can't fill.
Hmmm... Did the pollsters not already have filters for certainty to vote? I recall ICM discounted those who had not voted the last time by 50%. And yet they had a 1% Labour lead.
It seems to me that the BES have identified well known and well recognised problems but they have not explained why they were so much more of a problem in 2015 than, say, 2010.
I must say that I am astonished that more than 5% of our population is now over 80. At the risk of overgeneralising internet pollsters are going to have a particular problem with them. But that is just an extreme case of the more general problem. Normal people don't want to talk to pollsters at all and with caller ID etc it is easier to avoid it. Those that do want to talk to pollsters or fill in their online questionnaires are increasingly less representative of the rest.
I think you're right David. Something's not right here.
If we'd had compulsory voting, as in Australia, would Ed have romped home to victory? I think not.
What if turnout had been in the 70-75% bracket that many predicted at the time? Once again, I doubt it. I struggle to see how that'd overturn the solid performances the Tories had in the key marginals, although it probably would have led to them falling short of a majority.
There's a distinction between values-signalling that you're 'Labour', and actually going out and voting Labour, and for their leader to become PM with all the policy baggage that that carries, or does not carry.
Oh dear. That Luvvies Letter supposedly spontaneously supporting the TVLF was organised by the BBC's Danny Cohen and at least one of the signatories didn't see the text of it prior to publication.
Oh dear. That Luvvies Letter supposedly spontaneously supporting the TVLF was organised by the BBC's Danny Cohen and at least one of the signatories didn't see the text of it prior to publication.
Savile died last month, aged 84. "I think it will be a great tribute to Jimmy to recreate his famous show as a Christmas treat for audiences," said BBC1 controller Danny Cohen.
I backed him at 6s and laid off at 9-2 yesterday, also laid Yvette for £22 at 4.3 - I think the Corbyn surge could help Burnham. Whoever laid me the £2 I had at 550.0 on Corbyn (I've laid him plenty (And in hindsight too soon) since) probably isn't too happy.
Morning. It seems that polling companies are struggling to find samples anywhere near representative of the population. Phone samples are becoming outdated as people move from fixed to mobile phones, with the ability to ignore unwanted or marketing calls. Online samples rely on self selection and exclude large groups of people while over-representing others.
It is difficult to see how this is easily rectified, although one change I think we will see is an emphasis on quality rather than quantity of polls - so larger samples and over a longer period, with the higher cost being borne by multiple commissioners in the media. So maybe we get a quarterly poll with 10,000 sample over a couple of weeks, sponsored by a newspaper, a TV news programme and a news website.
It is difficult to see how this is easily rectified, although one change I think we will see is an emphasis on quality rather than quantity of polls - so larger samples and over a longer period, with the higher cost being borne by multiple commissioners in the media. So maybe we get a quarterly poll with 10,000 sample over a couple of weeks, sponsored by a newspaper, a TV news programme and a news website.
Indeed. They might have to go for the expensive and far more reliable approach used in the social sciences. Stratified Random Sampling with interviewers knocking on doors and talking to people. Typically by dividing your population into a number of groups (age, sex etc) and then selecting a random sample from your base list (electoral roll or whatever) to produce a representative number of people in that strata, plus an over flow list for each strata to replace people that cannot be contacted. Attempts are usually made on 2-3 occasions to contact the given person at their house, then they are replaced by someone off the overflow list. Might be a bit pricey of course...
Wishing that my fiver at 100/1 had been a ton, with the great benefits of betting hindsight!
Could Corbyn actually win this in the first round, with the left wing of the party seemingly rejuvenated by his candidacy and with probably an unofficial spoiling campaign from all the other parties in his favour?
I see from the last thread that the DT's anonymously-bylined Corbyn campaign is well under way. Labour have said they can stop these spoilers but what can they actually do in practice? I guess they don't have membership lists for other parties, and they can easily find a Toby Young or a Harry Cole that tries to register, but it could still yet provide a huge spoiler effect on the result.
Very interesting thread. The stuff about the % of people of certain ages within the age bands is very interesting - only 0.5% of 80+ age but they are 5% of population.
I'm a little sceptical as to this being the true, final cause (indeed we may never know). It doesn't quite fit with the anecdotal evidence (for example from Nick P of this parish) of people saying they were going to vote Lab a couple of weeks before the GE and then a day or two before actual poll becoming hesitant when canvassers went around again.
But this work does mean I think that polling companies need to look at the registered to vote question - which I and many other PBers pointed out in the run up to GE.
Whilst some people in care homes will be away with the fairies, a good proportion aren't. I imagine those that can vote do so with high proclivity due to 'duty'. I also guess they could be tricker to reach than average via mobile/internet, particularly the 85s/over. A small hidden reservoir of Conservative/UKIP votes perhaps ?
Morning. It seems that polling companies are struggling to find samples anywhere near representative of the population. Phone samples are becoming outdated as people move from fixed to mobile phones, with the ability to ignore unwanted or marketing calls. Online samples rely on self selection and exclude large groups of people while over-representing others.
It is difficult to see how this is easily rectified, although one change I think we will see is an emphasis on quality rather than quantity of polls - so larger samples and over a longer period, with the higher cost being borne by multiple commissioners in the media. So maybe we get a quarterly poll with 10,000 sample over a couple of weeks, sponsored by a newspaper, a TV news programme and a news website.
I'd certainly vote for less polls. I think it became ridiculous before GE 2010 and could be argued is getting to the point where it is effecting the result (e.g. the whole Lab/SNP thing).
Whilst some people in care homes will be away with the fairies, a good proportion aren't. I imagine those that can vote do so with high proclivity due to 'duty'. I also guess they could be tricker to reach than average via mobile/internet, particularly the 85s/over. A small hidden reservoir of Conservative/UKIP votes perhaps ?
Those sort of places tend to run a mini-bus down to the polling station on poll day, so the likelihood of them voting is excellent. Even those lukewarm about going to vote will probably tag along because their friends are going.
Wishing that my fiver at 100/1 had been a ton, with the great benefits of betting hindsight!
Could Corbyn actually win this in the first round, with the left wing of the party seemingly rejuvenated by his candidacy and with probably an unofficial spoiling campaign from all the other parties in his favour?
I see from the last thread that the DT's anonymously-bylined Corbyn campaign is well under way. Labour have said they can stop these spoilers but what can they actually do in practice? I guess they don't have membership lists for other parties, and they can easily find a Toby Young or a Harry Cole that tries to register, but it could still yet provide a huge spoiler effect on the result.
They will have canvassing returns showing whether people are strong Tory voters or not.
I backed him at 6s and laid off at 9-2 yesterday, also laid Yvette for £22 at 4.3 - I think the Corbyn surge could help Burnham. Whoever laid me the £2 I had at 550.0 on Corbyn (I've laid him plenty (And in hindsight too soon) since) probably isn't too happy.
Corbyn is not going to happen. But whoever thought it was good idea to lend him a few nominations should be expelled from the party frankly.
It is difficult to see how this is easily rectified, although one change I think we will see is an emphasis on quality rather than quantity of polls - so larger samples and over a longer period, with the higher cost being borne by multiple commissioners in the media. So maybe we get a quarterly poll with 10,000 sample over a couple of weeks, sponsored by a newspaper, a TV news programme and a news website.
Indeed. They might have to go for the expensive and far more reliable approach used in the social sciences. Stratified Random Sampling with interviewers knocking on doors and talking to people. Typically by dividing your population into a number of groups (age, sex etc) and then selecting a random sample from your base list (electoral roll or whatever) to produce a representative number of people in that strata, plus an over flow list for each strata to replace people that cannot be contacted. Attempts are usually made on 2-3 occasions to contact the given person at their house, then they are replaced by someone off the overflow list. Might be a bit pricey of course...
Indeed. I remember an interview (one of many) with Lynton Crosby, where he described polls for the media as basically cheap crap. Those who are actually involved in the election go with much more sophisticated but expensive polling techniques, providing a better overall picture of the party standings and reactions to specific policy proposals and campaign techniques, messages.
Between 1992 and now, the standard media polling has been close enough to be acceptable by the media outlets. Whatever the reasons behind the 2015 election polling disaster they have shown that this is no longer the case, at least in the eyes of those media customers.
What about the Exit Poll? From my memory, the exit polls in 05 and 10 (and 01?) were almost spot on. This time the Exit Poll underestimated the Tories - just like 92 - and that suggests that shy Tories was part of the problem. But I thought pollsters had figured that out? Also, the collapse of the LD vote and the rise of Ukip probably didn't help the pollsters either.
I agree with the suggestion that we need fewer polls of better quality. I think more regional polling would be good too.
@jeremycorbyn: @leftoutside I believe that homeo-meds works for some ppl and that it compliments 'convential' meds. they both come from organic matter...
Didn't realise he was a homeopathy nutter too! Excellent
So all the pollsters (and the rest of us) have to do is take about 3% off whatever score Labour get's in a poll... Sounds simple.
I think the pollsters will adjust, the problem will come if Labour elect someone who genuinely fires up the 18-24s to vote (Or the Conservative candidate repels the 65+s) - but that doesn't look to be a danger with any of the leadership contenders.
@jeremycorbyn: @leftoutside I believe that homeo-meds works for some ppl and that it compliments 'convential' meds. they both come from organic matter...
Didn't realise he was a homeopathy nutter too! Excellent
Yep! I wonder how much of the NHS budget he thinks should be removed from medicines and replaced with expensive placebos?
The Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee are looking at purdah this morning. Let us hope they do the decent thing and demand no taxpayer money is used in an election. This is the mother of all parliaments, not a tinpot republic.
Voted very strongly against raising the threshold at which people start to pay income tax Voted moderately against a statutory register of lobbyists Voted strongly against limits on success fees paid to lawyers in no-win no fee cases
@jeremycorbyn: @leftoutside I believe that homeo-meds works for some ppl and that it compliments 'convential' meds. they both come from organic matter...
Didn't realise he was a homeopathy nutter too! Excellent
So all the pollsters (and the rest of us) have to do is take about 3% off whatever score Labour get's in a poll... Sounds simple.
Depends. It probably wouldn't have worked in 1997. ICM had Lab % right, but Tory 3 to high. With Gallop it would have worked. Interesting paper from Curtice from the time:
The Telegraph vote for Corbyn campaign is "hilarious". Obviously, should he be elected we will not see any sanctimonious articles in that newspaper about the Tories needing a proper opposition.
I suspect it will be about as successful as the Grauniad's 'letter writing campaign' to stop Bush......
Quite. I doubt that it's meant to be taken seriously. It adds to Labour's present discomfort and gives them something else to rail against instead of having any kind of serious debate. Indeed the fact that Corbyn is more articulate and honest in his beliefs than Cooper and Burnham combined is very telling. As is the nastiness directed at Kendall whose message has been summarily rejected. All very sad as the country does deserve a proper opposition.
Kendall's 'message' this week has been to reject the Inheritance Tax Cut and the Tories plans for new strike laws, hardly a tragedy if it is rejected!
Did you read the linked article, its terribly pro-EU, basically saying Cameron should hold the referendum now because it might all go wrong later, plus all the usual platitudes
To remain influential as a champion of free trade at a time when agreements are being hammered out with the US and Japan, the UK needs to be negotiating from inside the club.
etc. Slightly ironic that article being written today considering the events of the past week (and arguably the past six months)
@jeremycorbyn: @leftoutside I believe that homeo-meds works for some ppl and that it compliments 'convential' meds. they both come from organic matter...
Didn't realise he was a homeopathy nutter too! Excellent
Voted strongly against measures to reduce tax avoidance !
It is difficult to see how this is easily rectified, although one change I think we will see is an emphasis on quality rather than quantity of polls - so larger samples and over a longer period, with the higher cost being borne by multiple commissioners in the media. So maybe we get a quarterly poll with 10,000 sample over a couple of weeks, sponsored by a newspaper, a TV news programme and a news website.
Indeed. They might have to go for the expensive and far more reliable approach used in the social sciences. Stratified Random Sampling with interviewers knocking on doors and talking to people. Typically by dividing your population into a number of groups (age, sex etc) and then selecting a random sample from your base list (electoral roll or whatever) to produce a representative number of people in that strata, plus an over flow list for each strata to replace people that cannot be contacted. Attempts are usually made on 2-3 occasions to contact the given person at their house, then they are replaced by someone off the overflow list. Might be a bit pricey of course...
Or the cheaper alternative of only asking one question. What puts many people off completing polls is the sheer hard work of ploughing through dozens of items from "do you think we'd be better off out of the EU?" through to "if Ed Miliband were an octopus, how many saucers of milk would you give George Osborne?" The answers to most questions from most people would be, "I've never really thought about it".
@jeremycorbyn: @leftoutside I believe that homeo-meds works for some ppl and that it compliments 'convential' meds. they both come from organic matter...
Didn't realise he was a homeopathy nutter too! Excellent
If you look at the detail it suggests this is because he voted against the budget, hardly a revolutionary idea for a person of his politics. Its the limitation of the automatic processing that happens at theyworkforyou I think.
Well, quite. The General Election was simply a rogue poll of the wider electorate with bad weighting problems, completely unrepresentative. :-)
MBO last thread:
Thanks for that, Nick. Do you feel there is a disconnect between the party "out in the wild" and on the green benches? The Labour left seems significantly less prominent in parliament than in the wider party, but I'm not sure how much of that stems from how the bulk of the party membership at large are not so active and engaged. I imagine there are a lot of "quiet centrists".
Most members who I talk to feel (a) we lost track of what we were for in 2010-2015: the party became primarily a receptacle for "Stop the Tories" votes, and in Scotland there was a more positive alternative but (b) we need to have a reasonable shot at winning. There is very little venom in the discussions - people are soberly chewing it over. Corbyn is doing well because he offers a coherent vision, and people yearn for that. He isn't in my opinion going to win, because of (b).
Thanks Nick.
Online there seems to be a lot of venom against Liz - but think that's likely because of Corbyn being disproportionately strong online with the youth backing he has.
The Telegraph vote for Corbyn campaign is "hilarious". Obviously, should he be elected we will not see any sanctimonious articles in that newspaper about the Tories needing a proper opposition.
I suspect it will be about as successful as the Grauniad's 'letter writing campaign' to stop Bush......
Quite. I doubt that it's meant to be taken seriously. It adds to Labour's present discomfort and gives them something else to rail against instead of having any kind of serious debate. Indeed the fact that Corbyn is more articulate and honest in his beliefs than Cooper and Burnham combined is very telling. As is the nastiness directed at Kendall whose message has been summarily rejected. All very sad as the country does deserve a proper opposition.
Kendall's 'message' this week has been to reject the Inheritance Tax Cut and the Tories plans for new strike laws, hardly a tragedy if it is rejected!
She is coming to realise that the first election she need to win is the ballot of Labour members and supporters, rather than the general election. She's allowed her opponents so far to paint her as the lady in the blue rosette, so really needs to appeal to the wider membership with her pronouncements and policies.
@jeremycorbyn: @leftoutside I believe that homeo-meds works for some ppl and that it compliments 'convential' meds. they both come from organic matter...
Didn't realise he was a homeopathy nutter too! Excellent
Voted strongly against measures to reduce tax avoidance !
@jeremycorbyn: @leftoutside I believe that homeo-meds works for some ppl and that it compliments 'convential' meds. they both come from organic matter...
Didn't realise he was a homeopathy nutter too! Excellent
Cyanide is organic matter. It is worrying the low level of intelligence needed to get to some positions of power.
@jeremycorbyn: @leftoutside I believe that homeo-meds works for some ppl and that it compliments 'convential' meds. they both come from organic matter...
Didn't realise he was a homeopathy nutter too! Excellent
Voted strongly against measures to reduce tax avoidance !
If you vote against the budget, you are voting against reducing tax avoidance, increasing the minimum threshold etc.
Identifying weightings for differential turnout is all well and good, but I'm wondering to what extent the weights evolve over time. Changes in likelihood to vote may not matter as much as changes in voting intention, but in a tight election it would make a difference.
That was conducted before the SNP fell into the MAHOOSIVE elephant trap of the fox hunting bill though. Surely there will be seismic changes in their ratings at the next poll?
@jeremycorbyn: @leftoutside I believe that homeo-meds works for some ppl and that it compliments 'convential' meds. they both come from organic matter...
Didn't realise he was a homeopathy nutter too! Excellent
@jeremycorbyn: @leftoutside I believe that homeo-meds works for some ppl and that it compliments 'convential' meds. they both come from organic matter...
Didn't realise he was a homeopathy nutter too! Excellent
Cyanide is organic matter. It is worrying the low level of intelligence needed to get to some positions of power.
All consultants will be given six weeks to agree to a new contract requiring them to work weekend shifts. If they refuse, Mr Hunt will use powers to impose a new contract on the 2,000 consultants who join the NHS every year.
Existing consultants will also face a financial shake-up. They are not currently made to work weekends but tend to strike deals worth up to £200 an hour. These deals will now be phased out although there will be different cash incentives on offer for those who agree to move to a new contract voluntarily.
Health sources insist the overall pay bill will stay the same. Those working the most anti-social hours in the most difficult areas will be eligible for bonuses of up to £30,000.
Numerous studies have highlighted the shocking difference in health outcomes between those admitted to hospital during the week and those who come in at the weekend. In cases of renal failure, death rates are 37 per cent higher for patients admitted on a Sunday rather than on a Wednesday. The gap is 8 per cent for urinary tract infections and 7 per cent for broken legs and necks. Some NHS hospitals, such as the Salford Royal, have already agreed deals on weekend working...
They blame the disastrous opt-out contract negotiated by Labour that saw the pay of top doctors rise by 28 per cent. Their average salary is now £111,354 a year. In a report in 2013, the Commons public accounts committee savaged the contract, saying it had resulted in ‘nonsense’.
@jeremycorbyn: @leftoutside I believe that homeo-meds works for some ppl and that it compliments 'convential' meds. they both come from organic matter...
Didn't realise he was a homeopathy nutter too! Excellent
Cyanide is organic matter. It is worrying the low level of intelligence needed to get to some positions of power.
@jeremycorbyn: @leftoutside I believe that homeo-meds works for some ppl and that it compliments 'convential' meds. they both come from organic matter...
Didn't realise he was a homeopathy nutter too! Excellent
So is our future King.
Fortunately parliament only has to politely respond to his letters on the matter, Jeremy Corbyn can actually become PM.
The Telegraph vote for Corbyn campaign is "hilarious". Obviously, should he be elected we will not see any sanctimonious articles in that newspaper about the Tories needing a proper opposition.
I suspect it will be about as successful as the Grauniad's 'letter writing campaign' to stop Bush......
Quite. I doubt that it's meant to be taken seriously. It adds to Labour's present discomfort and gives them something else to rail against instead of having any kind of serious debate. Indeed the fact that Corbyn is more articulate and honest in his beliefs than Cooper and Burnham combined is very telling. As is the nastiness directed at Kendall whose message has been summarily rejected. All very sad as the country does deserve a proper opposition.
Kendall's 'message' this week has been to reject the Inheritance Tax Cut and the Tories plans for new strike laws, hardly a tragedy if it is rejected!
She is coming to realise that the first election she need to win is the ballot of Labour members and supporters, rather than the general election. She's allowed her opponents so far to paint her as the lady in the blue rosette, so really needs to appeal to the wider membership with her pronouncements and policies.
Indeed but she is now moving left to appeal to activists which will turn off floating voters while she has moved too far right previously to actually be able to win the leadership. So she is losing the one asset she had, her supposed electability! If she was sensible she would have followed the golden law of politics and solidified her base first and then reached out, not the reverse
So all the pollsters (and the rest of us) have to do is take about 3% off whatever score Labour get's in a poll... Sounds simple.
I think the pollsters will adjust, the problem will come if Labour elect someone who genuinely fires up the 18-24s to vote (Or the Conservative candidate repels the 65+s) - but that doesn't look to be a danger with any of the leadership contenders.
Some already have, or never needed to.
Who was it that suppressed the 6% Tory lead less than a week before polling day? Survation?
And we've had a handful of polls since the GE, including from ICM, that show numbers v.similar to the result. Overcorrecting would be just as bad.
What I want to know is why ICM went from 4-6% Tory leads in the final few weeks to all a bit Pete Tong in the final few days.
Something else other than just weighting was going on there. I'd normally say herding, but ICM doesn't do herding.
Online there seems to be a lot of venom against Liz - but think that's likely because of Corbyn being disproportionately strong online with the youth backing he has.
Yes, and I think people online tend to be more vituperative anyway, as we sometimes see here. I expect if MalcolmG came to a PBmeet, we'd find him a nice chap, but when he gets to a keyboard...
Certainly at the Islington N nomination, the people who spoke in favour of Liz got a respectful hearing and polite applause. All three of them said they came from other areas where Corbyn would struggle and they thought Kendall would have a good shot.
Or the cheaper alternative of only asking one question. What puts many people off completing polls is the sheer hard work of ploughing through dozens of items from "do you think we'd be better off out of the EU?" through to "if Ed Miliband were an octopus, how many saucers of milk would you give George Osborne?" The answers to most questions from most people would be, "I've never really thought about it".
@jeremycorbyn: @leftoutside I believe that homeo-meds works for some ppl and that it compliments 'convential' meds. they both come from organic matter...
Didn't realise he was a homeopathy nutter too! Excellent
So is our future King.
And he talks to his plants, but at least that won't become government policy.
Did you read the linked article, its terribly pro-EU, basically saying Cameron should hold the referendum now because it might all go wrong later, plus all the usual platitudes
To remain influential as a champion of free trade at a time when agreements are being hammered out with the US and Japan, the UK needs to be negotiating from inside the club.
etc. Slightly ironic that article being written today considering the events of the past week (and arguably the past six months) Listening to the fevered support of some of these people over the past few weeks, with their belief in the subservience of elected representatives to the standing EU bureaucracy, is making me and no doubt many others determined that Out is the only way forward.
It is becoming clearer by the day that there is no status quo to vote for, as major reform of the EZ is required to make it work in practice rather than in theory - meanwhile Greece is being literally hung out to dry without a care for the impact on the country and its citizens in order for the EU Project to succeed.
Seeing Burnham attempting to steer wrangle a narrow loss for Corbyn would be hilarious. How on Earth can it help Labour electorally if Corbyn's supporters come a close second?
They'll be demanding all sorts of stuff that Burnham really doesn't to do.
Did you read the linked article, its terribly pro-EU, basically saying Cameron should hold the referendum now because it might all go wrong later, plus all the usual platitudes
To remain influential as a champion of free trade at a time when agreements are being hammered out with the US and Japan, the UK needs to be negotiating from inside the club.
etc. Slightly ironic that article being written today considering the events of the past week (and arguably the past six months)
Listening to the fevered support of some of these people over the past few weeks, with their belief in the subservience of elected representatives to the standing EU bureaucracy, is making me and no doubt many others determined that Out is the only way forward.
It is becoming clearer by the day that there is no status quo to vote for, as major reform of the EZ is required to make it work in practice rather than in theory - meanwhile Greece is being literally hung out to dry without a care for the impact on the country and its citizens in order for the EU Project to succeed.
You wont get any argument from me on that, I was BOO before the Greek fiasco was even on the cards, although from the Hannanite perspective (sovereignty) rather than the immigration one.
I'd like to say London doesn't deserve Galloway, but..
Not a very effective poll either as there will only be 1 Labour and 1 Tory candidate
I'm open to bets with reputable posters about the size of the first round vote that George Galloway will get in the London Mayoral election. If anyone thinks that 20% is the pivot point for an evens bet, I'll be taking the under side of the bet, if you don't mind.
I'd like to say London doesn't deserve Galloway, but..
Not a very effective poll either as there will only be 1 Labour and 1 Tory candidate
I'm open to bets with reputable posters about the size of the first round vote that George Galloway will get in the London Mayoral election. If anyone thinks that 20% is the pivot point for an evens bet, I'll be taking the under side of the bet, if you don't mind.
Seeing Burnham attempting to steer wrangle a narrow loss for Corbyn would be hilarious. How on Earth can it help Labour electorally if Corbyn's supporters come a close second?
They'll be demanding all sorts of stuff that Burnham really doesn't to do.
anyway, I'm trying to work out what I'd like most:
Corbyn ahead on 1st pref, narrowly beaten
or
straight Corbyn win
The one place a strong Corbyn performance would help a little is Scotland, he would be poison for Labour in England, especially if he wins but in Scotland he may actually help Scottish Labour in the central belt
Did you read the linked article, its terribly pro-EU, basically saying Cameron should hold the referendum now because it might all go wrong later, plus all the usual platitudes
To remain influential as a champion of free trade at a time when agreements are being hammered out with the US and Japan, the UK needs to be negotiating from inside the club.
etc. Slightly ironic that article being written today considering the events of the past week (and arguably the past six months)
Listening to the fevered support of some of these people over the past few weeks, with their belief in the subservience of elected representatives to the standing EU bureaucracy, is making me and no doubt many others determined that Out is the only way forward.
It is becoming clearer by the day that there is no status quo to vote for, as major reform of the EZ is required to make it work in practice rather than in theory - meanwhile Greece is being literally hung out to dry without a care for the impact on the country and its citizens in order for the EU Project to succeed.
What has swung my vote more than anything else is the tearing up of the previous agreement on the EFSM. It makes very clear that the EU doesn't feel itself bound to anything it commits to that limits its power. Apparently civil servants are negotiating on a deal where they will lend out the money they guaranteed they would not use, but it's alright because they'll replace it with a guarantee they'll give it back if it gets lost. Well if the first guarantee can just be overridden like that, why should we trust this one?
Seeing Burnham attempting to steer wrangle a narrow loss for Corbyn would be hilarious. How on Earth can it help Labour electorally if Corbyn's supporters come a close second?
They'll be demanding all sorts of stuff that Burnham really doesn't to do.
anyway, I'm trying to work out what I'd like most:
Corbyn ahead on 1st pref, narrowly beaten
or
straight Corbyn win
The one place a strong Corbyn performance would help a little is Scotland, he would be poison for Labour in England, especially if he wins but in Scotland he may actually help Scottish Labour in the central belt
The majorities in the central belt are far larger and tougher to overturn than the Nuneatons, Broxtowes and Southampton Itchens that Labour need to overturn to get into Gov't.
All consultants will be given six weeks to agree to a new contract requiring them to work weekend shifts. If they refuse, Mr Hunt will use powers to impose a new contract on the 2,000 consultants who join the NHS every year.
Existing consultants will also face a financial shake-up. They are not currently made to work weekends but tend to strike deals worth up to £200 an hour. These deals will now be phased out although there will be different cash incentives on offer for those who agree to move to a new contract voluntarily.
That sounds eminently reasonable. It would be good to see the NHS becoming more patient-centric in its organisation, as is seen elsewhere in the world.
Apart from the weekend problems already identified, it would also be good to see outpatient appointments outside of work hours so as to minimise the impact of minor procedures on the economy in general. I don't want to take a day off work to go for a checkup, minor procedure or a followup with a doctor, would much rather be able to schedule it for 8pm. This doesn't need more recources, rather more flexibility of those that are there already.
Did you read the linked article, its terribly pro-EU, basically saying Cameron should hold the referendum now because it might all go wrong later, plus all the usual platitudes
To remain influential as a champion of free trade at a time when agreements are being hammered out with the US and Japan, the UK needs to be negotiating from inside the club.
etc. Slightly ironic that article being written today considering the events of the past week (and arguably the past six months)
Listening to the fevered support of some of these people over the past few weeks, with their belief in the subservience of elected representatives to the standing EU bureaucracy, is making me and no doubt many others determined that Out is the only way forward.
It is becoming clearer by the day that there is no status quo to vote for, as major reform of the EZ is required to make it work in practice rather than in theory - meanwhile Greece is being literally hung out to dry without a care for the impact on the country and its citizens in order for the EU Project to succeed.
You wont get any argument from me on that, I was BOO before the Greek fiasco was even on the cards, although from the Hannanite perspective (sovereignty) rather than the immigration one. Yes, would like to see a lot more of Mr Dan Hannan.
He has his own views on a whole range of political subjects - with which people may or may not agree - but when it comes to the principles of democracy and returning power to the people his arguments are very coherent and eloquently made, could appeal beyond the libertarian wing of the Conservatives who are his usual audience.
"LABOUR members are divided on how best to lock the party out of power for a generation, it has emerged.
While many activists hope to accelerate irrelevance by supporting every part of the Conservative manifesto, others are urging the party to embrace an eccentric, unelectable zealot to ensure a rapid and total political meltdown.
Party supporter Joanna Kramer, from Bristol, said: “This leadership election could make a huge difference to how Labour’s obituaries are written.
“I’m planning to vote for Andy Burnham, because he could singlehandedly bring about the end of the entire Labour movement through the sheer force of his lack of personality."
I'd like to say London doesn't deserve Galloway, but..
Not a very effective poll either as there will only be 1 Labour and 1 Tory candidate
Oh, I'm sure it's pure fluff, but the total of votes for all the Labour candidates is only a couple of points above GG.
It does suggest GG getting a reasonable number of Labour supporters, so Jowell or whoever else is Labour candidate will need to ensure they knock him out before the final round
Seeing Burnham attempting to steer wrangle a narrow loss for Corbyn would be hilarious. How on Earth can it help Labour electorally if Corbyn's supporters come a close second?
They'll be demanding all sorts of stuff that Burnham really doesn't to do.
anyway, I'm trying to work out what I'd like most:
Corbyn ahead on 1st pref, narrowly beaten
or
straight Corbyn win
The one place a strong Corbyn performance would help a little is Scotland, he would be poison for Labour in England, especially if he wins but in Scotland he may actually help Scottish Labour in the central belt
The majorities in the central belt are far larger and tougher to overturn than the Nuneatons, Broxtowes and Southampton Itchens that Labour need to overturn to get into Gov't.
On the whole yes but they also saw bigger swings in 2015, to get a majority Labour is going to need to win back a few seats from the SNP as well as win back the marginals in England you mention
Seeing Burnham attempting to steer wrangle a narrow loss for Corbyn would be hilarious. How on Earth can it help Labour electorally if Corbyn's supporters come a close second?
They'll be demanding all sorts of stuff that Burnham really doesn't to do.
anyway, I'm trying to work out what I'd like most:
Corbyn ahead on 1st pref, narrowly beaten
or
straight Corbyn win
The one place a strong Corbyn performance would help a little is Scotland, he would be poison for Labour in England, especially if he wins but in Scotland he may actually help Scottish Labour in the central belt
I doubt Corbyn will be much help in Scotland at all. The rise of the SNP is not about 70s and 80s socialism - Scots tend to have similar views on immigration, welfare and other issues as the English. The SNP is largely about identity.
Because Corbyn does not have much support in the parliamentary party - and that is where the real power lies in Labour once the leader is selected - I doubt whoever does lead will have much of a problem on a day to day basis. Left-wing cries of betrayal etc from the sidelines never do any Labour leader any harm. The Tory union reforms will have the effect of concentrating union minds and will probably make them far less vociferous in opposing Labour policy, whoever the leader is.
It is difficult to see how this is easily rectified, although one change I think we will see is an emphasis on quality rather than quantity of polls - so larger samples and over a longer period, with the higher cost being borne by multiple commissioners in the media. So maybe we get a quarterly poll with 10,000 sample over a couple of weeks, sponsored by a newspaper, a TV news programme and a news website.
Indeed. They might have to go for the expensive and far more reliable approach used in the social sciences. Stratified Random Sampling with interviewers knocking on doors and talking to people. Typically by dividing your population into a number of groups (age, sex etc) and then selecting a random sample from your base list (electoral roll or whatever) to produce a representative number of people in that strata, plus an over flow list for each strata to replace people that cannot be contacted. Attempts are usually made on 2-3 occasions to contact the given person at their house, then they are replaced by someone off the overflow list. Might be a bit pricey of course...
Or the cheaper alternative of only asking one question. What puts many people off completing polls is the sheer hard work of ploughing through dozens of items from "do you think we'd be better off out of the EU?" through to "if Ed Miliband were an octopus, how many saucers of milk would you give George Osborne?" The answers to most questions from most people would be, "I've never really thought about it".
That's brilliant. I had a good laugh at that but it's very true. I've always felt questions at the end of a poll can be trusted very little due to fatigue and the "just keep clicking/just say anything" syndrome.
Did you read the linked article, its terribly pro-EU, basically saying Cameron should hold the referendum now because it might all go wrong later, plus all the usual platitudes
To remain influential as a champion of free trade at a time when agreements are being hammered out with the US and Japan, the UK needs to be negotiating from inside the club.
etc. Slightly ironic that article being written today considering the events of the past week (and arguably the past six months)
Listening to the fevered support of some of these people over the past few weeks, with their belief in the subservience of elected representatives to the standing EU bureaucracy, is making me and no doubt many others determined that Out is the only way forward.
It is becoming clearer by the day that there is no status quo to vote for, as major reform of the EZ is required to make it work in practice rather than in theory - meanwhile Greece is being literally hung out to dry without a care for the impact on the country and its citizens in order for the EU Project to succeed.
What has swung my vote more than anything else is the tearing up of the previous agreement on the EFSM. It makes very clear that the EU doesn't feel itself bound to anything it commits to that limits its power. Apparently civil servants are negotiating on a deal where they will lend out the money they guaranteed they would not use, but it's alright because they'll replace it with a guarantee they'll give it back if it gets lost. Well if the first guarantee can just be overridden like that, why should we trust this one?
I really miss the Telegraph blogs. I used to read them everyday and the quality of Mr Hannan's reasoning/knowledge was superb.
I barely bother with the DT now unless specifically linked to on here. A real missed opportunity. The Times is far too slow to respond to updates during the day - the DT was right off the mark.
Did you read the linked article, its terribly pro-EU, basically saying Cameron should hold the referendum now because it might all go wrong later, plus all the usual platitudes
To remain influential as a champion of free trade at a time when agreements are being hammered out with the US and Japan, the UK needs to be negotiating from inside the club.
etc. Slightly ironic that article being written today considering the events of the past week (and arguably the past six months)
Listening to the fevered support of some of these people over the past few weeks, with their belief in the subservience of elected representatives to the standing EU bureaucracy, is making me and no doubt many others determined that Out is the only way forward.
It is becoming clearer by the day that there is no status quo to vote for, as major reform of the EZ is required to make it work in practice rather than in theory - meanwhile Greece is being literally hung out to dry without a care for the impact on the country and its citizens in order for the EU Project to succeed.
You wont get any argument from me on that, I was BOO before the Greek fiasco was even on the cards, although from the Hannanite perspective (sovereignty) rather than the immigration one.
Yes, would like to see a lot more of Mr Dan Hannan.
He has his own views on a whole range of political subjects - with which people may or may not agree - but when it comes to the principles of democracy and returning power to the people his arguments are very coherent and eloquently made, could appeal beyond the libertarian wing of the Conservatives who are his usual audience.
Apart from the weekend problems already identified, it would also be good to see outpatient appointments outside of work hours so as to minimise the impact of minor procedures on the economy in general. I don't want to take a day off work to go for a checkup, minor procedure or a followup with a doctor, would much rather be able to schedule it for 8pm. This doesn't need more recources, rather more flexibility of those that are there already.
No, it needs more resources, unless you are planning to phase out the existing 9 to 5 coverage. Your general aim, I agree with: it is a pita to have to take half a day or a day off work to go to an outpatients clinic, but I do not see a free lunch there. Remember it is not just doctors and nurses but whole teams down to receptionists, porters and maybe even car park attendants who'd be needed.
Seeing Burnham attempting to steer wrangle a narrow loss for Corbyn would be hilarious. How on Earth can it help Labour electorally if Corbyn's supporters come a close second?
They'll be demanding all sorts of stuff that Burnham really doesn't to do.
anyway, I'm trying to work out what I'd like most:
Corbyn ahead on 1st pref, narrowly beaten
or
straight Corbyn win
The one place a strong Corbyn performance would help a little is Scotland, he would be poison for Labour in England, especially if he wins but in Scotland he may actually help Scottish Labour in the central belt
I doubt Corbyn will be much help in Scotland at all. The rise of the SNP is not about 70s and 80s socialism - Scots tend to have similar views on immigration, welfare and other issues as the English. The SNP is largely about identity.
Because Corbyn does not have much support in the parliamentary party - and that is where the real power lies in Labour once the leader is selected - I doubt whoever does lead will have much of a problem on a day to day basis. Left-wing cries of betrayal etc from the sidelines never do any Labour leader any harm. The Tory union reforms will have the effect of concentrating union minds and will probably make them far less vociferous in opposing Labour policy, whoever the leader is.
He may help a little in seats like Paisley and Ochil which are in the top 100 Labour target seats, although I agree he would go down less well in Edinburgh and Aberdeen where Labour also have targets.
Oh dear. That Luvvies Letter supposedly spontaneously supporting the TVLF was organised by the BBC's Danny Cohen and at least one of the signatories didn't see the text of it prior to publication.
It is just plain wrong of the BBC to do that. But, will the BBC Trust fire anyone?
What you wont be hearing about on the BBC news headlines...
Seems it was wider than Cohen...
"Last night Annie Nightingale, 75, Radio 1's longest-serving presenter, also revealed that she had been asked to sign the letter by her boss, Radio 1 controller Ben Cooper. Mr Cooper told her that Danny Cohen was behind the letter, she said."
So about as independent as most of those party political letters then...
A letter outlining a plot by some Muslims to take over schools in Birmingham was "no hoax", according to the city's education commissioner Sir Mike Tomlinson.
The anonymous Trojan Horse letter, discovered in 2013, included advice on installing school governors.
Apart from the weekend problems already identified, it would also be good to see outpatient appointments outside of work hours so as to minimise the impact of minor procedures on the economy in general. I don't want to take a day off work to go for a checkup, minor procedure or a followup with a doctor, would much rather be able to schedule it for 8pm. This doesn't need more recources, rather more flexibility of those that are there already.
No, it needs more resources, unless you are planning to phase out the existing 9 to 5 coverage. Your general aim, I agree with: it is a pita to have to take half a day or a day off work to go to an outpatients clinic, but I do not see a free lunch there. Remember it is not just doctors and nurses but whole teams down to receptionists, porters and maybe even car park attendants who'd be needed.
My thinking was along the lines of an existing outpatient doctor, his nurse and receptionist working a 1-9 shift rather than a 9-5, say two days a week. Yes there will be other issues to work through like building security, car parks etc but innovative concepts like this should at least be on the table. They may or may not work, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't be tried out. Ask any office worker or manager (or parent) what a PITA hospital working hours are for routine outpatient stuff, there must be millions of working days a year lost to it.
Michael Palin revealed today the BBC's £327,800-a-year TV boss Danny Cohen secretly helped to organise a letter of support signed by 29 celebrities.
The comedian and presenter, 72, admitted that the corporation's director of television lobbied him and asked him to sign because he was 'worried the BBC would become smaller'.
The letter was presented an independent but it appears that Cohen helped put together the letter signed by celebrities, including some of the BBC's highest paid stars.
Mr Cohen, who is responsible of all the BBC's TV channels, has also used his Twitter account to thank stars for their support and re-tweeted dozens of messages using the hashtag #BackTheBBC
Comments
Even the BMA spokesman needs time to read the executive summary. Pure 24 hour rolling bollox.
MBO last thread:
Thanks for that, Nick. Do you feel there is a disconnect between the party "out in the wild" and on the green benches? The Labour left seems significantly less prominent in parliament than in the wider party, but I'm not sure how much of that stems from how the bulk of the party membership at large are not so active and engaged. I imagine there are a lot of "quiet centrists".
Most members who I talk to feel (a) we lost track of what we were for in 2010-2015: the party became primarily a receptacle for "Stop the Tories" votes, and in Scotland there was a more positive alternative but (b) we need to have a reasonable shot at winning. There is very little venom in the discussions - people are soberly chewing it over. Corbyn is doing well because he offers a coherent vision, and people yearn for that. He isn't in my opinion going to win, because of (b). Still re-running election night? Broxtowe had a 10,000 Tory majority in 1992 and there wasn't a significant change in demography. We defied gravity for a long time, but everything comes to an end. You've had a good gloat, time to move on IMO?
Honestly, where were the braincells when that plan was hatched? http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/medianews/article4499526.ece
What is
HBNCBN
If we'd had compulsory voting, as in Australia, would Ed have romped home to victory? I think not.
What if turnout had been in the 70-75% bracket that many predicted at the time? Once again, I doubt it. I struggle to see how that'd overturn the solid performances the Tories had in the key marginals, although it probably would have led to them falling short of a majority.
There's a distinction between values-signalling that you're 'Labour', and actually going out and voting Labour, and for their leader to become PM with all the policy baggage that that carries, or does not carry.
I think pollsters should start there.
Jeremy Corbyn now just 7-2 to be next Labour leader http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/british-politics/next-labour-leader …
ho ho ho....
Is the LD leadership ballot declaration being televised
https://twitter.com/dailymailuk/status/621592342290657280
http://www.radiotimes.com/news/2011-11-15/bbc1-to-revive-jimll-fix-it-for-christmas---with-shane-richie
It is difficult to see how this is easily rectified, although one change I think we will see is an emphasis on quality rather than quantity of polls - so larger samples and over a longer period, with the higher cost being borne by multiple commissioners in the media. So maybe we get a quarterly poll with 10,000 sample over a couple of weeks, sponsored by a newspaper, a TV news programme and a news website.
Could Corbyn actually win this in the first round, with the left wing of the party seemingly rejuvenated by his candidacy and with probably an unofficial spoiling campaign from all the other parties in his favour?
I see from the last thread that the DT's anonymously-bylined Corbyn campaign is well under way. Labour have said they can stop these spoilers but what can they actually do in practice?
I guess they don't have membership lists for other parties, and they can easily find a Toby Young or a Harry Cole that tries to register, but it could still yet provide a huge spoiler effect on the result.
Very interesting thread. The stuff about the % of people of certain ages within the age bands is very interesting - only 0.5% of 80+ age but they are 5% of population.
I'm a little sceptical as to this being the true, final cause (indeed we may never know). It doesn't quite fit with the anecdotal evidence (for example from Nick P of this parish) of people saying they were going to vote Lab a couple of weeks before the GE and then a day or two before actual poll becoming hesitant when canvassers went around again.
But this work does mean I think that polling companies need to look at the registered to vote question - which I and many other PBers pointed out in the run up to GE.
Age Resident care home population, 2001
65 and over 290,000
85 and over 164,000
Whilst some people in care homes will be away with the fairies, a good proportion aren't. I imagine those that can vote do so with high proclivity due to 'duty'. I also guess they could be tricker to reach than average via mobile/internet, particularly the 85s/over. A small hidden reservoir of Conservative/UKIP votes perhaps ?
http://www.tns-bmrb.co.uk/news/snp-continues-to-dominate-in-scottish-election-polling
Tories are having a field day (e.g. http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2015/07/jeremy-corbyns-extraordinary-success-is-a-coup-for-the-tories/)
Between 1992 and now, the standard media polling has been close enough to be acceptable by the media outlets. Whatever the reasons behind the 2015 election polling disaster they have shown that this is no longer the case, at least in the eyes of those media customers.
I agree with the suggestion that we need fewer polls of better quality. I think more regional polling would be good too.
#LyingLab!!!!!
So all the pollsters (and the rest of us) have to do is take about 3% off whatever score Labour get's in a poll... Sounds simple.
Didn't realise he was a homeopathy nutter too! Excellent
This puzzled me
http://www.crest.ox.ac.uk/papers/p56.pdf
https://twitter.com/robostarred/status/621602393181016065
I'd like to say London doesn't deserve Galloway, but..
Voted strongly against measures to reduce tax avoidance !
If you look at the detail it suggests this is because he voted against the budget, hardly a revolutionary idea for a person of his politics. Its the limitation of the automatic processing that happens at theyworkforyou I think. Likewise.
Online there seems to be a lot of venom against Liz - but think that's likely because of Corbyn being disproportionately strong online with the youth backing he has.
If you vote against the budget, you are voting against reducing tax avoidance, increasing the minimum threshold etc.
http://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/ebook/9780854044443#!divbookcontent
anyway, I'm trying to work out what I'd like most:
Corbyn ahead on 1st pref, narrowly beaten
or
straight Corbyn win
Who was it that suppressed the 6% Tory lead less than a week before polling day? Survation?
And we've had a handful of polls since the GE, including from ICM, that show numbers v.similar to the result. Overcorrecting would be just as bad.
What I want to know is why ICM went from 4-6% Tory leads in the final few weeks to all a bit Pete Tong in the final few days.
Something else other than just weighting was going on there. I'd normally say herding, but ICM doesn't do herding.
Certainly at the Islington N nomination, the people who spoke in favour of Liz got a respectful hearing and polite applause. All three of them said they came from other areas where Corbyn would struggle and they thought Kendall would have a good shot. lol! Classic, and true.
Listening to the fevered support of some of these people over the past few weeks, with their belief in the subservience of elected representatives to the standing EU bureaucracy, is making me and no doubt many others determined that Out is the only way forward.
It is becoming clearer by the day that there is no status quo to vote for, as major reform of the EZ is required to make it work in practice rather than in theory - meanwhile Greece is being literally hung out to dry without a care for the impact on the country and its citizens in order for the EU Project to succeed.
They'll be demanding all sorts of stuff that Burnham really doesn't to do.
It is becoming clearer by the day that there is no status quo to vote for, as major reform of the EZ is required to make it work in practice rather than in theory - meanwhile Greece is being literally hung out to dry without a care for the impact on the country and its citizens in order for the EU Project to succeed.
You wont get any argument from me on that, I was BOO before the Greek fiasco was even on the cards, although from the Hannanite perspective (sovereignty) rather than the immigration one.
It is becoming clearer by the day that there is no status quo to vote for, as major reform of the EZ is required to make it work in practice rather than in theory - meanwhile Greece is being literally hung out to dry without a care for the impact on the country and its citizens in order for the EU Project to succeed.
What has swung my vote more than anything else is the tearing up of the previous agreement on the EFSM. It makes very clear that the EU doesn't feel itself bound to anything it commits to that limits its power. Apparently civil servants are negotiating on a deal where they will lend out the money they guaranteed they would not use, but it's alright because they'll replace it with a guarantee they'll give it back if it gets lost. Well if the first guarantee can just be overridden like that, why should we trust this one?
Apart from the weekend problems already identified, it would also be good to see outpatient appointments outside of work hours so as to minimise the impact of minor procedures on the economy in general. I don't want to take a day off work to go for a checkup, minor procedure or a followup with a doctor, would much rather be able to schedule it for 8pm. This doesn't need more recources, rather more flexibility of those that are there already.
Pitch is apparently very good.
But it is overcast, I'm hoping for some good swing.
Yes, would like to see a lot more of Mr Dan Hannan.
He has his own views on a whole range of political subjects - with which people may or may not agree - but when it comes to the principles of democracy and returning power to the people his arguments are very coherent and eloquently made, could appeal beyond the libertarian wing of the Conservatives who are his usual audience.
"Labour split on how to self-destruct"
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/politics/politics-headlines/labour-split-on-how-to-self-destruct-20150714100103
"LABOUR members are divided on how best to lock the party out of power for a generation, it has emerged.
While many activists hope to accelerate irrelevance by supporting every part of the Conservative manifesto, others are urging the party to embrace an eccentric, unelectable zealot to ensure a rapid and total political meltdown.
Party supporter Joanna Kramer, from Bristol, said: “This leadership election could make a huge difference to how Labour’s obituaries are written.
“I’m planning to vote for Andy Burnham, because he could singlehandedly bring about the end of the entire Labour movement through the sheer force of his lack of personality."
Anyone care to remind him of what a good day he had at Lord's 10 years' ago?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9nofkoClevE
Because Corbyn does not have much support in the parliamentary party - and that is where the real power lies in Labour once the leader is selected - I doubt whoever does lead will have much of a problem on a day to day basis. Left-wing cries of betrayal etc from the sidelines never do any Labour leader any harm. The Tory union reforms will have the effect of concentrating union minds and will probably make them far less vociferous in opposing Labour policy, whoever the leader is.
I barely bother with the DT now unless specifically linked to on here. A real missed opportunity. The Times is far too slow to respond to updates during the day - the DT was right off the mark. Yes, would like to see a lot more of Mr Dan Hannan.
He has his own views on a whole range of political subjects - with which people may or may not agree - but when it comes to the principles of democracy and returning power to the people his arguments are very coherent and eloquently made, could appeal beyond the libertarian wing of the Conservatives who are his usual audience.
Corbyn leadership odds down to 10/3:
10/11 Burnham
11/4 Cooper
10/3 Corbyn
10/1 Kendall
Of the 100 top Labour target seats for 2020 they need for a majority, 85 are held by the Tories, 9 by the SNP (+their 101st target), 3 by the LDs, 2 by Plaid and 1 by the Greens
http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/united_kingdom/targets/lab
Seems it was wider than Cohen...
"Last night Annie Nightingale, 75, Radio 1's longest-serving presenter, also revealed that she had been asked to sign the letter by her boss, Radio 1 controller Ben Cooper. Mr Cooper told her that Danny Cohen was behind the letter, she said."
So about as independent as most of those party political letters then...
https://yougov.co.uk/news/2015/07/16/futures-bleak-lib-dems/
Less honest than Tories - ROFLMAO.
The anonymous Trojan Horse letter, discovered in 2013, included advice on installing school governors.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-33507650
Well blow me away...
I wonder if the leaked private polling yesterday showing a 15% lead for Corbyn, had the desired outcome by the individual responsible…
http://www.politics.co.uk/blogs/2015/07/16/boris-johnson-s-water-cannon-farce-reveals-why-he-will-never
Ask any office worker or manager (or parent) what a PITA hospital working hours are for routine outpatient stuff, there must be millions of working days a year lost to it.
So it's ...
"Conventional medicine, you're so good and kind."
"Well thank you, Mr Corbyn."
http://order-order.com/2015/07/16/bbc-licence-fee-lobbying-circle-jerk/
Aus 11/10
Draw 2/1
Lay the draw again?
My forecast says rain overnight tonight but then no more than occasional showers until Monday.