''Meanwhile, another disastrous set of immigration numbers...failure on the deficit, failure on the EU, failure on immigration...not a lot to get excited about.''
2016 could be a very tough year for Dave and George.
The silence from Mr Boris Johnson is interesting. At the moment the tory taliban is just a few noisy thatcherites such as myself. Next year it might be a horde.
Labour 9,000 UKIP 6,000 Conservative 3,000 Lib Dem 1,000 Green 500 OMRLP 300
turnout 27%
It would be nice to have a little competition on this.
I think it'll be like Manchester Central back in 2012, with a very low turnout. I'll say 20% (just so Lucy Powell can still have the recent record for low turnouts). I just cannot see people being enthused enough by this election, especially at this time of year. There's not enough push or pull factors to send them to their local polling station.
Labour 6000 UKIP 5000 Conservative 2000 Lib Dem 900 Others 621
If turnout is atrocious enough but the tories somehow manage to get most of their voters out, they could just snatch it. Remember, 8000 people voted tory in OW&R in May despite it being a very safe labour seat AND UKIP being perceived as the challenger.
A tory win isn't likely, but isn't impossible either.
Not that they'd have a cats chance in hell of holding it in 2020!
Agree with that. But I just think it'll be an election of two opposing forces: Labourites enthused by Corbyn enough to go to the polls, and UKIP voters enraged by immigration. I'm not sure the Conservatives will be able to get traction between those two forces.
It would be interesting to know if the 'Northern Powerhouse' meme has cut through in that part of the north. It might be worth a few votes.
Net immigration figures today not exactly going to calm those unhappy with the rate of immigration.
Police rush in after man heard screaming 'I'm going to kill you'; discover noise caused by him attacking spider
Officers in Sydney respond to reports of man shouting threats and furniture being thrown – only to find a ‘quite embarrassed’ man on his own in an apartment
Interesting, I'm not sure the Chancellor's remit is to engineer anything. He should balance the books and get out of people's lives instead of meddling all the time.
Articles this morning saying if the £27bn windfall doesn't turn up we're royally f****d, he's gambling our future with his own career.
The mere existence of the state and the job of chancellor means he is going to 'meddle'.
The problem in giving people much larger tax free allowances every year is that it means employers can avoid giving pay rises because the government is upping disposable income, while some in work subsidies (tax credits) never reduce because they are based on gross pay and it all hinders the chancellor in the job of balancing the books.
Forcing up gross pay cuts in work subsidies and drives an increase in earnings tax revenue, which helps balance the books.
Osborne could also do with a bit of inflation to inflate VAT takings and so on.
The risk, of course, is an increase in unemployment and fewer workers - but immigration makes the latter unlikely.
Well quite, but the state doesn't exist, it was created by people like Osborne and he is manipulating it to his own end. Take "the living wage", if Brown had so much as mentioned that the tories would have been apoplectic.
Osborne is making no attempt at balancing the books despite running a campaign to do exactly that. We spend £1bn each month on foreign aid, very few people have the foggiest idea where it goes.
Do you have the foggiest where it goes?
No and frankly I don't care, we're £1.5 trillion in debt, our foreign aid budget is the biggest in the world.
The debt is not going to go away even once we balance the books. We will need decades of restraint on spending. And the deficit is coming down. Pretending that it is not hardly shows you in a good light. We are a country. We have responsibilities. Leaving aside the moral and humanitarian responsibilities to our fellow human beings we have a strategic responsibility to ourselves to create a safer and prosperous democratic world. Do we really want to spend more blood because we allow the world to regress backwards.
Where did I pretend the deficit is not coming down?
If you are going to misrepresent what I've said I suggest shows you in a very poor light.
I have to say, Mr @chestnut you're one of the very few on here who actually has figures at his finger tips, that blow almost all the hyperbole out of the water.
Long may you post here. I'd love to see a thread header by you.
Meanwhile, another disastrous set of immigration numbers...failure on the deficit, failure on the EU, failure on immigration...not a lot to get excited about.
Au contraire mr Runnymede, tse is celebrating the rise in immigration, its very exciting.
I have no idea what the tory message is now, they pledge to reduce numbers then celebrate when they rise.
Yes, but we are in a wholly different world to Thatcher's time now so such comparisons don't impress me much. There were larger and faster cuts under Denis Healey/Callaghan - economic reality can force your hand.
Leaving aside the economics, my big criticism is his political judgement: he got it wrong in the first place by making the tax credit cuts too fast and unfairly stepped on the withdrawal rate, then he and his aides put it about that he didn't think much of anyone on welfare, sneering rather than recognising many were decent folk in a welfare trap.
Then he chose to have a separate vote on the tax credit cuts to wrongfoot Labour in the Commons (which he won more than once, at notable political cost) but it ultimately backfired as pressure built up and the Lords rejected it.
And now he's done a full u-turn - and gone through all of the above for nothing. Either he was playing politics the whole time (badly) or he has fickle economic judgement.
Neither are good. He might have got out of a short-term hole but, having got it wrong first and hen having done a full u-turn that cedes the entire political argument, I lost respect for him as a potential leader yesterday.
That's why I have a lot of sympathy for Osborne. Healey and Callaghan did what was best for the country. Whereas as Brown and Darling were determined to leave Osborne with several booby traps.
I have sympathy with the shitty legacy he was left to clean up. But that doesn't mean I don't criticise how he chooses to deal with it, politically or economically.
Wiltshire UA - Salisbury St Edmund & Wilford Nottinghamshire CC - Selston Ashfield DC - Selston Lancaster BC - Carnforth & Millhead Rochford DC - Rochford Fife - Dunfermline North Fife - Rosyth Gwynedd - Llanaelhaearn Newport CC - Bettws
I've made an informed decision based on knocking of hundreds of doors of council estates earlier this year thanks. You should come with next time and ask people what they think of our foreign aid budget.
But that's just pathetic. You're not making an 'informed decision': you're making an utterly uninformed decision based on generally uninformed anecdata.
It seems your doorstop conversations are out of tune with the GBP. Are you sure you've not got a lead ear for people who want us to meet our international obligations?
All those other wicked countries around the world, refusing to be as generous as us.
Whether you like it or not, lots of people in the UK are having a tough time, for various reasons. Ask them what they think of us sending money to countries with space programmes.
And let's take your argument to it's logical conclusion: why not just ask countries how much they need and we fulfil their request? Come on - exactly how far should our benevolence extend when our debt is £1.5 trillion and rising?
That's not my argument, and what you said certainly isn't a logical inference of my position.
So let's recall what you've said in the last few posts: you argue against International Aid, despite admitting you haven't bothered reading up on it so you are able to form a proper position. Instead, you base your position on doorstep conversations (five million, perchance?) with members of the GBP who are curiously out of step with polling of the GBP.
Please read up on it, and try to form a considered, instead of instinctual, position. By all means argue that some of the money is ill-spent, but do that on data, not blind bias.
Yes, but we are in a wholly different world to Thatcher's time now so such comparisons don't impress me much. There were larger and faster cuts under Denis Healey/Callaghan - economic reality can force your hand.
Leaving aside the economics, my big criticism is his political judgement: he got it wrong in the first place by making the tax credit cuts too fast and unfairly stepped on the withdrawal rate, then he and his aides put it about that he didn't think much of anyone on welfare, sneering rather than recognising many were decent folk in a welfare trap.
Then he chose to have a separate vote on the tax credit cuts to wrongfoot Labour in the Commons (which he won more than once, at notable political cost) but it ultimately backfired as pressure built up and the Lords rejected it.
And now he's done a full u-turn - and gone through all of the above for nothing. Either he was playing politics the whole time (badly) or he has fickle economic judgement.
Neither are good. He might have got out of a short-term hole but, having got it wrong first and hen having done a full u-turn that cedes the entire political argument, I lost respect for him as a potential leader yesterday.
That's why I have a lot of sympathy for Osborne. Healey and Callaghan did what was best for the country. Whereas as Brown and Darling were determined to leave Osborne with several booby traps.
I have sympathy with the shitty legacy he was left to clean up. But that doesn't mean I don't criticise how he chooses to deal with it, politically or economically.
You are right to criticise. It is the comparisons with Brown that annoy me for the reasons above.
Huzzah. Might mean Osborne's assumptions might be right after all.
@krishgm: OBR says growth higher thanks to slower cuts and higher net migration.
The public will not tolerate these levels of immigration. Either the Tories fix it or they will be in trouble.
They re-elected the government that failed on immigration.
If immigration really was the number one concern in the country UKIP would have won a landslide in May.
Indeed, and that failure on immigration was a campaign issue right up until polling day. It led to Cameron repledging to cut immigration to the tens of thousands, and it was in the manifesto.
A vote for the Conservatives was a vote for low immigration. If all three mainstream parties become high immigration parties then the number one issue of public concern will find an outlet somewhere else.
Meanwhile, another disastrous set of immigration numbers...failure on the deficit, failure on the EU, failure on immigration...not a lot to get excited about.
Au contraire mr Runnymede, tse is celebrating the rise in immigration, its very exciting.
I have no idea what the tory message is now, they pledge to reduce numbers then celebrate when they rise.
I'm a fairly atypical Tory on matters of immigration.
Nearly 200,000 of our long term migrants are students, with 167,000 of them paying to study at UK universities.
How many foreign students paying to study at our universities are there in the UK? For your premise to hold would there not have to be the best part of half a million (assuming most are on three year undergraduate courses)? That seems a little high to me considering that according HESA there are only about one million students of all types at British Universities.
I've made an informed decision based on knocking of hundreds of doors of council estates earlier this year thanks. You should come with next time and ask people what they think of our foreign aid budget.
But that's just pathetic. You're not making an 'informed decision': you're making an utterly uninformed decision based on generally uninformed anecdata.
It seems your doorstop conversations are out of tune with the GBP. Are you sure you've not got a lead ear for people who want us to meet our international obligations?
All those other wicked countries around the world, refusing to be as generous as us.
Whether you like it or not, lots of people in the UK are having a tough time, for various reasons. Ask them what they think of us sending money to countries with space programmes.
And let's take your argument to it's logical conclusion: why not just ask countries how much they need and we fulfil their request? Come on - exactly how far should our benevolence extend when our debt is £1.5 trillion and rising?
That's not my argument, and what you said certainly isn't a logical inference of my position.
So let's recall what you've said in the last few posts: you argue against International Aid, despite admitting you haven't bothered reading up on it so you are able to form a proper position. Instead, you base your position on doorstep conversations (five million, perchance?) with members of the GBP who are curiously out of step with polling of the GBP.
Please read up on it, and try to form a considered, instead of instinctual, position. By all means argue that some of the money is ill-spent, but do that on data, not blind bias.
My "blind bias" is based on priorities and our current situation. I have formed a considered opinion based on our national debt, deficit and cuts to the police and other public spending.
You keep shaking the money tree and bleating about ebola, I'm very comfortable with my position.
Labour 9,000 UKIP 6,000 Conservative 3,000 Lib Dem 1,000 Green 500 OMRLP 300
turnout 27%
It would be nice to have a little competition on this.
I think it'll be like Manchester Central back in 2012, with a very low turnout. I'll say 20% (just so Lucy Powell can still have the recent record for low turnouts). I just cannot see people being enthused enough by this election, especially at this time of year. There's not enough push or pull factors to send them to their local polling station.
Labour 6000 UKIP 5000 Conservative 2000 Lib Dem 900 Others 621
If turnout is atrocious enough but the tories somehow manage to get most of their voters out, they could just snatch it. Remember, 8000 people voted tory in OW&R in May despite it being a very safe labour seat AND UKIP being perceived as the challenger.
A tory win isn't likely, but isn't impossible either.
Not that they'd have a cats chance in hell of holding it in 2020!
Agree with that. But I just think it'll be an election of two opposing forces: Labourites enthused by Corbyn enough to go to the polls, and UKIP voters enraged by immigration. I'm not sure the Conservatives will be able to get traction between those two forces.
It would be interesting to know if the 'Northern Powerhouse' meme has cut through in that part of the north. It might be worth a few votes.
Net immigration figures today not exactly going to calm those unhappy with the rate of immigration.
Meanwhile, another disastrous set of immigration numbers...failure on the deficit, failure on the EU, failure on immigration...not a lot to get excited about.
Au contraire mr Runnymede, tse is celebrating the rise in immigration, its very exciting.
I have no idea what the tory message is now, they pledge to reduce numbers then celebrate when they rise.
I'm a fairly atypical Tory on matters of immigration.
You are a typical tory in every way, if immigration had come down you'd have cheered as well.
I had a look at the ONS Migration Statistical Bulletin produced under Labour, and the ones now being produced under the coalition, then conservative government.
It has doubled in size, and now incorporates things that previously went unmentioned.
It would be more useful to the discussion if ONS actually broke the bulletin into more than one release - one focussing on employment related immigration, and one focussing on all the other types.
Fee paying, university students really aren't what the public has in mind when expressing their feelings about immigration.
Meanwhile, another disastrous set of immigration numbers...failure on the deficit, failure on the EU, failure on immigration...not a lot to get excited about.
Au contraire mr Runnymede, tse is celebrating the rise in immigration, its very exciting.
I have no idea what the tory message is now, they pledge to reduce numbers then celebrate when they rise.
I'm a fairly atypical Tory on matters of immigration.
You are a typical tory in every way, if immigration had come down you'd have cheered as well.
Nope. Immigration is good for the economy.
As a good conservative, it is our duty to do what is best for the economy.
Meanwhile, another disastrous set of immigration numbers...failure on the deficit, failure on the EU, failure on immigration...not a lot to get excited about.
Au contraire mr Runnymede, tse is celebrating the rise in immigration, its very exciting.
I have no idea what the tory message is now, they pledge to reduce numbers then celebrate when they rise.
I'm a fairly atypical Tory on matters of immigration.
You are a typical tory in every way, if immigration had come down you'd have cheered as well.
Tories believe in only one thing: holding office. That's why they're so ruthless in getting rid of leaders, unlike Labour.
Meanwhile I read more good news in the Telegraph this morning: Net immigration has hit a new record - 336,000 (636,000 gross) to the 12 months ending in June.
I look forward to concreting over Sussex
It is already happening, Mr. Brooke. The Llama field at the end of my road is to be covered by 140 houses next year and a whole new town is being built next to Horsham with another new town planned for Warnham and another at Ford not to mention there are hundreds of smaller developments in every town and village.
All those new people arriving (roughly population of Cardiff arrived last year) tend to go to the cities and people from the cities move out to places like Sussex. Still it promotes Growf, the rich get richer and everybody else suffers, and that is supposedly a good thing.
Nearly 200,000 of our long term migrants are students, with 167,000 of them paying to study at UK universities.
How many foreign students paying to study at our universities are there in the UK? For your premise to hold would there not have to be the best part of half a million (assuming most are on three year undergraduate courses)? That seems a little high to me considering that according HESA there are only about one million students of all types at British Universities.
Meanwhile, another disastrous set of immigration numbers...failure on the deficit, failure on the EU, failure on immigration...not a lot to get excited about.
Au contraire mr Runnymede, tse is celebrating the rise in immigration, its very exciting.
I have no idea what the tory message is now, they pledge to reduce numbers then celebrate when they rise.
I'm a fairly atypical Tory on matters of immigration.
You are a typical tory in every way, if immigration had come down you'd have cheered as well.
Tories believe in only one thing: holding office. That's why they're so ruthless in getting rid of leaders, unlike Labour.
George Osborne has showalth and welfare. The first goal is defensible; the second carries risks.
. These are important messages about consequences and mature, grown up politics and they get lost with slights of hand like yesterday.
The article points out that he is still intent on shrinking the size of the state.
ptio
Austerity was a political choice. Back George Osborne and any sensible erstwhile Labour MP with any kind of economic brief or knowledge into a corner and they would accept that.
Spending was too high, yeSo GO's decision was a political one tapping into the mood of fear and uncertainty. It was of course hugely successful eventually, including scaring Lab into not knowing quite how to respond.
Spending had to slow dramatically but austerity was not a necessity. It was politically expedient and may or may not have affected the pace of recovery.
The sooner Cons supporters understand and accept that the more healthy future debate about policy direction will be.
You lost me when you said austerity was a political choice. You risked permenantly losing me (on economic posts of yours) when you said there was no such thing as running out of money.
I'm sorry your nuances are too nuanced!
I am assuming you think we could run out of money and austerity was not a political choice?
On your second point, for an economy which is able to issue and which borrows in its own currency it cannot run out of money. I'm sorry but that is just a truism. There may be other consequences but suffice to say in 2008 they were not a significant factor, they still probably aren't (unless you are expecting rampant inflation any time soon).
On your first point, if you accept the above then austerity does indeed become a political choice.
Just because Governments with their own currency can always print more of it doesn't mean they can't run out of money.
Indeed, history shows that when Governments hit the printing presses it's precisely because they've run out of money.
As I said: "unless you are expecting rampant inflation any time soon".
I assume you are not (or are you?) so we needn't overdramatise.
Meanwhile, another disastrous set of immigration numbers...failure on the deficit, failure on the EU, failure on immigration...not a lot to get excited about.
Au contraire mr Runnymede, tse is celebrating the rise in immigration, its very exciting.
I have no idea what the tory message is now, they pledge to reduce numbers then celebrate when they rise.
I'm a fairly atypical Tory on matters of immigration.
You are a typical tory in every way, if immigration had come down you'd have cheered as well.
Nope. Immigration is good for the economy.
As a good conservative, it is our duty to do what is best for the economy.
Is ALL immigration good for the economy - and if so why did Dave promise to reduce it dramatically?
Meanwhile, another disastrous set of immigration numbers...failure on the deficit, failure on the EU, failure on immigration...not a lot to get excited about.
Au contraire mr Runnymede, tse is celebrating the rise in immigration, its very exciting.
I have no idea what the tory message is now, they pledge to reduce numbers then celebrate when they rise.
I'm a fairly atypical Tory on matters of immigration.
You are a typical tory in every way, if immigration had come down you'd have cheered as well.
Tories believe in only one thing: holding office. That's why they're so ruthless in getting rid of leaders, unlike Labour.
So true sir, what they do with power is irrelevant as long as they have it.
I'm very sanguine about immigration from most of the EU except Roma because of the crime lifestyle they frequently indulge in, and from the likes of Pakistan, Somalia, Bangladesh et al - groups with poor employment rates/poor integration and worse cultural practices.
I've made an informed decision based on knocking of hundreds of doors of council estates earlier this year thanks. You should come with next time and ask people what they think of our foreign aid budget.
But that's just pathetic. You're not making an 'informed decision': you're making an utterly uninformed decision based on generally uninformed anecdata.
It seems your doorstop conversations are out of tune with the GBP. Are you sure you've not got a lead ear for people who want us to meet our international obligations?
All those other wicked countries around the world, refusing to be as generous as us.
Whether you like it or not, lots of people in the UK are having a tough time, for various reasons. Ask them what they think of us sending money to countries with space programmes.
And let's take your argument to it's logical conclusion: why not just ask countries how much they need and we fulfil their request? Come on - exactly how far should our benevolence extend when our debt is £1.5 trillion and rising?
That's not my argument, and what you said certainly isn't a logical inference of my position.
So let's recall what you've said in the last few posts: you argue against International Aid, despite admitting you haven't bothered reading up on it so you are able to form a proper position. Instead, you base your position on doorstep conversations (five million, perchance?) with members of the GBP who are curiously out of step with polling of the GBP.
Please read up on it, and try to form a considered, instead of instinctual, position. By all means argue that some of the money is ill-spent, but do that on data, not blind bias.
My "blind bias" is based on priorities and our current situation. I have formed a considered opinion based on our national debt, deficit and cuts to the police and other public spending.
You keep shaking the money tree and bleating about ebola, I'm very comfortable with my position.
I've not mentioned Ebola!
You're comfortable with a position that is obviously based on "oooh, Johnny Foreigner's getting some money!", without looking into why that spending might just be in our interests.
Some posters who are vociferously against foreign aid on here have actually done some basic background research, and make good points. Your position on this is just ridiculous.
There have been two new polls in the last few days:
RedC: Fine Gael 31%, Fianna Fáil 19%, Sinn Féin 18%, Labour 7%, Others/Indies 25% Ipsos MRBI: Fine Gael 30%, Fianna Fáil 19%, Sinn Féin 21%, Labour 7%, Others/Indies 23%
The key point here is that FG's support is holding up well, but Labour remain in deep doo-dah. An FG minority government is looking more and more likely: Betfair Sports still offer 8/1, Boyle 6/1 (Paddy and Ladbrokes have already slashed their odds).
Meanwhile, another disastrous set of immigration numbers...failure on the deficit, failure on the EU, failure on immigration...not a lot to get excited about.
Au contraire mr Runnymede, tse is celebrating the rise in immigration, its very exciting.
I have no idea what the tory message is now, they pledge to reduce numbers then celebrate when they rise.
I'm a fairly atypical Tory on matters of immigration.
You are a typical tory in every way, if immigration had come down you'd have cheered as well.
Nope. Immigration is good for the economy.
As a good conservative, it is our duty to do what is best for the economy.
Is ALL immigration good for the economy - and if so why did Dave promise to reduce it dramatically?
Me and my Dad spoke to the chap in charge of one of Coventry's vulnerable families programs.
He said that alot of the immigrants coming over were not succesful business(wo)men, but that he'd seen alot of 'problem' families coming over into and falling into his line of work.
@rcs1000 Idea of a fixed migration fee would help immensely if implemented.
In YE September 2015, visa applications to study at a UK university (main applicants) fell by 2% to 168,229. There were also falls in: • the further education sector (to 16,191; -19%) • English Language schools (to 3,061; -10%) • the independent schools sector (to 13,766; -2%)
The Prime Mininster is addressing MPs about why Britain should extend air strikes into Syria.
He warns against not acting, saying: "We have to ask ourselves if the risks of inaction are greater than those of taking action... all the advice I've received says yes."
Mr Cameron also says Britain is in "top tier" of countries being targeted by Isil.
I'm in favour of most immigration from eastern Europe because I think their culture is close enough to ours for them to quickly integrate into British society, so I think Blair made the right decision in 2004 on that topic. The problem is with migration from societies very different from the UK like Somalia and Afghanistan.
Meanwhile, another disastrous set of immigration numbers...failure on the deficit, failure on the EU, failure on immigration...not a lot to get excited about.
Au contraire mr Runnymede, tse is celebrating the rise in immigration, its very exciting.
I have no idea what the tory message is now, they pledge to reduce numbers then celebrate when they rise.
I'm a fairly atypical Tory on matters of immigration.
You are a typical tory in every way, if immigration had come down you'd have cheered as well.
Nope. Immigration is good for the economy.
As a good conservative, it is our duty to do what is best for the economy.
Is ALL immigration good for the economy - and if so why did Dave promise to reduce it dramatically?
''I really, really don't. Labour or AN Other party rising from its ashes around 2025.''
Perversely, that works against cam and ossie though MS Plato. The tories might well feel they can replace the leadership with more radical people and still win easily in 2020.
Its unlikely, but not impossible.
Particularly if deficit reduction stalls and Cam loses the euro vote.
Meanwhile, another disastrous set of immigration numbers...failure on the deficit, failure on the EU, failure on immigration...not a lot to get excited about.
Au contraire mr Runnymede, tse is celebrating the rise in immigration, its very exciting.
I have no idea what the tory message is now, they pledge to reduce numbers then celebrate when they rise.
I'm a fairly atypical Tory on matters of immigration.
You are a typical tory in every way, if immigration had come down you'd have cheered as well.
Nope. Immigration is good for the economy.
As a good conservative, it is our duty to do what is best for the economy.
Is ALL immigration good for the economy - and if so why did Dave promise to reduce it dramatically?
As a whole yes.
Hang on, if its good, why promise to reduce it?
Because Dave was silly to make the pledge.
Plus it is unachievable whilst we remain in the EU.
A friend of mine used to work for Immigration and Asylum in Hastings - he went from do-gooder to embittered by the flakes and scroungers taking advantage, inc plenty of Nigerian 9 month pregnant ladies.
Immigration is all about quality. I'd be all in favour of a bond that covered 5yrs residency costs if you apply from certain countries.
Me and my Dad spoke to the chap in charge of one of Coventry's vulnerable families programs.
He said that alot of the immigrants coming over were not succesful business(wo)men, but that he'd seen alot of 'problem' families coming over into and falling into his line of work.
@rcs1000 Idea of a fixed migration fee would help immensely if implemented.
I'm in favour of most immigration from eastern Europe because I think their culture is close enough to ours for them to quickly integrate into British society, so I think Blair made the right decision in 2004 on that topic. The problem is with migration from societies very different from the UK like Somalia and Afghanistan.
I think a lot of the anger over immigration could be tempered by altering the asylum laws to be more sane. I'd be happy for experts on this (preferably not ones making money out of the system), but it does seem the the asylum system as it is currently working is not fit for purpose.
Which if true, is bad for both the public and for genuine refugees.
James Lyons: Box reserved for labour spinners in the press gallery empty for Cameron's speech on Syria
To be fair, what is them to spin? Jahadi Jez is going to tell Labour to vote no, and instead say we should give them all a nice hug instead. Either Cameron gets his own side to back him and / or some Labour MPs grow a backbone and vote in a way that matches how they really think on the issue.
"Whatever anyone thought of the Iraq War, terrible mistakes were made [in the reconstruction] … We are not in the business of dismantling the Syrian state or its institutions."
He also promises to only hold a vote when a majority exists for military action. "We will not hand a publicity coup to Isil," he says.
Mr Cameron adds: “We have to hit these terrorists in their heartlands right now."
James Lyons: Box reserved for labour spinners in the press gallery empty for Cameron's speech on Syria
To be fair, what is them to spin? Jahadi Jez is going to tell Labour to vote no, and instead say we should give them all a nice hug instead. Either Cameron gets his own side to back him and / or some Labour MPs grow a backbone and vote in a way that matches how they really think on the issue.
@Topping - my point is that if we followed your economic philosophy that's exactly what we'd end up with: a weak pound and rampant inflation.
No. I said that austerity was a political choice primarily, not an economic one, and specifically in 2008 was not necessary. I did not say that we should run deficits now and forever more.
I am a conservative, Tory, you know, right wing and all that.
What is however undisputed, is that austerity was a concept more beloved in theory by the Cons, the media, and the public, than it was necessary in practice (several economists, not all lefty bonkers ones, will tell you that for many countries the result was in fact the more austerity the less the growth these past few years but I will let you DYOR).
Some pertinent tweets on the immigration stats: Rob Ford - @robfordmancs
Immigration sceptics need to accept that most of the migrants coming to Britain work and contribute to economy. V clear in statistics.
Immigration liberals need to accept that the level of migration we're experiencing now has no precedent. Start from that point.
Spain now one of the top 5 sources of immigration and destinations of emigration. Workers come here, pensioners go there. Good deal for us?
Net imm figures also rising due to emigration falling. Illustrates idiocy of net imm target: ppl wanting to stay in Britain not a bad thing
Do we know the nationalities of those coming from Spain? it could be that a good chunk of those coming from Spain are returning Brits. It seems to me that lots of people like the idea of retiring abroad but when they get older and start to think about healthcare they quite like the idea of returning home.
Default setting: someone disagrees with me, they're ridiculous.
We waste money overseas, despite your condescendence my mind hasn't changed.
"We waste money overseas"
I like your definition of fact for something you admit you haven't studied. That makes it more an act of faith than an intelligent, considered position.
As I said below, there are posters who argue against foreign aid who do so from a strong position, based on knowledge. I don't think their position is ridiculous, even if I disagree with them.
As an aside, I've not said you're ridiculous (I hope). I've said your position on this matter is ridiculous.
''What the f* are we doing letting in the 100k that don't have a definite job... particularly the Non EU ppls.''
some will be arranged marriages in the Asian community?? not much we can do about those.
Oh yes we can. We can refuse admittance to anyone who cannot demonstrate that their marriage was entered into freely and based on a pre-existing relationship.
If someone leaves the country to marry someone they have never spent any time with, then the new spouse shall have no right of entry or residence in the UK
Most of Corbyn's questions had been anticipated in Cameron's statement.....not a lot of 'thinking on his feet' going on - least of all as he'd had sight of the statement....
All a big joke again I am sure. As been mentioned by others if Osborne had stood up and started quoting Hitler approach to economics, I don't think anybody would let him get away with claiming it as a joke.
Saying all that. I went to see Henning Wehn a couple of years ago and he did a cracking gag. Came on stage to some rousing music, encouraged the audience to clap along, waiting until the whole audience were fully engaged with it. Cue cut the music and informing us all that you can't beat a bit of the best tunes of the Hitler Youth.
A friend of mine used to work for Immigration and Asylum in Hastings - he went from do-gooder to embittered by the flakes and scroungers taking advantage, inc plenty of Nigerian 9 month pregnant ladies.
Immigration is all about quality. I'd be all in favour of a bond that covered 5yrs residency costs if you apply from certain countries.
Me and my Dad spoke to the chap in charge of one of Coventry's vulnerable families programs.
He said that alot of the immigrants coming over were not succesful business(wo)men, but that he'd seen alot of 'problem' families coming over into and falling into his line of work.
@rcs1000 Idea of a fixed migration fee would help immensely if implemented.
It's about the type of immigrant and their reason for immigrating and it's also about overall numbers too.
Default setting: someone disagrees with me, they're ridiculous.
We waste money overseas, despite your condescendence my mind hasn't changed.
"We waste money overseas"
I like your definition of fact for something you admit you haven't studied. That makes it more an act of faith than an intelligent, considered position.
As I said below, there are posters who argue against foreign aid who do so from a strong position, based on knowledge. I don't think their position is ridiculous, even if I disagree with them.
As an aside, I've not said you're ridiculous (I hope). I've said your position on this matter is ridiculous.
Studied - what on earth does that mean, would you like me to write a dissertation?
Look, we're £1.5 trillion in debt with a huge if reducing deficit. We pay more in foreign aid than any other country, perhaps we're second. That is all the research I need thanks, you can patronise me all you like.
Default setting: someone disagrees with me, they're ridiculous.
We waste money overseas, despite your condescendence my mind hasn't changed.
That’s the difference between Left and Right. As a Leftie, when someoned disagree with me they are mistaken and in need of education; when someone disagrees with (some) Righties they are ridiculous.
Most of Corbyn's questions had been anticipated in Cameron's statement.....not a lot of 'thinking on his feet' going on - least of all as he'd had sight of the statement....
Comments
2016 could be a very tough year for Dave and George.
The silence from Mr Boris Johnson is interesting. At the moment the tory taliban is just a few noisy thatcherites such as myself. Next year it might be a horde.
Police rush in after man heard screaming 'I'm going to kill you'; discover noise caused by him attacking spider
Officers in Sydney respond to reports of man shouting threats and furniture being thrown – only to find a ‘quite embarrassed’ man on his own in an apartment
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/nov/26/youre-dead-police-thought-man-trying-to-kill-spider-was-attacking-wife
If you are going to misrepresent what I've said I suggest shows you in a very poor light.
I have no idea what the tory message is now, they pledge to reduce numbers then celebrate when they rise.
If immigration really was the number one concern in the country UKIP would have won a landslide in May.
Wiltshire UA - Salisbury St Edmund & Wilford
Nottinghamshire CC - Selston
Ashfield DC - Selston
Lancaster BC - Carnforth & Millhead
Rochford DC - Rochford
Fife - Dunfermline North
Fife - Rosyth
Gwynedd - Llanaelhaearn
Newport CC - Bettws
So let's recall what you've said in the last few posts: you argue against International Aid, despite admitting you haven't bothered reading up on it so you are able to form a proper position. Instead, you base your position on doorstep conversations (five million, perchance?) with members of the GBP who are curiously out of step with polling of the GBP.
Please read up on it, and try to form a considered, instead of instinctual, position. By all means argue that some of the money is ill-spent, but do that on data, not blind bias.
The tories might not be in trouble.
But Osborne and Dave will be.
Both are adherents to the view prevalent at the moment in Europe that whatever party you vote for, you get social democracy.
Percentage of tories to the right of Ozzie and Dave? 70% 80? 90?
A vote for the Conservatives was a vote for low immigration. If all three mainstream parties become high immigration parties then the number one issue of public concern will find an outlet somewhere else.
Pheasant trapped in water pipe cost £25m http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/business/industries/utilities/article4624043.ece
You keep shaking the money tree and bleating about ebola, I'm very comfortable with my position.
Producing something and reading from it in a dramatic fashion is practically the definition of the old politics.
It has doubled in size, and now incorporates things that previously went unmentioned.
It would be more useful to the discussion if ONS actually broke the bulletin into more than one release - one focussing on employment related immigration, and one focussing on all the other types.
Fee paying, university students really aren't what the public has in mind when expressing their feelings about immigration.
We all like immigration on here, it suits the middle classes right down to the ground.
It isn't a question of personal preference but political perception and what the country will think.
As a good conservative, it is our duty to do what is best for the economy.
Immigration sceptics need to accept that most of the migrants coming to Britain work and contribute to economy. V clear in statistics.
Immigration liberals need to accept that the level of migration we're experiencing now has no precedent. Start from that point.
Spain now one of the top 5 sources of immigration and destinations of emigration. Workers come here, pensioners go there. Good deal for us?
Net imm figures also rising due to emigration falling. Illustrates idiocy of net imm target: ppl wanting to stay in Britain not a bad thing
All those new people arriving (roughly population of Cardiff arrived last year) tend to go to the cities and people from the cities move out to places like Sussex. Still it promotes Growf, the rich get richer and everybody else suffers, and that is supposedly a good thing.
Page 2, Para 6.
Unless people have to repeatedly renew visas.
Absolutely a good deal.
There's a distinction here between personal preference and how the numbers will play in the country.
Personally I don;t give a monkeys about immigration numbers.
But others in the country might.
I assume you are not (or are you?) so we needn't overdramatise.
http://www.thelocal.se/20151126/poll-swedes-get-behind-stricter-asylum-rules-sweden
I think the chances of Camborne being gone by, say the middle of 2017, are higher than they were a few days ago.
Still low, but significantly higher.
You're comfortable with a position that is obviously based on "oooh, Johnny Foreigner's getting some money!", without looking into why that spending might just be in our interests.
Some posters who are vociferously against foreign aid on here have actually done some basic background research, and make good points. Your position on this is just ridiculous.
There have been two new polls in the last few days:
RedC: Fine Gael 31%, Fianna Fáil 19%, Sinn Féin 18%, Labour 7%, Others/Indies 25%
Ipsos MRBI: Fine Gael 30%, Fianna Fáil 19%, Sinn Féin 21%, Labour 7%, Others/Indies 23%
The key point here is that FG's support is holding up well, but Labour remain in deep doo-dah. An FG minority government is looking more and more likely: Betfair Sports still offer 8/1, Boyle 6/1 (Paddy and Ladbrokes have already slashed their odds).
The 8/1 is a stand-out bet.
More info:
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/irish-times-poll-fine-gael-on-course-to-be-biggest-party-by-far-after-election-1.2444074
http://adriankavanaghelections.org/2015/11/21/fine-gael-gains-further-ground-constituency-level-analysis-of-the-sunday-business-post-red-c-opinion-poll-22nd-november-2015/
He said that alot of the immigrants coming over were not succesful business(wo)men, but that he'd seen alot of 'problem' families coming over into and falling into his line of work.
@rcs1000 Idea of a fixed migration fee would help immensely if implemented.
In YE September 2015, visa applications to study at a UK university (main applicants) fell by 2% to
168,229. There were also falls in:
• the further education sector (to 16,191; -19%)
• English Language schools (to 3,061; -10%)
• the independent schools sector (to 13,766; -2%)
70,000+ Chinese.
It's clear who he considers the real opposition in Westminster. Labour have made themselves irrelevant.
The SNP need to stick to their position and tell him No.
Echoing the great FDR.
Perversely, that works against cam and ossie though MS Plato. The tories might well feel they can replace the leadership with more radical people and still win easily in 2020.
Its unlikely, but not impossible.
Particularly if deficit reduction stalls and Cam loses the euro vote.
Plus it is unachievable whilst we remain in the EU.
Immigration is all about quality. I'd be all in favour of a bond that covered 5yrs residency costs if you apply from certain countries.
James Lyons: Box reserved for labour spinners in the press gallery empty for Cameron's speech on Syria
What the f* are we doing letting in the 100k that don't have a definite job... particularly the Non EU ppls.
Which if true, is bad for both the public and for genuine refugees.
We shall soon see how they are faring at a Westminster BE.
The Tories and Lib Dems may well be subjected to a classic non major two parties contesting squeeze, mind.
some will be arranged marriages in the Asian community?? not much we can do about those.
Default setting: someone disagrees with me, they're ridiculous.
We waste money overseas, despite your condescendence my mind hasn't changed.
I am a conservative, Tory, you know, right wing and all that.
What is however undisputed, is that austerity was a concept more beloved in theory by the Cons, the media, and the public, than it was necessary in practice (several economists, not all lefty bonkers ones, will tell you that for many countries the result was in fact the more austerity the less the growth these past few years but I will let you DYOR).
I like your definition of fact for something you admit you haven't studied. That makes it more an act of faith than an intelligent, considered position.
As I said below, there are posters who argue against foreign aid who do so from a strong position, based on knowledge. I don't think their position is ridiculous, even if I disagree with them.
As an aside, I've not said you're ridiculous (I hope). I've said your position on this matter is ridiculous.
Cameron tries to tick off another key concern of Labour MPs, pledges £1bn to post-conflict work in Syria.
If someone leaves the country to marry someone they have never spent any time with, then the new spouse shall have no right of entry or residence in the UK
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2015/nov/26/cameron-statement-syria-isis-air-strikes-not-a-sign-of-weakness-politics-live
Most of Corbyn's questions had been anticipated in Cameron's statement.....not a lot of 'thinking on his feet' going on - least of all as he'd had sight of the statement....
Liang herself told Today that she absolutely did not understand it, and that as a labour camp victim she did not find it funny at all:
http://order-order.com/2015/11/26/chinese-labour-camp-victim-contradicts-mcdonnells-green-room-claim/
All a big joke again I am sure. As been mentioned by others if Osborne had stood up and started quoting Hitler approach to economics, I don't think anybody would let him get away with claiming it as a joke.
Saying all that. I went to see Henning Wehn a couple of years ago and he did a cracking gag. Came on stage to some rousing music, encouraged the audience to clap along, waiting until the whole audience were fully engaged with it. Cue cut the music and informing us all that you can't beat a bit of the best tunes of the Hitler Youth.
Look, we're £1.5 trillion in debt with a huge if reducing deficit. We pay more in foreign aid than any other country, perhaps we're second. That is all the research I need thanks, you can patronise me all you like.
Remain: 40% (-)
Leave: 38% (-2)
(via YouGov / 19 - 24 Nov)
No comment needed