@gsoh31 Scottish VI (Holyrood, regional list): SNP 48%, Lab 19%, Con 17%, Lib Dems 7%, Greens 5%.
Cons agonisingly close to being second in Scotland.
Oh my word
Look a very distant third to me , their usual place just ahead of the odious Libdems.
The Tories in Scotland are on the up Malcolm and SLAB are in meltdown. There was a very telling piece on R4 yesterday with buoyant SNP canvassers in Joanne Lamont's seat, Labour canvassers sounding depressed and Ruth Davidson sounding positive.
Will it be enough for them to switch places? Still seems unlikely to me but some elements of the SNP are trying to promote RISE as a Labour alternative committed to independence. If they do bleed some more Labour supporters away it will get even closer. If Davidson can squeeze the Lib Dem and Labour unionist vote she just might do it. I think its at 3/1, maybe 4/1 bet. Any more than that and I am on.
THE comedian Eddie Izzard is being touted by Labour moderates as their secret weapon in the battle to wrest control of the party back from Jeremy Corbyn and his hard-left supporters.
Izzard, 53, is a long-standing Labour activist and will be approached by senior MPs to stand for the ruling national executive committee (NEC) this year.
Labour are fucked until the membership - generally nicely off, it seems, and actually pretty well looked after by the Tories - start to look beyond posturing and self-congratulation to helping those that the Labour party is supposed to help. A coherent, moderate message that explains why it is in everyone's interests to protect the poorest and most vulnerable while encouraging aspiration, helping business and recognising the importance of national identity is where Labour needs to get to. But it is going to take a long, long time from here. The comfort zone - literally and metaphorically - is a lot more attractive to the members of the Stupid Party.
Good morning all.
Firstly, those messages are easily co-opted by the Conservatives. Some would say they already have been.
Secondly, those of an ideologically zealous nature are not turned on by what are petite-bourgeois concerns. Where's the seizing of the means of production? Where's the bit where the banksters are put up against a wall and shot?
Thirdly, for the all the talk about the lack of women at the top of the Labour party, it's inaccurate; Labour are desperately, tragically short of testicles. A party of eunuchs led by a cabal of idiots is not particularly attractive to the electorate.
As Antifrank pointed out the other day, the problem Labour has is not so much the triumph of the left as the complete exaustion of the ideological philosophy of the Labour right.
If a post Cameron Tory party stays fairly centrist and socially liberal then there will be a landslide at the next election and we would be looking at 2030 or so before a realistic chance of an opposition taking power.
Sunday Times: Labour in Scotland has never before dropped below the 23% it won when it first started fighting elections as an independent party in 1918
Well, if we're comparing apples & oranges..
'The harsh truth is that the 14.9% vote share was the worst result since the Scottish Tories were formed in 1965. '
'ANNABEL Goldie, leader of the Scottish Conservative party, yesterday announced her resignation from the party following the Tories’ worst ever election result in Scotland.'
You'd have to ask the 3 "No" voters, but they might be in favour of true independence rather than flying the flag of Argentina.
Well, the piece does say it's 'possible' one of those three No voters wanted true independence. Although I want to know what was up with the one invalid vote. Were they also in favour of independence and so left it blank? Did they write 'I wish I was ruled by Argentina' on the ballot? I hope it was intentional, imagine being the only person in a vote to mess up.
@gsoh31 Scottish VI (Holyrood, regional list): SNP 48%, Lab 19%, Con 17%, Lib Dems 7%, Greens 5%.
Cons agonisingly close to being second in Scotland.
Oh my word
Look a very distant third to me , their usual place just ahead of the odious Libdems.
Those LDs seem like they poll better in Scotland than England, which doesn't seem right.
One would hope they get wiped out but the system means they will likely get a consolation or two. Also Tories are bricking it in reality, Davidson has had to elbow someone out in Edinburgh as she was a certain goner on losers list in Glasgow.
You make fair points, but by continually referring back to Brown you appear to be diverting attention from Osborne. He'll be judged on what he does not what Brown did.
What he has done is cut the deficit and improve the structural position year after year.
How many other Chancellor's have done the same or as well as that?
I've no idea but you make my point nicely, continually banging on about Brown reeks of insecurity. Let's judge Osborne not Brown.
I believe the key words in the sentence are 'strong' and 'based', and the key omission is around timescale. Strong does not just mean economically strong, though it can, and of course Scotland could be strong in many senses when independent in ways which are not economic, and so not based on oil, and even if we do mean economically and many presumptions were based on the oil, without it they could no doubt come up with some new plan or re-balancing to be economically strong without it, in time.
An excellent politician's statement. It will enrage opponents as a lie, but is crafted in such a way it can be defended because it is vague. She will no doubt claim the case was enhanced by oil, but not based on it. For one, even if Scotland were or is to be hit economically core nationalists would still say independence was the preferred option (though a trickier transition than they would like), as for them the case is not economic or based on oil.
Unusual to see a thoughtful , truthful post on any Scottish topic on here from outside ( and inside in Scottp's case, or so he claims ) Scotland.
@gsoh31 Scottish VI (Holyrood, regional list): SNP 48%, Lab 19%, Con 17%, Lib Dems 7%, Greens 5%.
Cons agonisingly close to being second in Scotland.
Oh my word
Look a very distant third to me , their usual place just ahead of the odious Libdems.
The Tories in Scotland are on the up Malcolm and SLAB are in meltdown. There was a very telling piece on R4 yesterday with buoyant SNP canvassers in Joanne Lamont's seat, Labour canvassers sounding depressed and Ruth Davidson sounding positive.
Will it be enough for them to switch places? Still seems unlikely to me but some elements of the SNP are trying to promote RISE as a Labour alternative committed to independence. If they do bleed some more Labour supporters away it will get even closer. If Davidson can squeeze the Lib Dem and Labour unionist vote she just might do it. I think its at 3/1, maybe 4/1 bet. Any more than that and I am on.
Tory surge
I know, I know. But this is much more about how far SLAB can fall than how much the Tories can rise.
You make fair points, but by continually referring back to Brown you appear to be diverting attention from Osborne. He'll be judged on what he does not what Brown did.
What he has done is cut the deficit and improve the structural position year after year.
How many other Chancellor's have done the same or as well as that?
I've no idea but you make my point nicely, continually banging on about Brown reeks of insecurity. Let's judge Osborne not Brown.
Idiot. The govt are dealing with Browns legacy. Economy shrunk by 7%, significant part of tax base wiped out, a history of industrial scale tax avoidance, spending out of control, budgeting out of control and a massive £160bn deficit.
I believe the key words in the sentence are 'strong' and 'based', and the key omission is around timescale. Strong does not just mean economically strong, though it can, and of course Scotland could be strong in many senses when independent in ways which are not economic, and so not based on oil, and even if we do mean economically and many presumptions were based on the oil, without it they could no doubt come up with some new plan or re-balancing to be economically strong without it, in time.
An excellent politician's statement. It will enrage opponents as a lie, but is crafted in such a way it can be defended because it is vague. She will no doubt claim the case was enhanced by oil, but not based on it. For one, even if Scotland were or is to be hit economically core nationalists would still say independence was the preferred option (though a trickier transition than they would like), as for them the case is not economic or based on oil.
Unusual to see a thoughtful , truthful post on any Scottish topic on here from outside ( and inside in Scottp's case, or so he claims ) Scotland.
I only wish my thoughtfulness on the subject could see a way to make the Union appealing to people again, on both sides of the border - the No vote was far too soft for my liking.
You make fair points, but by continually referring back to Brown you appear to be diverting attention from Osborne. He'll be judged on what he does not what Brown did.
What he has done is cut the deficit and improve the structural position year after year.
How many other Chancellor's have done the same or as well as that?
I've no idea but you make my point nicely, continually banging on about Brown reeks of insecurity. Let's judge Osborne not Brown.
.. if only because you have found something for your Sunday morning fix of being outraged.
@gsoh31 Scottish VI (Holyrood, regional list): SNP 48%, Lab 19%, Con 17%, Lib Dems 7%, Greens 5%.
Cons agonisingly close to being second in Scotland.
Oh my word
Look a very distant third to me , their usual place just ahead of the odious Libdems.
The Tories in Scotland are on the up Malcolm and SLAB are in meltdown. There was a very telling piece on R4 yesterday with buoyant SNP canvassers in Joanne Lamont's seat, Labour canvassers sounding depressed and Ruth Davidson sounding positive.
Will it be enough for them to switch places? Still seems unlikely to me but some elements of the SNP are trying to promote RISE as a Labour alternative committed to independence. If they do bleed some more Labour supporters away it will get even closer. If Davidson can squeeze the Lib Dem and Labour unionist vote she just might do it. I think its at 3/1, maybe 4/1 bet. Any more than that and I am on.
Morning David , would be nice for your sake but I still cannot see the Tories doing anything , they will be hamstrung as long as they are just London sockpuppets. I think reality is they will be at best same levels, they have little to offer Scotland at present other than London Tory policies with no questions asked. RISE are no hopers , usual socialist zealots , all egos and mental policies , be surprised if they break 3 figures. Be interesting to see how low labour get to. Dugdale is a muppet and not even a good one at that. SNP really need competition but it looks like it will be a long long time till that happens.
Erm, no. It affected us badly because we had a very large financial sector. Canada and Australia do not. Financial regulation had nothing to do with it, and despite the nostalgia on here, the Bank of England as sole regulator had been unable to prevent, to name but three, BCCI, Barings, or the secondary or fringe banking crisis. This is not to defend the FSA; merely to say its actions or inactions were largely irrelevant in the face of the global economic meltdown.
The point about Brown's silly remarks is of course unfortunately unanswerable.
Didn't stop Brown trying to re-write history:
Brown has talked specifically about the end of Tory boom and bust, but to suggest, as he did in the Mail interview, that it was always the mantra seems faintly ludicrous to anyone with an internet connection and the inclination to trawl through his public statements and speeches.....
But Brown's claim to the Mail just doesn't stand up. There have just been too many memorable references to the end of boom and bust - without any mention of Tory.
As I said earlier both Root and Taylor looked jittery and hyperactive. I really don't know what Taylor was playing at. It was a single at best and extremely risky.
Blame the CIA for the Cold War. Stalin was popular...random arrests under Article 58 of USSR's criminal code must have helped cement the love for the dear leader.
Do like this Rabada though. A real find for SA. He should have a long and successful career. Excellent action does not seem to take too much out of him.
I believe the key words in the sentence are 'strong' and 'based', and the key omission is around timescale. Strong does not just mean economically strong, though it can, and of course Scotland could be strong in many senses when independent in ways which are not economic, and so not based on oil, and even if we do mean economically and many presumptions were based on the oil, without it they could no doubt come up with some new plan or re-balancing to be economically strong without it, in time.
An excellent politician's statement. It will enrage opponents as a lie, but is crafted in such a way it can be defended because it is vague. She will no doubt claim the case was enhanced by oil, but not based on it. For one, even if Scotland were or is to be hit economically core nationalists would still say independence was the preferred option (though a trickier transition than they would like), as for them the case is not economic or based on oil.
Unusual to see a thoughtful , truthful post on any Scottish topic on here from outside ( and inside in Scottp's case, or so he claims ) Scotland.
I only wish my thoughtfulness on the subject could see a way to make the Union appealing to people again, on both sides of the border - the No vote was far too soft for my liking.
Be interesting to see what the outcome of the secret negotiations on the "Fiscal Settlement " come out with. SNP will need to be firm and if the unionists try to stiff Scotland they have to vote down the Smith powers.
'Astounded' is no where near, a million light years away from how I would describe viewing the lib dems proposals. They become more absurd by the second. Ally themselves with Corbyn? Put that tosspot into power? Still it just shows the LDs in their true light. Pale pink socialists. They had a chance to do something in government but rubbished their tory partners, their own government, at every turn, but then they go running to the most rancid left wing labour leader in its history to try to grub their way back to some sort of relevance.
What a bunch of jokers. Being kicked in the teeth by Blair over their last PR alliance is not enough for them. They want to go through it again.
Blame the CIA for the Cold War. Stalin was popular...random arrests under Article 58 of USSR's criminal code must have helped cement the love for the dear leader.
Ed achieved incredibly little in his 5 years as leader of the Labour party but one thing he did manage was to make the crazy delusions of Ken Livingston irrelevant and ignorable. Now he seems for all practical purposes to be deputy leader.
@ScottyNational: News:"Powers in the Scotland Bill do not go as far as were promised,"says Sturgeon,"such as the power to retrospectively add promises" #marr
Blame the CIA for the Cold War. Stalin was popular...random arrests under Article 58 of USSR's criminal code must have helped cement the love for the dear leader.
Ed achieved incredibly little in his 5 years as leader of the Labour party but one thing he did manage was to make the crazy delusions of Ken Livingston irrelevant and ignorable. Now he seems for all practical purposes to be deputy leader.
Miliband's decision to resign on the morning after the vote must rank as one of the worst decisions taken by a Labour leader.
Whatever. It's hard to scrape together much sympathy for them whilst expenses troughing continues, and they can waste time debating whether to ban Trump from the UK.
"Those with a salary of over £32,500 more likely to vote Conservative"
Not if George Osborne royally pisses them off by raiding their future pension pots.
Who else are they going to vote for?
They are not forced to vote at all. In my local area I am politically homeless and there is no-one that I agree with. Staying at home next time (or spoiling my paper) could be a positive decision.
Blame the CIA for the Cold War. Stalin was popular...random arrests under Article 58 of USSR's criminal code must have helped cement the love for the dear leader.
The man is bonkers. Why I ever thought he was a decent chap is beyond me. How does one defend Stalin (and despite calling him a monster, that is what he is doing - it's not even a 'he was terrible, but he did achieve some things, in a brutal way', it is explaining away his actions by blaming motivation for it on others) in this day and age?
And why are people so against intervention elsewhere (with good reason, it has to be said, I've opposed most intervention myself) so often justify Russian intervention. You see it all the time, a justification that Russian interest in regions was being hindered, so it's ok to invade other nations, in essence.
I think Ken comes across as madder than Corbyn, even more far out (odd considering he could not have run London while being so openly extreme), and lacks even Corbyn's pleasant demeanour.
Edit - I know we have some Russian fans on here, but I'm about to head out and on this issue my mind ispretty set, so there's no need to explain to me why the West trying to tempt Ukraine and other places to their sphere of influence justifies any action by Russia.
SALMOND'S company was unlimited but he changed it to limited after criticism. As he pointed out given that he was declaring all income in the parliamentary register the claims of lack of transparency were always spurious. You really need to catch up Watford since all of this is in the Scottish parliamentary register of interests.
The suggestion of tax avoidance is also nonsence. The company makes little or no difference to his tax position since all income is taxed when taken. It would only be to his advantage if he had little earned income in the near future which seems improbable. I fear my accountancy training gives me the advantage over social media smearing!
Finally the Scottish register of interests shows a huge level of charitable giving from Salmond. If I were still a unionist I would have a care in this direction of attack since in terms of donations Salmond comes out miles in front of any other MSP/MP. I am frankly surprised that he does not make more of this publically. He would be perfectly justified in doing so.
Blame the CIA for the Cold War. Stalin was popular...random arrests under Article 58 of USSR's criminal code must have helped cement the love for the dear leader.
Ed achieved incredibly little in his 5 years as leader of the Labour party but one thing he did manage was to make the crazy delusions of Ken Livingston irrelevant and ignorable. Now he seems for all practical purposes to be deputy leader.
Miliband's decision to resign on the morning after the vote must rank as one of the worst decisions taken by a Labour leader.
And that is pretty hard to imagine given that his resignation on pretty much any other day of his leadership would have been one of the best!
That is, if the point of the exercise is to cement his own authority and rule over the party. Prevents him being overshadowed by any other performer at Conference.
From a vote winning perspective, it is a dud. Plus ca change.
Why is it a dud?
Works well at Tory Conference to have the leaders speech the closing act. In the big picture it may be moot but I don't see it being a dud.
It will help stage manage the conference more like a rally than a conference I suspect.
That is, if the point of the exercise is to cement his own authority and rule over the party. Prevents him being overshadowed by any other performer at Conference.
From a vote winning perspective, it is a dud. Plus ca change.
Why is it a dud?
Works well at Tory Conference to have the leaders speech the closing act. In the big picture it may be moot but I don't see it being a dud.
Because Corbo is a dud; he is in touch with Islington and a few pockets of Greater London and other cities.....and that is it.
The Labour party still have a bit of residual popularity. Many of the members hate the very notion of ut, but an awful lot of seats in England would be in play with a new-generation Blairite leader.
@PolhomeEditor: Jeremy Corbyn says he's read "some but not all" of Margaret Beckett's 15-page report into why Labour lost last year https://t.co/GyjwaQiWku
Why bother when he knows that it's a load of nonsense.
It helps him misquote history again. Whether being surrounded by adoring muslims will help Labour is moot.
Erm, no. It affected us badly because we had a very large financial sector. Canada and Australia do not. Financial regulation had nothing to do with it, and despite the nostalgia on here, the Bank of England as sole regulator had been unable to prevent, to name but three, BCCI, Barings, or the secondary or fringe banking crisis. This is not to defend the FSA; merely to say its actions or inactions were largely irrelevant in the face of the global economic meltdown.
The point about Brown's silly remarks is of course unfortunately unanswerable.
Didn't stop Brown trying to re-write history:
Brown has talked specifically about the end of Tory boom and bust, but to suggest, as he did in the Mail interview, that it was always the mantra seems faintly ludicrous to anyone with an internet connection and the inclination to trawl through his public statements and speeches.....
But Brown's claim to the Mail just doesn't stand up. There have just been too many memorable references to the end of boom and bust - without any mention of Tory.
On the previous thread TSE made an excellent point about Conservative canvassing, how organised and professional the operation is, by comparison the UKIP approach is shambolic; no back data, no targeting, naive canvassers enthusiastically knocking door after door. This time last year I attended a campaign meeting with the UKIP hierarchy and was told to get out in our target areas, none of us knew what our target areas were. This remains the single biggest problem UKIP face, 4m voters but spread across the country and within constituencies, the Libs have worked out a way of ploughing limited resources into areas that are ripe for picking.
Incidentally, a terrifying thought for several on here that are arguing for electoral reform, under PR I would almost certainly be an MP, be careful what you wish for.
(Light blue touch paper and retreat safe distance)
I disagree with you on a lot, but many people share your views, and so with no way to gauge if you would be good at the job, I would welcome seeing you as an MP. I also suspect it would be entetaiming.
'entertaining'? Read my previous about 'astonished'!
Still it just shows the LDs in their true light. Pale pink socialists.
The Lib Dems are increasingly becoming/regressing back to the SDP. There is no longer a true liberal party (the closest is probably the Conservative & Unionist Party).
@PolhomeEditor: Jeremy Corbyn says he's read "some but not all" of Margaret Beckett's 15-page report into why Labour lost last year https://t.co/GyjwaQiWku
Why bother when he knows that it's a load of nonsense.
When Jeremy Corbyn's leadership of the Labour party dies and is cut open, we will find Calais engraved on its heart.
Having thought about it quite a bit in the last few days I have come to the conclusion that Alastair Meeks is once again spot on. The problem in Labour is not these idiots on the far left fringe, they have always been there. The real problem is the incredible weakness of the centre right of the party who seem to have no coherent idea what they are for, how Labour can adapt to the modern world and seem to have no leadership worth a damn.
Until these problems are addressed in a meaningful way many Labour supporters will continue to argue for Corbyn on the basis that he at least believes in something. In the current generation the only one I can think of who might have had the intellectual heft for such a task was Ed Balls and the PM is not alone in missing him.
In the next generation there are a few possibilities such as Jarvis for leadership but I am struggling to see anyone who is going to work out a credible and sellable program for government. Where is Labour's next Mandelson? Or even, lord help us, Brown?
I don't see how a pact on electoral reform would tar the Lib Dems with Corbyn's brush at all. I also don't see that UKIP wouldn't join such a pact, though I do see why the others might not have them. But it would make sense for them all to join together in it.
The people it would seem to make least sense for is the SNP - FPTP seems to have served them very well now they've achieved dominance in Scotland.
@PolhomeEditor: Jeremy Corbyn says he's read "some but not all" of Margaret Beckett's 15-page report into why Labour lost last year https://t.co/GyjwaQiWku
Why bother when he knows that it's a load of nonsense.
When Jeremy Corbyn's leadership of the Labour party dies and is cut open, we will find Calais engraved on its heart.
I'm trying to work out whether there is some sense in his stance, politically. Obviously it's a core vote strategy, if anything. But his core probably needs a fillip. And no-one took Ed seriously on pledge no. 4. They wouldn't take it seriously from Corbyn either. So arguably he may as well come out pro-migrant and get what credit is going for that.
I saw the Revenant this weekend. A fairly gruelling film, with great landscapes, but I don't think either the best film or actor of the year. Best Cinematography or supporting actor maybe. There wasn't much nuance in DiCaprio's performance.
I always think the best judge of a film is how much of it stays with you after a week or so. It gets rid of the superficial. 'The Room' and 'The Big Short' are certainly up there. 'The Revenant' is mainly landscape and photography as you suggest
What would you tip for the Oscars?
Like anyone, I have my own ideas of what makes a great film, but the Academy voting process is a bit alien to me.
My favourites were 'Carol' 'Room' 'The Big Short' and 'Revenant. As Watford says the Academy have quirks. Best Picture tends not to go to small films which probably rules out 'Carol' and 'Room' which leaves 'Revenant' and 'The Big Short'. I'm leaning towards 'Revenant' but I haven't yet seen 'Spotlight' which by all accounts is good . I'll let you know when I have
@PolhomeEditor: Jeremy Corbyn says he's read "some but not all" of Margaret Beckett's 15-page report into why Labour lost last year https://t.co/GyjwaQiWku
Why would he be interested in what Labour did before his rise to power? His focus is not on trying to defend the past - he rejects that utterly. Indeed he rebelled often enough for it to be clear that he had no confidence in what Labour has stood for in the past - it was just a label he used for personal gain when standing for election.
15 pages.... and he cannot admit to reading it all. How hard can it be? I am guessing that in order to be vaguely honest he has actually read just the title page. On the other hand if he is anything like my dear old mother he would have read the ending first to see if he was going to like the story - and left it there.
Independent reporting that the Great opposition leaders speech to be moved to end of conference. This is to avoid it being picked over in the news cycle and media outlets picking up comments from their MPs. They hope all MPs would have left and the news cycle has moved on. It is likely to be approved by NEC however many are horrified at the move.
It's bad when Even Labour know they have to hide their leader from any scrutiny.
Before lefties start pointing out the others have their speeches at or towards the end it should be remembered they always have had and are not moving them to avoid the public and media
Labour = frit
I just don't get the logic.
MPs and journos leave conference on the last day because the leader's speech is on the penultimate day.
If they move the speech, won't they just hang around another day? Or if their budgets won't allow it, just arrive a day late?
I don't see how a pact on electoral reform would tar the Lib Dems with Corbyn's brush at all. I also don't see that UKIP wouldn't join such a pact, though I do see why the others might not have them. But it would make sense for them all to join together in it.
The people it would seem to make least sense for is the SNP - FPTP seems to have served them very well now they've achieved dominance in Scotland.
Indeed. I imagine the SNP would have nothing to do with it.
THE SNP's shadow leader of the House of Commons says he and most of the party's 115,000 members are “relatively relaxed” about not seeking a mandate for an independence referendum in May.
Despite many activists wanting a swift second vote, Pete Wishart, one of the party's most senior MPs and chair of the Commons’ Scottish Affairs Select Committee, said the coming Holyrood election would be about good governance, not the constitution.
The No vote in 2014 was “decisive” and should be respected, he told the Sunday Herald....
“We’ve had that referendum, we got a decisive result, and we said that would be a once in a generation referendum.
That's absolutely true, of course, but it's the first time I can remember an SNP MP saying it. Since they are forbidden to disagree with SNP policy, the assumption is that this line was sanctioned by the Leader herself.
Which once more raises the question of why Unionists won't say they won decisively. Their refusal to do so over the last 15 months has been unhelpful.
oooooooH we have an expert who knows what SNP MP's are and are not allowed to do. You cretinous halfwit he is giving his opinion , we are not talking about the Tory party here we are talking about real politicians, human beings not party robots whipped into shape. Stick to what you know about because it is certainly not the SNP or Scottish politics.
Ah Malky, did you see the news reports yesterday regarding a troughing Westminster fat cat politician setting up an unlimited company for tax avoidance purposes?
Alec Salmond is his name.
Usual Tory lies from you , it is a limited company and pays tax you moron. Invest your JSA on some education.
The press report said that it was an unlimited company (which exempts from the requirement to file at companies house).
Yes it pays tax, but at a lower rate than personal income tax.
FWIW, I don't think there is anything wrong in what he has done, but your defence is garbage!
"Those with a salary of over £32,500 more likely to vote Conservative"
Not if George Osborne royally pisses them off by raiding their future pension pots.
Who else are they going to vote for?
They are not forced to vote at all. In my local area I am politically homeless and there is no-one that I agree with. Staying at home next time (or spoiling my paper) could be a positive decision.
Spoiling your paper (politely, mind) could be a positive decision. I don't believe that staying at home is, as there is no message communicated
Labour centre right peeps spent the last 5 years saying Ed Millivand will never be prime minister but never offered an alternative vision.
The best attempt were some of the blue Labour ideas which had promise but the potential centre right leadership never really picked them up and ran with them the way they should have. There were far more interested in positioning themselves for a leadership run than answering the question of what their leadership would have been for.
"Those with a salary of over £32,500 more likely to vote Conservative"
Not if George Osborne royally pisses them off by raiding their future pension pots.
Who else are they going to vote for?
They are not forced to vote at all. In my local area I am politically homeless and there is no-one that I agree with. Staying at home next time (or spoiling my paper) could be a positive decision.
Spoiling your paper (politely, mind) could be a positive decision. I don't believe that staying at home is, as there is no message communicated
Having thought about it quite a bit in the last few days I have come to the conclusion that Alastair Meeks is once again spot on. The problem in Labour is not these idiots on the far left fringe, they have always been there. The real problem is the incredible weakness of the centre right of the party who seem to have no coherent idea what they are for, how Labour can adapt to the modern world and seem to have no leadership worth a damn.
Until these problems are addressed in a meaningful way many Labour supporters will continue to argue for Corbyn on the basis that he at least believes in something. In the current generation the only one I can think of who might have had the intellectual heft for such a task was Ed Balls and the PM is not alone in missing him.
In the next generation there are a few possibilities such as Jarvis for leadership but I am struggling to see anyone who is going to work out a credible and sellable program for government. Where is Labour's next Mandelson? Or even, lord help us, Brown?
As society becomes more diverse, the politics of identity and culture can only rise in importance. On this front Labour has nothing to offer to the majority, especially in England, and their pandering to Muslim concerns is helping to consolidate Tory support amongst other minorities.
"Those with a salary of over £32,500 more likely to vote Conservative"
Not if George Osborne royally pisses them off by raiding their future pension pots.
Who else are they going to vote for?
They are not forced to vote at all. In my local area I am politically homeless and there is no-one that I agree with. Staying at home next time (or spoiling my paper) could be a positive decision.
Spoiling your paper (politely, mind) could be a positive decision. I don't believe that staying at home is, as there is no message communicated
Has anyone ever paid any attention to a spoilt ballot paper? The default assumption is the person completing it is mentally incompetent and couldn't follow what to do.
SALMOND'S company was unlimited but he changed it to limited after criticism. As he pointed out given that he was declaring all income in the parliamentary register the claims of lack of transparency were always spurious. You really need to catch up Watford since all of this is in the Scottish parliamentary register of interests.
The suggestion of tax avoidance is also nonsence. The company makes little or no difference to his tax position since all income is taxed when taken. It would only be to his advantage if he had little earned income in the near future which seems improbable. I fear my accountancy training gives me the advantage over social media smearing!
Finally the Scottish register of interests shows a huge level of charitable giving from Salmond. If I were still a unionist I would have a care in this direction of attack since in terms of donations Salmond comes out miles in front of any other MSP/MP. I am frankly surprised that he does not make more of this publically. He would be perfectly justified in doing so.
Unfortunately your accountancy training didn't include the concept of being able to invest the monies help in the company, so benefiting from the ability to generate a return on the deferred tax component.
Additionally, I am sure there will be a point in the future when he has lower incomes.
If it had no benefit then why would he pay the costs (monetary and administrative) to do it this way?
@PolhomeEditor: Jeremy Corbyn says he's read "some but not all" of Margaret Beckett's 15-page report into why Labour lost last year https://t.co/GyjwaQiWku
Why bother when he knows that it's a load of nonsense.
When Jeremy Corbyn's leadership of the Labour party dies and is cut open, we will find Calais engraved on its heart.
I'm trying to work out whether there is some sense in his stance, politically. Obviously it's a core vote strategy, if anything. But his core probably needs a fillip. And no-one took Ed seriously on pledge no. 4. They wouldn't take it seriously from Corbyn either. So arguably he may as well come out pro-migrant and get what credit is going for that.
Ed's cock up was a monumental piece of sculpture whereas Corbyn's was a just a bit of post avant-garde neo conceptual quasi constructivist performance street art.
Erm, no. It affected us badly because we had a very large financial sector. Canada and Australia do not. Financial regulation had nothing to do with it, and despite the nostalgia on here, the Bank of England as sole regulator had been unable to prevent, to name but three, BCCI, Barings, or the secondary or fringe banking crisis. This is not to defend the FSA; merely to say its actions or inactions were largely irrelevant in the face of the global economic meltdown.
The point about Brown's silly remarks is of course unfortunately unanswerable.
Didn't stop Brown trying to re-write history:
Brown has talked specifically about the end of Tory boom and bust, but to suggest, as he did in the Mail interview, that it was always the mantra seems faintly ludicrous to anyone with an internet connection and the inclination to trawl through his public statements and speeches.....
But Brown's claim to the Mail just doesn't stand up. There have just been too many memorable references to the end of boom and bust - without any mention of Tory.
Next Holyrood Election. SLAB and the Conservatives will primarily have to chase Regional List seats. LDs 2 constituency seats in the Islands look gone which leaves them relying on the List where they had 3 seats in 2011. But with the major 2 opposition parties also relying on winning seats from the List, the LDs could see themselves squeezed out.
"Those with a salary of over £32,500 more likely to vote Conservative"
Not if George Osborne royally pisses them off by raiding their future pension pots.
Who else are they going to vote for?
They are not forced to vote at all. In my local area I am politically homeless and there is no-one that I agree with. Staying at home next time (or spoiling my paper) could be a positive decision.
Spoiling your paper (politely, mind) could be a positive decision. I don't believe that staying at home is, as there is no message communicated
I agree with that entirely.
My point was obscured (with apologies) as I attempted to reply to "Who else are they going to vote for?" - it's not a forced choice, they could well just stay at home .... whilst also adding my personal preference in brackets to proactively write "None of the above".
"Those with a salary of over £32,500 more likely to vote Conservative"
Not if George Osborne royally pisses them off by raiding their future pension pots.
Who else are they going to vote for?
They are not forced to vote at all. In my local area I am politically homeless and there is no-one that I agree with. Staying at home next time (or spoiling my paper) could be a positive decision.
Spoiling your paper (politely, mind) could be a positive decision. I don't believe that staying at home is, as there is no message communicated
And some argue, as Janan Ganesh did recently, that low turnout is a sign of content, so turning out and spoiling a ballot is more effective to counter such am argument.
"Those with a salary of over £32,500 more likely to vote Conservative"
Not if George Osborne royally pisses them off by raiding their future pension pots.
Why should the wealthiest get a disproportionate share of the incentives for saving?
Pensions are income deferred, they should be taxed at one point only.
With an ageing population Pensions are going to loom large. The constant raids on pensions by governments both red and blue just show what a mugs game they are. It is fully understandable that many do not make provision, or save via real estate. The latter significantly distorts our housing market, and fuels property bubbles.
Still it just shows the LDs in their true light. Pale pink socialists.
The Lib Dems are increasingly becoming/regressing back to the SDP. There is no longer a true liberal party (the closest is probably the Conservative & Unionist Party).
Yes There is in fact still a 'Liberal Party'. Based on Farron's showing it deserves to pick up a few new members.
HOW are we to use our two votes, one for a constituency MSP and one for a list candidate, at the Holyrood election in May?
As an SNP member, I have been told by Nicola Sturgeon to use both for our party but I don’t intend to obey.
As it seems certain the SNP will get back into power on constituency seats alone, I am not going to waste that second vote.
I am not a nationalist, I am a socialist. I am also seeking a second referendum when the time is right.
So, while going SNP with my constituency vote, I am looking for a socialist-independence home for my second one. I have found it in new Left organisation RISE – unambiguously socialist and committed to seeking a mandate for a second referendum.
Erm, no. It affected us badly because we had a very large financial sector. Canada and Australia do not. Financial regulation had nothing to do with it, and despite the nostalgia on here, the Bank of England as sole regulator had been unable to prevent, to name but three, BCCI, Barings, or the secondary or fringe banking crisis. This is not to defend the FSA; merely to say its actions or inactions were largely irrelevant in the face of the global economic meltdown.
The point about Brown's silly remarks is of course unfortunately unanswerable.
Didn't stop Brown trying to re-write history:
Brown has talked specifically about the end of Tory boom and bust, but to suggest, as he did in the Mail interview, that it was always the mantra seems faintly ludicrous to anyone with an internet connection and the inclination to trawl through his public statements and speeches.....
But Brown's claim to the Mail just doesn't stand up. There have just been too many memorable references to the end of boom and bust - without any mention of Tory.
"Those with a salary of over £32,500 more likely to vote Conservative"
Not if George Osborne royally pisses them off by raiding their future pension pots.
Why should the wealthiest get a disproportionate share of the incentives for saving?
Pensions are income deferred, they should be taxed at one point only.
With an ageing population Pensions are going to loom large. The constant raids on pensions by governments both red and blue just show what a mugs game they are. It is fully understandable that many do not make provision, or save via real estate. The latter significantly distorts our housing market, and fuels property bubbles.
My employer contributes 7.5% to my pension which I would not otherwise receive if I didn't have one. It'd need alot of raiding before it's not the best option for me personally.
Certainly I wouldn't bother if that was not the case.
"Those with a salary of over £32,500 more likely to vote Conservative"
Not if George Osborne royally pisses them off by raiding their future pension pots.
Who else are they going to vote for?
They are not forced to vote at all. In my local area I am politically homeless and there is no-one that I agree with. Staying at home next time (or spoiling my paper) could be a positive decision.
Spoiling your paper (politely, mind) could be a positive decision. I don't believe that staying at home is, as there is no message communicated
And some argue, as Janan Ganesh did recently, that low turnout is a sign of content, so turning out and spoiling a ballot is more effective to counter such am argument.
I have long argued that low turnout is due to contentedness. Many people just don't care about politics not because they're angry but because they're content. Angry people want to express their anger and will find a way, people who contentedly don't care and are happy to just go about their lives can ignore the whole process.
I had a friend in Eldon Square do almost exactly the same except in her case her parting shot was to take a bite out of the presumed biscuit pincher's donut - only finding her own biscuits when she got home!
Having thought about it quite a bit in the last few days I have come to the conclusion that Alastair Meeks is once again spot on. The problem in Labour is not these idiots on the far left fringe, they have always been there. The real problem is the incredible weakness of the centre right of the party who seem to have no coherent idea what they are for, how Labour can adapt to the modern world and seem to have no leadership worth a damn.
Until these problems are addressed in a meaningful way many Labour supporters will continue to argue for Corbyn on the basis that he at least believes in something. In the current generation the only one I can think of who might have had the intellectual heft for such a task was Ed Balls and the PM is not alone in missing him.
In the next generation there are a few possibilities such as Jarvis for leadership but I am struggling to see anyone who is going to work out a credible and sellable program for government. Where is Labour's next Mandelson? Or even, lord help us, Brown?
As society becomes more diverse, the politics of identity and culture can only rise in importance. On this front Labour has nothing to offer to the majority, especially in England, and their pandering to Muslim concerns is helping to consolidate Tory support amongst other minorities.
But there are gross inequities in our society that a centre right wing of a left wing party should be able to make a platform on. To take Charles' example why is it ok that the wealthiest in our society should be able to save £1.4m x40% tax on pensions plus ISAs? Our incentives to save as a nation are nothing more than a series of sops to the better off mitigating their tax bills at the cost of the rest of society.
When you look at the educational disadvantages that people from poorer backgrounds suffer, their poorer health and life expectancies, the quality of their housing...there is almost no end of work to do. But it has to be done in the real world where we have a functioning economy which generates the wealth to do it.
"Those with a salary of over £32,500 more likely to vote Conservative"
Not if George Osborne royally pisses them off by raiding their future pension pots.
Why should the wealthiest get a disproportionate share of the incentives for saving?
Pensions are income deferred, they should be taxed at one point only.
With an ageing population Pensions are going to loom large. The constant raids on pensions by governments both red and blue just show what a mugs game they are. It is fully understandable that many do not make provision, or save via real estate. The latter significantly distorts our housing market, and fuels property bubbles.
I agree - but assumed that @CasinoRoyale was referring to plans to restrict the higher rate tax relief on pension contributions, which strikes me as eminently fair.
(I do quite like the idea of Pension ISAs so they are taxed on going in, but are subsequently tax free. But that's a big change that would need to be carefully consulted on)
"Those with a salary of over £32,500 more likely to vote Conservative"
Not if George Osborne royally pisses them off by raiding their future pension pots.
Who else are they going to vote for?
They are not forced to vote at all. In my local area I am politically homeless and there is no-one that I agree with. Staying at home next time (or spoiling my paper) could be a positive decision.
Spoiling your paper (politely, mind) could be a positive decision. I don't believe that staying at home is, as there is no message communicated
And some argue, as Janan Ganesh did recently, that low turnout is a sign of content, so turning out and spoiling a ballot is more effective to counter such am argument.
I have long argued that low turnout is due to contentedness. Many people just don't care about politics not because they're angry but because they're content. Angry people want to express their anger and will find a way, people who contentedly don't care and are happy to just go about their lives can ignore the whole process.
Surely one could argue that people don’t vote because they feel that however they vote it doesn’t changing anything. One of the big criticisms of FPTP!
You make fair points, but by continually referring back to Brown you appear to be diverting attention from Osborne. He'll be judged on what he does not what Brown did.
What he has done is cut the deficit and improve the structural position year after year.
How many other Chancellor's have done the same or as well as that?
I've no idea but you make my point nicely, continually banging on about Brown reeks of insecurity. Let's judge Osborne not Brown.
People only bring up Brown when ludicrous charges are levied against Osborne like that he is borrowing. No shit Sherlock of course he is borrowing based on what he inherited from Brown - you can't bring up one issue without bringing up the cause. You need to judge a Chancellor based on the changes they cause and his change is a lowered deficit not an increased one.
If we want to judge Osborne then lets judge Osborne. He has: Cut the deficit year after year Cut the structural deficit Rebalanced the economy significantly away from public sector employment to private sector Presided over a boom in jobs Presided recently over one of the fastest growing economies while cutting the deficit Proved his detractors wrong time and again - eg Balls, '5 million unemployed' Blanchard, Krugman etc
HOW are we to use our two votes, one for a constituency MSP and one for a list candidate, at the Holyrood election in May?
As an SNP member, I have been told by Nicola Sturgeon to use both for our party but I don’t intend to obey.
As it seems certain the SNP will get back into power on constituency seats alone, I am not going to waste that second vote.
I am not a nationalist, I am a socialist. I am also seeking a second referendum when the time is right.
So, while going SNP with my constituency vote, I am looking for a socialist-independence home for my second one. I have found it in new Left organisation RISE – unambiguously socialist and committed to seeking a mandate for a second referendum.
If people support the SNP they should vote for them- trying to game the Holyrood voting system is a mugs game - but it's entertaining to see the SNP on the receiving end of opportunistic brass neck for a change.
"Those with a salary of over £32,500 more likely to vote Conservative"
Not if George Osborne royally pisses them off by raiding their future pension pots.
Who else are they going to vote for?
They are not forced to vote at all. In my local area I am politically homeless and there is no-one that I agree with. Staying at home next time (or spoiling my paper) could be a positive decision.
Spoiling your paper (politely, mind) could be a positive decision. I don't believe that staying at home is, as there is no message communicated
And some argue, as Janan Ganesh did recently, that low turnout is a sign of content, so turning out and spoiling a ballot is more effective to counter such am argument.
I have long argued that low turnout is due to contentedness. Many people just don't care about politics not because they're angry but because they're content. Angry people want to express their anger and will find a way, people who contentedly don't care and are happy to just go about their lives can ignore the whole process.
Surely one could argue that people don’t vote because they feel that however they vote it doesn’t changing anything. One of the big criticisms of FPTP!
It's got sod all to do with FPTP and everything to do with the failure of socialism and the fall of the iron curtain, combined with the acceptance of civil liberties for minorities etc (most recently gays, previously other minorities) leading to an end to many previous big angry divisions. Turnout has fallen globally regardless of electoral system.
It increased in the UK significantly at the last election even though we overwhelmingly voted to keep FPTP as people saw more of a difference. If we face the next election with a true red in claw and tooth socialist like Corbyn I'd expect it to increase further.
"Those with a salary of over £32,500 more likely to vote Conservative"
Not if George Osborne royally pisses them off by raiding their future pension pots.
Why should the wealthiest get a disproportionate share of the incentives for saving?
Pensions are income deferred, they should be taxed at one point only.
With an ageing population Pensions are going to loom large. The constant raids on pensions by governments both red and blue just show what a mugs game they are. It is fully understandable that many do not make provision, or save via real estate. The latter significantly distorts our housing market, and fuels property bubbles.
But a consequence of too high a tax rate is too big a concession to saving and therefore a contradiction to the notion of the tax in the first place. I think the suggestion of no tax concessions for pensions but no taxation of pensions is an interesting one, especially given the revised treatment of lump sums. Plus I would also much prefer lower taxation of income anyway. £1m or £1.25m is still a very large pot which most people cannot aspire to. But I would agree with anyone who said that it is important to encourage saving for retirement so that the old do not become a burden.
@PolhomeEditor: Jeremy Corbyn says he's read "some but not all" of Margaret Beckett's 15-page report into why Labour lost last year https://t.co/GyjwaQiWku
Why bother when he knows that it's a load of nonsense.
When Jeremy Corbyn's leadership of the Labour party dies and is cut open, we will find Calais engraved on its heart.
I'm trying to work out whether there is some sense in his stance, politically. Obviously it's a core vote strategy, if anything. But his core probably needs a fillip. And no-one took Ed seriously on pledge no. 4. They wouldn't take it seriously from Corbyn either. So arguably he may as well come out pro-migrant and get what credit is going for that.
Ed's cock up was a monumental piece of sculpture whereas Corbyn's was a just a bit of post avant-garde neo conceptual quasi constructivist performance street art.
Of all the ridiculousness of Corbyn, this really has to be the biscuit. It's such bad politics, there's no votes for it, there's huge votes against it, yet he continues to get nailed on it. He just isn't a politician.
A good corollary would be the SNP and the Monarchy. Everyone knows the SNP are a generally republican party but there's no purchase in the debate,it would spook voters and offer no benefit. So they put in place a "steady as she goes" policy, keep the monarchy for now, end the debate.
There's still over 4 months till the vote in Scotland. I'm really starting to think that Labour are over. Their list slippage in the latest polling spells utter disaster for them.
"Those with a salary of over £32,500 more likely to vote Conservative"
Not if George Osborne royally pisses them off by raiding their future pension pots.
Why should the wealthiest get a disproportionate share of the incentives for saving?
Pensions are income deferred, they should be taxed at one point only.
With an ageing population Pensions are going to loom large. The constant raids on pensions by governments both red and blue just show what a mugs game they are. It is fully understandable that many do not make provision, or save via real estate. The latter significantly distorts our housing market, and fuels property bubbles.
I agree - but assumed that @CasinoRoyale was referring to plans to restrict the higher rate tax relief on pension contributions, which strikes me as eminently fair.
(I do quite like the idea of Pension ISAs so they are taxed on going in, but are subsequently tax free. But that's a big change that would need to be carefully consulted on)
I think the idea of a Pension ISA is quite reasonable and sensible but I don't see it being plausibly introduced. How do you deal with the pensions people already have etc? Seems likely to result in a dog's breakfast.
If it can be made to work it seems fair, treat pensions like other savings and let people compare like for like with other ISAs etc
"Those with a salary of over £32,500 more likely to vote Conservative"
Not if George Osborne royally pisses them off by raiding their future pension pots.
Why should the wealthiest get a disproportionate share of the incentives for saving?
Better off people can afford to save more than poorer people. Paying a marginal tax rate of 40% certainly doesn't propel you into the ranks of the rich.
Blame the CIA for the Cold War. Stalin was popular...random arrests under Article 58 of USSR's criminal code must have helped cement the love for the dear leader.
Ed achieved incredibly little in his 5 years as leader of the Labour party but one thing he did manage was to make the crazy delusions of Ken Livingston irrelevant and ignorable. Now he seems for all practical purposes to be deputy leader.
Miliband's decision to resign on the morning after the vote must rank as one of the worst decisions taken by a Labour leader.
He had no choice. He wasn't strong enough to buck the expectation that he should go as the principle of "loser quits" was well established by every loser since Kinnock 1992.
THE SNP's shadow leader of the House of Commons says he and most of the party's 115,000 members are “relatively relaxed” about not seeking a mandate for an independence referendum in May.
Despite many activists wanting a swift second vote, Pete Wishart, one of the party's most senior MPs and chair of the Commons’ Scottish Affairs Select Committee, said the coming Holyrood election would be about good governance, not the constitution.
The No vote in 2014 was “decisive” and should be respected, he told the Sunday Herald....
“We’ve had that referendum, we got a decisive result, and we said that would be a once in a generation referendum.
That's absolutely true, of course, but it's the first time I can remember an SNP MP saying it. Since they are forbidden to disagree with SNP policy, the assumption is that this line was sanctioned by the Leader herself.
Which once more raises the question of why Unionists won't say they won decisively. Their refusal to do so over the last 15 months has been unhelpful.
oooooooH we have an expert who knows what SNP MP's are and are not allowed to do. You cretinous halfwit he is giving his opinion , we are not talking about the Tory party here we are talking about real politicians, human beings not party robots whipped into shape. Stick to what you know about because it is certainly not the SNP or Scottish politics.
Ah Malky, did you see the news reports yesterday regarding a troughing Westminster fat cat politician setting up an unlimited company for tax avoidance purposes?
Alec Salmond is his name.
Usual Tory lies from you , it is a limited company and pays tax you moron. Invest your JSA on some education.
The press report said that it was an unlimited company (which exempts from the requirement to file at companies house).
Yes it pays tax, but at a lower rate than personal income tax.
FWIW, I don't think there is anything wrong in what he has done, but your defence is garbage!
I beg to differ , your response is the garbage. The press report is ancient and it was changed to a limited company early on. Get your facts right before trying to be a smart arse.
"Those with a salary of over £32,500 more likely to vote Conservative"
Not if George Osborne royally pisses them off by raiding their future pension pots.
Why should the wealthiest get a disproportionate share of the incentives for saving?
Pensions are income deferred, they should be taxed at one point only.
With an ageing population Pensions are going to loom large. The constant raids on pensions by governments both red and blue just show what a mugs game they are. It is fully understandable that many do not make provision, or save via real estate. The latter significantly distorts our housing market, and fuels property bubbles.
But a consequence of too high a tax rate is too big a concession to saving and therefore a contradiction to the notion of the tax in the first place. I think the suggestion of no tax concessions for pensions but no taxation of pensions is an interesting one, especially given the revised treatment of lump sums. Plus I would also much prefer lower taxation of income anyway. £1m or £1.25m is still a very large pot which most people cannot aspire to. But I would agree with anyone who said that it is important to encourage saving for retirement so that the old do not become a burden.
The problem is that the deficit is stubbornly persistent, and while Osborne got away with it in 2015, that is going to be trickier in 2020.
It is only possible to tax people who have money. Pension pots are tempting targets for just such a chancellor. Brown then Osborne are destroying the incentive to save.
Money in pension funds gets recycled into equities and bonds, so is not lost to the economy. Savings are a good thing.
Worth noting that those with private pensions are going to not require so much state support when older. A classic false economy to penalise savers.
Comments
If a post Cameron Tory party stays fairly centrist and socially liberal then there will be a landslide at the next election and we would be looking at 2030 or so before a realistic chance of an opposition taking power.
'The harsh truth is that the 14.9% vote share was the worst result since the Scottish Tories were formed in 1965. '
http://tinyurl.com/gpopmkh
'ANNABEL Goldie, leader of the Scottish Conservative party, yesterday announced her resignation from the party following the Tories’ worst ever election result in Scotland.'
http://tinyurl.com/znjmkjs
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/It's_Scotland's_oil
Not if George Osborne royally pisses them off by raiding their future pension pots.
RISE are no hopers , usual socialist zealots , all egos and mental policies , be surprised if they break 3 figures.
Be interesting to see how low labour get to. Dugdale is a muppet and not even a good one at that.
SNP really need competition but it looks like it will be a long long time till that happens.
An extended period of calm is now required.
https://twitter.com/mattholehouse/status/691200055882170372
Blame the CIA for the Cold War.
Stalin was popular...random arrests under Article 58 of USSR's criminal code must have helped cement the love for the dear leader.
They become more absurd by the second.
Ally themselves with Corbyn? Put that tosspot into power?
Still it just shows the LDs in their true light. Pale pink socialists. They had a chance to do something in government but rubbished their tory partners, their own government, at every turn, but then they go running to the most rancid left wing labour leader in its history to try to grub their way back to some sort of relevance.
What a bunch of jokers. Being kicked in the teeth by Blair over their last PR alliance is not enough for them. They want to go through it again.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jan/23/mps-need-help-against-violent-public
In my local area I am politically homeless and there is no-one that I agree with.
Staying at home next time (or spoiling my paper) could be a positive decision.
And why are people so against intervention elsewhere (with good reason, it has to be said, I've opposed most intervention myself) so often justify Russian intervention. You see it all the time, a justification that Russian interest in regions was being hindered, so it's ok to invade other nations, in essence.
I think Ken comes across as madder than Corbyn, even more far out (odd considering he could not have run London while being so openly extreme), and lacks even Corbyn's pleasant demeanour.
Edit - I know we have some Russian fans on here, but I'm about to head out and on this issue my mind ispretty set, so there's no need to explain to me why the West trying to tempt Ukraine and other places to their sphere of influence justifies any action by Russia.
SALMOND'S company was unlimited but he changed it to limited after criticism. As he pointed out given that he was declaring all income in the parliamentary register the claims of lack of transparency were always spurious. You really need to catch up Watford since all of this is in the Scottish parliamentary register of interests.
The suggestion of tax avoidance is also nonsence. The company makes little or no difference to his tax position since all income is taxed when taken. It would only be to his advantage if he had little earned income in the near future which seems improbable. I fear my accountancy training gives me the advantage over social media smearing!
Finally the Scottish register of interests shows a huge level of charitable giving from Salmond. If I were still a unionist I would have a care in this direction of attack since in terms of donations Salmond comes out miles in front of any other MSP/MP. I am frankly surprised that he does not make more of this publically. He would be perfectly justified in doing so.
The Labour party still have a bit of residual popularity. Many of the members hate the very notion of ut, but an awful lot of seats in England would be in play with a new-generation Blairite leader.
http://www.independent.co.uk/travel/news-and-advice/the-brexit-break-a-jaunt-to-brussels-for-those-who-prefer-debate-to-daiquiris-a6830631.html
Mr Charles - has anyone approached you to be the screenwriter for the forthcoming blockbusting account of the downfall of the British economy in '08?
Sounds like it could be quite popular
Until these problems are addressed in a meaningful way many Labour supporters will continue to argue for Corbyn on the basis that he at least believes in something. In the current generation the only one I can think of who might have had the intellectual heft for such a task was Ed Balls and the PM is not alone in missing him.
In the next generation there are a few possibilities such as Jarvis for leadership but I am struggling to see anyone who is going to work out a credible and sellable program for government. Where is Labour's next Mandelson? Or even, lord help us, Brown?
The people it would seem to make least sense for is the SNP - FPTP seems to have served them very well now they've achieved dominance in Scotland.
My favourites were 'Carol' 'Room' 'The Big Short' and 'Revenant. As Watford says the Academy have quirks. Best Picture tends not to go to small films which probably rules out 'Carol' and 'Room' which leaves 'Revenant' and 'The Big Short'. I'm leaning towards 'Revenant' but I haven't yet seen 'Spotlight' which by all accounts is good . I'll let you know when I have
On the other hand if he is anything like my dear old mother he would have read the ending first to see if he was going to like the story - and left it there.
Douglas Adams on why it's best not to share a table with a stranger https://t.co/Doxzoq7eR0
MPs and journos leave conference on the last day because the leader's speech is on the penultimate day.
If they move the speech, won't they just hang around another day? Or if their budgets won't allow it, just arrive a day late?
Yes it pays tax, but at a lower rate than personal income tax.
FWIW, I don't think there is anything wrong in what he has done, but your defence is garbage!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/article/32658907
Additionally, I am sure there will be a point in the future when he has lower incomes.
If it had no benefit then why would he pay the costs (monetary and administrative) to do it this way?
My point was obscured (with apologies) as I attempted to reply to "Who else are they going to vote for?" - it's not a forced choice, they could well just stay at home .... whilst also adding my personal preference in brackets to proactively write "None of the above".
With an ageing population Pensions are going to loom large. The constant raids on pensions by governments both red and blue just show what a mugs game they are. It is fully understandable that many do not make provision, or save via real estate. The latter significantly distorts our housing market, and fuels property bubbles.
There is in fact still a 'Liberal Party'. Based on Farron's showing it deserves to pick up a few new members.
https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=1094830987236563&id=100001290175028&p=10&refid=52
General Boles
An angry group of Falkland Islanders protest against Jeremy Corbyn's shared sovereignty proposal https://t.co/CD5YYWTZ5I
The Daily/Sunday Politics program is losing it's zest. Is this a BBC plot to turn us off politics and current affairs?
Certainly I wouldn't bother if that was not the case.
Janan Ganesh
Beckett isn't a joke. Former foreign secretary. Doesn't need to be popular any more. Why put her name to that report? #bbcsp
When you look at the educational disadvantages that people from poorer backgrounds suffer, their poorer health and life expectancies, the quality of their housing...there is almost no end of work to do. But it has to be done in the real world where we have a functioning economy which generates the wealth to do it.
(I do quite like the idea of Pension ISAs so they are taxed on going in, but are subsequently tax free. But that's a big change that would need to be carefully consulted on)
One of the big criticisms of FPTP!
If we want to judge Osborne then lets judge Osborne. He has:
Cut the deficit year after year
Cut the structural deficit
Rebalanced the economy significantly away from public sector employment to private sector
Presided over a boom in jobs
Presided recently over one of the fastest growing economies while cutting the deficit
Proved his detractors wrong time and again - eg Balls, '5 million unemployed' Blanchard, Krugman etc
To me that seems like an impressive record.
It increased in the UK significantly at the last election even though we overwhelmingly voted to keep FPTP as people saw more of a difference. If we face the next election with a true red in claw and tooth socialist like Corbyn I'd expect it to increase further.
I think the suggestion of no tax concessions for pensions but no taxation of pensions is an interesting one, especially given the revised treatment of lump sums. Plus I would also much prefer lower taxation of income anyway.
£1m or £1.25m is still a very large pot which most people cannot aspire to. But I would agree with anyone who said that it is important to encourage saving for retirement so that the old do not become a burden.
A good corollary would be the SNP and the Monarchy. Everyone knows the SNP are a generally republican party but there's no purchase in the debate,it would spook voters and offer no benefit. So they put in place a "steady as she goes" policy, keep the monarchy for now, end the debate.
There's still over 4 months till the vote in Scotland. I'm really starting to think that Labour are over. Their list slippage in the latest polling spells utter disaster for them.
If it can be made to work it seems fair, treat pensions like other savings and let people compare like for like with other ISAs etc
It is only possible to tax people who have money. Pension pots are tempting targets for just such a chancellor. Brown then Osborne are destroying the incentive to save.
Money in pension funds gets recycled into equities and bonds, so is not lost to the economy. Savings are a good thing.
Worth noting that those with private pensions are going to not require so much state support when older. A classic false economy to penalise savers.