Underneath his challenge, of course, lies something deeper. For Mr Duncan Smith nothing is more important than Europe. Playing a leading role in splitting the party when John Major was prime minister was, after all, how he first made his name. Having decided that he would not stay after the referendum, why not resign now? He will figure that it might help the cause, and indeed it might.
As written by Osborne's special friend and advisor Danny Finkelstein. Dishing out the poison to IDS. Now if Osborne had the slightest political sense he would have asked his friends etc to just STFU and had a dignified silence. Instead Osborne unleashes another round of attacks inviting responses. Clearly Osborne has ignored the advice of Graham Brady.
The Fink seems a nice chap but his advice to Osborne included being dead against raising the starting point of income tax, which Osborne went along with until (thankfully) the Lib Dems talked sense to them.
Underneath his challenge, of course, lies something deeper. For Mr Duncan Smith nothing is more important than Europe. Playing a leading role in splitting the party when John Major was prime minister was, after all, how he first made his name. Having decided that he would not stay after the referendum, why not resign now? He will figure that it might help the cause, and indeed it might.
It does not ring true, though. that IDS was motivated by EUref. Given that de facto leadership of Leave was up for grabs until a couple of weeks ago when Boris finally fell off the fence, why not then?
IDS has said what most of us with a brain have known for years - the Tories rob from the poor and vulnerable and give to the rich and privileged. This is not news..
However the blue on blue infighting on here and the wider world is amusing...
On reflection, having seen IDS and the likes of Bernard Jenkin on tv yesterday, and the damage they did to John Major, now David Cameron, makes me want to go out and spend the next three months campaigning for Remain.
This is one of those occasions where you need to seperate the people from the issue. I can understand the sentiment though.
Last night's piece nearly contained this gem
'When their political careers are over, IDS will be responsible for more Labour general election victories than Corbyn'
Osborne has of course brought alot of this on himself by overtly making crap budgets and then U-turning on stuff like tax credits, PIP. The U-turns are more damaging I reckon than the original screw ups.
I was sent a text yesterday reminding me that IDS campaigned during the last election promising to
1) Have £12 billion of welfare cuts 2) Give the middle class tax cuts
IDS apparently was also against the Welfare cap. Did he get mixed up with the Tory and Labour manifestos ?
Extraordinary isn't it. This is Mr Bedroom Tax himself. I've heard of some damascene conversions but this is akin to the Pope becoming a rastafarian
AFAIK IDS was in favour of the original cap but then Osborne went further without a full evaluation and the problems with it start to expand.
It does not ring true, though. that IDS was motivated by EUref. Given that de facto leadership of Leave was up for grabs until a couple of weeks ago when Boris finally fell off the fence, why not then?
Because IDS leading the leave campaign would have been a massive boost for Remain
I am not even sure there is any evidence that he was being a "bloody nuisance" at the moment, except in as far as he attempted to deliver what he has always said he was going to deliver, got stiffed by the treasury and then tried to stop Camborne's attempt to pull the wool over the voters eyes. Had they funded his efforts at DWP properly, and let him get on with his job I rather doubt anyone would have heard a peep from him.
An alternative explanation is he was really crap at the job.
I guess if the rumoured DWP papers are released we may find out.
Sorry Scott, that just doesn't wash, even I don't believe that. He was at the DWP from GE2010 if he was that crap Dave would have got rid of him before now.. IDS is a twat for resigning, but he is now being smeared for doing so.
IIRC Cameron did try to shuffle him put to a department where he'd do less damage, but he made a credible threat to throw his toys out of the pram. Of course he should have fired him as his incompetence literally killed people, but politically it's easy to understand why he didn't.
IDS's resignation letter was the most aggressive by a Cabinet minister in living memory. Any attempt to portray him as a lamb in all this is laughable.
No one is suggesting he is a lamb, they are suggesting he is someone that could have been left alone to play with his toys in DWP with very little problem, but Osborne being an arrogant tosser who plainly didn't like him couldn't resist pushing a bit harder and then looks all surprised when it blows up in his face.
Osborne has a budget to balance.
If he gave less money away to rich pensioners and other client groups that wouldn't be a problem.
My peer group (I know, I know) of pensioners, many not Tories, wouldn’t object too much to paying a bit of increased tax for our bus passes and free TV licences. Especially when we see our grandchildren kicked in teeth on a regular basis and hear their concerns about how they’re going to find the money for their first home, whether rented or bought.
Agreed. A little bit taken from the wealthier top third of pensioners would have been a sensible step.
It was Labour policy in 2015 (and still is unless revoked) to scrap the heating allowance for pensioners in the 40% bracket, on the basis that an allowance to make sure you don't freeze cannot reasonably be portrayed as an essential if your income is over £40K. Among the many things voters grumbled about on the doorstep, that one was never raised at all, except to agree with it.
Mr. Meeks, scratching a wound may be understandable, but that doesn't make it smart.
As Machiavelli wrote, men must be pampered or annihilated (or well-treated/crushed). Altmann's attack inflamed IDS but did nothing to harm him, provoking only a retaliation by the Quiet Man and three statements of disagreement with her from other junior ministers.
What IDS said was bloody stupid. Giving more airtime to that and prompting multiple junior minister to agree with IDS (versus Altmann) was not clever. The likes of Cameron, Osborne, Gove and Brady should've co-operated to calm things down (perhaps by having a Leaver take DWP, or Cameron to agree to tone down the scare stories in agreement for a unified approach to IDS' departure [very sorry he's gone, did good work, signed off on Budget, surprised, etc]).
The bigger problem for the leadership is that the Conservative party is stuffed to the gunnels with people who would prefer to agree with Iain Duncan Smith, no matter how disloyal he has been to the government in which he has served, simply because he is a Leaver.
Backed largely by their constituency parties, if not actively selected on that basis.
Its the leadership that is out of step with the party.
I know you want them to be the metro-liberal party, but they are not, yet.
IDS has said what most of us with a brain have known for years - the Tories rob from the poor and vulnerable and give to the rich and privileged. This is not news..
However the blue on blue infighting on here and the wider world is amusing...
Giving less benefits never had been and never will be robbing.
And those numbers do not include tax credits, child benefit, council tax reductions and passported entitlements like free prescriptions, school meals, bus passes etc etc.
The cuts, in an overall sense, are a myth.
Neither Tory high command nor Labour HQ dare tell the truth about the years of hot air they have expended on something that isn't really happening.
It does not ring true, though. that IDS was motivated by EUref. Given that de facto leadership of Leave was up for grabs until a couple of weeks ago when Boris finally fell off the fence, why not then?
Because IDS leading the leave campaign would have been a massive boost for Remain
That may be objectively true but I doubt IDS would necessarily see things that way, so my point stands.
I see R5 are in full on sob story disabled cuts this morning & letting people spew all sorts of ill informed nonsense eg golly childes introduces a women as having written a brilliant letter to the pm about her unfair treatment was then allowed to rant utter rubbish about no need for cuts if government because of 22bn write down in government stake in rbs.
One thing this will signal is the beginning of the end for triple lock etc.
Mathematically that has to happen at some point, politically it's tricky - especially for Tories, but IDS (And Corbyn) may have accelerated that calculation.
One thing this will signal is the beginning of the end for triple lock etc.
Mathematically that has to happen at some point, politically it's tricky - especially for Tories, but IDS (And Corbyn) may have accelerated that calculation.
The Tories are, to all intents and purposes, taking off working age claimants to give to pensioner ones.
11% of pensioner households are now classified by ONS as millionaire households.
TheScreamingEagles, key is that the polls are moving in Zac's favour. With the change in voter registration, have the polls adjusted for fewer registered young and BME voters in London?
This one has - it asks about certainty to vote (and as expected, the elderly are vastly more certain than the young and the white voters somewhat more certain than the BME voters) and weights according to "likelihood to vote" and the ComRes turnout model (which I think has been adjusted post-2015). Pure preference in the final ballot regardless of certainty is not shown.
Of course, some respondents may think they're registered when they're not, though I'd think this group will be dominated by people who don't vote, so the impact will be fairly small. It's quite a good poll for Zac, but shouldn't be further adjusted for likelihood to vote as that would double-count.
One thing this will signal is the beginning of the end for triple lock etc.
Mathematically that has to happen at some point, politically it's tricky - especially for Tories, but IDS (And Corbyn) may have accelerated that calculation.
I think they'll tweak it bit by bit. The triple lock is a bit hard to justify when inflation is close to zero.
One thing this will signal is the beginning of the end for triple lock etc.
Mathematically that has to happen at some point, politically it's tricky - especially for Tories, but IDS (And Corbyn) may have accelerated that calculation.
The Tories are, to all intents and purposes, taking off working age claimants to give to pensioner ones.
11% of pensioner households are now classified by ONS as millionaire households.
IDS's resignation letter was the most aggressive by a Cabinet minister in living memory. Any attempt to portray him as a lamb in all this is laughable.
No one is suggesting he is a lamb, they are suggesting he is someone that could have been left alone to play with his toys in DWP with very little problem, but Osborne being an arrogant tosser who plainly didn't like him couldn't resist pushing a bit harder and then looks all surprised when it blows up in his face.
Osborne has a budget to balance.
If he gave less money away to rich pensioners and other client groups that wouldn't be a problem.
My peer group (I know, I know) of pensioners, many not Tories, wouldn’t object too much to paying a bit of increased tax for our bus passes and free TV licences. Especially when we see our grandchildren kicked in teeth on a regular basis and hear their concerns about how they’re going to find the money for their first home, whether rented or bought.
Agreed. A little bit taken from the wealthier top third of pensioners would have been a sensible step.
It was Labour policy in 2015 (and still is unless revoked) to scrap the heating allowance for pensioners in the 40% bracket, on the basis that an allowance to make sure you don't freeze cannot reasonably be portrayed as an essential if your income is over £40K. Among the many things voters grumbled about on the doorstep, that one was never raised at all, except to agree with it.
@michaelsavage: Economist Intelligence Unit: 'Potential beneficiary will be home sec Theresa May; we believe she is now strongest placed to succeed Cameron'
Hmm I have some green numbers next to May on Betfair. Tissue Price and Nabavi have also tipped this up.
One to keep onside for sure.
Treat with caution. The Economist Intelligence Unit (very much an international elitist pro-open borders, pro-internationalist and pro-Blairite publication) don't exactly have their finger on the pulse of Conservative internal party politics.
I was a big backer of Theresa but I think she's fatally wounded her chances by marching her troops to the top of the Leave hill and back down again. She doesn't have a big following in the party and this was her chance to get one.
If Osborne doesn't run, she might still have a chance to get to the final two as the 'establishment' Cameroon, perhaps, if she can gather enough MP to support her, but I can't detect much enthusiasm for her and I'm not a backer at current odds.
IDS's resignation letter was the most aggressive by a Cabinet minister in living memory. Any attempt to portray him as a lamb in all this is laughable.
No one is suggesting he is a lamb, they are suggesting he is someone that could have been left alone to play with his toys in DWP with very little problem, but Osborne being an arrogant tosser who plainly didn't like him couldn't resist pushing a bit harder and then looks all surprised when it blows up in his face.
Osborne has a budget to balance.
If he gave less money away to rich pensioners and other client groups that wouldn't be a problem.
My peer group (I know, I know) of pensioners, many not Tories, wouldn’t object too much to paying a bit of increased tax for our bus passes and free TV licences. Especially when we see our grandchildren kicked in teeth on a regular basis and hear their concerns about how they’re going to find the money for their first home, whether rented or bought.
Agreed. A little bit taken from the wealthier top third of pensioners would have been a sensible step.
It was Labour policy in 2015 (and still is unless revoked) to scrap the heating allowance for pensioners in the 40% bracket, on the basis that an allowance to make sure you don't freeze cannot reasonably be portrayed as an essential if your income is over £40K. Among the many things voters grumbled about on the doorstep, that one was never raised at all, except to agree with it.
IDS's resignation letter was the most aggressive by a Cabinet minister in living memory. Any attempt to portray him as a lamb in all this is laughable.
No one is suggesting he is a lamb, they are suggesting he is someone that could have been left alone to play with his toys in DWP with very little problem, but Osborne being an arrogant tosser who plainly didn't like him couldn't resist pushing a bit harder and then looks all surprised when it blows up in his face.
Osborne has a budget to balance.
If he gave less money away to rich pensioners and other client groups that wouldn't be a problem.
My peer group (I know, I know) of pensioners, many not Tories, wouldn’t object too much to paying a bit of increased tax for our bus passes and free TV licences. Especially when we see our grandchildren kicked in teeth on a regular basis and hear their concerns about how they’re going to find the money for their first home, whether rented or bought.
Agreed. A little bit taken from the wealthier top third of pensioners would have been a sensible step.
It was Labour policy in 2015 (and still is unless revoked) to scrap the heating allowance for pensioners in the 40% bracket, on the basis that an allowance to make sure you don't freeze cannot reasonably be portrayed as an essential if your income is over £40K. Among the many things voters grumbled about on the doorstep, that one was never raised at all, except to agree with it.
One thing this will signal is the beginning of the end for triple lock etc.
Mathematically that has to happen at some point, politically it's tricky - especially for Tories, but IDS (And Corbyn) may have accelerated that calculation.
The Tories are, to all intents and purposes, taking off working age claimants to give to pensioner ones.
11% of pensioner households are now classified by ONS as millionaire households.
Mr. Pulpstar, the Conservative problem in that regard is that if it's kinder to those in work (regarding benefit cuts) it'll get little credit, but full censure from pensioners if it starts being less kind to them.
IDS has provided some lovely quotes for Labour on this. Whether his resignation was justified or not, the manner of his departure is a combination of cretinous and incompetent.
One thing this will signal is the beginning of the end for triple lock etc.
Mathematically that has to happen at some point, politically it's tricky - especially for Tories, but IDS (And Corbyn) may have accelerated that calculation.
It is a brazen bribe to the people who vote. Along with bus passes, prescriptions and tv licences.
@michaelsavage: Economist Intelligence Unit: 'Potential beneficiary will be home sec Theresa May; we believe she is now strongest placed to succeed Cameron'
Hmm I have some green numbers next to May on Betfair. Tissue Price and Nabavi have also tipped this up.
One to keep onside for sure.
She's been undamaged by the EURef campaign so far, plus she looks like the only grown up there at the moment.
While best odds on Osborne as next Conservative leader have risen to 5/1 (still too short, surely), you can still get best odds of 5/2 on Johnson which is a price unchanged since before the Budget. 5/2 seems a very good price now, given that before it was seen as a two horse race and one of those two horses has just all but fallen. The remaining horse has done nothing in the past few days to damage their chances by doing nothing at all, conveniently being on a skiing holiday.
The contest for Tory leader to succeed Cameron is going to be a contest between a supporter of Remain and Leave, determined by a membership overwhelmingly in favour of Leave and I can't really see anyone but Johnson being the Leave candidate.
That doesn't mean that May is not a value bet at 10/1, it's just there is another value bet that happens also to be the favourite.
IDS's resignation letter was the most aggressive by a Cabinet minister in living memory. Any attempt to portray him as a lamb in all this is laughable.
No one is suggesting he is a lamb, they are suggesting he is someone that could have been left alone to play with his toys in DWP with very little problem, but Osborne being an arrogant tosser who plainly didn't like him couldn't resist pushing a bit harder and then looks all surprised when it blows up in his face.
Osborne has a budget to balance.
If he gave less money away to rich pensioners and other client groups that wouldn't be a problem.
My peer group (I know, I know) of pensioners, many not Tories, wouldn’t object too much to paying a bit of increased tax for our bus passes and free TV licences. Especially when we see our grandchildren kicked in teeth on a regular basis and hear their concerns about how they’re going to find the money for their first home, whether rented or bought.
Agreed. A little bit taken from the wealthier top third of pensioners would have been a sensible step.
It was Labour policy in 2015 (and still is unless revoked) to scrap the heating allowance for pensioners in the 40% bracket, on the basis that an allowance to make sure you don't freeze cannot reasonably be portrayed as an essential if your income is over £40K. Among the many things voters grumbled about on the doorstep, that one was never raised at all, except to agree with it.
Useful insight.
In terms of savings it was totally trivial amount...it needed to go much further was to see any real money. Brown gave a load of.very expensive freebies to OAPs & Tories too scared to scale them back.
Firmware updates for CE devices are difficult, and if they go wrong they can either fail to allow any updates or brick the box. I've designed a couple of on-air update systems, and the main thing is: "DO NOT BRICK THE BOX."
Fortunately, many OSs have decent bootloaders and update systems out of the box nowadays.
As an example, my newish Humas STB has an update system that does not allow itself to be updated from either on-air or USB. For a couple of weeks we got annoying message as it tried, and failed, to update itself.
A large company I worked for (although not my department) had a massive update problem with set-top boxes about fifteen years ago that bricked tens of thousands of units: i.e. they were unusable. The on-air image sent to the boxes was corrupted.
The solution: send vans round the country. Take a bricked unit from a customer and give them a fixed unit. Meanwhile, reflash the OS and give the next customer that box.
I know you were being helpful, so it seems churlish to say so, but that post is a good example of how professionals think the lay public is better informed than it is. I'm a former IT professional; I have a desktop and a laptop and a smartphone and use them all every day. I have no idea what most of your post means. A CE device? Brick the box? STB? Reflash the OS? You could post in Aramaic and it wouldn't be any more baffling.
I'm sure that the average teenager would be fine with it. But there are plenty of us out there with the everyday IT knowledge that we need who are nonetheless vulnerable to this kind of thing. It's why we cling to proprietary environments.
Quite the contrary,Labour should not try to assist the Tory party in its collective OCD,it should feed it and help it grow inside the Tory party like a cancer,watch the Tory party implode and have fun doing it.
@michaelsavage: Economist Intelligence Unit: 'Potential beneficiary will be home sec Theresa May; we believe she is now strongest placed to succeed Cameron'
Hmm I have some green numbers next to May on Betfair. Tissue Price and Nabavi have also tipped this up.
One to keep onside for sure.
She's been undamaged by the EURef campaign so far, plus she looks like the only grown up there at the moment.
While best odds on Osborne as next Conservative leader have risen to 5/1 (still too short, surely), you can still get best odds of 5/2 on Johnson which is a price unchanged since before the Budget. 5/2 seems a very good price now, given that before it was seen as a two horse race and one of those two horses has just all but fallen. The remaining horse has done nothing in the past few days to damage their chances by doing nothing at all, conveniently being on a skiing holiday.
The contest for Tory leader to succeed Cameron is going to be a contest between a supporter of Remain and Leave, determined by a membership overwhelmingly in favour of Leave and I can't really see anyone but Johnson being the Leave candidate.
That doesn't mean that May is not a value bet at 10/1, it's just there is another value bet that happens also to be the favourite.
If it comes down to those two, I'll be flinging myself in front of gunfire and dieing in a ditch to make sure it is May.
I still hope Gove goes for it. Osborne pulling out could help Gove as despite being on opposite sides of the EU debate I do believe they're friends and political allies. If the writing is on the wall that a Leaver will get it from the members then why not have Osborne and his allies unite in a spirit of reconciliation and have Gove as that Leaver?
@michaelsavage: Economist Intelligence Unit: 'Potential beneficiary will be home sec Theresa May; we believe she is now strongest placed to succeed Cameron'
Hmm I have some green numbers next to May on Betfair. Tissue Price and Nabavi have also tipped this up.
One to keep onside for sure.
Treat with caution. The Economist Intelligence Unit (very much an international elitist pro-open borders, pro-internationalist and pro-Blairite publication) don't exactly have their finger on the pulse of Conservative internal party politics.
I was a big backer of Theresa but I think she's fatally wounded her chances by marching her troops to the top of the Leave hill and back down again. She doesn't have a big following in the party and this was her chance to get one.
If Osborne doesn't run, she might still have a chance to get to the final two as the 'establishment' Cameroon, perhaps, if she can gather enough MP to support her, but I can't detect much enthusiasm for her and I'm not a backer at current odds.
She is by some distance the most electable, though. If Labour change leader I think the Tories are still in pretty good shape with May. I can't see that being true of any of the others in except - of course, maybe - Boris. But Boris is a risk, May is a much safer choice.
@PCollinsTimes: There is an echo of Brown v Field in Osborne v IDS. Head in the clouds welfare reformer spending money the Chancellor wants to save.
@PCollinsTimes: But when the dust settles on this George Osborne will be chancellor of the exchequer and Iain Duncan Smith will be Iain Duncan Smith.
The only minor flaw in that argument being the chancellor doesn't want to save it, he wants to piss it away with tax cuts for wealth pensioners and the middle classes. Which was the whole point of what IDS was saying, although with your head up your Twitter feed you probably didn't notice.
@michaelsavage: Economist Intelligence Unit: 'Potential beneficiary will be home sec Theresa May; we believe she is now strongest placed to succeed Cameron'
Hmm I have some green numbers next to May on Betfair. Tissue Price and Nabavi have also tipped this up.
One to keep onside for sure.
She's been undamaged by the EURef campaign so far, plus she looks like the only grown up there at the moment.
While best odds on Osborne as next Conservative leader have risen to 5/1 (still too short, surely), you can still get best odds of 5/2 on Johnson which is a price unchanged since before the Budget. 5/2 seems a very good price now, given that before it was seen as a two horse race and one of those two horses has just all but fallen. The remaining horse has done nothing in the past few days to damage their chances by doing nothing at all, conveniently being on a skiing holiday.
The contest for Tory leader to succeed Cameron is going to be a contest between a supporter of Remain and Leave, determined by a membership overwhelmingly in favour of Leave and I can't really see anyone but Johnson being the Leave candidate.
That doesn't mean that May is not a value bet at 10/1, it's just there is another value bet that happens also to be the favourite.
If the result of the referendum is to Remain it should be accepted by all Tory MPs and they should look to the future to continue the work of the government. From that point of view since there will not be another EU referendum for many years the new party leader should not be judged solely on the basis of the EU membership. There are many other important things to consider. If the result is Leave then the Leader should be considered as the best possible person to lead the transition.
I think unless you're going to slaughter every single last badger in England and Wales it's probably ineffective.
Yes, that's what Benn decided, which is why the last government didn't go ahead with the cull. The basic objective problem (aside from considerations of animal welfare) is that TB spreads by animals moving around. Badgers defend their territory, and if you kill them it speeds up the rate at which other badgers move into new territory, thereby hastening the spread of infection. If you pick an area with a high rate of infection, you can get a short-term benefit in reduced local infection, but quite soon you find you've made the problem less localised and thus worse.
Wales has made some progress with vaccination, but essentially it's a problem for which there isn't yet a really good answer. The return of the cull under the current government is very political - basically farmers saying "You must do something!"
Mr. Meeks, whereas you're taking the side of Cameron/Osborne, regardless of how arrogant and complacent they've been, just because they're Remainers?
Not at all.
It's a simple observation that for Leavers, Leaving is far more important than government coherence. For those of us who are not utterly obsessed by the subject, government coherence is far more important than the referendum.
It is possible to [intend to] vote Leave and yet not be obsessed with Leaving.
@faisalislam: Page 69 manifesto is why there's no chance of going back on the Triple Lock as IDS and other backbenchers suggest: https://t.co/PTakOSA0ep
I still hope Gove goes for it. Osborne pulling out could help Gove as despite being on opposite sides of the EU debate I do believe they're friends and political allies. If the writing is on the wall that a Leaver will get it from the members then why not have Osborne and his allies unite in a spirit of reconciliation and have Gove as that Leaver?
Gove vs May sets it up nicely with two sensible candidates, one from each side of the leave/remain divide; and locks out Boris.
Alexander Smith NBC #BoatyMcBoatface update: No one at the National Environment Research Council is free to speak to me bcos they're all in a "crisis meeting"
It was Osborne IDS was trying to wound, not Cameron IMHO.
For Cameron to be brought down aka Thatcher there need to be three conditions:
(1) He must be unpopular in the party (2) He must be unpopular in the country, and an electoral liability (3) There must be a credible King over the water
Right now, only condition one is (partly) fulfilled, although it is growing. (2) still doesn't apply and (3) is anyone's guess.
However, if Cameron truly botches the EU ref, his polling sinks with swing voters and, say, Boris seriously impressed (all big "ifs") then he's toast.
Mr. Meeks, whereas you're taking the side of Cameron/Osborne, regardless of how arrogant and complacent they've been, just because they're Remainers?
Not at all.
It's a simple observation that for Leavers, Leaving is far more important than government coherence. For those of us who are not utterly obsessed by the subject, government coherence is far more important than the referendum.
It is possible to [intend to] vote Leave and yet not be obsessed with Leaving.
Well, yes - but that particular crescent of the Venn diagram of political wonks is sparsely populated.
I still hope Gove goes for it. Osborne pulling out could help Gove as despite being on opposite sides of the EU debate I do believe they're friends and political allies. If the writing is on the wall that a Leaver will get it from the members then why not have Osborne and his allies unite in a spirit of reconciliation and have Gove as that Leaver?
Gove vs May sets it up nicely with two sensible candidates, one from each side of the leave/remain divide; and locks out Boris.
It includes £28.5 billion on "personal social services". This is a number that in many analyses one would want to report separately from other welfare spending. It includes spending on a range of things, such as looked-after children and long term care for the elderly, the sick and disabled. Unlike other elements of "social protection" it is not a cash transfer payment and in many ways has more in common with spending on health than spending on social security benefits.
Another £20 billion of the spending counted under welfare is pensions to older people other than state pensions. That includes spending on public service pensions – to retired nurses, soldiers and so on[1]. This is not spending that would normally be classed as "welfare". The rest of the pay package of a public sector worker is included as departmental spending within the department of that worker. One could either report such pension payments separately or, like pay, as part of the relevant spending function. The pay of nurses counts as health spending. One could count their pensions in the same way.
That leaves around £120 billion of other welfare spending, which can be broken down in a number of different ways.
Since the government has chosen to report state pension spending separately, one obvious division would be to separate spending on those of working age and those of pension age. In addition to state pensions a further £28 billion is spent on pensioners, of which £15 billion goes on benefits specifically for that group, such as pension credit, attendance allowance and winter fuel payment, while the remaining £13 billion is largely spent on housing benefit and disability living allowance. So of the £205 billion or so spent on tax credits and social security benefits about £111 billion is spent on those over pension age and £94 billion on those of working age.
Even after "pensions" are deducted from "welfare" figures, there are still some pension payments remaining in "welfare". See extract from IFS article below.
Authors: Andrew Hood and Paul Johnson
Publisher: Institute for Fiscal Studies
The government has started to send out information on how tax revenue is spent to individuals who pay income tax or National Insurance contributions. It has broken down spending into a number of categories. The biggest of these is "welfare", which represents a quarter of total spending. State pensions also appear as a separate category, accounting for 12% of spending. In this observation we look at what counts as pension and welfare spending, and offer some alternative breakdowns.
Spending on state pensions is straightforward. This is essentially just the annual spend on the basic state pension and earnings-related state pensions from various different schemes.
"Welfare" spending, at 25% of the total, is taken directly from the government's public expenditure statistical analyses. It is the total spending defined as "social protection" in these analyses, less spending on state pensions. Total spending on social protection comes in at £251 billion in 2013-14, which is about 37% of total public spending of £686 billion (before accounting adjustments). Take off £83 billion of spending on state pensions and you get to £168 billion on "welfare" - very nearly a quarter of total spending.
Too much. The referendum is on 23rd June. By the 24th June the verdict of voters will be known, and it will be kiss and make up time. People here - and in the media, of course, but they are paid to be excitable - are giving too much significance to a civil war for which the ceasefire date is already known, and is quite soon. The political landscape will look very different on June 24th.
One thing this will signal is the beginning of the end for triple lock etc.
Mathematically that has to happen at some point, politically it's tricky - especially for Tories, but IDS (And Corbyn) may have accelerated that calculation.
The Tories are, to all intents and purposes, taking off working age claimants to give to pensioner ones.
11% of pensioner households are now classified by ONS as millionaire households.
Personally I'd cut both.
So would I.
It's easy to craft a meme of being mean to the poor whenever you touch welfare but the truth is we spend far too much on social security, as a nation.
Government policy must be focussed on (a) getting all people into work, with the dignity and sense of purpose it provides, (b) getting people to save for their own retirement and (c) encouraging human social support networks of family, friends, mentors, neighbours, and local communities for those in need
Too much. The referendum is on 23rd June. By the 24th June the verdict of voters will be known, and it will be kiss and make up time. People here - and in the media, of course, but they are paid to be excitable - are giving too much significance to a civil war for which the ceasefire date is already known, and is quite soon. The political landscape will look very different on June 24th.
I still hope Gove goes for it. Osborne pulling out could help Gove as despite being on opposite sides of the EU debate I do believe they're friends and political allies. If the writing is on the wall that a Leaver will get it from the members then why not have Osborne and his allies unite in a spirit of reconciliation and have Gove as that Leaver?
Gove vs May sets it up nicely with two sensible candidates, one from each side of the leave/remain divide; and locks out Boris.
@michaelsavage: Economist Intelligence Unit: 'Potential beneficiary will be home sec Theresa May; we believe she is now strongest placed to succeed Cameron'
Hmm I have some green numbers next to May on Betfair. Tissue Price and Nabavi have also tipped this up.
One to keep onside for sure.
She's been undamaged by the EURef campaign so far, plus she looks like the only grown up there at the moment.
While best odds on Osborne as next Conservative leader have risen to 5/1 (still too short, surely), you can still get best odds of 5/2 on Johnson which is a price unchanged since before the Budget. 5/2 seems a very good price now, given that before it was seen as a two horse race and one of those two horses has just all but fallen. The remaining horse has done nothing in the past few days to damage their chances by doing nothing at all, conveniently being on a skiing holiday.
The contest for Tory leader to succeed Cameron is going to be a contest between a supporter of Remain and Leave, determined by a membership overwhelmingly in favour of Leave and I can't really see anyone but Johnson being the Leave candidate.
That doesn't mean that May is not a value bet at 10/1, it's just there is another value bet that happens also to be the favourite.
I may be horribly wrong about Boris but I am comfortable with being red on him. My reasoning is that he blatantly doesn't have what it takes to be leader of a major party, let alone Prime Minister, and that Tory MPs will notice this. If his selling point is that he's a Leaver, well, so are dozens of others.
The main issue I see with Boris is simply that people don't take him seriously. He's clever and funny but the leader, more than any other factor, defines a party in the eyes of the electorate. You can't be defined by unruly hair and a bunch of gags.
he wants to piss it away with tax cuts for wealth pensioners and the middle classes. Which was the whole point of what IDS was saying
That was the manifesto platform IDS stood on
Was he too stupid to read it, or just dishonest about it?
You do talk some rot. Not all MPs agree with every word of the manifesto, shocking I know. The new DWP minister voted against Gay Marriage, which was not only party policy, but flagship party policy. Its not exactly uncommon, and plenty of MPs circulate personal manifestos in their constituencies so their voters know their reservations.
I still hope Gove goes for it. Osborne pulling out could help Gove as despite being on opposite sides of the EU debate I do believe they're friends and political allies. If the writing is on the wall that a Leaver will get it from the members then why not have Osborne and his allies unite in a spirit of reconciliation and have Gove as that Leaver?
Gove vs May sets it up nicely with two sensible candidates, one from each side of the leave/remain divide; and locks out Boris.
That would be a very interesting contest.
May needs to answer how she screws down immigration under her thumb whilst Remaining in the EU to get my vote.
But that result would constitute a nice payday for me ;-)
Not all MPs agree with every word of the manifesto, shocking I know. The new DWP minister voted against Gay Marriage, which was not only party policy, but flagship party policy. Its not exactly uncommon, and plenty of MPs circulate personal manifestos in their constituencies so their voters know their reservations.
So can you find me a single instance of IDS complaining about the triple lock before he resigned?
Not all MPs agree with every word of the manifesto, shocking I know. The new DWP minister voted against Gay Marriage, which was not only party policy, but flagship party policy. Its not exactly uncommon, and plenty of MPs circulate personal manifestos in their constituencies so their voters know their reservations.
So can you find me a single instance of IDS complaining about the triple lock before he resigned?
One thing this will signal is the beginning of the end for triple lock etc.
Mathematically that has to happen at some point, politically it's tricky - especially for Tories, but IDS (And Corbyn) may have accelerated that calculation.
The Tories are, to all intents and purposes, taking off working age claimants to give to pensioner ones.
11% of pensioner households are now classified by ONS as millionaire households.
Personally I'd cut both.
While the baby boomers continue to make up the rump of those people who vote pensions and pensioner benefits will not be touched.
The last 60 years has seen a wealth transfer from the young to the old that precisely follows the ageing of the baby boomers.
I still hope Gove goes for it. Osborne pulling out could help Gove as despite being on opposite sides of the EU debate I do believe they're friends and political allies. If the writing is on the wall that a Leaver will get it from the members then why not have Osborne and his allies unite in a spirit of reconciliation and have Gove as that Leaver?
Gove vs May sets it up nicely with two sensible candidates, one from each side of the leave/remain divide; and locks out Boris.
That would be a very interesting contest.
That combination would be very electable, I think.
Gove's negatives are much less of an issue if he's Chancellor rather than PM. Chancellors are almost always unpopular regardless (a point one should keep in mind when thinking about Osborne - who was the last popular Chancellor? - easy, Clarke - and before that?)
I still hope Gove goes for it. Osborne pulling out could help Gove as despite being on opposite sides of the EU debate I do believe they're friends and political allies. If the writing is on the wall that a Leaver will get it from the members then why not have Osborne and his allies unite in a spirit of reconciliation and have Gove as that Leaver?
Gove vs May sets it up nicely with two sensible candidates, one from each side of the leave/remain divide; and locks out Boris.
Indeed I think that could be an ideal final two. It could cross the leave/remain divide too, I imagine Osborne for instance would prefer Gove over May.
One thing this will signal is the beginning of the end for triple lock etc.
Mathematically that has to happen at some point, politically it's tricky - especially for Tories, but IDS (And Corbyn) may have accelerated that calculation.
The Tories are, to all intents and purposes, taking off working age claimants to give to pensioner ones.
11% of pensioner households are now classified by ONS as millionaire households.
Personally I'd cut both.
While the baby boomers continue to make up the rump of those people who vote pensions and pensioner benefits will not be touched.
The last 60 years has seen a wealth transfer from the young to the old that precisely follows the ageing of the baby boomers.
I still hope Gove goes for it. Osborne pulling out could help Gove as despite being on opposite sides of the EU debate I do believe they're friends and political allies. If the writing is on the wall that a Leaver will get it from the members then why not have Osborne and his allies unite in a spirit of reconciliation and have Gove as that Leaver?
Gove vs May sets it up nicely with two sensible candidates, one from each side of the leave/remain divide; and locks out Boris.
That would be a very interesting contest.
That combination would be very electable, I think.
Gove's negatives are much less of an issue if he's Chancellor rather than PM. Chancellors are almost unpopular regardless (a point one should keep in mind when thinking about Osborne - who was the last popular Chancellor? - easy, Clarke - and before that?)
Brown was popular when he was maxing out the credit card. It's easier to be popular while being a giveaway Chancellor than an austere one.
One thing this will signal is the beginning of the end for triple lock etc.
Mathematically that has to happen at some point, politically it's tricky - especially for Tories, but IDS (And Corbyn) may have accelerated that calculation.
The Tories are, to all intents and purposes, taking off working age claimants to give to pensioner ones.
11% of pensioner households are now classified by ONS as millionaire households.
Personally I'd cut both.
While the baby boomers continue to make up the rump of those people who vote pensions and pensioner benefits will not be touched.
The last 60 years has seen a wealth transfer from the young to the old that precisely follows the ageing of the baby boomers.
@SamCoatesTimes: A senior modernising Tory tells me: "We should call this what it is: a coup. A coup by the usual suspects who want to oust Dave and George..
IDS's career is defined by destroying his party leader and sitting PM over Europe. Whatever good works he has done at DWP will forever be overshadowed by his latest attempt to do so again.
One thing this will signal is the beginning of the end for triple lock etc.
Mathematically that has to happen at some point, politically it's tricky - especially for Tories, but IDS (And Corbyn) may have accelerated that calculation.
The Tories are, to all intents and purposes, taking off working age claimants to give to pensioner ones.
11% of pensioner households are now classified by ONS as millionaire households.
Personally I'd cut both.
While the baby boomers continue to make up the rump of those people who vote pensions and pensioner benefits will not be touched.
The last 60 years has seen a wealth transfer from the young to the old that precisely follows the ageing of the baby boomers.
You mean Generation X is screwed?
Gen X (assuming you go with the definition that puts it finishing at 1979) is fine-ish, they are going to start inheriting the vastly expensive properties their baby boomer parents have and they still managed to get the very coat tails of the baby-boomer privileges like free University education so that they started their working lives with minimal debt.
@SamCoatesTimes: A senior modernising Tory tells me: "We should call this what it is: a coup. A coup by the usual suspects who want to oust Dave and George..
IDS's career is defined by destroying his party leader and sitting PM over Europe. Whatever good works he has done at DWP will forever be overshadowed by his latest attempt to do so again.
I still hope Gove goes for it. Osborne pulling out could help Gove as despite being on opposite sides of the EU debate I do believe they're friends and political allies. If the writing is on the wall that a Leaver will get it from the members then why not have Osborne and his allies unite in a spirit of reconciliation and have Gove as that Leaver?
Gove vs May sets it up nicely with two sensible candidates, one from each side of the leave/remain divide; and locks out Boris.
That would be a very interesting contest.
That combination would be very electable, I think.
Gove's negatives are much less of an issue if he's Chancellor rather than PM. Chancellors are almost unpopular regardless (a point one should keep in mind when thinking about Osborne - who was the last popular Chancellor? - easy, Clarke - and before that?)
Brown was popular when he was maxing out the credit card. It's easier to be popular while being a giveaway Chancellor than an austere one.
Mr. Indigo, well, quite. It's a cosy consensus for the political class, at odds with the majority of the public.
Miss Plato, huzzah!
Read Bane of Souls first. It's the one I wrote first and although the stories are stand-alone, they have some overlapping characters (only one has a major role in both). Journey of Altmortis is both my best-rated and least-read book [I probably cocked up the cover request].
I should stress that Francis, Charles, Roger, and the other characters with the same names as PBers aren't based on PB members.
I still hope Gove goes for it. Osborne pulling out could help Gove as despite being on opposite sides of the EU debate I do believe they're friends and political allies. If the writing is on the wall that a Leaver will get it from the members then why not have Osborne and his allies unite in a spirit of reconciliation and have Gove as that Leaver?
Gove vs May sets it up nicely with two sensible candidates, one from each side of the leave/remain divide; and locks out Boris.
That would be a very interesting contest.
Neither remotely posh and both pretty competent - and May has a looooooong memory......
Gove could be a very great Chancellor indeed, he could be the man to make the really deep reforms to address the long-standing absurdities which have grown up over the years - for example, the ridiculous jumps in marginal tax rates at various points on the income scale, and the daft feature of having both NI and income tax.
However, any such reform would provoke howls of anguish from those who lose out, and it's something you'd really need to do early in a parliamentary term after winning a big majority. I'm not sure Gove would be as good in a politically very constrained scenario.
I still hope Gove goes for it. Osborne pulling out could help Gove as despite being on opposite sides of the EU debate I do believe they're friends and political allies. If the writing is on the wall that a Leaver will get it from the members then why not have Osborne and his allies unite in a spirit of reconciliation and have Gove as that Leaver?
Gove vs May sets it up nicely with two sensible candidates, one from each side of the leave/remain divide; and locks out Boris.
That would be a very interesting contest.
That combination would be very electable, I think.
Gove's negatives are much less of an issue if he's Chancellor rather than PM. Chancellors are almost unpopular regardless (a point one should keep in mind when thinking about Osborne - who was the last popular Chancellor? - easy, Clarke - and before that?)
Brown was popular when he was maxing out the credit card. It's easier to be popular while being a giveaway Chancellor than an austere one.
I'm afraid it's a sad fact that as of next year we will have had 20 years of political chancellors and zero of reformers. It's one of the reasons we're struggling.
One thing this will signal is the beginning of the end for triple lock etc.
Mathematically that has to happen at some point, politically it's tricky - especially for Tories, but IDS (And Corbyn) may have accelerated that calculation.
The Tories are, to all intents and purposes, taking off working age claimants to give to pensioner ones.
11% of pensioner households are now classified by ONS as millionaire households.
Personally I'd cut both.
While the baby boomers continue to make up the rump of those people who vote pensions and pensioner benefits will not be touched.
The last 60 years has seen a wealth transfer from the young to the old that precisely follows the ageing of the baby boomers.
You mean Generation X is screwed?
Gen X (assuming you go with the definition that puts it finishing at 1979) is fine-ish, they are going to start inheriting the vastly expensive properties their baby boomer parents have and they still managed to get the very coat tails of the baby-boomer privileges like free University education so that they started their working lives with minimal debt.
It is generation Y that is screwed.
Well **** Generation Y. What did they do in the war?
Mr. Indigo, well, quite. It's a cosy consensus for the political class, at odds with the majority of the public.
Miss Plato, huzzah!
Read Bane of Souls first. It's the one I wrote first and although the stories are stand-alone, they have some overlapping characters (only one has a major role in both). Journey of Altmortis is both my best-rated and least-read book [I probably cocked up the cover request].
I should stress that Francis, Charles, Roger, and the other characters with the same names as PBers aren't based on PB members.
Mr. Urquhart, Cameron's utterly feeble on the EU.
MD what genre are your books and what style if you don't mind me asking? I've seen you mention your books a few times but not sure what they actually are - but where you've mentioned other things like games etc they've aligned with my hobbies so I'm tempted by your books if I could look them up.
In another extraordinary development the pensions minister, Ros Altmann, has released a statement attacking her former boss Iain Duncan Smith. She reinforces the No10 line that Iain Duncan Smith “championed the very package of reforms to disability benefits he now says is the reason he has resigned” and accuses him of being very hard to work for. Her reaction is odd in that she said nothing about his departure for 24 hours, then at 9pm last night released a series of tweets culminating in her statement saying his attacks on the government can be explained by his position as a Brexiteer.
So was she encouraged by No10? Her statement is strikingly similar to No10’s version of events. But it says it knew nothing, that there was no communication with her and that she speaks in a personal capacity. Which, in itself, is fascinating: if ministers are now allowed to make ”personal” statements about government crises then politics in general will get a whole lot more interesting.
That's an incredibly bias write up of his resignation.
You're normally much more objective than this.
The fallacy that people you don't like must have base motives for their actions.
It's more that the explanation given by Iain Duncan Smith is utterly unconvincing. We are being asked to believe that he has been held hostage in a Cabinet for six years delivering benefits cuts that he hated, standing only last year on a manifesto pledged to deliver further cuts and that he is profoundly opposed to the entire thrust of the government two days after a budget where he had previously signed off cuts that in any case were being abandoned before he resigned. Like the Walrus, he holds his pocket-handkerchief before his streaming eyes.
It's utterly implausible.
There is a simpler explanation: he hates David Cameron and in particular George Osborne, and he is looking to sabotage them.
Comments
The Fink seems a nice chap but his advice to Osborne included being dead against raising the starting point of income tax, which Osborne went along with until (thankfully) the Lib Dems talked sense to them.
It does not ring true, though. that IDS was motivated by EUref. Given that de facto leadership of Leave was up for grabs until a couple of weeks ago when Boris finally fell off the fence, why not then?
However the blue on blue infighting on here and the wider world is amusing...
@PCollinsTimes: But when the dust settles on this George Osborne will be chancellor of the exchequer and Iain Duncan Smith will be Iain Duncan Smith.
The Tories aren't making cuts; they are making choices.
http://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/year_spending_2016UKbn_15bc1n#ukgs302
What's your source ?
Its the leadership that is out of step with the party.
I know you want them to be the metro-liberal party, but they are not, yet.
And those numbers do not include tax credits, child benefit, council tax reductions and passported entitlements like free prescriptions, school meals, bus passes etc etc.
The cuts, in an overall sense, are a myth.
Neither Tory high command nor Labour HQ dare tell the truth about the years of hot air they have expended on something that isn't really happening.
50% increase in pension spending 09 -> 16 !!
But that was the Tory manifesto, so not sure why anyone is now surprised...
Mathematically that has to happen at some point, politically it's tricky - especially for Tories, but IDS (And Corbyn) may have accelerated that calculation.
11% of pensioner households are now classified by ONS as millionaire households.
Of course, some respondents may think they're registered when they're not, though I'd think this group will be dominated by people who don't vote, so the impact will be fairly small. It's quite a good poll for Zac, but shouldn't be further adjusted for likelihood to vote as that would double-count.
I was a big backer of Theresa but I think she's fatally wounded her chances by marching her troops to the top of the Leave hill and back down again. She doesn't have a big following in the party and this was her chance to get one.
If Osborne doesn't run, she might still have a chance to get to the final two as the 'establishment' Cameroon, perhaps, if she can gather enough MP to support her, but I can't detect much enthusiasm for her and I'm not a backer at current odds.
IDS has provided some lovely quotes for Labour on this. Whether his resignation was justified or not, the manner of his departure is a combination of cretinous and incompetent.
The contest for Tory leader to succeed Cameron is going to be a contest between a supporter of Remain and Leave, determined by a membership overwhelmingly in favour of Leave and I can't really see anyone but Johnson being the Leave candidate.
That doesn't mean that May is not a value bet at 10/1, it's just there is another value bet that happens also to be the favourite.
I'm sure that the average teenager would be fine with it. But there are plenty of us out there with the everyday IT knowledge that we need who are nonetheless vulnerable to this kind of thing. It's why we cling to proprietary environments.
They won't, of course.
If the result is Leave then the Leader should be considered as the best possible person to lead the transition.
Wales has made some progress with vaccination, but essentially it's a problem for which there isn't yet a really good answer. The return of the cull under the current government is very political - basically farmers saying "You must do something!"
Was he too stupid to read it, or just dishonest about it?
Alexander Smith NBC
#BoatyMcBoatface update: No one at the National Environment Research Council is free to speak to me bcos they're all in a "crisis meeting"
For Cameron to be brought down aka Thatcher there need to be three conditions:
(1) He must be unpopular in the party
(2) He must be unpopular in the country, and an electoral liability
(3) There must be a credible King over the water
Right now, only condition one is (partly) fulfilled, although it is growing. (2) still doesn't apply and (3) is anyone's guess.
However, if Cameron truly botches the EU ref, his polling sinks with swing voters and, say, Boris seriously impressed (all big "ifs") then he's toast.
https://middlevision.wordpress.com/2016/03/21/the-quiet-man-pumps-up-the-volume-in-a-bitter-personal-feud/
Part 2
What is included in that "welfare" total?
It includes £28.5 billion on "personal social services". This is a number that in many analyses one would want to report separately from other welfare spending. It includes spending on a range of things, such as looked-after children and long term care for the elderly, the sick and disabled. Unlike other elements of "social protection" it is not a cash transfer payment and in many ways has more in common with spending on health than spending on social security benefits.
Another £20 billion of the spending counted under welfare is pensions to older people other than state pensions. That includes spending on public service pensions – to retired nurses, soldiers and so on[1]. This is not spending that would normally be classed as "welfare". The rest of the pay package of a public sector worker is included as departmental spending within the department of that worker. One could either report such pension payments separately or, like pay, as part of the relevant spending function. The pay of nurses counts as health spending. One could count their pensions in the same way.
That leaves around £120 billion of other welfare spending, which can be broken down in a number of different ways.
Since the government has chosen to report state pension spending separately, one obvious division would be to separate spending on those of working age and those of pension age. In addition to state pensions a further £28 billion is spent on pensioners, of which £15 billion goes on benefits specifically for that group, such as pension credit, attendance allowance and winter fuel payment, while the remaining £13 billion is largely spent on housing benefit and disability living allowance. So of the £205 billion or so spent on tax credits and social security benefits about £111 billion is spent on those over pension age and £94 billion on those of working age.
Even after "pensions" are deducted from "welfare" figures, there are still some pension payments remaining in "welfare". See extract from IFS article below.
Authors:
Andrew Hood and Paul Johnson
Publisher:
Institute for Fiscal Studies
The government has started to send out information on how tax revenue is spent to individuals who pay income tax or National Insurance contributions. It has broken down spending into a number of categories. The biggest of these is "welfare", which represents a quarter of total spending. State pensions also appear as a separate category, accounting for 12% of spending. In this observation we look at what counts as pension and welfare spending, and offer some alternative breakdowns.
Spending on state pensions is straightforward. This is essentially just the annual spend on the basic state pension and earnings-related state pensions from various different schemes.
"Welfare" spending, at 25% of the total, is taken directly from the government's public expenditure statistical analyses. It is the total spending defined as "social protection" in these analyses, less spending on state pensions. Total spending on social protection comes in at £251 billion in 2013-14, which is about 37% of total public spending of £686 billion (before accounting adjustments). Take off £83 billion of spending on state pensions and you get to £168 billion on "welfare" - very nearly a quarter of total spending.
Re foreign aid, I'm generally in favour - but dfid clearly can't find places to spend it wisely and splash it about in profligate ways.
This is stupid.
Too much. The referendum is on 23rd June. By the 24th June the verdict of voters will be known, and it will be kiss and make up time. People here - and in the media, of course, but they are paid to be excitable - are giving too much significance to a civil war for which the ceasefire date is already known, and is quite soon. The political landscape will look very different on June 24th.
It's easy to craft a meme of being mean to the poor whenever you touch welfare but the truth is we spend far too much on social security, as a nation.
Government policy must be focussed on (a) getting all people into work, with the dignity and sense of purpose it provides, (b) getting people to save for their own retirement and (c) encouraging human social support networks of family, friends, mentors, neighbours, and local communities for those in need
The main issue I see with Boris is simply that people don't take him seriously. He's clever and funny but the leader, more than any other factor, defines a party in the eyes of the electorate. You can't be defined by unruly hair and a bunch of gags.
But that result would constitute a nice payday for me ;-)
Very funny...if this guy wasn't a guiding hand in opposition policies that will impoverish us all except the likes of him.
Ho hum
That's an incredibly bias write up of his resignation.
You're normally much more objective than this.
The last 60 years has seen a wealth transfer from the young to the old that precisely follows the ageing of the baby boomers.
Gove's negatives are much less of an issue if he's Chancellor rather than PM. Chancellors are almost always unpopular regardless (a point one should keep in mind when thinking about Osborne - who was the last popular Chancellor? - easy, Clarke - and before that?)
However, I'm sure Nus will give me a hug next time I see her.
The suggestion made to me was that people disclaimed the manifesto they stood on.
I was querying whether IDS was one such, to which the answer appears to be no
Below headline poll findings, key metrics are interesting. #Sadiq leads #Zac on top 2 issues. But big % of DKs https://t.co/Rna8qrIGl6
Ed Miliband's first tweets. Solid. https://t.co/A3GxUWh4fG
Mine was even less interesting. These are rather fun
http://www.kentonline.co.uk/kent/news/what-was-your-first-tweet-92776/
IDS's career is defined by destroying his party leader and sitting PM over Europe. Whatever good works he has done at DWP will forever be overshadowed by his latest attempt to do so again.
It is generation Y that is screwed.
Not recently
You lucky, lucky man.
Miss Plato, huzzah!
Read Bane of Souls first. It's the one I wrote first and although the stories are stand-alone, they have some overlapping characters (only one has a major role in both). Journey of Altmortis is both my best-rated and least-read book [I probably cocked up the cover request].
I should stress that Francis, Charles, Roger, and the other characters with the same names as PBers aren't based on PB members.
Mr. Urquhart, Cameron's utterly feeble on the EU.
However, any such reform would provoke howls of anguish from those who lose out, and it's something you'd really need to do early in a parliamentary term after winning a big majority. I'm not sure Gove would be as good in a politically very constrained scenario.
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2014/05/27/guest-slot-rod-crosby-the-bell-tolls-for-labour-and-miliband/
y = 1.4857x - 0.1209
R^2 = 0.9549......
@NicoHines: George Osborne is sticking his finger up your bum - and it's not a medical necessity. https://t.co/ZxVI0s5LPx
In another extraordinary development the pensions minister, Ros Altmann, has released a statement attacking her former boss Iain Duncan Smith. She reinforces the No10 line that Iain Duncan Smith “championed the very package of reforms to disability benefits he now says is the reason he has resigned” and accuses him of being very hard to work for. Her reaction is odd in that she said nothing about his departure for 24 hours, then at 9pm last night released a series of tweets culminating in her statement saying his attacks on the government can be explained by his position as a Brexiteer.
So was she encouraged by No10? Her statement is strikingly similar to No10’s version of events. But it says it knew nothing, that there was no communication with her and that she speaks in a personal capacity. Which, in itself, is fascinating: if ministers are now allowed to make ”personal” statements about government crises then politics in general will get a whole lot more interesting.
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/03/no-idss-resignation-was-not-about-europe-but-the-governments-reaction-might-be/
It's utterly implausible.
There is a simpler explanation: he hates David Cameron and in particular George Osborne, and he is looking to sabotage them.