As I remarked earlier, the shifts since Feb look a bit odd - a huge shift to Sadiq in inner London, and a big shift to Zac in outer London. Maybe both are real effects, but the magnitudes of the shifts in one month look rather unlikely TBH.
Brussels?
A Khan win would be good news for the Tories, eventually. They can spend the next three years delicately but assiduously noting the Labour Mayor of London's close associations with horrible Islamist scum.
In terms of GE 2020, Labour need Khan to lose.
My colleagues, reliable Tory voting folk all, are spectacularly unenthusiastic about goldsmith. To the extent that one is going to break the habit of a lifetime and not bother voting in the mayoral election.
Was it Europe?
No, it's the fact that he's a bit shit.
Oh, I quite agree. A truly mediocre candidate.
Khan will win.
Which is the worst result for Labour long term. His victory will cement Corbyn in place AND give the Tories a huge *Islamist* target to aim at through to 2020. Boris had a Woman Problem, but Khan has a Jihadist Problem. The latter is infinitely more pernicious, obv.
The plan falls apart when Khan turns out to be a reasonable mayor, and the ISIS flag isn't seen fluttering above City Hall.
Is there a positive case for remaining in the EU and the inevitable ever closer political union that will bring? If not, then Brexit will happen sooner or later.
Dave's negotiations got us an opt out from ever closer union.
It's almost as if the British legal community was capable of expressing more than one opinion
I am sure I will be proved right in the coming months and years. The EU has been very consistent in its failings both economically and politically. Fortunately time is on the Eurosceptics side as globalisation renders the EU more and more irrelevant.
Is there a positive case for remaining in the EU and the inevitable ever closer political union that will bring? If not, then Brexit will happen sooner or later.
Dave's negotiations got us an opt out from ever closer union.
Current implied probability for Trump | Cruz is 74%. Come on! It surely can't be over 1 in 5 that there is a hung convention AND someone is imposed... so many other outcomes: Trump majority; Trump just short on first ballot but wins enough extra delegates on the second ballot (uncommitted or Carson supporters); a Trump-Kasich agreement; Cruz wins the support of the vast majority of non-Trump delegates on the second ballot; Cruz wins as an agreed candidate on a later ballot.
Is there a positive case for remaining in the EU and the inevitable ever closer political union that will bring? If not, then Brexit will happen sooner or later.
To be truly integrated fully into the EU we would need to be in the Eurozone as it is we will be on the outer fringe with Sweden, Denmark and some of the Eastern European nations
Trump ain't heading for 25 in Wisconsin, he'll get more than 93 in Cali.
urgh, keeps playing up
right, had to use Edge (urgh x 2), but I make it 1,240 excluding uncommitteds - so right on the line. Wins on the first ballot though, with ~50 of the uncommitteds, assuming no tricks.
I agree with you Pulps on those two.
How many are you giving Trump in Wisconsin ?
He looks to have 3 in the bag (CD 3) and close on two others. (So perhaps 6 is fair value)
I haven't looked at it CD by CD, but I think Trump would take 2 or 3.
Is there a positive case for remaining in the EU and the inevitable ever closer political union that will bring? If not, then Brexit will happen sooner or later.
Dave's negotiations got us an opt out from ever closer union.
Is there a positive case for remaining in the EU and the inevitable ever closer political union that will bring? If not, then Brexit will happen sooner or later.
Dave's negotiations got us an opt out from ever closer union.
It's almost as if the British legal community was capable of expressing more than one opinion
A lot of senior EU officials, both current and former also agree with Lawyers or Britain.
There is no universal truth and there is no point looking for someone to annoint one, least of all a lawyer, for what is fundamentally not a legal question. That's my only point.
Who knew lawyers were so well respected and everyone agreed with what they said.
This may take some getting used to.
It's not that everyone respects and agree with what they say - we just know lawyers cause trouble and strop if you don't respect and agree with them, so we have to at least pretend to.
John Ralfe, a pensions consultant, said last night that any plan to put the Tata pension pot into public ownership would be prohibited by the EU. He told The Times that it 'would certainly fall foul of the EU's state aid rules', adding: 'Royal Mail, from 2012, isn't a precedent. The facts were very, very different.' A deal on pensions could cost taxpayers as much as £2billion
To reply to Fox - there's a lot of leafleting going on at Tube stations etc. and a good deal of phone canvassing - doorstep not so much. Khan has been going primarily on housing, which a whopping 48% of the poll think is the most important issue (Khan leads 32 to 20 on that). Goldsmith has done a bit on the environment, on which he leads 25-23, but only 33% think it's important) and his adverts have gone heavy on "friend of the transport unions" and "Corbyn's man".
The former has backfired, as the poll shows: 28-23 prefer Khan on dealing with the transport unions, and only 15% care - as I said during the last strike, people see the strikes as an occasional nuisance, like rainstorms, but not a huge deal. The latter is anecdotally going down as meh - a lot of people realise that Khan isn't Corbyn's man, quite a few wish he was, but even to others it's not clear what the party leader has to do with London.
John Ralfe, a pensions consultant, said last night that any plan to put the Tata pension pot into public ownership would be prohibited by the EU. He told The Times that it 'would certainly fall foul of the EU's state aid rules', adding: 'Royal Mail, from 2012, isn't a precedent. The facts were very, very different.' A deal on pensions could cost taxpayers as much as £2billion
If Tata steel goes bust, the pension fund ends up being taken over by the government anyway so I imagine there is some way of structuring things to allow the pension to be jettisoned. Interestingly the sale of Tata Scunthorpe seems to be dependant on the workers accepting the shutting down of the final salary scheme they were still enjoying. .
Incidentally, the Standard is being much more even-handed this time, though they're doing it by alternating apparently biased pieces each way, rather than by having every article neutral. I think they'll go mildly for Goldsmith in the end, but the main message they're putting over is that both candidates are quite good.
Goldsmith tried one full-page ad in the Standard a few weeks back, but hasn't repeated it, unless I missed it. Khan is relying on the ground troops, who are certainly numerous - there seem to be dozens of Labour teams out every week.
More Wisconsin polling, from Emerson - Sanders 51-43 (but was 1 point behind with ARG, which is actually a more recent poll than Emerson), Cruz 40-35 (but was 10 behind with ARG). We normally discount ARG but the general trend seems to be that Trump is closing the gap. All samples pretty derisorily small.
Oddly its seems to have been in both, first Surrey and then Kent:
' Penge formed a part of the parish of Battersea, with the historic county boundary between Kent and Surrey forming its eastern boundary.[14] In 1855 both parts of the parish were included in the area of the Metropolitan Board of Works, with Penge Hamlet Vestry electing six members to the Lewisham District Board of Works.[15] The Local Government Act 1888 abolished the Metropolitan Board, with its area becoming the County of London. However the London Government Act 1899 subsequently made provision for Penge to be removed from the County of London and annexed to either Surrey or Kent. Accordingly, an Order in Council transferred the hamlet to Kent in 1900, constituting it as Penge Urban District.[16] The urban district was abolished in 1965 by the London Government Act 1963, and its former area merged with that of other districts to form the London Borough of Bromley. '
Trump ain't heading for 25 in Wisconsin, he'll get more than 93 in Cali.
urgh, keeps playing up
right, had to use Edge (urgh x 2), but I make it 1,240 excluding uncommitteds - so right on the line. Wins on the first ballot though, with ~50 of the uncommitteds, assuming no tricks.
I agree with you Pulps on those two.
How many are you giving Trump in Wisconsin ?
He looks to have 3 in the bag (CD 3) and close on two others. (So perhaps 6 is fair value)
The magic number is 12, so Trump needs to win 4 CD if he loses Wisconsin to remain on track, the larger the shortfall the higher the chances he gambles all on California in the summer, speaking of which:
It's WTA per CD, like Wisconsin, a Trump win by 8 won't guarantee him all delegates there but more than 130 out of the 177 California delegates should be enough even if he does badly in Wisconsin, provided he doesn't slip up anywhere else.
The betting markets are correct in that it's 50/50 if Trump loses Wisconsin.
Stratford, Crouch End, Lewisham etc are the epitome of both ethnic Inner London and public sector Luvvie Central.
Irrespective of what the official definitions of Outer London are or what we think should be included my original point still remains.
Namely that it is erroneous to think of Outer London as being Conservative dominated. It isn't and there has been massive demographic change there during the last generation with consequent electoral effects.
These Outer London constituencies were Conservative in 1992 but Labour in 2015:
Brent North Bretford & Isleworth Ealing Acton Ealing North Edmonton Enfield North Harrow West Hayes & Harlington Ilford North Mitcham & Morden
Incidentally, the Standard is being much more even-handed this time, though they're doing it by alternating apparently biased pieces each way, rather than by having every article neutral. I think they'll go mildly for Goldsmith in the end, but the main message they're putting over is that both candidates are quite good.
Yes, that's my impression too. The Standard could probably swing it for one or the other if they really went for it, but I'm not seeing a particularly strong line either way.
TBH, I think both candidates are reasonably good, though neither is particularly exciting. I'm finding it hard to see how Zac wins this one, although the Standard print edition today has a few more details on their latest poll which are quite favourable to Zac; he seems to be gaining trust on all the main issues by around 4 points since the last poll. But that's not enough, given that Sadiq is still well ahead on all the key issues.
Thank goodness this is starting to be exposed. They have only literally scratched the surface so far.......revealing the registered office of Blairmore Holdings would be a start.
Thank goodness this is starting to be exposed. They have only literally scratched the surface so far.......revealing the registered office of Blairmore Holdings would be a start.
Good night all.
It's easy enough to find. Registered Office Arango Orillac Building 54th Street Panama City Republic of Panama.
'Only the little people pay taxes.' said Leona Helmsley.
Incidentally, the Standard is being much more even-handed this time, though they're doing it by alternating apparently biased pieces each way, rather than by having every article neutral. I think they'll go mildly for Goldsmith in the end, but the main message they're putting over is that both candidates are quite good.
Yes, that's my impression too. The Standard could probably swing it for one or the other if they really went for it, but I'm not seeing a particularly strong line either way.
TBH, I think both candidates are reasonably good, though neither is particularly exciting. I'm finding it hard to see how Zac wins this one, although the Standard print edition today has a few more details on their latest poll which are quite favourable to Zac; he seems to be gaining trust on all the main issues by around 4 points since the last poll. But that's not enough, given that Sadiq is still well ahead on all the key issues.
Yes, fair summary. To reply to Another Richard - we're talking about different things. Boris's famous doughnut strategy was based on the official Outer London boroughs, which are indeed traditionally Tory, and Zac only leading there fractionally is therefore not good for him.
You're saying that some of the boroughs counted as Inner London ought really to be Outer, and therefore it's false to depict outer London as solidly Tory. You might be right, but the suggested reclassification isn't relevant to the Boris vs poll comparison, if you see what I mean.
In general I think suburbs are slowly trending Labour in most cities, because the sort of public sector and ethnic small business ABC1 voters who've made a bit of money are moving out of the centre without necessarily changing their political views. Conversely the old Labour heartlands of coalfields etc. are becoming less Labour, because the old heavy industries and mines have closed and employment is now trending towards light industry and services.
Incidentally, the Standard is being much more even-handed this time, though they're doing it by alternating apparently biased pieces each way, rather than by having every article neutral. I think they'll go mildly for Goldsmith in the end, but the main message they're putting over is that both candidates are quite good.
Yes, that's my impression too. The Standard could probably swing it for one or the other if they really went for it, but I'm not seeing a particularly strong line either way.
TBH, I think both candidates are reasonably good, though neither is particularly exciting. I'm finding it hard to see how Zac wins this one, although the Standard print edition today has a few more details on their latest poll which are quite favourable to Zac; he seems to be gaining trust on all the main issues by around 4 points since the last poll. But that's not enough, given that Sadiq is still well ahead on all the key issues.
Yes, fair summary. To reply to Another Richard - we're talking about different things. Boris's famous doughnut strategy was based on the official Outer London boroughs, which are indeed traditionally Tory, and Zac only leading there fractionally is therefore not good for him.
You're saying that some of the boroughs counted as Inner London ought really to be Outer, and therefore it's false to depict outer London as solidly Tory. You might be right, but the suggested reclassification isn't relevant to the Boris vs poll comparison, if you see what I mean.
In general I think suburbs are slowly trending Labour in most cities, because the sort of public sector and ethnic small business ABC1 voters who've made a bit of money are moving out of the centre without necessarily changing their political views. Conversely the old Labour heartlands of coalfields etc. are becoming less Labour, because the old heavy industries and mines have closed and employment is now trending towards light industry and services.
No Nick I'm just counting the official Outer London boroughs as Outer London boroughs, which are:
That creates a problem because you then have 20 Outer London boroughs compared with only 12 Inner London boroughs. I suppose you could reclassify Newham and Haringey as Inner London to reduce the disparity to 18:14 but any more would be stretching things.
Anyway its all academic because however you define Outer London the fact, for the reasons you mention, is that its no longer the Conservative bastion it was up until 1992 and expecting Goldsmith to automatically have a large lead there is erroneous.
I see the US Supreme Court has voted 8-0 to uphold the principle that constituencies should (or at least can) reflect population size rather than voter numbers. That would certainly change things if it happened here, as I've been urging for years, as it would neutralise the whole issue of lower registration in mobile city environments.
Stratford, Crouch End, Lewisham etc are the epitome of both ethnic Inner London and public sector Luvvie Central.
Irrespective of what the official definitions of Outer London are or what we think should be included my original point still remains.
Namely that it is erroneous to think of Outer London as being Conservative dominated. It isn't and there has been massive demographic change there during the last generation with consequent electoral effects.
These Outer London constituencies were Conservative in 1992 but Labour in 2015:
Brent North Bretford & Isleworth Ealing Acton Ealing North Edmonton Enfield North Harrow West Hayes & Harlington Ilford North Mitcham & Morden
Is there a positive case for remaining in the EU and the inevitable ever closer political union that will bring? If not, then Brexit will happen sooner or later.
Dave's negotiations got us an opt out from ever closer union.
Dave's "deal" is worse than that between Darth Vader and Lando Calrissian in "The Empire Strikes Back"!
Only just yesterday I discovered the London Live TV channel (Freeview 8). It had an interesting documentary about the psychopathic child-murderer Harold Jones, who killed an 8-year-old girl when he was 15. He was found Not Guilty, and returned home to Abertillery to a hero's welcome. (Essentially the local public opinion was that he had been framed by the local police, who were too dim to manage to find the real killer). Within two weeks of being acquitted, he murdered an 11-year-old girl and hid her body in the attic of his own home. He confessed to both murders, and a lot of local people were left feeling silly. The shopkeeper who had given him a false alibi at his first trial was hounded out of town.
Is there a positive case for remaining in the EU and the inevitable ever closer political union that will bring? If not, then Brexit will happen sooner or later.
Dave's negotiations got us an opt out from ever closer union.
Did anyone tell the ECJ ? If it's not in a treaty it doesn't count at the ECJ.
Pity Ryan seems incapable of reciting more than a couple of sentences without having to stare down at his notes, thereby conveying a sense of not being terribly bright at best and of his being somewhat insincere at worst. His advisors need to train him how to read an autocue ..... and fast. He doesn't come across as having a particularly forceful personality, giving the impression that Hillary would gobble him up for breakfast. These are only my first impressions mind.
John Ralfe, a pensions consultant, said last night that any plan to put the Tata pension pot into public ownership would be prohibited by the EU. He told The Times that it 'would certainly fall foul of the EU's state aid rules', adding: 'Royal Mail, from 2012, isn't a precedent. The facts were very, very different.' A deal on pensions could cost taxpayers as much as £2billion
John Ralfe, a pensions consultant, said last night that any plan to put the Tata pension pot into public ownership would be prohibited by the EU. He told The Times that it 'would certainly fall foul of the EU's state aid rules', adding: 'Royal Mail, from 2012, isn't a precedent. The facts were very, very different.' A deal on pensions could cost taxpayers as much as £2billion
There's actually EU case law here. When France Telecom got into financial trouble ten or twelve years ago, they came to a deal to let the government take pension liabilities off the firm. And although it was challenged, the French government won. So long as the UK government copied what the French government did, they should be OK.
I was just wondering yesterday whether Corbyn or Cameron was the luckiest politician alive. It seems to swing like a pendulum........Under any normal circumstances both wouldn't have survived. Cameron has lost his party but thanks to Corbyn is wearing an asbestos suit. Corbyn has a minute amount of support outside of his clique but it doesn't show because he's facing a disintegrating Tory Party.
Now there is this......... The Panama story which has given Corbyn an opening the size of the Grand Canyon.
Tax evasion/avoidance by extremely rich people is one of the few things that unites both left and right rich and poor.
That Cameron's father has been involved just adds to the uncomfortable sense of privilege that has been like a ticking time bomb under his administration since it took over in 2010.
So says barrister specialising in financial affairs on the BBC. I suspect we are looking at a very big story here.
" Whoever is without sin among you, let him be the first to cast a stone" No person is innocent.
But that does not mean is that they were guilty of something as a result of opening a legal offshore account.
Tax avoidance is legal. For example, by allowing people to avoid income tax and capital gains tax in a shares ISA, the government promotes and encourages tax avoidance.
Comments
Hence I've classed the Lewisham West & Penge constituency as being half an Outer London constituency.
Trump majority; Trump just short on first ballot but wins enough extra delegates on the second ballot (uncommitted or Carson supporters); a Trump-Kasich agreement; Cruz wins the support of the vast majority of non-Trump delegates on the second ballot; Cruz wins as an agreed candidate on a later ballot.
This may take some getting used to.
Any thoughts: http://www.redstate.com/streiff/2016/04/03/breaking.-incompetent-donald-trump-campaign-appears-zero-delegates-north-dakota/
I mean I'd believe it more if it weren't written in such an aggressive tone
So I've heard
John Ralfe, a pensions consultant, said last night that any plan to put the Tata pension pot into public ownership would be prohibited by the EU. He told The Times that it 'would certainly fall foul of the EU's state aid rules', adding: 'Royal Mail, from 2012, isn't a precedent. The facts were very, very different.'
A deal on pensions could cost taxpayers as much as £2billion
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3522255/British-Steel-revived-new-plans.html#ixzz44ti1bnLy
The former has backfired, as the poll shows: 28-23 prefer Khan on dealing with the transport unions, and only 15% care - as I said during the last strike, people see the strikes as an occasional nuisance, like rainstorms, but not a huge deal. The latter is anecdotally going down as meh - a lot of people realise that Khan isn't Corbyn's man, quite a few wish he was, but even to others it's not clear what the party leader has to do with London.
.
Goldsmith tried one full-page ad in the Standard a few weeks back, but hasn't repeated it, unless I missed it. Khan is relying on the ground troops, who are certainly numerous - there seem to be dozens of Labour teams out every week.
Kilburn is in Brent
Penge is in Bromley
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outer_London
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/matt/
Stratford, Crouch End, Lewisham etc are the epitome of both ethnic Inner London and public sector Luvvie Central.
' Penge formed a part of the parish of Battersea, with the historic county boundary between Kent and Surrey forming its eastern boundary.[14] In 1855 both parts of the parish were included in the area of the Metropolitan Board of Works, with Penge Hamlet Vestry electing six members to the Lewisham District Board of Works.[15] The Local Government Act 1888 abolished the Metropolitan Board, with its area becoming the County of London. However the London Government Act 1899 subsequently made provision for Penge to be removed from the County of London and annexed to either Surrey or Kent. Accordingly, an Order in Council transferred the hamlet to Kent in 1900, constituting it as Penge Urban District.[16] The urban district was abolished in 1965 by the London Government Act 1963, and its former area merged with that of other districts to form the London Borough of Bromley. '
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penge
ORB are being based on a two point lead last month, yet it was actually a 7-8 point lead on certain to vote and very probable.
http://abc7.com/politics/trump-still-leads-in-ca-despite-negative-views-poll-shows/1275688/
SurveyUSA, California
Trump 40
Cruz 32
Kasich 17
It's WTA per CD, like Wisconsin, a Trump win by 8 won't guarantee him all delegates there but more than 130 out of the 177 California delegates should be enough even if he does badly in Wisconsin, provided he doesn't slip up anywhere else.
The betting markets are correct in that it's 50/50 if Trump loses Wisconsin.
Namely that it is erroneous to think of Outer London as being Conservative dominated. It isn't and there has been massive demographic change there during the last generation with consequent electoral effects.
These Outer London constituencies were Conservative in 1992 but Labour in 2015:
Brent North
Bretford & Isleworth
Ealing Acton
Ealing North
Edmonton
Enfield North
Harrow West
Hayes & Harlington
Ilford North
Mitcham & Morden
TBH, I think both candidates are reasonably good, though neither is particularly exciting. I'm finding it hard to see how Zac wins this one, although the Standard print edition today has a few more details on their latest poll which are quite favourable to Zac; he seems to be gaining trust on all the main issues by around 4 points since the last poll. But that's not enough, given that Sadiq is still well ahead on all the key issues.
https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/717095512982294534
Is it bad for the PM ?
Sure it is.
Goodnight.
Good night all.
What could possibly go wrong ?
'Only the little people pay taxes.' said Leona Helmsley.
The little people have had enough.
You're saying that some of the boroughs counted as Inner London ought really to be Outer, and therefore it's false to depict outer London as solidly Tory. You might be right, but the suggested reclassification isn't relevant to the Boris vs poll comparison, if you see what I mean.
In general I think suburbs are slowly trending Labour in most cities, because the sort of public sector and ethnic small business ABC1 voters who've made a bit of money are moving out of the centre without necessarily changing their political views. Conversely the old Labour heartlands of coalfields etc. are becoming less Labour, because the old heavy industries and mines have closed and employment is now trending towards light industry and services.
Barking
Barnet
Bexley
Brent
Bromley
Croydon
Ealing
Enfield
Haringey
Harrow
Havering
Hillingdon
Hounslow
Kingston
Merton
Newham
Redbridge
Richmond
Sutton
Walton Forest
That creates a problem because you then have 20 Outer London boroughs compared with only 12 Inner London boroughs. I suppose you could reclassify Newham and Haringey as Inner London to reduce the disparity to 18:14 but any more would be stretching things.
Anyway its all academic because however you define Outer London the fact, for the reasons you mention, is that its no longer the Conservative bastion it was up until 1992 and expecting Goldsmith to automatically have a large lead there is erroneous.
Con 33% (-2)
Lab 32% (-)
Lib Dem 5% (-)
UKIP 17% (-)
SNP 6% (-)
PC 1% (-)
Green 4% (+1)
Other 2% (+1)
Changes are from February.
1999: 46.4%
2003: 38.2%
2007: 43.5%
2011: 41.8%
http://www.statista.com/statistics/284390/welsh-assembly-elections-turnout-rates/
http://www.theguardian.com/global/2016/apr/04/us-supreme-court-unanimously-rejects-conservative-challenge-voting-rights
Believe in BRITAIN!
Be LEAVE!
Remain 49%
Leave 48%
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/04/eu-referendum-project-fear-working-as-poll-shows-remain-taking-a/
His advisors need to train him how to read an autocue ..... and fast.
He doesn't come across as having a particularly forceful personality, giving the impression that Hillary would gobble him up for breakfast. These are only my first impressions mind.
Now there is this......... The Panama story which has given Corbyn an opening the size of the Grand Canyon.
Tax evasion/avoidance by extremely rich people is one of the few things that unites both left and right rich and poor.
That Cameron's father has been involved just adds to the uncomfortable sense of privilege that has been like a ticking time bomb under his administration since it took over in 2010.
So advantage Corbyn
3 hours 3 minutes 3 seconds
So says barrister specialising in financial affairs on the BBC. I suspect we are looking at a very big story here.
" Whoever is without sin among you, let him be the first to cast a stone"
No person is innocent.
But that does not mean is that they were guilty of something as a result of opening a legal offshore account.
Tax avoidance is legal. For example, by allowing people to avoid income tax and capital gains tax in a shares ISA, the government promotes and encourages tax avoidance.