Mr. Meeks, an unkind man might suggest getting immigration figures wrong by a million or so is not the height of reliability.
"But Leaver mania is uncontrollable, I suppose." - Not sure that adds much to the debate.
Mr. Observer, cheers for that answer (although not voting is just neutral, I'd say).
Mr. F, like global warming
A really unkind man would point out that the ONS immigration statistics seem to be holding up well and that they are facing criticism by a malign campaign seeking to lie its way to victory by confusing apples and pears:
This is starting to get really serious for the dodgy Posh Boys... Wouldn't it be hilarious if they had their majority taken off them.
Some bad losers reversing the democratic decision of the people? No, that wouldn't be good.
The problem the law faces is that our hybrid electoral system sees a national campaign fought locally. In my view a letter in David Cameron's name that says "for me to keep Ed Miliband out of Downing Street you have to vote Conservative in Torbay" is clearly part of the national campaign. It's only part of a local campaign if it's "this candidate would be better for this constituency".
Mr. Meeks, given the posts of Mr. 86 and Miss Plato, I've changed my view on ONS objectivity, but having a million more migrants than previously thought remains a rather serious fact.
"...a malign campaign seeking to lie its way to victory by confusing apples and pears..." - It could be worse. Leave could be prophesying global war if Remain wins.
I have a great deal of admiration for Roger through his articles. We all know his views from his comments in the threads and it is fair to say they are pretty much diametrically opposed to my own. But you would be hard pressed to tell his views from his articles where he is a model of circumspection and neutrality.
Yet another informative and balanced article. Many thanks Roger.
I agree. Thank you Roger. The article is enlightening and interesting and a credit to both PB and yourself. Your other articles have been of a very high standard too.
Hopefully one day you'll achieve the same thing when you comment below the line too.
What I do find interesting here is that the ONS aren't being blamed here - it's seen as a Number 10 led cover-up.
When I worked at the ONS I thought it was an organisation with a very good reputation. On a number of issues - such as the classification of publically owned banks as being in the public sector - we were seen as the arbiter.
The subject of immigration is a difficult one for the ONS, however. There has always been a suspicion that the IPS is not fit for purpose, but the estimates for the 2011 population were pretty close to what the Census said. Whether things have started to go awry since 2011 is tough to say. If there is anything majorly wrong with the estimates, we won't find out until 2022.
I only had marginal contact with the ONS in my previous Whitehall life, and never saw them as figure benders - it's not in their DNA as stats experts, and they've no vested interest in fibbing. They were certainly under the thumb of HMG about what to publish. They've some great people on Twitter answering ad hoc questions nowadays.
If you want to see what government departments can do to statistics, look what the DfT did to my rail performance release on Thursday:
Having said that performance improved for nearly all operators in Q4 (January to March) when compared to Q3 (October to December), I look forward to them pointing out the opposite at next year's Q3 release!
This is starting to get really serious for the dodgy Posh Boys... Wouldn't it be hilarious if they had their majority taken off them.
As I mentioned previously could or would that throw any referendum decision into doubt as the government of the day had no mandate to offer said referendum?
Can you just imagine the fallout for Remain if they won on the back of this supported by the PM. It would be nuclear if Leave carried the day. The constitutional implications are enormous. Perhaps argue to govern as a minority government but even so?
Yep, there could all sorts of legal challenges coming up...
And these are the leading people for REMAIN... Who would buy a used car from dodgy Dave? Yet we're being asked the whole EU project, lock, stock and barrel from these dodgy Posh Boys.
Mr. Meeks, given the posts of Mr. 86 and Miss Plato, I've changed my view on ONS objectivity, but having a million more migrants than previously thought remains a rather serious fact.
"...a malign campaign seeking to lie its way to victory by confusing apples and pears..." - It could be worse. Leave could be prophesying global war if Remain wins.
We don't have a million more migrants than previously thought. We have a Leave campaign seeking to ignore standard international definitions of migration.
Perhaps it is the idea of international standards that worries them.
In the Eurovision Songfest there is no doubt that Graham Norton will be the perfect commentator tonight, as he follows in the footsteps of Terry Wogan in taking the piss out of the contestants and the block voting liable to occur.
*** Not a joke post ***
Weren't the British figures fiddled once to hide support for the Polish entry?
IIRC David Herdson has said the support for foreign entries is a good indicator of the extent of EU immigration to that country.
In the Eurovision Songfest there is no doubt that Graham Norton will be the perfect commentator tonight, as he follows in the footsteps of Terry Wogan in taking the piss out of the contestants and the block voting liable to occur.
*** Not a joke post ***
Weren't the British figures fiddled once to hide support for the Polish entry?
IIRC David Herdson has said the support for foreign entries is a good indicator of the extent of EU immigration to that country.
Not fiddled, exactly - the amount that the jury hated it overcame the amount the televoters loved it which pushed it right down in the overall rankings.
This was one contributing factor to the switch to the new system this year where the jury and televoters results are scored separately rather than combined as before.
What I do find interesting here is that the ONS aren't being blamed here - it's seen as a Number 10 led cover-up.
When I worked at the ONS I thought it was an organisation with a very good reputation. On a number of issues - such as the classification of publically owned banks as being in the public sector - we were seen as the arbiter.
The subject of immigration is a difficult one for the ONS, however. There has always been a suspicion that the IPS is not fit for purpose, but the estimates for the 2011 population were pretty close to what the Census said. Whether things have started to go awry since 2011 is tough to say. If there is anything majorly wrong with the estimates, we won't find out until 2022.
I only had marginal contact with the ONS in my previous Whitehall life, and never saw them as figure benders - it's not in their DNA as stats experts, and they've no vested interest in fibbing. They were certainly under the thumb of HMG about what to publish. They've some great people on Twitter answering ad hoc questions nowadays.
If you want to see what government departments can do to statistics, look what the DfT did to my rail performance release on Thursday:
Having said that performance improved for nearly all operators in Q4 (January to March) when compared to Q3 (October to December), I look forward to them pointing out the opposite at next year's Q3 release!
I confess to being responsible for similar stuff in the past
What always amazed me was how often a departmental head would suggest telling the most blatant lies to get out of a corner. Or get terribly huffy when we received perfectly reasonable criticism. They honestly thought handing a complete eff-up to my team would magic it away.
Err, no - we can seek to minimise it in a credible way, hope to throw others off the scent by dandling something shiny instead or add a dollop of dignity to the apologies. What we won't do is lie or take the blame for your incompetence.
Mr. Meeks, given the posts of Mr. 86 and Miss Plato, I've changed my view on ONS objectivity, but having a million more migrants than previously thought remains a rather serious fact.
"...a malign campaign seeking to lie its way to victory by confusing apples and pears..." - It could be worse. Leave could be prophesying global war if Remain wins.
We don't have a million more migrants than previously thought. We have a Leave campaign seeking to ignore standard international definitions of migration.
Perhaps it is the idea of international standards that worries them.
Or perhaps the international standards are no longer fit for purpose.
In the Eighties we had difficulties working out how much money there was in the economy, so we developed M1, M3, PSLs etc.
Unemployment was next as the idea of working for a single employer faded as self-employment increased and zero hour contracts came into existence. The concept of underemployment was developed.
With cross-border seasonal working and temporary foreign postings, perhaps our concept of immigration should be similarly flexible.
Incidentally, how Romanian and Polish pension lawyers have you encountered through work? I suggest it is considerably fewer than the number of Romanians and Poles I've met through mine.
"Leave look shell-shocked". LOL!!!! They are in the lead.
The bias on this site is quite ridiculous. Quite apart from anything else, a nation with clearly evenly divided opinion should be reflected in thread leaders.
Get your act together pb.com or risk even more people walking out.
While I would welcome diversity of opinion in thread headers, I find it remarkable some people regard such diversity as a requirement due to how popular opinion is split. It might be a good idea to do so, but there's no need for it. I see even guido was mocking this sort of safe space attitude, with upset at bias. It's not the BBC for heavens sake. Labour uncut is full of bile for Corbyn, that's not reflective of how opinion in labour is split, should they have to change their position. Conhome commentators at least have acted Cameron for years, which his satisfaction ratings in the party showed wasn't the general case at the time. We could have endless examples.
More generally, as someone for leave and knowing few remainers, I recognise the danger of assuming everyone thinks line me. As there is a dominance from leavers here, being presented with remain arguments is probably a good thing to keep sharp
No, Richard is correct. Page 136 of the treasury analysis states:
The population and migration projections which underlie the modelling were used by the OBR in their Economic and fiscal outlook accompanying Budget 2016. It is assumed that population growth will slow in line with the ONS’s current principal population projections. In the principal projection, total net international migration to the UK falls from 329,000 per year in 2014 towards 185,000 per year from 2021 onwards. This is a stylised projection rather than a forecast.
This gives a UK population of 71.4m in 2030, up from 65.6m in 2016. As Richard says, the same population increase is assumed for every scenario.
Actually you're both wrong. The population number used to calculate the headline figure (£4,300 drop in the seldom used GDP per household) is 27 million for current GDP and for 2030 GDP. What the report does at a later stage is say what it thinks population will be will be in 2030. The ONS's predictions for 2030 population (which are not used in the report just mentioned) are based on current government policy much like the OBR's (who if you recall declined to get involved in George Osbourne's budget game on the EU).
To work out what the population would be in 2030 if we left you have to assume the same government, now able to keeps its net migration target might want to meet it. I appreciate that's an assumption but no bigger (and somewhat smaller in fact) than many remain assumptions.
Hattie recently said "It's easy to overlook, but it’s impossible to overstate, how important the EU has been in our struggle for women's rights at work. Some of our rights came directly from the EU, some rights were enhanced because of the EU and our rights as women at work can't be taken away, as they are guaranteed by our membership of the EU...
We fought hard for those rights, in Brussels and in Westminster. That's a fact. If we leave the EU, the guarantees of those rights will be gone. That's a fact too...
The last thing we need now is to have to fight to defend and protect the rights we've already got. But that is what would happen if we left the EU. We've got used to being able to rely on the EU to underpin those rights. Let’s not take them for granted and find that we have to fight for them all over again."
Why does it never seem to occur to these people that the flavour of European Government might change and then they would find themselves having these rights abolished over the head of a progressive elected government in the UK?
More generally, as someone for leave and knowing few remainers, I recognise the danger of assuming everyone thinks line me. As there is a dominance from leavers here, being presented with remain arguments is probably a good thing to keep sharp
I quite agree. Plus it will be much more fun if the children win! So long as the site reports relevant news in its entirety - i.e. not cherry picking the polls that are favourable to one side or another - then I don't mind what spin the contributors in part on it.
I don't watch evening news shows - any coverage of Major's speech? Haven't heard it mentioned here other than my pre-briefed snippets earlier in the day.
I'm guessing he was bumped down by Holiday Parent. I'm not sure why he gave it on a Friday PM either. Remain was running with the IMF, Major was wasted ammo. Still given he tried to play the waycist card - that may be a blessing.
Eurovision Russia is the favourite to win this year's Eurovision Song Contest, which takes place later in Stockholm. Russia's Sergey Lazarev, a huge pop star in the country, is widely tipped to win with his techno ballad, You Are The Only One . Australia, France, Sweden and Ukraine are also hotly tipped for success in the competition.
BBC news
Australia.? ........ The EU obviously extending its bureaucratic tentacles even further or more likely, the organisers fancy an "all expenses" trip down under next year
The European broadcasting Union is even more rapacious than the EU, clearly!
Hattie recently said "It's easy to overlook, but it’s impossible to overstate, how important the EU has been in our struggle for women's rights at work. Some of our rights came directly from the EU, some rights were enhanced because of the EU and our rights as women at work can't be taken away, as they are guaranteed by our membership of the EU...
We fought hard for those rights, in Brussels and in Westminster. That's a fact. If we leave the EU, the guarantees of those rights will be gone. That's a fact too...
The last thing we need now is to have to fight to defend and protect the rights we've already got. But that is what would happen if we left the EU. We've got used to being able to rely on the EU to underpin those rights. Let’s not take them for granted and find that we have to fight for them all over again."
Why does it never seem to occur to these people that the flavour of European Government might change and then they would find themselves having these rights abolished over the head of a progressive elected government in the UK?
I think the sclerotic nature of pan European governance plays into that impression for once. It is very hard for it to change direction, that's one if my problems with it, but it does mean it is unlikely to take what would presumably be massive legal changes required.
In the Eurovision Songfest there is no doubt that Graham Norton will be the perfect commentator tonight, as he follows in the footsteps of Terry Wogan in taking the piss out of the contestants and the block voting liable to occur.
*** Not a joke post ***
Weren't the British figures fiddled once to hide support for the Polish entry?
IIRC David Herdson has said the support for foreign entries is a good indicator of the extent of EU immigration to that country.
Not fiddled, exactly - the amount that the jury hated it overcame the amount the televoters loved it which pushed it right down in the overall rankings.
This was one contributing factor to the switch to the new system this year where the jury and televoters results are scored separately rather than combined as before.
So, the British jury hated the Polish entry overruled the Poles who quite liked it and democratically voted it into first position.
Explain to me why this isn't racism of the first order?
I was just continuing the "fiddled immigration figures" meme. You've managed to supercharge it into an Establishment is racist and undemocratic meme, who change the rules at will when their policies produce an effect that is to their disadvantage.
Where do you get the idea that OUT is in the lead? If people thought that then IN wouldn't be a 70% chance on the betting markets
Speaking for the OP I suppose he would say the latest polls.
You of course look at the betting markets which are in part at least skewed by not trusting online polls as much as phone ones.
I look forward to phone polls later in the week. Should be really interesting.
While I am not an expert in that matter I would imagine the betting polls are quite skewable by the simple ploy of laying large amounts of money on an outcome.
So if £10 million is laid on remain overall and £1 million on brexit this wil inevitably affect the odds as the bookies can't afford to give good odds for remain anymore (unless that outcome is inconcievable).
With it known that the wealthy are disproportionately in favour of Remain, it would be a good strategy to lay a lot of money on it and skew the narrative, probably far better value than paying for adverts (and it wouldn't need declaring as a donation either).
Mr. Meeks, given the posts of Mr. 86 and Miss Plato, I've changed my view on ONS objectivity, but having a million more migrants than previously thought remains a rather serious fact.
"...a malign campaign seeking to lie its way to victory by confusing apples and pears..." - It could be worse. Leave could be prophesying global war if Remain wins.
We don't have a million more migrants than previously thought. We have a Leave campaign seeking to ignore standard international definitions of migration.
Perhaps it is the idea of international standards that worries them.
If you're explaining, you're losing.
People aren't interested in 'standard international definitions of migration' they rely on what they seen and hear from the supermarket to the A&E waiting room.
People will believe there are a million more immigrants than previously told because it will correspond to their own experiences.
And they won't believe those who have previously peddled the 'no more than 10-15,000 Eastern European migrants' or 'reduce net immigration to the tens of thousands' claims.
In the Eurovision Songfest there is no doubt that Graham Norton will be the perfect commentator tonight, as he follows in the footsteps of Terry Wogan in taking the piss out of the contestants and the block voting liable to occur.
*** Not a joke post ***
Weren't the British figures fiddled once to hide support for the Polish entry?
IIRC David Herdson has said the support for foreign entries is a good indicator of the extent of EU immigration to that country.
I think that was the polish milk maid song, which supposedly got most votes, but the points allocation for the uk was based off public vote and judges scored, and they placed it so low it got nothing, or very little anyway.
This is starting to get really serious for the dodgy Posh Boys... Wouldn't it be hilarious if they had their majority taken off them.
As I mentioned previously could or would that throw any referendum decision into doubt as the government of the day had no mandate to offer said referendum?
Can you just imagine the fallout for Remain if they won on the back of this supported by the PM. It would be nuclear if Leave carried the day. The constitutional implications are enormous. Perhaps argue to govern as a minority government but even so?
Yep, there could all sorts of legal challenges coming up...
And these are the leading people for REMAIN... Who would buy a used car from dodgy Dave? Yet we're being asked the whole EU project, lock, stock and barrel from these dodgy Posh Boys.
Hmmmmmmm.....
Both sides are run by politicians, who in the public eye are all dodgy.
In the Eurovision Songfest there is no doubt that Graham Norton will be the perfect commentator tonight, as he follows in the footsteps of Terry Wogan in taking the piss out of the contestants and the block voting liable to occur.
*** Not a joke post ***
Weren't the British figures fiddled once to hide support for the Polish entry?
IIRC David Herdson has said the support for foreign entries is a good indicator of the extent of EU immigration to that country.
I think that was the polish milk maid song, which supposedly got most votes, but the points allocation for the uk was based off public vote and judges scored, and they placed it so low it got nothing, or very little anyway.
I rather like this milk maid advert (which appears to be a in house spoof)
In the Eurovision Songfest there is no doubt that Graham Norton will be the perfect commentator tonight, as he follows in the footsteps of Terry Wogan in taking the piss out of the contestants and the block voting liable to occur.
*** Not a joke post ***
Weren't the British figures fiddled once to hide support for the Polish entry?
IIRC David Herdson has said the support for foreign entries is a good indicator of the extent of EU immigration to that country.
I think that was the polish milk maid song, which supposedly got most votes, but the points allocation for the uk was based off public vote and judges scored, and they placed it so low it got nothing, or very little anyway.
If I recall correctly the Polish milk maid didn't simply get public votes based on EU migration but also based on ... how shall we phrase this ... her jugs.
Where do you get the idea that OUT is in the lead? If people thought that then IN wouldn't be a 70% chance on the betting markets
Speaking for the OP I suppose he would say the latest polls.
You of course look at the betting markets which are in part at least skewed by not trusting online polls as much as phone ones.
I look forward to phone polls later in the week. Should be really interesting.
While I am not an expert in that matter I would imagine the betting polls are quite skewable by the simple ploy of laying large amounts of money on an outcome.
So if £10 million is laid on remain overall and £1 million on brexit this wil inevitably affect the odds as the bookies can't afford to give good odds for remain anymore (unless that outcome is inconcievable).
With it known that the wealthy are disproportionately in favour of Remain, it would be a good strategy to lay a lot of money on it and skew the narrative, probably far better value than paying for adverts (and it wouldn't need declaring as a donation either).
What would be the point in wasting large sums to get a statistic in your favour that most people will not know about?
They may be betting more with their hearts, but there is no evidence betting markets on politics have been successfully skewed and then gone on to skew the actual result.
F1: saw snippets of coverage yesterday. Oddly, Palmer and Ocon[sp], who drove his car in P1, both suffered punctures on the back left tyre. I wonder if that'll happen during the race.
The last wet race at the circuit was in 1996, when somebody or other called Michael Schumacher won his first race for Ferrari.
This is starting to get really serious for the dodgy Posh Boys... Wouldn't it be hilarious if they had their majority taken off them.
As I mentioned previously could or would that throw any referendum decision into doubt as the government of the day had no mandate to offer said referendum?
Can you just imagine the fallout for Remain if they won on the back of this supported by the PM. It would be nuclear if Leave carried the day. The constitutional implications are enormous. Perhaps argue to govern as a minority government but even so?
Yep, there could all sorts of legal challenges coming up...
And these are the leading people for REMAIN... Who would buy a used car from dodgy Dave? Yet we're being asked the whole EU project, lock, stock and barrel from these dodgy Posh Boys.
Hmmmmmmm.....
Both sides are run by politicians, who in the public eye are all dodgy.
Where do you get the idea that OUT is in the lead? If people thought that then IN wouldn't be a 70% chance on the betting markets
Speaking for the OP I suppose he would say the latest polls.
You of course look at the betting markets which are in part at least skewed by not trusting online polls as much as phone ones.
I look forward to phone polls later in the week. Should be really interesting.
While I am not an expert in that matter I would imagine the betting polls are quite skewable by the simple ploy of laying large amounts of money on an outcome.
So if £10 million is laid on remain overall and £1 million on brexit this wil inevitably affect the odds as the bookies can't afford to give good odds for remain anymore (unless that outcome is inconcievable).
With it known that the wealthy are disproportionately in favour of Remain, it would be a good strategy to lay a lot of money on it and skew the narrative, probably far better value than paying for adverts (and it wouldn't need declaring as a donation either).
What would be the point in wasting large sums to get a statistic in your favour that most people will not know about?
They may be betting more with their hearts, but there is no evidence betting markets on politics have been successfully skewed and then gone on to skew the actual result.
It would depend on how large the sums were.
I think you are underestimating how much effect the bookies odds have on people. Several people have pointed out to me that the bookies have remain well ahead and that they (unlike opinion polls ) are a better guide because their finances rely on their accuracy (I paraphrase slightly).
And certainly anyone dealing with politics in a media capacity would be well aware of those figures.
It would certainly be much easier (and cheaper) to do this in a binary market like a referendum than with a normal election.
This is starting to get really serious for the dodgy Posh Boys... Wouldn't it be hilarious if they had their majority taken off them.
As I mentioned previously could or would that throw any referendum decision into doubt as the government of the day had no mandate to offer said referendum?
Can you just imagine the fallout for Remain if they won on the back of this supported by the PM. It would be nuclear if Leave carried the day. The constitutional implications are enormous. Perhaps argue to govern as a minority government but even so?
Yep, there could all sorts of legal challenges coming up...
And these are the leading people for REMAIN... Who would buy a used car from dodgy Dave? Yet we're being asked the whole EU project, lock, stock and barrel from these dodgy Posh Boys.
Hmmmmmmm.....
Both sides are run by politicians, who in the public eye are all dodgy.
Yep. I am sure there could be consequences if this really travels its course but I am not sure the claims that Remain are any more exposed to this than Leave are correct. Apart from Anna Soubry the only other constituency I heard about specifically was Thanet South and that is held by an avowed Leaver and former UKIPper.
I can see this all making for interesting times but I have absolutely no idea how it will all fall in the end.
This is starting to get really serious for the dodgy Posh Boys... Wouldn't it be hilarious if they had their majority taken off them.
As I mentioned previously could or would that throw any referendum decision into doubt as the government of the day had no mandate to offer said referendum?
Can you just imagine the fallout for Remain if they won on the back of this supported by the PM. It would be nuclear if Leave carried the day. The constitutional implications are enormous. Perhaps argue to govern as a minority government but even so?
Yep, there could all sorts of legal challenges coming up...
And these are the leading people for REMAIN... Who would buy a used car from dodgy Dave? Yet we're being asked the whole EU project, lock, stock and barrel from these dodgy Posh Boys.
Hmmmmmmm.....
Both sides are run by politicians, who in the public eye are all dodgy.
Some are more dodgy than others though...
That may be true, but it means the backlash against any one side being proven dodgy may be less than people think, depending on the severity, since the ones who might benefit are not seen as squeaky clean either.
Where do you get the idea that OUT is in the lead? If people thought that then IN wouldn't be a 70% chance on the betting markets
Speaking for the OP I suppose he would say the latest polls.
You of course look at the betting markets which are in part at least skewed by not trusting online polls as much as phone ones.
I look forward to phone polls later in the week. Should be really interesting.
While I am not an expert in that matter I would imagine the betting polls are quite skewable by the simple ploy of laying large amounts of money on an outcome.
So if £10 million is laid on remain overall and £1 million on brexit this wil inevitably affect the odds as the bookies can't afford to give good odds for remain anymore (unless that outcome is inconcievable).
With it known that the wealthy are disproportionately in favour of Remain, it would be a good strategy to lay a lot of money on it and skew the narrative, probably far better value than paying for adverts (and it wouldn't need declaring as a donation either).
What would be the point in wasting large sums to get a statistic in your favour that most people will not know about?
They may be betting more with their hearts, but there is no evidence betting markets on politics have been successfully skewed and then gone on to skew the actual result.
It would depend on how large the sums were.
I think you are underestimating how much effect the bookies odds have on people. Several people have pointed out to me that the bookies have remain well ahead and that they (unlike opinion polls ) are a better guide because their finances rely on their accuracy (I paraphrase slightly).
And certainly anyone dealing with politics in a media capacity would be well aware of those figures.
It would certainly be much easier (and cheaper) to do this in a binary market like a referendum than with a normal election.
Not really because you'd need to successfully push in every bookie out there or else you'd see major discrepancies and arbitrage opportunities between say Ladbrokes and Betfair.
Mr. Meeks, you don't think it's legitimate to point out that an organisation part-funded by the EU might not be the epitome of objectivity when assessing whether we should be in the EU?
I think that any suggestion that the ONS is not one of the finest statistics-gathering organisations in the world is absurd. If they can manage to issue reliable impartial statistics in the context of normal politics day in day out despite being government-funded, I struggle to see why they should automatically become a zombie army hypnotised by Jean-Claude Juncker whenever a statistic might touch on the EU. But Leaver mania is uncontrollable, I suppose.
Likewise, any suggestion that the BBC is the not the finest broadcaster in the world, committed to impartiality dày in day out. I struggle to see how Jews might see bias over Israel (the suppression of the Balen Report not withstanding) or Catholics see bias over child abuse (the laughable whitewash of the Smith report not withstanding).
Alastair, your faith in Government institutions is truly touching.
OTOH it is possible for a scientist to be wrong. In fact that fallibility is a part and parcel of science, as is a healthy skepticism.
Indeed. Hawking as an example strongly supported Labour and claimed scientific research was at risk if the Tories won. Funny how people like Scott didn't want to listen to them then but do now.
"If I recall correctly the Polish milk maid didn't simply get public votes based on EU migration but also based on ... how shall we phrase this ... her jugs."
It was a travesty. The Polish milkmaids should have won, but we got a result based on virtue signalling. Yes, I know it's a gay-fest but still.
I did like the Swedish presenter a few years ago who, surrounded by the local gay community, said on air. "You're not gay really, you just haven't met the right girl."
Great OP Roger, informative, balanced, accessible to non-advertising people.
In a couple of days I am off to a nice tropical island to look at a few business opportunities, tough but someone has to do it. There is no broadband there, so the question is do I spend my per-MB mobile data reading the daily Meeks, or go and swim in that 40C water instead
Where do you get the idea that OUT is in the lead? If people thought that then IN wouldn't be a 70% chance on the betting markets
Speaking for the OP I suppose he would say the latest polls.
You of course look at the betting markets which are in part at least skewed by not trusting online polls as much as phone ones.
I look forward to phone polls later in the week. Should be really interesting.
While I am not an expert in that matter I would imagine the betting polls are quite skewable by the simple ploy of laying large amounts of money on an outcome.
So if £10 million is laid on remain overall and £1 million on brexit this wil inevitably affect the odds as the bookies can't afford to give good odds for remain anymore (unless that outcome is inconcievable).
With it known that the wealthy are disproportionately in favour of Remain, it would be a good strategy to lay a lot of money on it and skew the narrative, probably far better value than paying for adverts (and it wouldn't need declaring as a donation either).
What would be the point in wasting large sums to get a statistic in your favour that most people will not know about?
They may be betting more with their hearts, but there is no evidence betting markets on politics have been successfully skewed and then gone on to skew the actual result.
It would depend on how large the sums were.
I think you are underestimating how much effect the bookies odds have on people. Several people have pointed out to me that the bookies have remain well ahead and that they (unlike opinion polls ) are a better guide because their finances rely on their accuracy (I paraphrase slightly).
And certainly anyone dealing with politics in a media capacity would be well aware of those figures.
It would certainly be much easier (and cheaper) to do this in a binary market like a referendum than with a normal election.
Not really because you'd need to successfully push in every bookie out there or else you'd see major discrepancies and arbitrage opportunities between say Ladbrokes and Betfair.
If there were hundreds of bookies offering odds perhaps, but afaik politicalbetting in UK is only offered by a handful.
Mr. Meeks, you don't think it's legitimate to point out that an organisation part-funded by the EU might not be the epitome of objectivity when assessing whether we should be in the EU?
I think that any suggestion that the ONS is not one of the finest statistics-gathering organisations in the world is absurd. If they can manage to issue reliable impartial statistics in the context of normal politics day in day out despite being government-funded, I struggle to see why they should automatically become a zombie army hypnotised by Jean-Claude Juncker whenever a statistic might touch on the EU. But Leaver mania is uncontrollable, I suppose.
Likewise, any suggestion that the BBC is the not the finest broadcaster in the world, committed to impartiality dày in day out. I struggle to see how Jews might see bias over Israel (the suppression of the Balen Report not withstanding) or Catholics see bias over child abuse (the laughable whitewash of the Smith report not withstanding).
Alastair, your faith in Government institutions is truly touching.
I see the states, across this big nation I see the laws made in Brussels, E.C. I think of the ones I consider my favorites I think of the people that are working for me
Some civil servants are just like my loved ones They work so hard and they try to be strong I'm a lucky guy to live in my building They own the buildings to help them along (c/o Talking Heads Don't Worry About The Government)
Mr. Meeks, you don't think it's legitimate to point out that an organisation part-funded by the EU might not be the epitome of objectivity when assessing whether we should be in the EU?
I think that any suggestion that the ONS is not one of the finest statistics-gathering organisations in the world is absurd. If they can manage to issue reliable impartial statistics in the context of normal politics day in day out despite being government-funded, I struggle to see why they should automatically become a zombie army hypnotised by Jean-Claude Juncker whenever a statistic might touch on the EU. But Leaver mania is uncontrollable, I suppose.
Likewise, any suggestion that the BBC is the not the finest broadcaster in the world, committed to impartiality dày in day out. I struggle to see how Jews might see bias over Israel (the suppression of the Balen Report not withstanding) or Catholics see bias over child abuse (the laughable whitewash of the Smith report not withstanding).
Alastair, your faith in Government institutions is truly touching.
I see the states, across this big nation I see the laws made in Brussels, E.C. I think of the ones I consider my favorites I think of the people that are working for me
Some civil servants are just like my loved ones They work so hard and they try to be strong I'm a lucky guy to live in my building They own the buildings to help them along (c/o Talking Heads Don't Worry About The Government)
Fabulous song. Along with much of the rest of early Talking Heads. Inspired.
Where do you get the idea that OUT is in the lead? If people thought that then IN wouldn't be a 70% chance on the betting markets
Speaking for the OP I suppose he would say the latest polls.
You of course look at the betting markets which are in part at least skewed by not trusting online polls as much as phone ones.
I look forward to phone polls later in the week. Should be really interesting.
While I am not an expert in that matter I would imagine the betting polls are quite skewable by the simple ploy of laying large amounts of money on an outcome.
So if £10 million is laid on remain overall and £1 million on brexit this wil inevitably affect the odds as the bookies can't afford to give good odds for remain anymore (unless that outcome is inconcievable).
With it known that the wealthy are disproportionately in favour of Remain, it would be a good strategy to lay a lot of money on it and skew the narrative, probably far better value than paying for adverts (and it wouldn't need declaring as a donation either).
What would be the point in wasting large sums to get a statistic in your favour that most people will not know about?
They may be betting more with their hearts, but there is no evidence betting markets on politics have been successfully skewed and then gone on to skew the actual result.
It would depend on how large the sums were.
I think you are underestimating how much effect the bookies odds have on people. Several people have pointed out to me that the bookies have remain well ahead and that they (unlike opinion polls ) are a better guide because their finances rely on their accuracy (I paraphrase slightly).
And certainly anyone dealing with politics in a media capacity would be well aware of those figures.
It would certainly be much easier (and cheaper) to do this in a binary market like a referendum than with a normal election.
Not really because you'd need to successfully push in every bookie out there or else you'd see major discrepancies and arbitrage opportunities between say Ladbrokes and Betfair.
If there were hundreds of bookies offering odds perhaps, but afaik politicalbetting in UK is only offered by a handful.
A handful trading millions is a lot of money. Mess one up and the arbitrage opportunities would appear. Much easier to target just one.
Where do you get the idea that OUT is in the lead? If people thought that then IN wouldn't be a 70% chance on the betting markets
Speaking for the OP I suppose he would say the latest polls.
You of course look at the betting markets which are in part at least skewed by not trusting online polls as much as phone ones.
I look forward to phone polls later in the week. Should be really interesting.
While I am not an expert in that matter I would imagine the betting polls are quite skewable by the simple ploy of laying large amounts of money on an outcome.
So if £10 million is laid on remain overall and £1 million on brexit this wil inevitably affect the odds as the bookies can't afford to give good odds for remain anymore (unless that outcome is inconcievable).
With it known that the wealthy are disproportionately in favour of Remain, it would be a good strategy to lay a lot of money on it and skew the narrative, probably far better value than paying for adverts (and it wouldn't need declaring as a donation either).
What would be the point in wasting large sums to get a statistic in your favour that most people will not know about?
They may be betting more with their hearts, but there is no evidence betting markets on politics have been successfully skewed and then gone on to skew the actual result.
It would depend on how large the sums were. I think you are underestimating how much effect the bookies odds have on people. Several people have pointed out to me that the bookies have remain well ahead and that they (unlike opinion polls ) are a better guide because their finances rely on their accuracy (I paraphrase slightly). And certainly anyone dealing with politics in a media capacity would be well aware of those figures. It would certainly be much easier (and cheaper) to do this in a binary market like a referendum than with a normal election.
Does anyone know what the bookies odds were stating on the possibility of a Conservative majority 6 weeks before GE day? I got £20 at 7/1 on this two weeks before GE day. So sometimes odds are not reflecting what is going to happen, when mislead by polls.
Mr. Meeks, you don't think it's legitimate to point out that an organisation part-funded by the EU might not be the epitome of objectivity when assessing whether we should be in the EU?
I think that any suggestion that the ONS is not one of the finest statistics-gathering organisations in the world is absurd. If they can manage to issue reliable impartial statistics in the context of normal politics day in day out despite being government-funded, I struggle to see why they should automatically become a zombie army hypnotised by Jean-Claude Juncker whenever a statistic might touch on the EU. But Leaver mania is uncontrollable, I suppose.
Likewise, any suggestion that the BBC is the not the finest broadcaster in the world, committed to impartiality dày in day out. I struggle to see how Jews might see bias over Israel (the suppression of the Balen Report not withstanding) or Catholics see bias over child abuse (the laughable whitewash of the Smith report not withstanding).
Alastair, your faith in Government institutions is truly touching.
I see the states, across this big nation I see the laws made in Brussels, E.C. I think of the ones I consider my favorites I think of the people that are working for me
Some civil servants are just like my loved ones They work so hard and they try to be strong I'm a lucky guy to live in my building They own the buildings to help them along (c/o Talking Heads Don't Worry About The Government)
Fabulous song. Along with much of the rest of early Talking Heads. Inspired.
Yes, one of best gigs I have seen was them supported by Dire Straits circa 1979/80 for just a few quid at Soton Uni.
If there were hundreds of bookies offering odds perhaps, but afaik politicalbetting in UK is only offered by a handful. A handful trading millions is a lot of money. Mess one up and the arbitrage opportunities would appear. Much easier to target just one.
Seems an unbelievable conspiracy.
10 million pounds has been traded on the referendum result on Betfair. It would cost a fortune to manipulate that market.
Mr. Meeks, you don't think it's legitimate to point out that an organisation part-funded by the EU might not be the epitome of objectivity when assessing whether we should be in the EU?
I think that any suggestion that the ONS is not one of the finest statistics-gathering organisations in the world is absurd. If they can manage to issue reliable impartial statistics in the context of normal politics day in day out despite being government-funded, I struggle to see why they should automatically become a zombie army hypnotised by Jean-Claude Juncker whenever a statistic might touch on the EU. But Leaver mania is uncontrollable, I suppose.
Likewise, any suggestion that the BBC is the not the finest broadcaster in the world, committed to impartiality dày in day out. I struggle to see how Jews might see bias over Israel (the suppression of the Balen Report not withstanding) or Catholics see bias over child abuse (the laughable whitewash of the Smith report not withstanding).
Alastair, your faith in Government institutions is truly touching.
I see the states, across this big nation I see the laws made in Brussels, E.C. I think of the ones I consider my favorites I think of the people that are working for me
Some civil servants are just like my loved ones They work so hard and they try to be strong I'm a lucky guy to live in my building They own the buildings to help them along (c/o Talking Heads Don't Worry About The Government)
Fabulous song. Along with much of the rest of early Talking Heads. Inspired.
Yes, one of best gigs I have seen was them supported by Dire Straits circa 1979/80 for just a few quid at Soton Uni.
They were one of the few bands (along with Roxy Music) that I really regret not seeing. I have managed to catch up on a few bands I thought I would never get to see but I think Talking Heads and Roxy are two that will continue to elude me.
Mr. Meeks, you don't think it's legitimate to point out that an organisation part-funded by the EU might not be the epitome of objectivity when assessing whether we should be in the EU?
I think that any suggestion that the ONS is not one of the finest statistics-gathering organisations in the world is absurd. If they can manage to issue reliable impartial statistics in the context of normal politics day in day out despite being government-funded, I struggle to see why they should automatically become a zombie army hypnotised by Jean-Claude Juncker whenever a statistic might touch on the EU. But Leaver mania is uncontrollable, I suppose.
Likewise, any suggestion that the BBC is the not the finest broadcaster in the world, committed to impartiality dày in day out. I struggle to see how Jews might see bias over Israel (the suppression of the Balen Report not withstanding) or Catholics see bias over child abuse (the laughable whitewash of the Smith report not withstanding).
Alastair, your faith in Government institutions is truly touching.
John Major was still in BBC news today about his insults aimed at specific conservative people. For example "The Justice Secretary should be "embarrassed and ashamed" at his "mischief making" in warning that future expansion of the 28-member bloc is set to heap strain on schools, the NHS and housing as well as raising security concerns."
Has there been a similar level of personal attack from a senior conservative LEAVE supporter against a senior conservative REMAIN supporter?
In the Eurovision Songfest there is no doubt that Graham Norton will be the perfect commentator tonight, as he follows in the footsteps of Terry Wogan in taking the piss out of the contestants and the block voting liable to occur.
*** Not a joke post ***
Weren't the British figures fiddled once to hide support for the Polish entry?
IIRC David Herdson has said the support for foreign entries is a good indicator of the extent of EU immigration to that country.
Were you lurking that long ago, @VapidBilge, and under what name, I wonder?
I think you are underestimating how much effect the bookies odds have on people. Several people have pointed out to me that the bookies have remain well ahead and that they (unlike opinion polls ) are a better guide because their finances rely on their accuracy (I paraphrase slightly).
And certainly anyone dealing with politics in a media capacity would be well aware of those figures.
It would certainly be much easier (and cheaper) to do this in a binary market like a referendum than with a normal election.
How many outside of the world of politics? I haven't seen the odds of leave or remain reported anywhere but here.
Wonder how much this will be... they aren't telling us until after the EUref.
Eurocrats said budget plans inc spending increases to deal with migration crisis, cover payment shortfalls in regional projects, pay for security upgrades to EU sites following Brussels/Paris terror attacks.
John Major was still in BBC news today about his insults aimed at specific conservative people. For example "The Justice Secretary should be "embarrassed and ashamed" at his "mischief making" in warning that future expansion of the 28-member bloc is set to heap strain on schools, the NHS and housing as well as raising security concerns."
Has there been a similar level of personal attack from a senior conservative LEAVE supporter against a senior conservative REMAIN supporter?
How is that a personal attack? If it is, Piri Patel did the same to George Osborne, accusing him of cashing in favours with the IMF:
"The EU-funded IMF should not interfere in our democratic debate ... It appears the chancellor is cashing in favours to [Christine] Lagarde in order to encourage the IMF to bully the British people."
Osborne in some way forced the Lagarde to make her comments in order to bully the British people. Piri Patel sits in the same cabinet as Osborne. It is absolutely extraordinary.
As I understand the position, the accusation against the Tories is that they bussed people round the country, paid for their overnight stays, presented in each constituency as campaigning on local issues for the local candidate, and then failed to declare the expenses at all; later, they said oops, sorry...but it was a national expense anyway. I have no qualified opijnion on whether this should be considered as local or not, but think it's reasonable to investigate it, if only to make the position clear for the future.
I can't speak for the LibDem bus, but the Labour bus was a minibus which ferried people who'd come in for the day to the specific canvass spots. The expenses for accommodation were £0.00. Generally, people using the bus were coming in from Nottingham. It is a mistake to imply that the two things are comparable.
Where do you get the idea that OUT is in the lead? If people thought that then IN wouldn't be a 70% chance on the betting markets
Speaking for the OP I suppose he would say the latest polls.
You of course look at the betting markets which are in part at least skewed by not trusting online polls as much as phone ones.
I look forward to phone polls later in the week. Should be really interesting.
While I am not an expert in that matter I would imagine the betting polls are quite skewable by the simple ploy of laying large amounts of money on an outcome.
So if £10 million is laid on remain overall and £1 million on brexit this wil inevitably affect the odds as the bookies can't afford to give good odds for remain anymore (unless that outcome is inconcievable).
With it known that the wealthy are disproportionately in favour of Remain, it would be a good strategy to lay a lot of money on it and skew the narrative, probably far better value than paying for adverts (and it wouldn't need declaring as a donation either).
What would be the point in wasting large sums to get a statistic in your favour that most people will not know about?
They may be betting more with their hearts, but there is no evidence betting markets on politics have been successfully skewed and then gone on to skew the actual result.
It would depend on how large the sums were. I think you are underestimating how much effect the bookies odds have on people. Several people have pointed out to me that the bookies have remain well ahead and that they (unlike opinion polls ) are a better guide because their finances rely on their accuracy (I paraphrase slightly). And certainly anyone dealing with politics in a media capacity would be well aware of those figures. It would certainly be much easier (and cheaper) to do this in a binary market like a referendum than with a normal election.
Does anyone know what the bookies odds were stating on the possibility of a Conservative majority 6 weeks before GE day? I got £20 at 7/1 on this two weeks before GE day. So sometimes odds are not reflecting what is going to happen, when mislead by polls.
What were the odds on the Tories getting most seats? There were multiple outcomes possible in the GE, which would have been reflected in the various odds.
10 million pounds has been traded on the referendum result on Betfair. It would cost a fortune to manipulate that market.
£10 million isnt a great deal in the context. £15 million was donated to the two sides in the ten weeks up to mid April and with a market of £10m you could probably skew it with under a million
The challenge would be spreading it over hundreds or thousands of bets. A few large bets would obviously raise suspicions.
Alternatively it could just be primarily a reflection that the wealthy are disproportionately in favour of remaining in and disproportionally have spare cash to invest in obscure markets at Turf Accountants
Mr. Meeks, you don't think it's legitimate to point out that an organisation part-funded by the EU might not be the epitome of objectivity when assessing whether we should be in the EU?
I think that any suggestion that the ONS is not one of the finest statistics-gathering organisations in the world is absurd. If they can manage to issue reliable impartial statistics in the context of normal politics day in day out despite being government-funded, I struggle to see why they should automatically become a zombie army hypnotised by Jean-Claude Juncker whenever a statistic might touch on the EU. But Leaver mania is uncontrollable, I suppose.
Likewise, any suggestion that the BBC is the not the finest broadcaster in the world, committed to impartiality dày in day out. I struggle to see how Jews might see bias over Israel (the suppression of the Balen Report not withstanding) or Catholics see bias over child abuse (the laughable whitewash of the Smith report not withstanding).
Alastair, your faith in Government institutions is truly touching.
Everyone thinks the BBC is biased against them.
I doubt many metropolitan upper-middle class do so.
In any case, won't science simply continue but in foreign countries?
Any money the EU gives to science in the UK comes out of the UK budget to the EU - so no reason why science can't have the same net funding - all we would be doing is cutting out the middle-man.
Fact is, I’m not mayor any more. Now it’s that Kenyan chappie. Or whatever. So, that’s . . . what? Three quarters of an hour most weeks I can use for other things?
Obviously I’ve still got my Telegraph column to write, so that’s 27 minutes each Sunday I won’t see again, and I’m still the MP for . . . well, God knows. Uxslip? Is that a place? One way or another, though, I’ve suddenly all the time in the world.
So. It’s time to do my bit to free Britain from tyranny. For too long, this country has been lorded over by the wrong sorts of people! By which I mean, people who aren’t me! Just joking! Or am I? Yes! No? Ha!
Whoops, best go. Battlebus outside, beeping the old horn. For England and St George! But not Osborne. Crikey.
Mr. Meeks, you don't think it's legitimate to point out that an organisation part-funded by the EU might not be the epitome of objectivity when assessing whether we should be in the EU?
I think that any suggestion that the ONS is not one of the finest statistics-gathering organisations in the world is absurd. If they can manage to issue reliable impartial statistics in the context of normal politics day in day out despite being government-funded, I struggle to see why they should automatically become a zombie army hypnotised by Jean-Claude Juncker whenever a statistic might touch on the EU. But Leaver mania is uncontrollable, I suppose.
Likewise, any suggestion that the BBC is the not the finest broadcaster in the world, committed to impartiality dày in day out. I struggle to see how Jews might see bias over Israel (the suppression of the Balen Report not withstanding) or Catholics see bias over child abuse (the laughable whitewash of the Smith report not withstanding).
Alastair, your faith in Government institutions is truly touching.
Everyone thinks the BBC is biased against them.
I doubt many metropolitan upper-middle class do so.
You want to bet? There are a lot of metropolitan upper-middle class Tory and Labour MPs.
Where do you get the idea that OUT is in the lead? If people thought that then IN wouldn't be a 70% chance on the betting markets
Speaking for the OP I suppose he would say the latest polls.
You of course look at the betting markets which are in part at least skewed by not trusting online polls as much as phone ones.
I look forward to phone polls later in the week. Should be really interesting.
While I am not an expert in that matter I would imagine the betting polls are quite skewable by the simple ploy of laying large amounts of money on an outcome.
So if £10 million is laid on remain overall and £1 million on brexit this wil inevitably affect the odds as the bookies can't afford to give good odds for remain anymore (unless that outcome is inconcievable).
With it known that the wealthy are disproportionately in favour of Remain, it would be a good strategy to lay a lot of money on it and skew the narrative, probably far better value than paying for adverts (and it wouldn't need declaring as a donation either).
What would be the point in wasting large sums to get a statistic in your favour that most people will not know about?
They may be betting more with their hearts, but there is no evidence betting markets on politics have been successfully skewed and then gone on to skew the actual result.
It would depend on how large the sums were. I think you are underestimating how much effect the bookies odds have on people. Several people have pointed out to me that the bookies have remain well ahead and that they (unlike opinion polls ) are a better guide because their finances rely on their accuracy (I paraphrase slightly). And certainly anyone dealing with politics in a media capacity would be well aware of those figures. It would certainly be much easier (and cheaper) to do this in a binary market like a referendum than with a normal election.
Does anyone know what the bookies odds were stating on the possibility of a Conservative majority 6 weeks before GE day? I got £20 at 7/1 on this two weeks before GE day. So sometimes odds are not reflecting what is going to happen, when mislead by polls.
What were the odds on the Tories getting most seats? There were multiple outcomes possible in the GE, which would have been reflected in the various odds.
The tories were approximately 1/4 to gain most seats on election day. Everytime the price drifted out to 1/3 or so it got hammered back in.
Where do you get the idea that OUT is in the lead? If people thought that then IN wouldn't be a 70% chance on the betting markets
Speaking for the OP I suppose he would say the latest polls.
You of course look at the betting markets which are in part at least skewed by not trusting online polls as much as phone ones.
I look forward to phone polls later in the week. Should be really interesting.
While I am not an expert in that matter I would imagine the betting polls are quite skewable by the simple ploy of laying large amounts of money on an outcome.
So if £10 million is laid on remain overall and £1 million on brexit this wil inevitably affect the odds as the bookies can't afford to give good odds for remain anymore (unless that outcome is inconcievable).
With it known that the wealthy are disproportionately in favour of Remain, it would be a good strategy to lay a lot of money on it and skew the narrative, probably far better value than paying for adverts (and it wouldn't need declaring as a donation either).
If I were very wealthy, I would be betting heavily on Leave to hedge my likely stock market losses.
On immigration, it's entirely what Roger quotes at the top of his piece:
"Facts aren't important. What matters is what the public believes."
Dave is reaping what he sowed.
The fact is we have over net migration of 330,000. Not sustainable.
Probably true - which means we need to change our economic model pronto. Right now our growth is predicated on high levels of immigration. And without growth we are going to have one hell of a problem funding everything from infrastructure through to care for our growing number of old people.
On immigration, it's entirely what Roger quotes at the top of his piece:
"Facts aren't important. What matters is what the public believes."
Dave is reaping what he sowed.
The fact is we have over net migration of 330,000. Not sustainable.
Why not let the free market decide, rather than the government?
Indeed. The fact is we have net population from births alone at approximately the same as migration too. If new migrations (like new adults years after birth) are willing to work then what is the problem? We have plenty of land and jobs available.
Labour is struggling to attract working-class voters, analysis finds Fabian Society report on voting patterns in local elections finds party performed badly in its traditional heartlands
In the Eurovision Songfest there is no doubt that Graham Norton will be the perfect commentator tonight, as he follows in the footsteps of Terry Wogan in taking the piss out of the contestants and the block voting liable to occur.
*** Not a joke post ***
Weren't the British figures fiddled once to hide support for the Polish entry?
IIRC David Herdson has said the support for foreign entries is a good indicator of the extent of EU immigration to that country.
Not fiddled, exactly - the amount that the jury hated it overcame the amount the televoters loved it which pushed it right down in the overall rankings.
This was one contributing factor to the switch to the new system this year where the jury and televoters results are scored separately rather than combined as before.
So, the British jury hated the Polish entry overruled the Poles who quite liked it and democratically voted it into first position.
Explain to me why this isn't racism of the first order?
Because the jury vote was independent of (and before - IIRC the juries vote on the dress rehearsal) the public vote.
And because the jury is made up of music industry professionals and hence tend to vote on their perception of musical merit, whereas in the case of the Polish milk maids, the British public was in at least some part voting on the quality of their, um, jugs.
Wonder how much this will be... they aren't telling us until after the EUref.
Eurocrats said budget plans inc spending increases to deal with migration crisis, cover payment shortfalls in regional projects, pay for security upgrades to EU sites following Brussels/Paris terror attacks.
In any case, won't science simply continue but in foreign countries?
Any money the EU gives to science in the UK comes out of the UK budget to the EU - so no reason why science can't have the same net funding - all we would be doing is cutting out the middle-man.
Where do you get the idea that OUT is in the lead? If people thought that then IN wouldn't be a 70% chance on the betting markets
Speaking for the OP I suppose he would say the latest polls.
You of course look at the betting markets which are in part at least skewed by not trusting online polls as much as phone ones.
I look forward to phone polls later in the week. Should be really interesting.
While I am not an expert in that matter I would imagine the betting polls are quite skewable by the simple ploy of laying large amounts of money on an outcome.
So if £10 million is laid on remain overall and £1 million on brexit this wil inevitably affect the odds as the bookies can't afford to give good odds for remain anymore (unless that outcome is inconcievable).
With it known that the wealthy are disproportionately in favour of Remain, it would be a good strategy to lay a lot of money on it and skew the narrative, probably far better value than paying for adverts (and it wouldn't need declaring as a donation either).
What would be the point in wasting large sums to get a statistic in your favour that most people will not know about?
They may be betting more with their hearts, but there is no evidence betting markets on politics have been successfully skewed and then gone on to skew the actual result.
It would depend on how large the sums were. I think you are underestimating how much effect the bookies odds have on people. Several people have pointed out to me that the a binary market like a referendum than with a normal election.
Does anyone know what the bookies odds were stating on the possibility of a Conservative majority 6 weeks before GE day? I got £20 at 7/1 on this two weeks before GE day. So sometimes odds are not reflecting what is going to happen, when mislead by polls.
What were the odds on the Tories getting most seats? There were multiple outcomes possible in the GE, which would have been reflected in the various odds.
The tories were approximately 1/4 to gain most seats on election day. Everytime the price drifted out to 1/3 or so it got hammered back in.
So the odds were pretty reasonably reflective of the outcome. What got everyone - including the Tories - is the Tory overall majority. Where there is a only one of two possible outcomes it may be that odds are more reflective of what is happening. That said, I expect leave to win, so I am surprised that the odds are as they are.
Thanks. ComRes under Andrew Cooper IMHO has become a bit politically suspect since he returned from Govt. The man is very political for the "wet" Conservatives. Cooper is also the infamous Mr 0.5% chance of Conservatives winning.
Where do you get the idea that OUT is in the lead? If people thought that then IN wouldn't be a 70% chance on the betting markets
Speaking for the OP I suppose he would say the latest polls.
You of course look at the betting markets which are in part at least skewed by not trusting online polls as much as phone ones.
I look forward to phone polls later in the week. Should be really interesting.
While I am not an expert in that matter I would imagine the betting polls are quite skewable by the simple ploy of laying large amounts of money on an outcome.
So if £10 million is laid on remain overall and £1 million on brexit this wil inevitably affect the odds as the bookies can't afford to give good odds for remain anymore (unless that outcome is inconcievable).
With it known that the wealthy are disproportionately in favour of Remain, it would be a good strategy to lay a lot of money on it and skew the narrative, probably far better value than paying for adverts (and it wouldn't need declaring as a donation either).
What would be the point in wasting large sums to get a statistic in your favour that most people will not know about?
They may be betting more with their hearts, but there is no evidence betting markets on politics have been successfully skewed and then gone on to skew the actual result.
It would depend on how large the sums were. I think you are underestimating how much effect the bookies odds have on people. Several people have pointed out to me that the bookies have remain well ahead and that they (unlike opinion polls ) are a better guide because their finances rely on their accuracy (I paraphrase slightly). And certainly anyone dealing with politics in a media capacity would be well aware of those figures. It would certainly be much easier (and cheaper) to do this in a binary market like a referendum than with a normal election.
Does anyone know what the bookies odds were stating on the possibility of a Conservative majority 6 weeks before GE day? I got £20 at 7/1 on this two weeks before GE day. So sometimes odds are not reflecting what is going to happen, when mislead by polls.
What were the odds on the Tories getting most seats? There were multiple outcomes possible in the GE, which would have been reflected in the various odds.
The odds on a conservative majority were bordering on the long. It was a mainstream outcome.
Mr. Meeks, you don't think it's legitimate to point out that an organisation part-funded by the EU might not be the epitome of objectivity when assessing whether we should be in the EU?
I think that any suggestion that the ONS is not one of the finest statistics-gathering organisations in the world is absurd. If they can manage to issue reliable impartial statistics in the context of normal politics day in day out despite being government-funded, I struggle to see why they should automatically become a zombie army hypnotised by Jean-Claude Juncker whenever a statistic might touch on the EU. But Leaver mania is uncontrollable, I suppose.
Likewise, any suggestion that the BBC is the not the finest broadcaster in the world, committed to impartiality dày in day out. I struggle to see how Jews might see bias over Israel (the suppression of the Balen Report not withstanding) or Catholics see bias over child abuse (the laughable whitewash of the Smith report not withstanding).
Alastair, your faith in Government institutions is truly touching.
Everyone thinks the BBC is biased against them.
I doubt many metropolitan upper-middle class do so.
Yes this is important. The BBC is not biased towards a party political worldview, it is biased towards a social/class world view ie progressive metropolitan upper middle class what you might call the managerial class.
There will always be such a class and their views will always be over represented in proportion to others however recent decades have seen an increasing social and cultural disconnect and divergence between this group and others, which, together with that managerial class over valuing themselves with an increasingly obscene pay gap between them and the rest, is causing a collapse in faith in governments and institutions in the west, symptoms of which are Donald Trump being a GOP nomination, the government feeling it had to grant this referendum and it not being anything like a certain outcome that they will win it.
If only I had put a pound accumulator 18 months ago on Corbyn winning Labour, Leicester winning the premuership and trump winning the presidency lol.
Comments
Fact of the matter is the Posh Boys have exhausted all of their political capitol and annoyed the majority of their supporters with this EU rubbish.
They're on their own and the sooner Osborne and Cameron are out in disgrace the better...
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/0110d2a4-18fe-11e6-b197-a4af20d5575e.html#axzz48cDV5t3i
I backed Australia each way at 12/1 for Eurovision a few weeks ago. She can belt out a song this girl.
The problem the law faces is that our hybrid electoral system sees a national campaign fought locally. In my view a letter in David Cameron's name that says "for me to keep Ed Miliband out of Downing Street you have to vote Conservative in Torbay" is clearly part of the national campaign. It's only part of a local campaign if it's "this candidate would be better for this constituency".
"...a malign campaign seeking to lie its way to victory by confusing apples and pears..." - It could be worse. Leave could be prophesying global war if Remain wins.
Hopefully one day you'll achieve the same thing when you comment below the line too.
https://twitter.com/transportgovuk/status/730795128386916354
Having said that performance improved for nearly all operators in Q4 (January to March) when compared to Q3 (October to December), I look forward to them pointing out the opposite at next year's Q3 release!
And these are the leading people for REMAIN... Who would buy a used car from dodgy Dave? Yet we're being asked the whole EU project, lock, stock and barrel from these dodgy Posh Boys.
Hmmmmmmm.....
Perhaps it is the idea of international standards that worries them.
Weren't the British figures fiddled once to hide support for the Polish entry?
IIRC David Herdson has said the support for foreign entries is a good indicator of the extent of EU immigration to that country.
This was one contributing factor to the switch to the new system this year where the jury and televoters results are scored separately rather than combined as before.
Indeed. The Police must follow the evidence wherever it may lead, etc...
What always amazed me was how often a departmental head would suggest telling the most blatant lies to get out of a corner. Or get terribly huffy when we received perfectly reasonable criticism. They honestly thought handing a complete eff-up to my team would magic it away.
Err, no - we can seek to minimise it in a credible way, hope to throw others off the scent by dandling something shiny instead or add a dollop of dignity to the apologies. What we won't do is lie or take the blame for your incompetence.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-35983912
In the Eighties we had difficulties working out how much money there was in the economy, so we developed M1, M3, PSLs etc.
Unemployment was next as the idea of working for a single employer faded as self-employment increased and zero hour contracts came into existence. The concept of underemployment was developed.
With cross-border seasonal working and temporary foreign postings, perhaps our concept of immigration should be similarly flexible.
Incidentally, how Romanian and Polish pension lawyers have you encountered through work? I suggest it is considerably fewer than the number of Romanians and Poles I've met through mine.
More generally, as someone for leave and knowing few remainers, I recognise the danger of assuming everyone thinks line me. As there is a dominance from leavers here, being presented with remain arguments is probably a good thing to keep sharp
In any case, won't science simply continue but in foreign countries?
To work out what the population would be in 2030 if we left you have to assume the same government, now able to keeps its net migration target might want to meet it. I appreciate that's an assumption but no bigger (and somewhat smaller in fact) than many remain assumptions.
We fought hard for those rights, in Brussels and in Westminster. That's a fact. If we leave the EU, the guarantees of those rights will be gone. That's a fact too...
The last thing we need now is to have to fight to defend and protect the rights we've already got. But that is what would happen if we left the EU. We've got used to being able to rely on the EU to underpin those rights. Let’s not take them for granted and find that we have to fight for them all over again."
Why does it never seem to occur to these people that the flavour of European Government might change and then they would find themselves having these rights abolished over the head of a progressive elected government in the UK?
I'm guessing he was bumped down by Holiday Parent. I'm not sure why he gave it on a Friday PM either. Remain was running with the IMF, Major was wasted ammo. Still given he tried to play the waycist card - that may be a blessing.
You of course look at the betting markets which are in part at least skewed by not trusting online polls as much as phone ones.
I look forward to phone polls later in the week. Should be really interesting.
Mr. Bedfordshire, welcome (back?) to pb.com.
Explain to me why this isn't racism of the first order?
I was just continuing the "fiddled immigration figures" meme. You've managed to supercharge it into an Establishment is racist and undemocratic meme, who change the rules at will when their policies produce an effect that is to their disadvantage.
So if £10 million is laid on remain overall and £1 million on brexit this wil inevitably affect the odds as the bookies can't afford to give good odds for remain anymore (unless that outcome is inconcievable).
With it known that the wealthy are disproportionately in favour of Remain, it would be a good strategy to lay a lot of money on it and skew the narrative, probably far better value than paying for adverts (and it wouldn't need declaring as a donation either).
People aren't interested in 'standard international definitions of migration' they rely on what they seen and hear from the supermarket to the A&E waiting room.
People will believe there are a million more immigrants than previously told because it will correspond to their own experiences.
And they won't believe those who have previously peddled the 'no more than 10-15,000 Eastern European migrants' or 'reduce net immigration to the tens of thousands' claims.
OTOH it is possible for a scientist to be wrong. In fact that fallibility is a part and parcel of science, as is a healthy skepticism.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bm_OfPVuW-E
They may be betting more with their hearts, but there is no evidence betting markets on politics have been successfully skewed and then gone on to skew the actual result.
The last wet race at the circuit was in 1996, when somebody or other called Michael Schumacher won his first race for Ferrari.
I think you are underestimating how much effect the bookies odds have on people. Several people have pointed out to me that the bookies have remain well ahead and that they (unlike opinion polls ) are a better guide because their finances rely on their accuracy (I paraphrase slightly).
And certainly anyone dealing with politics in a media capacity would be well aware of those figures.
It would certainly be much easier (and cheaper) to do this in a binary market like a referendum than with a normal election.
I can see this all making for interesting times but I have absolutely no idea how it will all fall in the end.
Alastair, your faith in Government institutions is truly touching.
The UK's entry came in the top two in these years:
1959, 1960, 1961, 1964, 1965, 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1972, 1975, 1976, 1977, 1981, 1988, 1989, 1992, 1993, 1997, 1998
so a more than respectable record.
But nothing but failure since then.
Its usual practice to take things more seriously when you're successful in them.
"If I recall correctly the Polish milk maid didn't simply get public votes based on EU migration but also based on ... how shall we phrase this ... her jugs."
It was a travesty. The Polish milkmaids should have won, but we got a result based on virtue signalling. Yes, I know it's a gay-fest but still.
I did like the Swedish presenter a few years ago who, surrounded by the local gay community, said on air. "You're not gay really, you just haven't met the right girl."
In a couple of days I am off to a nice tropical island to look at a few business opportunities, tough but someone has to do it. There is no broadband there, so the question is do I spend my per-MB mobile data reading the daily Meeks, or go and swim in that 40C water instead
I see the laws made in Brussels, E.C.
I think of the ones I consider my favorites
I think of the people that are working for me
Some civil servants are just like my loved ones
They work so hard and they try to be strong
I'm a lucky guy to live in my building
They own the buildings to help them along
(c/o Talking Heads Don't Worry About The Government)
Seems an unbelievable conspiracy.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-36292193
If there were hundreds of bookies offering odds perhaps, but afaik politicalbetting in UK is only offered by a handful.
A handful trading millions is a lot of money. Mess one up and the arbitrage opportunities would appear. Much easier to target just one.
Seems an unbelievable conspiracy.
10 million pounds has been traded on the referendum result on Betfair. It would cost a fortune to manipulate that market.
"The Justice Secretary should be "embarrassed and ashamed" at his "mischief making" in warning that future expansion of the 28-member bloc is set to heap strain on schools, the NHS and housing as well as raising security concerns."
Has there been a similar level of personal attack from a senior conservative LEAVE supporter against a senior conservative REMAIN supporter?
Eurocrats said budget plans inc spending increases to deal with migration crisis, cover payment shortfalls in regional projects, pay for security upgrades to EU sites following Brussels/Paris terror attacks.
"The EU-funded IMF should not interfere in our democratic debate ... It appears the chancellor is cashing in favours to [Christine] Lagarde in order to encourage the IMF to bully the British people."
Osborne in some way forced the Lagarde to make her comments in order to bully the British people. Piri Patel sits in the same cabinet as Osborne. It is absolutely extraordinary.
I can't speak for the LibDem bus, but the Labour bus was a minibus which ferried people who'd come in for the day to the specific canvass spots. The expenses for accommodation were £0.00. Generally, people using the bus were coming in from Nottingham. It is a mistake to imply that the two things are comparable.
£10 million isnt a great deal in the context. £15 million was donated to the two sides in the ten weeks up to mid April and with a market of £10m you could probably skew it with under a million
The challenge would be spreading it over hundreds or thousands of bets. A few large bets would obviously raise suspicions.
Alternatively it could just be primarily a reflection that the wealthy are disproportionately in favour of remaining in and disproportionally have spare cash to invest in obscure markets at Turf Accountants
@Anna_Soubry: Perfectly legal #LabourExpress in Tory marginal Cleethorpes @RachelReevesMP #wevedonenothingwrong https://t.co/0qPkMFKNfY
@Anna_Soubry: #we'vedonenothingwrong #LabourExpress @Andrew4Pendle @eddieIzzard @LucyMPowell . Why the #Torybashing ? https://t.co/AEkM8LigJz
Poll alert: The @Independent has a @ComResPolls poll tonight, shared with @TheSundayMirror https://t.co/xFGoXsKY6k
And because the jury is made up of music industry professionals and hence tend to vote on their perception of musical merit, whereas in the case of the Polish milk maids, the British public was in at least some part voting on the quality of their, um, jugs.
ComRes under Andrew Cooper IMHO has become a bit politically suspect since he returned from Govt. The man is very political for the "wet" Conservatives. Cooper is also the infamous Mr 0.5% chance of Conservatives winning.
Tory maj was a surprise because people didn't believe the Lib Dem polling ! (And the 2 step polling method was very flawed)
There will always be such a class and their views will always be over represented in proportion to others however recent decades have seen an increasing social and cultural disconnect and divergence between this group and others, which, together with that managerial class over valuing themselves with an increasingly obscene pay gap between them and the rest, is causing a collapse in faith in governments and institutions in the west, symptoms of which are Donald Trump being a GOP nomination, the government feeling it had to grant this referendum and it not being anything like a certain outcome that they will win it.
If only I had put a pound accumulator 18 months ago on Corbyn winning Labour, Leicester winning the premuership and trump winning the presidency lol.