I suspect firstly because of cost. But, more importantly, I suspect they don't trust the advertising industry not to leak their strategy to the Remain side.
Yes, I think that's right. I also think they also don't think televised PPBs (who watches them?) will be decisive.
Social media clips of 30s-1minute, however, might be.
Thanks Roger, another good article to go with Ms Cyclefree's yesterday.
Can anyone with the Times post a summary of their front page story on Turkey - if it's half as bad as the headline then Remain are really in trouble.
I think we predicted on here several months ago pretty much to the day, when the PM would write his "Vote Remain or your pension gets it" blackmail letter. Sad to see the man and his office so diminished by this campaign, he must know in his heart by now that he's only got a fortnight left in the job.
5 leaked diplomatic cables:
- visa free travel for 1.5m Turks who hold *special passports* - this is a 'significant and symbolic' gesture to Turkey and thanks for holding up their end of the migrant deal - to keep this secret until after 23rd June "to control the situation" - Head of Europol confirms analysis that terrorist threat linked to migration - inc from false Syrian passports
@FluffyThoughts - what has James Murdoch, a man who let it not be forgotten was obliged to answer some very awkward questions over phone hacking (to which he gave very unconvincing answers) and who owes his position entirely to parental patronage, got that puts him ahead of Sugar (who at least built up his own business)?
Indeed, arguably it is Rupert Murdoch that conforms more nearly to Trump, while James is comparable to Donald Trump Jr.
BSkyB. No wonder he is now running Fox.com Century-Fox.
He didn't come into Sky until years after it had been founded. In fact I think he was the third or fourth chief exec. OK, he hasn't crashed it but equally I'm dubious about its current level of sustainability. He looked like a rabbit in the headlights over BT Vision, and his performance in front of that Select Committee was a sick joke.
So I ask again - in what respect was he better than Sugar?
Question of Leave supporters: accepting that they believe the dire economic warnings (latest is 30% fall in the currency and 20% off house prices) are basically 'scaremongering' - how bad would the theoretical economic shock have to be before they changed their minds?
Or to put it another way - if we voted leave and there WAS actually a significantly negative economic shock, would they think that perhaps a mistake had been made?
The scare stories are illogical.
They have just taken the worst case of each scenario rather than thinking about feedback loops
e.g. interest rates will rise (presumably because of the currency collapse) - but this will support the currency. At the same time, house prices will fall (presumably because of interest rates rise) while ignoring the currency collapse reducing prices for foreign domiciled investors.
I'm still not sure why you'd be increasing interest rates when the economy is falling off a cliff - the only reason would be to support the currency, while a cheaper currency is actually part of the remedy for any economic shock. More QE is a more likely solution - which will actually inflate house prices and cause currency depreciation [it's not a great thing in itself, but if I was running the BofE then I'd flood the market with liquidity in the event of a Brexit vote. Just in case.]
The average joe won't understand the precise mechanisms. But he can smell bullsh1t a mile off. And Remain's scaremongering just comes across that.
Question of Leave supporters: accepting that they believe the dire economic warnings (latest is 30% fall in the currency and 20% off house prices) are basically 'scaremongering' - how bad would the theoretical economic shock have to be before they changed their minds?
Or to put it another way - if we voted leave and there WAS actually a significantly negative economic shock, would they think that perhaps a mistake had been made?
Nope. I've no doubt at all that things will end up alright. The nearest parallel is probably our exit from the ERM in 1992, an event that was literally the firing of the starting gun on a decade-long boom. Having said that it's likely that it will take a couple of years to sort things out, so there may well be a bit of a storm it we will come through it.
For me this is about democracy and who governs us, there was a great article yesterday by James Dyson in the DT, very positive for the future outside the EU and I suspect a lot of entrepreneurs (as opposed to multinationals) feel the same way.
James Dyson's complaint was that he wasn't able to hire non EU workers as easily as he could hire EU workers. He is in favour of a complete free for all. Fair enough that's his argument - but it doesn't remotely fit in with the crack down on immigration promised by the leave campaign.
He was talking about very highly skilled workers - engineers and scientists, PhDs with six figure salaries. Damn right there should be a free for all for those workers.
Seventeen-years ago was the NATO intervention within Kosovo. Despite the crazies running NATO at the time General Sir Michael Jackson refused to attack Russian paratroopers that had invaded Pristina airport. Within months the following people were forced to resign:
General Wesley Clark (C-in-C, NATO), Lord George Robertson (Head, NATO), and General Sir Michael Jackson (C-in-C, KFOR).
Only the last is deserving of any respect....
Robertson in particular was as thick as mince, I would not have trusted him to run a bath.
Good to see Labour examining extending the right to buy to private tenants.
What? Are they saying I could be forced to sell my house to my tenant?
Sounds just about what those halfwits would come up with, they will make it below market value as well. You wonder if they are as stupid as they make out or if they just prefer being the opposition.
It does really illustrate how taxpayers were ripped off by the discounted sellnig of public sector houses though.
The Cameron pension line is obviously and clearly wrong. The Tory Leave elite, like the Tory Remain elite, will do nothing to harm the Tory client state. They know just as well as Dave and George who they need to look after in order to get elected.
Which sort of makes threatening them a bit mad. I really don't get where Cameron's coming from, winning a vote is one thing doing it while annoying all your core supporters is another.
As I have said before, the problem with victory at all costs is eventually the bill turns up and this one is going to be expensive.
I said a long time ago that you'd know Remain were seriously worried about losing if they raised pensions as an issue. Ten days out and lo and behold. This tells me that Leave have it in the bag.
For a good laugh, I'd recommend pages 12-13 of the Sunday Times. Of Conservative MPs "The careerists are shitting themselves. It's no fun kissing backsides for years, only to discover you've been kissing the wrong backsides."
The Cameron pension line is obviously and clearly wrong. The Tory Leave elite, like the Tory Remain elite, will do nothing to harm the Tory client state. They know just as well as Dave and George who they need to look after in order to get elected.
Which sort of makes threatening them a bit mad. I really don't get where Cameron's coming from, winning a vote is one thing doing it while annoying all your core supporters is another.
As I have said before, the problem with victory at all costs is eventually the bill turns up and this one is going to be expensive.
I said a long time ago that you'd know Remain were seriously worried about losing if they raised pensions as an issue. Ten days out and lo and behold. This tells me that Leave have it in the bag.
Leave absolutely do not have this in the bag.
No but we're winning, if mostly due to topics I personally don't care about.
Question of Leave supporters: accepting that they believe the dire economic warnings (latest is 30% fall in the currency and 20% off house prices) are basically 'scaremongering' - how bad would the theoretical economic shock have to be before they changed their minds?
Or to put it another way - if we voted leave and there WAS actually a significantly negative economic shock, would they think that perhaps a mistake had been made?
Nope. I've no doubt at all that things will end up alright. The nearest parallel is probably our exit from the ERM in 1992, an event that was literally the firing of the starting gun on a decade-long boom. Having said that it's likely that it will take a couple of years to sort things out, so there may well be a bit of a storm it we will come through it.
For me this is about democracy and who governs us, there was a great article yesterday by James Dyson in the DT, very positive for the future outside the EU and I suspect a lot of entrepreneurs (as opposed to multinationals) feel the same way.
James Dyson's complaint was that he wasn't able to hire non EU workers as easily as he could hire EU workers. He is in favour of a complete free for all. Fair enough that's his argument - but it doesn't remotely fit in with the crack down on immigration promised by the leave campaign.
He was talking about very highly skilled workers - engineers and scientists, PhDs with six figure salaries. Damn right there should be a free for all for those workers.
Car washers and Big Issue sellers, not so much.
Our elected government, not the EU, has decided to restrict Dyson's ability to hire highly-qualified scientists and engineers.
Good to see Labour examining extending the right to buy to private tenants.
What? Are they saying I could be forced to sell my house to my tenant?
Yes- at a heft discount lol
Will be very popular among the young.
I never swear on this blog, but if that's true they can fuck right off.
All that will happen it that people who for example work abroad for a few years will just leave their places empty.
They will force empty properties to be sold as well as that will mean you are a rich property speculator, or make council tax a gazillion pounds on empty houses.
That was pretty much his approach to education...and God help us, Nicky Morgan is worse, appointing a failed bureaucrat (one who failed really disastrously, with catastrophic consequences, at that) who has never even set foot in a classroom as the new Chief Inspector at OFSTED.
The sad irony of Wilshaw is that he was the only Head of OFSTED with significant front line teaching experience, and his first act was to go native.
“If you think using professionals is expensive you should see what it costs to use amateurs."
I once quoted that Red Adair saying, and the other person replied with
'The Titanic was built by professionals, The Ark was built by amateurs'
But thank you for another excellent piece Roger
In fairness, there wasn't much wrong with the construction of the Titanic.
To a point I would certainly agree.
However ship construction now requires the bulkheads to go to the "uppermost continuous deck" and damage stability to be taken into account. ( to a point the designers of Titanic did consider damage stability at least)
The SOLAS* regulations also evolved directly from this disaster that has protected Mariners ever since and saved many lives at sea. You will now see this manifestation on commercial vessels, ferries and other craft.
Why LEAVE have chosen to do everything in-house is a mystery.
I suspect firstly because of cost. But, more importantly, I suspect they don't trust the advertising industry not to leak their strategy to the Remain side.
Lol - now the admen are part of the conspiracy? The list of evil plotters gets bigger by the day.
No conspiracy - just a realistic expectation that an overwhelming majority of advertising employees support Remain (young, metropolitan, wealthier than average) and that one individual within what would be a relatively large team would probably leak it.
That's the way the world works (sadly). I'm sure you could limit it to a "need to know" basis with a firewalled team, etc, but why take the risk?
Your description of the ad lads did lead me to wonder if part of the problem the ads are a bit dull is they are crafted by people who have no experience of the other half of society. If they have little cultural affinity they must struggle to hit the right notes.
Isn't it kinda their job to 'hit the right notes' though...
certainly, but sometimes I think it's like sending a heavy metal band to play Chopin.
Mr. Sandpit, precisely my view. The idea someone's private property can be forcibly bought from them, at a discount, is reprehensible.
Mr. Doethur, the difference is that getting something from the state (to which one contributes through taxes) is fundamentally different to getting it from an individual.
I if work hard and make money and decide to buy some property both for income and a potential source of large cash if I decide to sell, only to have the rug pulled from under me (so I make a huge loss), I'd be furious, and rightly so.
The state dictating private property can be forcibly acquired against the will of the owner, at a potentially devastating loss, is unacceptable.
Cameron has gone mad, stark staring mad. I've just read his rant in the Telegraph. Vote Remain or your bus passes free TV licences and the triple pension lock gets it.
Naked blackmail - and naked Blackmail of a generation who sacrificed so much and gave up loved ones and so much material comfort to win a world war.
And he thinks it will help.He might as well have called our pensioners "Bastards" (cf ~Major)
What an steaming idiot.
It was what saved him in Scottish Referendum, that was the last throw of the dice and the pensioners saved him based on fear. His last great hope yet again.
Except it wasn't. Cameron has drawn the wrong lesson by focusing on the result rather than the direction of travel over the previous months. The relentless negativity of Better Together (too poor, too wee, too stupid) almost lost against the optimism of the independence movement. What turned things around were the vow and the last-minute intervention of Gordon Brown in presenting a positive case for the union.
Both Cameron and Brown majored on losing pensions, that was their positive case. It was a bare faced lie then and is no different this time.
For a good laugh, I'd recommend pages 12-13 of the Sunday Times. Of Conservative MPs "The careerists are shitting themselves. It's no fun kissing backsides for years, only to discover you've been kissing the wrong backsides."
Not sure I need to. That post itself has raised a chuckle in me.
Cameron has gone mad, stark staring mad. I've just read his rant in the Telegraph. Vote Remain or your bus passes free TV licences and the triple pension lock gets it.
Naked blackmail - and naked Blackmail of a generation who sacrificed so much and gave up loved ones and so much material comfort to win a world war.
And he thinks it will help.He might as well have called our pensioners "Bastards" (cf ~Major)
What an steaming idiot.
I saw a clip on Sky that he's threatening to cut the Defence/NHS budgets too - and basically says that if we don't vote Remain, his entire manifesto can't be delivered.
Talk about going all in. If I wasn't seeing this with my own eyes - I wouldn't believe it.
Whoever is is media bod sure isn't Alistair Campbell!
It's very clear that they've got a hammer - and everything looks like a nail. There's no finesse - no subtlety. I don't feel they're even trying to seduce me, it's all bash-bash-bash.
Well Cameron and co are certainly going to have to try and build a "bridge over troubled water" whatever happens.
For a good laugh, I'd recommend pages 12-13 of the Sunday Times. Of Conservative MPs "The careerists are shitting themselves. It's no fun kissing backsides for years, only to discover you've been kissing the wrong backsides."
The Cameron pension line is obviously and clearly wrong. The Tory Leave elite, like the Tory Remain elite, will do nothing to harm the Tory client state. They know just as well as Dave and George who they need to look after in order to get elected.
Which sort of makes threatening them a bit mad. I really don't get where Cameron's coming from, winning a vote is one thing doing it while annoying all your core supporters is another.
As I have said before, the problem with victory at all costs is eventually the bill turns up and this one is going to be expensive.
Many of his core supporters are deeply passionate leavers - annoying them was unavoidable. That being the case, clearly he felt he needed to go all out in order to win, which he feels is the best interests of the country, even if it really pissed off those same people.
I've said before it all seems straightforward and not in the least irrational as people are presenting it- Cameron likely knows his tactics are damaging, but sees no alternative, and that must mean he felt it would be close from the start. Victory at any cost was the only way to victory. Sure the bill will come due, but that's better than it being due right now if he loses.
He's using a political payday loan - it's only going to get him in to deeper trouble, but it gives him a chance to get by now to face things later.
Economic fear is the best card remain have. Not all leavers think things will be fine, as cyclefree put it yesterday some have decided the price is worth it. If the price looks higher, some will waver.
Enough? I don't think so. I think people are ignoring such warnings now and many of those feel things are crappy already. And it us a shame the best arguments remain have are so negative.
But I understand it, I believe Roger has said before, in politics going negative usually works.
For a good laugh, I'd recommend pages 12-13 of the Sunday Times. Of Conservative MPs "The careerists are shitting themselves. It's no fun kissing backsides for years, only to discover you've been kissing the wrong backsides."
An amusing line, but it makes no sense. The ge was a year ago. Until at least then and some while after, Camerons arse was the right one to kiss. Cosying up to Boris for instance 'years' ago would do no good before now.
More appropriately, they are discovering it's no fun being too late to notice kissing the backside ain't what it used to be
The Cameron pension line is obviously and clearly wrong. The Tory Leave elite, like the Tory Remain elite, will do nothing to harm the Tory client state. They know just as well as Dave and George who they need to look after in order to get elected.
Which sort of makes threatening them a bit mad. I really don't get where Cameron's coming from, winning a vote is one thing doing it while annoying all your core supporters is another.
As I have said before, the problem with victory at all costs is eventually the bill turns up and this one is going to be expensive.
I said a long time ago that you'd know Remain were seriously worried about losing if they raised pensions as an issue. Ten days out and lo and behold. This tells me that Leave have it in the bag.
Leave absolutely do not have this in the bag.
No but we're winning, if mostly due to topics I personally don't care about.
I'm not sure. I think Leave are underestimating just how many voters (totally inaccurately, of course) fear for their short-term wallets. And not much else.
Question of Leave supporters: accepting that they believe the dire economic warnings (latest is 30% fall in the currency and 20% off house prices) are basically 'scaremongering' - how bad would the theoretical economic shock have to be before they changed their minds?
Or to put it another way - if we voted leave and there WAS actually a significantly negative economic shock, would they think that perhaps a mistake had been made?
The scare stories are illogical.
They have just taken the worst case of each scenario rather than thinking about feedback loops
e.g. interest rates will rise (presumably because of the currency collapse) - but this will support the currency. At the same time, house prices will fall (presumably because of interest rates rise) while ignoring the currency collapse reducing prices for foreign domiciled investors.
I'm still not sure why you'd be increasing interest rates when the economy is falling off a cliff - the only reason would be to support the currency, while a cheaper currency is actually part of the remedy for any economic shock. More QE is a more likely solution - which will actually inflate house prices and cause currency depreciation [it's not a great thing in itself, but if I was running the BofE then I'd flood the market with liquidity in the event of a Brexit vote. Just in case.]
The average joe won't understand the precise mechanisms. But he can smell bullsh1t a mile off. And Remain's scaremongering just comes across that.
The feedback loop is presumably:
Currency crash -> increased inflation (including significant increased costs for businesses, including exporting businesses) -> increased interest rates -> significant crisis in housing market (negative equity, unaffordable (existing mortgages), house price falls, significant reduction in housing investment) -> less money in people's pockets -> less spending on highstreet -> Recession
FFS, Cameron isn't threatening to cut pensions as a vindictive response to a Levae vote, just pointing out that they may be unsustainable due to damage Brexit will cause. They are, after all, our single biggest welfare benefit.
(Though personally I'd be happy to see state pensions frozen for a few years to help the deficit, which until this referendum everyone on here card about)
Just looking at the rather amusing "shoot to kill" Dan Hodges article. A few choice quotes:
The first serious act of aggression was launched two weeks ago when Johnson and Gove co-authored a letter accusing the Prime Minister of being ‘corrosive of public trust’ over immigration.
I guess all the attacks on Boris and Gove before that weren't "serious"?
None of that has [the attacks on Boris] anything to do with a Machiavellian scheme from No 10 or No 11,’ says a Cabinet Minister. ‘Boris is personally rude, misogynistic, disruptive in meetings, and makes everything about him. He is not at all a team player, and is actually a complete vacuum when it comes to belief, conviction or moral compass. He has no sense of duty, no sense of loyalty and no sense of service.’
I like the focus on policies and what is the best for the UK in the long term. That's what's important, right folks?
[the now] ceaseless wave of attacks on the Prime Minister’s integrity. ‘Cameron called for honesty then told five outright lies in 30 minutes,’ said an article posted on the Vote Leave website following his clash with Farage on Tuesday.
I guess he should be allowed to allowed to say what he likes because he's a 'pretty straight sort of guy', right?
By trying to win the referendum in a way that gives him the best opportunity of putting his party back together, the Prime Minister risks losing the contest.
It is amazing how Hodges' rabid Europhilia has clouded his judgement on the EU referendum to the extent of it being a complete waste of time to read his articles.
Good to see Labour examining extending the right to buy to private tenants.
What? Are they saying I could be forced to sell my house to my tenant?
Sounds just about what those halfwits would come up with, they will make it below market value as well. You wonder if they are as stupid as they make out or if they just prefer being the opposition.
It does really illustrate how taxpayers were ripped off by the discounted sellnig of public sector houses though.
For sure and made sure people were too busying trying not to be out on the street to protest about anything.
Cameron has gone mad, stark staring mad. I've just read his rant in the Telegraph. Vote Remain or your bus passes free TV licences and the triple pension lock gets it.
Naked blackmail - and naked Blackmail of a generation who sacrificed so much and gave up loved ones and so much material comfort to win a world war.
And he thinks it will help.He might as well have called our pensioners "Bastards" (cf ~Major)
What an steaming idiot.
I saw a clip on Sky that he's threatening to cut the Defence/NHS budgets too - and basically says that if we don't vote Remain, his entire manifesto can't be delivered.
Talk about going all in. If I wasn't seeing this with my own eyes - I wouldn't believe it.
It's completely true: what you voted for, what you used to cheer to the rafters is predicated on high levels of immigration and EU membership. You voted for policies designed to clear the deficit by 2020. If that is to happen it requires a certain level of growth, plus tax rises and spending cuts. If growth stalls as a result of Brexit - and even most Leavers concede it will - then to achieve what you voted for there will have to be further cuts and/or tax rises.
No we didn't we voted to not have a neomarxist Wonk and the Krankies (Salmond and Sturgeon) anywhere the leavers of power.
Cameron has been daft enough to think that people actually voted for him.
Plato made absolutely clear that she completely endorsed government policy. She used to be a big fan of everything it did. If you do not support moving to a surplus by 2020, fair enough.
Excuse me. Do not put words in my mouth or use me as a pawn in your proxy war.
I'm not. I am making a statement of fact. You are repudiating policies and strategies that just a few months ago you enthusiastically endorsed - such as Osborne's deficit reduction plan.
Mr. Doethur, the difference is that getting something from the state (to which one contributes through taxes) is fundamentally different to getting it from an individual.
I if work hard and make money and decide to buy some property both for income and a potential source of large cash if I decide to sell, only to have the rug pulled from under me (so I make a huge loss), I'd be furious, and rightly so.
The state dictating private property can be forcibly acquired against the will of the owner, at a potentially devastating loss, is unacceptable.
I can see that to an extent. But selling them at a huge discount was effectively subsidising private enterprise. Moreover that argument really doesn't apply to housing associations.
The irony of Corbyn's idea, if it is as reported, is that it would make it near-impossible to rent cheaply while still not reducing house prices to the level most people could afford - therefore absolutely hammering the disadvantaged and giving cash bonuses of inflating assets bought cheaply to those who already have money.
Except experts who matter who have relevant real world experience are not all on the Remain side are they? Why are you wilfully disrespecting experts like Dyson and others?
Who has more experience in setting up a business, running a business and trading globally? Dyson or Hawking?
If this was a debate about physics I'd trust Hawking. It's not its a debate about trade so Dyson is the expert here.
For a good laugh, I'd recommend pages 12-13 of the Sunday Times. Of Conservative MPs "The careerists are shitting themselves. It's no fun kissing backsides for years, only to discover you've been kissing the wrong backsides."
The PB Tories who still back Remain are also dominated by arse-lickers.
I doubt it would be long before they turned their affections to a PM Boris or PM Gove.
If you have to cut spending then you will be taking away money from the recipients.
Assuming spending is reasonably well targeted then by definition that is the people with the least (even changes to the state pension affect the poorest most as it's a bigger proportion of their retirement income).
It was good to see tax increases on the wealthiest decile as well.
Yep, the government's deficit reduction plans - supported enthusiastically by the Tory Leavers - have had the biggest impact on the poorest and the least impact on the wealthiest. Ditto cuts to services. That won't change under Boris. The Elite will be absolutely fine.
All you are saying is that you wanted a different mix of tax increases and spending cuts. That's fine, but not particularly insightful
Mine For Nothing New YouGov poll: Only 32% of people trust BOE Governor Mark Carney in the EU referendum debate. And just 21% of Undecided voters. #Brexit
Just looking at the rather amusing "shoot to kill" Dan Hodges article. A few choice quotes:
The first serious act of aggression was launched two weeks ago when Johnson and Gove co-authored a letter accusing the Prime Minister of being ‘corrosive of public trust’ over immigration.
I guess all the attacks on Boris and Gove before that weren't "serious"?
None of that has [the attacks on Boris] anything to do with a Machiavellian scheme from No 10 or No 11,’ says a Cabinet Minister. ‘Boris is personally rude, misogynistic, disruptive in meetings, and makes everything about him. He is not at all a team player, and is actually a complete vacuum when it comes to belief, conviction or moral compass. He has no sense of duty, no sense of loyalty and no sense of service.’
I like the focus on policies and what is the best for the UK in the long term. That's what's important, right folks?
[the now] ceaseless wave of attacks on the Prime Minister’s integrity. ‘Cameron called for honesty then told five outright lies in 30 minutes,’ said an article posted on the Vote Leave website following his clash with Farage on Tuesday.
I guess he should be allowed to allowed to say what he likes because he's a 'pretty straight sort of guy', right?
By trying to win the referendum in a way that gives him the best opportunity of putting his party back together, the Prime Minister risks losing the contest.
It is amazing how Hodges' rabid Europhilia has clouded his judgement on the EU referendum to the extent of it being a complete waste of time to read his articles.
While that may be so, and I think leave will win, I'm pretty sure people said his anti ed m monomania meant it was a waste of time reading his stuff pre ge.
It doesn't mean he is right now, but he's been ignored due to being rabid before.
So I ask again - in what respect was he better than Sugar?
I doubt Mr Sugar could repeat his 'Eighties success under current UK and EU-Legislation. Look at the mess he left THFC in.
Right, so he had better luck at one time and left a mess. But James Murdoch inherited a strong position from which he took News International to the brink of total ruin and Sky is not currently in my judgement doing particularly well at innovating in an increasingly crowded and diverse market.
So again - what's with the adulation for this idiot?
I think it's Shami Chakrabarti in the Remain video, rather than Reeta. While Stephanie Flanders (and Paul Mason for that matter) are safely out of the BBC to enable them to be opinion makers, I think Reeta Chakrabarti promoting Remain would raise a few eyebrows!
The point I have made-apparently unsuccessfully-is that the 'Remain' broadcast and everthing else we are seeing from the Remain side is likely to be the result of extensive research and targetting. If 'YOU' aren't seeing it then (probably) you're not the target market.
You'll either be in the bag or in the other side's bag or unconvincable!!
One factor in those Nobel Laureate luvvies' (poor things) endorsement of "Remain" is surely the fact that EU research funding is favourable to the UK.
What EU research funding has done is that it has relentlessly poured research money in to the top tier universities.
When the UK largely controlled its own spending in research, the money was spread more evenly, so say Universities of Oxford & Leicester & Bedfordshore would all get some research monies, though of course somewhat more for Oxford and somewhat less for Bedfordshire.
Now, almost all the research money is skewed towards the very best departments at the very best universities.
As you can imagine, this has produced winners (my department is absolutely swimming with Euro-cash). And the Nobel ‘luvvies’ (great name, BTW) will be absolutely huge beneficiaries, with truly enormous grants. So, no surprise they are so enthusiastic.
However, it has produced very many more losers, such as Leicester and Bedfordshire, whose research income will have shrunk over the last ten years. The UK grants will not have been replaced by EU grants.
And of course, if the UK is getting the lions share of the research money, that means entire countries (like Slovakia or Portugal or Latvia, poor countries) are being absolutely shafted. They are putting in to the EU science budget and getting nothing out.
If you believe the Rich should get Richer, and the Poor should have what little they possess taken away from then, then EU funding of science has been an enormous success.
One factor in those Nobel Laureate luvvies' (poor things) endorsement of "Remain" is surely the fact that EU research funding is favourable to the UK.
It's a weak argument though. EU research funding recycled to the UK out of our gross contributions is pretty meaningless as a reason to stay, particularly since our net contributions are approaching £10bn pa.
Dominic Cummings, for example, views additional science spending as a key reason to Leave.
The Cameron pension line is obviously and clearly wrong. The Tory Leave elite, like the Tory Remain elite, will do nothing to harm the Tory client state. They know just as well as Dave and George who they need to look after in order to get elected.
Which sort of makes threatening them a bit mad. I really don't get where Cameron's coming from, winning a vote is one thing doing it while annoying all your core supporters is another.
As I have said before, the problem with victory at all costs is eventually the bill turns up and this one is going to be expensive.
I said a long time ago that you'd know Remain were seriously worried about losing if they raised pensions as an issue. Ten days out and lo and behold. This tells me that Leave have it in the bag.
Leave absolutely do not have this in the bag.
No but we're winning, if mostly due to topics I personally don't care about.
I'm not sure. I think Leave are underestimating just how many voters (totally inaccurately, of course) fear for their short-term wallets. And not much else.
There are an awful lot of those.
I said it many weeks ago that people would vote Remain to save a FIVER. That was what happened in Scottish Referendum, some fools voted based on greed having been told their pensions would be cut. Naked personal greed due to fear will win it for Remain.
One factor in those Nobel Laureate luvvies' (poor things) endorsement of "Remain" is surely the fact that EU research funding is favourable to the UK.
What EU research funding has done is that it has relentlessly poured research money in to the top tier universities.
When the UK largely controlled its own spending in research, the money was spread more evenly, so say Universities of Oxford & Leicester & Bedfordshore would all get some research monies, though of course somewhat more for Oxford and somewhat less for Bedfordshire.
Now, almost all the research money is skewed towards the very best departments at the very best universities.
As you can imagine, this has produced winners (my department is absolutely swimming with Euro-cash). And the Nobel ‘luvvies’ (great name, BTW) will be absolutely huge beneficiaries, with truly enormous grants. So, no surprise they are so enthusiastic.
However, it has produced very many more losers, such as Leicester and Bedfordshire, whose research income will have shrunk over the last ten years. The UK grants will not have been replaced by EU grants.
And of course, if the UK is getting the lions share of the research money, that means entire countries (like Slovakia or Portugal or Latvia, poor countries) are being absolutely shafted. They are putting in to the EU science budget and getting nothing out.
If you believe the Rich should get Richer, and the Poor should have what little they possess taken away from then, then EU funding of science has been an enormous success.
That sounds to me like a problem that could be easily fixed by the UK Government simply changing its research funding policy.
Just like on any other matter we currently have domestic sovereign control over.
LOL. Of course, the 1,500 hours and a whole shelf of reading for exams needed for an Air Transport Pilot's Licence are a complete waste of time!!
I thought the Hawker-Siddeley Trident made pilots irrelevant when landing. [And, as a result, introduced 'balck-boxes'.] So how did it go wrong after it's introduction in 1964....
Mine For Nothing New YouGov poll: Only 32% of people trust BOE Governor Mark Carney in the EU referendum debate. And just 21% of Undecided voters. #Brexit
A problem for Remain is that some erstwhile "neutral" experts are trusted, but only up until the point at which they come out for Remain.
The point I have made-apparently unsuccessfully-is that the 'Remain' broadcast and everthing else we are seeing from the Remain side is likely to be the result of extensive research and targetting. If 'YOU' aren't seeing it then (probably) you're not the target market.
You'll either be in the bag or in the other side's bag or unconvincable!!
Oh, I see what they are trying to do. Hammer home messages at the waverers so they switch or stay at home, ignore trying to convince the passionate and rely on the loyal and labour to rally the core remain vote. I've no doubt they've researched it a lot. Facts on the ground might hinder its effectiveness, but the strategy makes sense.
The Cameron pension line is obviously and clearly wrong. The Tory Leave elite, like the Tory Remain elite, will do nothing to harm the Tory client state. They know just as well as Dave and George who they need to look after in order to get elected.
Which sort of makes threatening them a bit mad. I really don't get where Cameron's coming from, winning a vote is one thing doing it while annoying all your core supporters is another.
As I have said before, the problem with victory at all costs is eventually the bill turns up and this one is going to be expensive.
I said a long time ago that you'd know Remain were seriously worried about losing if they raised pensions as an issue. Ten days out and lo and behold. This tells me that Leave have it in the bag.
Leave absolutely do not have this in the bag.
No but we're winning, if mostly due to topics I personally don't care about.
I'm not sure. I think Leave are underestimating just how many voters (totally inaccurately, of course) fear for their short-term wallets. And not much else.
There are an awful lot of those.
Yes but to turn them you have to make a credible threat not a laughable one.
If Cameron had said something along the lines of
"there will be an inevitable economic cost, at least in the short term which could see an uptick in unemployment by half a million and interest rates and inflation two or three percent higher over the next five years. You might be able to survive it but it would mean life was a bit harder and think also of those not as fortunate as you who will suffer more before you vote"
that may well have resonated. Instead we got, £4300, ten million or whatever it was unemployed, a house price crash, world war three and the south of england sinking into the sea because leaving the EU would cause runaway climate change (ok I made up the last one but none of it is believeable)
Mr. Roger, that point about research was made when people raised the Nigel Farage's Little England line as something that was going to piss the electorate off.
Mind you, finding a potential area to work on (Farage being disliked by some) and applying the line to exploit it are two different things.
Except experts who matter who have relevant real world experience are not all on the Remain side are they? Why are you wilfully disrespecting experts like Dyson and others?
Who has more experience in setting up a business, running a business and trading globally? Dyson or Hawking?
If this was a debate about physics I'd trust Hawking. It's not its a debate about trade so Dyson is the expert here.
Experts have specialist subject knowledge, within their area of expertise, however that doesn't make them immune to groupthink, orthodoxy or confirmation bias. On political matters, they can be just as opinionated as the rest of us.
And what Adam Smith said in the 18th Century is as true today, as it was then: "People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise prices."
The Cameron pension line is obviously and clearly wrong. The Tory Leave elite, like the Tory Remain elite, will do nothing to harm the Tory client state. They know just as well as Dave and George who they need to look after in order to get elected.
Which sort of makes threatening them a bit mad. I really don't get where Cameron's coming from, winning a vote is one thing doing it while annoying all your core supporters is another.
As I have said before, the problem with victory at all costs is eventually the bill turns up and this one is going to be expensive.
I said a long time ago that you'd know Remain were seriously worried about losing if they raised pensions as an issue. Ten days out and lo and behold. This tells me that Leave have it in the bag.
Leave absolutely do not have this in the bag.
No but we're winning, if mostly due to topics I personally don't care about.
I'm not sure. I think Leave are underestimating just how many voters (totally inaccurately, of course) fear for their short-term wallets. And not much else.
There are an awful lot of those.
I said it many weeks ago that people would vote Remain to save a FIVER. That was what happened in Scottish Referendum, some fools voted based on greed having been told their pensions would be cut. Naked personal greed due to fear will win it for Remain.
We English are made of sterner stuff and don't have quite such a love for the contents of our spporrans (wallets)
The Cameron pension line is obviously and clearly wrong. The Tory Leave elite, like the Tory Remain elite, will do nothing to harm the Tory client state. They know just as well as Dave and George who they need to look after in order to get elected.
Which sort of makes threatening them a bit mad. I really don't get where Cameron's coming from, winning a vote is one thing doing it while annoying all your core supporters is another.
As I have said before, the problem with victory at all costs is eventually the bill turns up and this one is going to be expensive.
I said a long time ago that you'd know Remain were seriously worried about losing if they raised pensions as an issue. Ten days out and lo and behold. This tells me that Leave have it in the bag.
Leave absolutely do not have this in the bag.
No but we're winning, if mostly due to topics I personally don't care about.
I'm not sure. I think Leave are underestimating just how many voters (totally inaccurately, of course) fear for their short-term wallets. And not much else.
There are an awful lot of those.
Yes but to turn them you have to make a credible threat not a laughable one.
If Cameron had said something along the lines of
"there will be an inevitable economic cost, at least in the short term which could see an uptick in unemployment by half a million and interest rates and inflation two or three percent higher over the next five years. You might be able to survive it but it would mean life was a bit harder and think also of those not as fortunate as you who will suffer more before you vote"
that may well have resonated. Instead we got, £4300, ten million or whatever it was unemployed, a house price crash, world war three and the south of england sinking into the sea because leaving the EU would cause runaway climate change (ok I made up the last one but none of it is believeable)
An interesting thing about the "£4,300" is that no-one's talking about that number as everyone is too busy attacking Vote Leave's £350m.
The point I have made-apparently unsuccessfully-is that the 'Remain' broadcast and everthing else we are seeing from the Remain side is likely to be the result of extensive research and targetting. If 'YOU' aren't seeing it then (probably) you're not the target market.
You'll either be in the bag or in the other side's bag or unconvincable!!
As ever a good point Roger, however the problem here is we are on new ground. I suspect the campaigns are headed by politicos who know their own supporters and their parties' target swing groups well. This works under FPTP when you can effectively ignore the views of 50% of the electorate.
However in a referendum everything's all mixed up. Some of your swing voters are probably people you have never engaged with before, or are a forced choice where targeting one group's key values offends another. that's why I think the communication side of this referendum is so hard to manage, a lot of it is treading new ground and as a results lots of mistakes are being made by both sides.
Mr. Royale, that reminds me of polling from around 2005 (I think) when people liked specific policies until they discovered they were Conservative.
Mr. Bedfordshire, quite. The woe, doom, death and despair that was laid on so thick early on has substantially eroded the impact of any more dreadful warnings which Remain come out with.
F1: progress a bit slow on the pre-race piece as I have been listening to lots of Queen. I blame Mr. Charles for this.
The Cameron pension line is obviously and clearly wrong. The Tory Leave elite, like the Tory Remain elite, will do nothing to harm the Tory client state. They know just as well as Dave and George who they need to look after in order to get elected.
Which sort of makes threatening them a bit mad. I really don't get where Cameron's coming from, winning a vote is one thing doing it while annoying all your core supporters is another.
As I have said before, the problem with victory at all costs is eventually the bill turns up and this one is going to be expensive.
I said a long time ago that you'd know Remain were seriously worried about losing if they raised pensions as an issue. Ten days out and lo and behold. This tells me that Leave have it in the bag.
Leave absolutely do not have this in the bag.
No but we're winning, if mostly due to topics I personally don't care about.
I'm not sure. I think Leave are underestimating just how many voters (totally inaccurately, of course) fear for their short-term wallets. And not much else.
There are an awful lot of those.
I said it many weeks ago that people would vote Remain to save a FIVER. That was what happened in Scottish Referendum, some fools voted based on greed having been told their pensions would be cut. Naked personal greed due to fear will win it for Remain.
Sadly I tend to agree. A few slim polling leads haven't convinced me.
Cameron has gone mad, stark staring mad. I've just read his rant in the Telegraph. Vote Remain or your bus passes free TV licences and the triple pension lock gets it.
Naked blackmail - and naked Blackmail of a generation who sacrificed so much and gave up loved ones and so much material comfort to win a world war.
And he thinks it will help.He might as well have called our pensioners "Bastards" (cf ~Major)
What an steaming idiot.
I saw a clip on Sky that he's threatening to cut the Defence/NHS budgets too - and basically says that if we don't vote Remain, his entire manifesto can't be delivered.
Talk about going all in. If I wasn't seeing this with my own eyes - I wouldn't believe it.
It's completely true: what you voted for, what you used to cheer to the rafters is predicated on high levels of immigration and EU membership. You voted for policies designed to clear the deficit by 2020. If that is to happen it requires a certain level of growth, plus tax rises and spending cuts. If growth stalls as a result of Brexit - and even most Leavers concede it will - then to achieve what you voted for there will have to be further cuts and/or tax rises.
No we didn't we voted to not have a neomarxist Wonk and the Krankies (Salmond and Sturgeon) anywhere the leavers of power.
Cameron has been daft enough to think that people actually voted for him.
Plato made absolutely clear that she completely endorsed government policy. She used to be a big fan of everything it did. If you do not support moving to a surplus by 2020, fair enough.
Excuse me. Do not put words in my mouth or use me as a pawn in your proxy war.
I'm not. I am making a statement of fact. You are repudiating policies and strategies that just a few months ago you enthusiastically endorsed - such as Osborne's deficit reduction plan.
Just stop. Make your own case - and leave me out of it.
Just looking at the rather amusing "shoot to kill" Dan Hodges article. A few choice quotes:
The first serious act of aggression was launched two weeks ago when Johnson and Gove co-authored a letter accusing the Prime Minister of being ‘corrosive of public trust’ over immigration.
I guess all the attacks on Boris and Gove before that weren't "serious"?
None of that has [the attacks on Boris] anything to do with a Machiavellian scheme from No 10 or No 11,’ says a Cabinet Minister. ‘Boris is personally rude, misogynistic, disruptive in meetings, and makes everything about him. He is not at all a team player, and is actually a complete vacuum when it comes to belief, conviction or moral compass. He has no sense of duty, no sense of loyalty and no sense of service.’
I like the focus on policies and what is the best for the UK in the long term. That's what's important, right folks?
[the now] ceaseless wave of attacks on the Prime Minister’s integrity. ‘Cameron called for honesty then told five outright lies in 30 minutes,’ said an article posted on the Vote Leave website following his clash with Farage on Tuesday.
I guess he should be allowed to allowed to say what he likes because he's a 'pretty straight sort of guy', right?
By trying to win the referendum in a way that gives him the best opportunity of putting his party back together, the Prime Minister risks losing the contest.
It is amazing how Hodges' rabid Europhilia has clouded his judgement on the EU referendum to the extent of it being a complete waste of time to read his articles.
I seem to recall that he was paid by the EU to write articles attacking any Eurosceptics during the 2014 European elections? I wish I could remember the name of the particular group that he worked for, but it was openly a pro-EU propaganda unit.
Just looking at the rather amusing "shoot to kill" Dan Hodges article. A few choice quotes:
The first serious act of aggression was launched two weeks ago when Johnson and Gove co-authored a letter accusing the Prime Minister of being ‘corrosive of public trust’ over immigration.
I guess all the attacks on Boris and Gove before that weren't "serious"?
None of that has [the attacks on Boris] anything to do with a Machiavellian scheme from No 10 or No 11,’ says a Cabinet Minister. ‘Boris is personally rude, misogynistic, disruptive in meetings, and makes everything about him. He is not at all a team player, and is actually a complete vacuum when it comes to belief, conviction or moral compass. He has no sense of duty, no sense of loyalty and no sense of service.’
I like the focus on policies and what is the best for the UK in the long term. That's what's important, right folks?
[the now] ceaseless wave of attacks on the Prime Minister’s integrity. ‘Cameron called for honesty then told five outright lies in 30 minutes,’ said an article posted on the Vote Leave website following his clash with Farage on Tuesday.
I guess he should be allowed to allowed to say what he likes because he's a 'pretty straight sort of guy', right?
By trying to win the referendum in a way that gives him the best opportunity of putting his party back together, the Prime Minister risks losing the contest.
It is amazing how Hodges' rabid Europhilia has clouded his judgement on the EU referendum to the extent of it being a complete waste of time to read his articles.
While that may be so, and I think leave will win, I'm pretty sure people said his anti ed m monomania meant it was a waste of time reading his stuff pre ge.
It doesn't mean he is right now, but he's been ignored due to being rabid before.
Surely the more apposite example of his prediction here is his 'naked' run down Whitehall after consistently ridiculing and under-calling UKIP.
If you have to cut spending then you will be taking away money from the recipients.
Assuming spending is reasonably well targeted then by definition that is the people with the least (even changes to the state pension affect the poorest most as it's a bigger proportion of their retirement income).
It was good to see tax increases on the wealthiest decile as well.
Yep, the government's deficit reduction plans - supported enthusiastically by the Tory Leavers - have had the biggest impact on the poorest and the least impact on the wealthiest. Ditto cuts to services. That won't change under Boris. The Elite will be absolutely fine.
All you are saying is that you wanted a different mix of tax increases and spending cuts. That's fine, but not particularly insightful
No, all I am saying is that framing the referendum as the People v the Elite, as if the Elite would in any way be biscomfited by Brexit, is ridiculous. The Elite will be absolutely fine. What's more, given what Tory Leavers have enthusiasticalky supported over the years, the notion that they are on the side of the weak and the vulnerable is risible.
The Cameron pension line is obviously and clearly wrong. The Tory Leave elite, like the Tory Remain elite, will do nothing to harm the Tory client state. They know just as well as Dave and George who they need to look after in order to get elected.
Which sort of makes threatening them a bit mad. I really don't get where Cameron's coming from, winning a vote is one thing doing it while annoying all your core supporters is another.
As I have said before, the problem with victory at all costs is eventually the bill turns up and this one is going to be expensive.
I said a long time ago that you'd know Remain were seriously worried about losing if they raised pensions as an issue. Ten days out and lo and behold. This tells me that Leave have it in the bag.
Leave absolutely do not have this in the bag.
No but we're winning, if mostly due to topics I personally don't care about.
I'm not sure. I think Leave are underestimating just how many voters (totally inaccurately, of course) fear for their short-term wallets. And not much else.
There are an awful lot of those.
I said it many weeks ago that people would vote Remain to save a FIVER. That was what happened in Scottish Referendum, some fools voted based on greed having been told their pensions would be cut. Naked personal greed due to fear will win it for Remain.
It's a big risk to Leave's vote.
I also worry about female voters, who tend to be much more risk-averse, a bit less vocal, and we've heard slightly less of and from in this referendum.
That's why I'd like a bit more Andrea and Gisela, and a bit less Boris.
The Cameron pension line is obviously and clearly wrong. The Tory Leave elite, like the Tory Remain elite, will do nothing to harm the Tory client state. They know just as well as Dave and George who they need to look after in order to get elected.
Which sort of makes threatening them a bit mad. I really don't get where Cameron's coming from, winning a vote is one thing doing it while annoying all your core supporters is another.
As I have said before, the problem with victory at all costs is eventually the bill turns up and this one is going to be expensive.
I said a long time ago that you'd know Remain were seriously worried about losing if they raised pensions as an issue. Ten days out and lo and behold. This tells me that Leave have it in the bag.
Leave absolutely do not have this in the bag.
No but we're winning, if mostly due to topics I personally don't care about.
I'm not sure. I think Leave are underestimating just how many voters (totally inaccurately, of course) fear for their short-term wallets. And not much else.
There are an awful lot of those.
I said it many weeks ago that people would vote Remain to save a FIVER. That was what happened in Scottish Referendum, some fools voted based on greed having been told their pensions would be cut. Naked personal greed due to fear will win it for Remain.
Sadly I tend to agree. A few slim polling leads haven't convinced me.
They'll be more and fatter soon.
Which does actually make me nervous. I'm 90% sure I won't waver, but it is a big leap and there will be pain.
David Frum on the Marr paper review was very gently pointing out to Helena Kennedy that if you ignore voters' concerns re immigration, and use rhetoric which makes them out to be racist....you eventually end up with Donald Trump.
Helena Kennedy talked all over him and wouldn't let him speak.
And there we have the Labour Party's problem on this issue perfectly demonstrated.
Except experts who matter who have relevant real world experience are not all on the Remain side are they? Why are you wilfully disrespecting experts like Dyson and others?
Who has more experience in setting up a business, running a business and trading globally? Dyson or Hawking?
If this was a debate about physics I'd trust Hawking. It's not its a debate about trade so Dyson is the expert here.
Fair enough - Alan Sugar supports staying in and was opposed to the UK joining the Euro.
If you have to cut spending then you will be taking away money from the recipients.
Assuming spending is reasonably well targeted then by definition that is the people with the least (even changes to the state pension affect the poorest most as it's a bigger proportion of their retirement income).
It was good to see tax increases on the wealthiest decile as well.
Yep, the government's deficit reduction plans - supported enthusiastically by the Tory Leavers - have had the biggest impact on the poorest and the least impact on the wealthiest. Ditto cuts to services. That won't change under Boris. The Elite will be absolutely fine.
All you are saying is that you wanted a different mix of tax increases and spending cuts. That's fine, but not particularly insightful
No, all I am saying is that framing the referendum as the People v the Elite, as if the Elite would in any way be biscomfited by Brexit, is ridiculous. The Elite will be absolutely fine. What's more, given what Tory Leavers have enthusiasticalky supported over the years, the notion that they are on the side of the weak and the vulnerable is risible.
I do think the elite point is a reasonable one. The same sort of people will be in charge, just slightly different ones, or the same ones doing slightly different things only in a few areas.
The Cameron pension line is obviously and clearly wrong. The Tory Leave elite, like the Tory Remain elite, will do nothing to harm the Tory client state. They know just as well as Dave and George who they need to look after in order to get elected.
Which sort of makes threatening them a bit mad. I really don't get where Cameron's coming from, winning a vote is one thing doing it while annoying all your core supporters is another.
As I have said before, the problem with victory at all costs is eventually the bill turns up and this one is going to be expensive.
I said a long time ago that you'd know Remain were seriously worried about losing if they raised pensions as an issue. Ten days out and lo and behold. This tells me that Leave have it in the bag.
Leave absolutely do not have this in the bag.
No but we're winning, if mostly due to topics I personally don't care about.
I'm not sure. I think Leave are underestimating just how many voters (totally inaccurately, of course) fear for their short-term wallets. And not much else.
There are an awful lot of those.
I said it many weeks ago that people would vote Remain to save a FIVER. That was what happened in Scottish Referendum, some fools voted based on greed having been told their pensions would be cut. Naked personal greed due to fear will win it for Remain.
Sadly I tend to agree. A few slim polling leads haven't convinced me.
They'll be more and fatter soon.
Which does actually make me nervous. I'm 90% sure I won't waver, but it is a big leap and there will be pain.
Just looking at the rather amusing "shoot to kill" Dan Hodges article. A few choice quotes:
The first serious act of aggression was launched two weeks ago when Johnson and Gove co-authored a letter accusing the Prime Minister of being ‘corrosive of public trust’ over immigration.
I guess all the attacks on Boris and Gove before that weren't "serious"?
None of that has [the attacks on Boris] anything to do with a Machiavellian scheme from No 10 or No 11,’ says a Cabinet Minister. ‘Boris is personally rude, misogynistic, disruptive in meetings, and makes everything about him. He is not at all a team player, and is actually a complete vacuum when it comes to belief, conviction or moral compass. He has no sense of duty, no sense of loyalty and no sense of service.’
I like the focus on policies and what is the best for the UK in the long term. That's what's important, right folks?
[the now] ceaseless wave of attacks on the Prime Minister’s integrity. ‘Cameron called for honesty then told five outright lies in 30 minutes,’ said an article posted on the Vote Leave website following his clash with Farage on Tuesday.
I guess he should be allowed to allowed to say what he likes because he's a 'pretty straight sort of guy', right?
By trying to win the referendum in a way that gives him the best opportunity of putting his party back together, the Prime Minister risks losing the contest.
It is amazing how Hodges' rabid Europhilia has clouded his judgement on the EU referendum to the extent of it being a complete waste of time to read his articles.
While that may be so, and I think leave will win, I'm pretty sure people said his anti ed m monomania meant it was a waste of time reading his stuff pre ge.
It doesn't mean he is right now, but he's been ignored due to being rabid before.
Surely the more apposite example of his prediction here is his 'naked' run down Whitehall after consistently ridiculing and under-calling UKIP.
That could be the more apposite example. We won't know until June 24th.
For a good laugh, I'd recommend pages 12-13 of the Sunday Times. Of Conservative MPs "The careerists are shitting themselves. It's no fun kissing backsides for years, only to discover you've been kissing the wrong backsides."
Not sure I need to. That post itself has raised a chuckle in me.
Actually, I might just pop out and buy it.. :-)
That's just a taster. The article is full of juicy stuff.
If you have to cut spending then you will be taking away money from the recipients.
Assuming spending is reasonably well targeted then by definition that is the people with the least (even changes to the state pension affect the poorest most as it's a bigger proportion of their retirement income).
It was good to see tax increases on the wealthiest decile as well.
Yep, the government's deficit reduction plans - supported enthusiastically by the Tory Leavers - have had the biggest impact on the poorest and the least impact on the wealthiest. Ditto cuts to services. That won't change under Boris. The Elite will be absolutely fine.
All you are saying is that you wanted a different mix of tax increases and spending cuts. That's fine, but not particularly insightful
No, all I am saying is that framing the referendum as the People v the Elite, as if the Elite would in any way be biscomfited by Brexit, is ridiculous. The Elite will be absolutely fine. What's more, given what Tory Leavers have enthusiasticalky supported over the years, the notion that they are on the side of the weak and the vulnerable is risible.
Rather like the factory where Leave had their meeting this week. He’s for Leave, but his staff are almost excuslively migrants. So much so that safety notices are in Polish. Apparently he’s known locally as a low wage payer!
I suspect the triple pensions lock may be doomed anyway after 2020 - Labour already proposed to drop it for higher income pensioners and that wasn't something we got any criticism about, and Tories clearly see it as a nice little earner electorally but not really sensible. When inflation was high enough to make the 2.5% element irrelevant, it was easier to defend economically, but why even rich pensioners should automatically get a 2.5% rise per year is mysterious.
Mine For Nothing New YouGov poll: Only 32% of people trust BOE Governor Mark Carney in the EU referendum debate. And just 21% of Undecided voters. #Brexit
A problem for Remain is that some erstwhile "neutral" experts are trusted, but only up until the point at which they come out for Remain.
Which masks a deeper problem.
Being tarnished by association seems to be a theme. I was really surprised by the Carney numbers. I'd expect 20pts or more higher. Then again, Osborne getting 2% for leadership/charisma was harsh - and hilarious.
Why LEAVE have chosen to do everything in-house is a mystery.
I suspect firstly because of cost. But, more importantly, I suspect they don't trust the advertising industry not to leak their strategy to the Remain side.
Lol - now the admen are part of the conspiracy? The list of evil plotters gets bigger by the day.
No conspiracy - just a realistic expectation that an overwhelming majority of advertising employees support Remain (young, metropolitan, wealthier than average) and that one individual within what would be a relatively large team would probably leak it.
That's the way the world works (sadly). I'm sure you could limit it to a "need to know" basis with a firewalled team, etc, but why take the risk?
Your description of the ad lads did lead me to wonder if part of the problem the ads are a bit dull is they are crafted by people who have no experience of the other half of society. If they have little cultural affinity they must struggle to hit the right notes.
And yet by some miracle they manage to sell washing powder, baked beans & tampons.
If there is a problem with the advertising it is usually a problem with the brief and/or product.
REMAIN's problem us the product they are selling is "Not LEAVE".
One thing I think which isn't given enough attention is the effect of local radio.
Its heard by millions of people everyday and its stories have a relevance to the average voter which politicians and 'experts' in London don't.
For example this story led the local news and will have been heard by tens of thousands of people in South Yorkshire and Nottinghamshire last week:
' An uninsured drunk-driver going at about 100mph killed a pensioner who was on the way to visit his great-grandchildren.
Killer Aleksandrs Ivanovs, who is a Latvian national, was seen smiling and handing cigarettes to friends in the immediate aftermath of the crash, before swearing at paramedics who arrived at the scene and refusing to do a breathalyser test for police officers.
...
Ivanovs, aged 32 and of Manvers Road, Mexborough, was sentenced to six years in prison at Sheffield Crown Court after pleading guilty to causing death by dangerous driving.
Judge Goose said he did not have the power to order the deportation of Ivanovs as Latvia is part of the European Union. '
Cameron has gone mad, stark staring mad. I've just read his rant in the Telegraph. Vote Remain or your bus passes free TV licences and the triple pension lock gets it.
Naked blackmail - and naked Blackmail of a generation who sacrificed so much and gave up loved ones and so much material comfort to win a world war.
And he thinks it will help.He might as well have called our pensioners "Bastards" (cf ~Major)
What an steaming idiot.
I saw a clip on Sky that he's threatening to cut the Defence/NHS budgets too - and basically says that if we don't vote Remain, his entire manifesto can't be delivered.
Talk about going all in. If I wasn't seeing this with my own eyes - I wouldn't believe it.
It's completely true: what you voted for, what you used to cheer to the rafters is predicated on high levels of immigration and EU membership. You voted for policies designed to clear the deficit by 2020. If that is to happen it requires a certain level of growth, plus tax rises and spending cuts. If growth stalls as a result of Brexit - and even most Leavers concede it will - then to achieve what you voted for there will have to be further cuts and/or tax rises.
No we didn't we voted to not have a neomarxist Wonk and the Krankies (Salmond and Sturgeon) anywhere the leavers of power.
Cameron has been daft enough to think that people actually voted for him.
Plato made absolutely clear that she completely endorsed government policy. She used to be a big fan of everything it did. If you do not support moving to a surplus by 2020, fair enough.
Excuse me. Do not put words in my mouth or use me as a pawn in your proxy war.
I'm not. I am making a statement of fact. You are repudiating policies and strategies that just a few months ago you enthusiastically endorsed - such as Osborne's deficit reduction plan.
Just stop. Make your own case - and leave me out of it.
I am making the case that many Tory Leave supporters are hypocrites. You are helping me to make my case by pretending to be shocked by policies that just a few months ago you wholeheartedly supported.
I suspect the triple pensions lock may be doomed anyway after 2020 - Labour already proposed to drop it for higher income pensioners and that wasn't something we got any criticism about, and Tories clearly see it as a nice little earner electorally but not really sensible. When inflation was high enough to make the 2.5% element irrelevant, it was easier to defend economically, but why even rich pensioners should automatically get a 2.5% rise per year is mysterious.
(I'm a higher-rate pensioner.)
A labour policy to support, right there.
Seeing the visceral hatred being expressed by Tory supporters for one another, and even though labour voters are not unified on this, I'm coming round to the view labour might have a chance in2020. Which may be why anew pm tries to have one sooner.
The point I have made-apparently unsuccessfully-is that the 'Remain' broadcast and everthing else we are seeing from the Remain side is likely to be the result of extensive research and targetting. If 'YOU' aren't seeing it then (probably) you're not the target market.
You'll either be in the bag or in the other side's bag or unconvincable!!
Oh, I see what they are trying to do. Hammer home messages at the waverers so they switch or stay at home, ignore trying to convince the passionate and rely on the loyal and labour to rally the core remain vote. I've no doubt they've researched it a lot. Facts on the ground might hinder its effectiveness, but the strategy makes sense.
I suspect the triple pensions lock may be doomed anyway after 2020 - Labour already proposed to drop it for higher income pensioners and that wasn't something we got any criticism about, and Tories clearly see it as a nice little earner electorally but not really sensible. When inflation was high enough to make the 2.5% element irrelevant, it was easier to defend economically, but why even rich pensioners should automatically get a 2.5% rise per year is mysterious.
(I'm a higher-rate pensioner.)
As you said triple lock pensions are 'a nice little earner electorally'.
By themselves they show that the government's economic strategy is one of 'borrow and bribe' and not 'austerity'.
Not that this government is the first or will be the last to do that.
Mr. Royale, that reminds me of polling from around 2005 (I think) when people liked specific policies until they discovered they were Conservative.
Mr. Bedfordshire, quite. The woe, doom, death and despair that was laid on so thick early on has substantially eroded the impact of any more dreadful warnings which Remain come out with.
F1: progress a bit slow on the pre-race piece as I have been listening to lots of Queen. I blame Mr. Charles for this.
Or in 2010, when loads of voters loved Clegg in the debate, then discovered what the LDs stood for.
The Cameron pension line is obviously and clearly wrong. The Tory Leave elite, like the Tory Remain elite, will do nothing to harm the Tory client state. They know just as well as Dave and George who they need to look after in order to get elected.
Which sort of makes threatening them a bit mad. I really don't get where Cameron's coming from, winning a vote is one thing doing it while annoying all your core supporters is another.
As I have said before, the problem with victory at all costs is eventually the bill turns up and this one is going to be expensive.
I said a long time ago that you'd know Remain were seriously worried about losing if they raised pensions as an issue. Ten days out and lo and behold. This tells me that Leave have it in the bag.
Leave absolutely do not have this in the bag.
No but we're winning, if mostly due to topics I personally don't care about.
I'm not sure. I think Leave are underestimating just how many voters (totally inaccurately, of course) fear for their short-term wallets. And not much else.
There are an awful lot of those.
Yes but to turn them you have to make a credible threat not a laughable one.
If Cameron had said something along the lines of
"there will be an inevitable economic cost, at least in the short term which could see an uptick in unemployment by half a million and interest rates and inflation two or three percent higher over the next five years. You might be able to survive it but it would mean life was a bit harder and think also of those not as fortunate as you who will suffer more before you vote"
that may well have resonated. Instead we got, £4300, ten million or whatever it was unemployed, a house price crash, world war three and the south of england sinking into the sea because leaving the EU would cause runaway climate change (ok I made up the last one but none of it is believeable)
An interesting thing about the "£4,300" is that no-one's talking about that number as everyone is too busy attacking Vote Leave's £350m.
That's no accident.
Someone on Twitter was talking about their taxi driver who was saying they were voting Remain because they'd heard leaving would cost £350m a week.
Mr. Observer, the polls are very close. The time has not yet come to abandon all hope.
I am not abandoning anything. I have always thought Leave will win. They have the best and most accessible line. They won't deliver on it, though.
Apparently I do need to keep reminding people that this isn't an election, so Leave won't be running the country if they win and hence won't be in a position to deliver or otherwise.
Cameron has gone mad, stark staring mad. I've just read his rant in the Telegraph. Vote Remain or your bus passes free TV licences and the triple pension lock gets it.
Naked blackmail - and naked Blackmail of a generation who sacrificed so much and gave up loved ones and so much material comfort to win a world war.
And he thinks it will help.He might as well have called our pensioners "Bastards" (cf ~Major)
What an steaming idiot.
I saw a clip on Sky that he's threatening to cut the Defence/NHS budgets too - and basically says that if we don't vote Remain, his entire manifesto can't be delivered.
Talk about going all in. If I wasn't seeing this with my own eyes - I wouldn't believe it.
It's completely true: what you voted for, what you used to cheer to the rafters is predicated on high levels of immigration and EU membership. You voted for policies designed to clear the deficit by 2020. If that is to happen it requires a certain level of growth, plus tax rises and spending cuts. If growth stalls as a result of Brexit - and even most Leavers concede it will - then to achieve what you voted for there will have to be further cuts and/or tax rises.
No we didn't we voted to not have a neomarxist Wonk and the Krankies (Salmond and Sturgeon) anywhere the leavers of power.
Cameron has been daft enough to think that people actually voted for him.
Plato made absolutely clear that she completely endorsed government policy. She used to be a big fan of everything it did. If you do not support moving to a surplus by 2020, fair enough.
Excuse me. Do not put words in my mouth or use me as a pawn in your proxy war.
I'm not. I am making a statement of fact. You are repudiating policies and strategies that just a few months ago you enthusiastically endorsed - such as Osborne's deficit reduction plan.
Just stop. Make your own case - and leave me out of it.
I am making the case that many Tory Leave supporters are hypocrites. You are helping me to make my case by pretending to be shocked by policies that just a few months ago you wholeheartedly supported.
I'll defend Plato and other loyal Tories on here. I stopped voting Tory in 2012 (Help to Buy was the tipping point), but I wouldn't hold it against those who defended the Tories against that numpty Ed Miliband. For too long there has been a dishonesty from all politicians. I'm not sure I entirely agree with the link you make between immigration and the deficit, but I think you're right to suggest that there would be negative consequences to dramatically reducing immigration.
But I think you're being unfair to have a go at Tories who are now seeing what Cameron and Osborne believe in. That's the great thing about this referendum, the Europhile Tories have been flushed out for what they are.
Mr. Observer, the polls are very close. The time has not yet come to abandon all hope.
I am not abandoning anything. I have always thought Leave will win. They have the best and most accessible line. They won't deliver on it, though.
Apparently I do need to keep reminding people that this isn't an election, so Leave won't be running the country if they win and hence won't be in a position to deliver or otherwise.
Yes they will. Leave Tories will be running the government.
David Frum on the Marr paper review was very gently pointing out to Helena Kennedy that if you ignore voters' concerns re immigration, and use rhetoric which makes them out to be racist....you eventually end up with Donald Trump.
Helena Kennedy talked all over him and wouldn't let him speak.
And there we have the Labour Party's problem on this issue perfectly demonstrated.
Why LEAVE have chosen to do everything in-house is a mystery.
I suspect firstly because of cost. But, more importantly, I suspect they don't trust the advertising industry not to leak their strategy to the Remain side.
Lol - now the admen are part of the conspiracy? The list of evil plotters gets bigger by the day.
No conspiracy - just a realistic expectation that an overwhelming majority of advertising employees support Remain (young, metropolitan, wealthier than average) and that one individual within what would be a relatively large team would probably leak it.
That's the way the world works (sadly). I'm sure you could limit it to a "need to know" basis with a firewalled team, etc, but why take the risk?
Your description of the ad lads did lead me to wonder if part of the problem the ads are a bit dull is they are crafted by people who have no experience of the other half of society. If they have little cultural affinity they must struggle to hit the right notes.
And yet by some miracle they manage to sell washing powder, baked beans & tampons.
If there is a problem with the advertising it is usually a problem with the brief and/or product.
REMAIN's problem us the product they are selling is "Not LEAVE".
Currently remains product seems to be STOP BORIS
Of little interest to most of the audience and a marmite position for the rest.
What will happen to the economy in the short (less than 2 years) and medium term if Brecit happens? How low will GBP fall? How many points off GDP will be taken off? Will inflation rise significantly as well as interest rates? Serious answers please as like a lot of people in the country, I am concerned.
Except experts who matter who have relevant real world experience are not all on the Remain side are they? Why are you wilfully disrespecting experts like Dyson and others?
Who has more experience in setting up a business, running a business and trading globally? Dyson or Hawking?
If this was a debate about physics I'd trust Hawking. It's not its a debate about trade so Dyson is the expert here.
Fair enough - Alan Sugar supports staying in and was opposed to the UK joining the Euro.
Has Alan Sugar achieved anything in business as opposed to publicity in the last 25 years ?
Perhaps you'd like to remind us how successful he was at running Spurs.
Mr. Observer, the polls are very close. The time has not yet come to abandon all hope.
I am not abandoning anything. I have always thought Leave will win. They have the best and most accessible line. They won't deliver on it, though.
Apparently I do need to keep reminding people that this isn't an election, so Leave won't be running the country if they win and hence won't be in a position to deliver or otherwise.
Yes they will. Leave Tories will be running the government.
I wonder if that is the ultimate deterrent to Labour voters. Cameron comes out and says "I will resign if you vote to Leave, and the people who take over are nasty right wing Tories."
Some of us quiet, low-key, equable Remainers (who have lost the will to live and post here on the subject amidst the raucous, hubristic triumphalism) will permit ourselves a modest if wry smile should the result show a comfortable margin to stay on June 23rd (which I'm not predicting, having done no campaigning at all).
The Cameron pension line is obviously and clearly wrong. The Tory Leave elite, like the Tory Remain elite, will do nothing to harm the Tory client state. They know just as well as Dave and George who they need to look after in order to get elected.
Which sort of makes threatening them a bit mad. I really don't get where Cameron's coming from, winning a vote is one thing doing it while annoying all your core supporters is another.
As I have said before, the problem with victory at all costs is eventually the bill turns up and this one is going to be expensive.
I said a long time ago that you'd know Remain were seriously worried about losing if they raised pensions as an issue. Ten days out and lo and behold. This tells me that Leave have it in the bag.
Leave absolutely do not have this in the bag.
No but we're winning, if mostly due to topics I personally don't care about.
I'm not sure. I think Leave are underestimating just how many voters (totally inaccurately, of course) fear for their short-term wallets. And not much else.
There are an awful lot of those.
Yes but to turn them you have to make a credible threat not a laughable one.
If Cameron had said something along the lines of
"there will be an inevitable economic cost, at least in the short term which could see an uptick in unemployment by half a million and interest rates and inflation two or three percent higher over the next five years. You might be able to survive it but it would mean life was a bit harder and think also of those not as fortunate as you who will suffer more before you vote"
that may well have resonated. Instead we got, £4300, ten million or whatever it was unemployed, a house price crash, world war three and the south of england sinking into the sea because leaving the EU would cause runaway climate change (ok I made up the last one but none of it is believeable)
An interesting thing about the "£4,300" is that no-one's talking about that number as everyone is too busy attacking Vote Leave's £350m.
Comments
Yes, I think that's right. I also think they also don't think televised PPBs (who watches them?) will be decisive.
Social media clips of 30s-1minute, however, might be.
So I ask again - in what respect was he better than Sugar?
They have just taken the worst case of each scenario rather than thinking about feedback loops
e.g. interest rates will rise (presumably because of the currency collapse) - but this will support the currency. At the same time, house prices will fall (presumably because of interest rates rise) while ignoring the currency collapse reducing prices for foreign domiciled investors.
I'm still not sure why you'd be increasing interest rates when the economy is falling off a cliff - the only reason would be to support the currency, while a cheaper currency is actually part of the remedy for any economic shock. More QE is a more likely solution - which will actually inflate house prices and cause currency depreciation [it's not a great thing in itself, but if I was running the BofE then I'd flood the market with liquidity in the event of a Brexit vote. Just in case.]
The average joe won't understand the precise mechanisms. But he can smell bullsh1t a mile off. And Remain's scaremongering just comes across that.
Car washers and Big Issue sellers, not so much.
The sad irony of Wilshaw is that he was the only Head of OFSTED with significant front line teaching experience, and his first act was to go native.
However ship construction now requires the bulkheads to go to the "uppermost continuous deck" and damage stability to be taken into account. ( to a point the designers of Titanic did consider damage stability at least)
The SOLAS* regulations also evolved directly from this disaster that has protected Mariners ever since and saved many lives at sea. You will now see this manifestation on commercial vessels, ferries and other craft.
* Safety of Life At Sea.
Mr. Sandpit, precisely my view. The idea someone's private property can be forcibly bought from them, at a discount, is reprehensible.
Mr. Doethur, the difference is that getting something from the state (to which one contributes through taxes) is fundamentally different to getting it from an individual.
I if work hard and make money and decide to buy some property both for income and a potential source of large cash if I decide to sell, only to have the rug pulled from under me (so I make a huge loss), I'd be furious, and rightly so.
The state dictating private property can be forcibly acquired against the will of the owner, at a potentially devastating loss, is unacceptable.
Actually, I might just pop out and buy it.. :-)
More appropriately, they are discovering it's no fun being too late to notice kissing the backside ain't what it used to be
There are an awful lot of those.
Currency crash -> increased inflation (including significant increased costs for businesses, including exporting businesses) -> increased interest rates -> significant crisis in housing market (negative equity, unaffordable (existing mortgages), house price falls, significant reduction in housing investment) -> less money in people's pockets -> less spending on highstreet -> Recession
(Though personally I'd be happy to see state pensions frozen for a few years to help the deficit, which until this referendum everyone on here card about)
The irony of Corbyn's idea, if it is as reported, is that it would make it near-impossible to rent cheaply while still not reducing house prices to the level most people could afford - therefore absolutely hammering the disadvantaged and giving cash bonuses of inflating assets bought cheaply to those who already have money.
Who has more experience in setting up a business, running a business and trading globally? Dyson or Hawking?
If this was a debate about physics I'd trust Hawking. It's not its a debate about trade so Dyson is the expert here.
I doubt it would be long before they turned their affections to a PM Boris or PM Gove.
Our #EUref rolling (7pt) averages so far w/ the latest Opinium and YouGov polls:
Remain: 44.1%
Leave: 45.0% https://t.co/lXVd0JC6RJ
The second most recent video is this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VXF2kYK30co
New YouGov poll: Only 32% of people trust BOE Governor Mark Carney in the EU referendum debate. And just 21% of Undecided voters. #Brexit
It doesn't mean he is right now, but he's been ignored due to being rabid before.
So again - what's with the adulation for this idiot?
You'll either be in the bag or in the other side's bag or unconvincable!!
When the UK largely controlled its own spending in research, the money was spread more evenly, so say Universities of Oxford & Leicester & Bedfordshore would all get some research monies, though of course somewhat more for Oxford and somewhat less for Bedfordshire.
Now, almost all the research money is skewed towards the very best departments at the very best universities.
As you can imagine, this has produced winners (my department is absolutely swimming with Euro-cash). And the Nobel ‘luvvies’ (great name, BTW) will be absolutely huge beneficiaries, with truly enormous grants. So, no surprise they are so enthusiastic.
However, it has produced very many more losers, such as Leicester and Bedfordshire, whose research income will have shrunk over the last ten years. The UK grants will not have been replaced by EU grants.
And of course, if the UK is getting the lions share of the research money, that means entire countries (like Slovakia or Portugal or Latvia, poor countries) are being absolutely shafted. They are putting in to the EU science budget and getting nothing out.
If you believe the Rich should get Richer, and the Poor should have what little they possess taken away from then, then EU funding of science has been an enormous success.
Dominic Cummings, for example, views additional science spending as a key reason to Leave.
And how many of their players are the England team and squad ?
Instead the England team is based upon teams renowned for chocking when the pressure is on - Tottenham and Liverpool.
Qualified pilots should fly planes. Not design or build them.
Just like on any other matter we currently have domestic sovereign control over.
#DoTheMath
Which masks a deeper problem.
If Cameron had said something along the lines of
"there will be an inevitable economic cost, at least in the short term which could see an uptick in unemployment by half a million and interest rates and inflation two or three percent higher over the next five years. You might be able to survive it but it would mean life was a bit harder and think also of those not as fortunate as you who will suffer more before you vote"
that may well have resonated. Instead we got, £4300, ten million or whatever it was unemployed, a house price crash, world war three and the south of england sinking into the sea because leaving the EU would cause runaway climate change (ok I made up the last one but none of it is believeable)
Mind you, finding a potential area to work on (Farage being disliked by some) and applying the line to exploit it are two different things.
Cambridge and Oxford will provide the highest REMAIN votes outside London.
And what Adam Smith said in the 18th Century is as true today, as it was then: "People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise prices."
He has not stopped the production of "Family Guy"? Yep, that is good enough for me....
Oh wait,, I think I see a flaw in this cunning plan.
That's no accident.
However in a referendum everything's all mixed up. Some of your swing voters are probably people you have never engaged with before, or are a forced choice where targeting one group's key values offends another. that's why I think the communication side of this referendum is so hard to manage, a lot of it is treading new ground and as a results lots of mistakes are being made by both sides.
Mr. Bedfordshire, quite. The woe, doom, death and despair that was laid on so thick early on has substantially eroded the impact of any more dreadful warnings which Remain come out with.
F1: progress a bit slow on the pre-race piece as I have been listening to lots of Queen. I blame Mr. Charles for this.
I also worry about female voters, who tend to be much more risk-averse, a bit less vocal, and we've heard slightly less of and from in this referendum.
That's why I'd like a bit more Andrea and Gisela, and a bit less Boris.
Which does actually make me nervous. I'm 90% sure I won't waver, but it is a big leap and there will be pain.
Helena Kennedy talked all over him and wouldn't let him speak.
And there we have the Labour Party's problem on this issue perfectly demonstrated.
Apparently he’s known locally as a low wage payer!
(I'm a higher-rate pensioner.)
If there is a problem with the advertising it is usually a problem with the brief and/or product.
REMAIN's problem us the product they are selling is "Not LEAVE".
One thing I think which isn't given enough attention is the effect of local radio.
Its heard by millions of people everyday and its stories have a relevance to the average voter which politicians and 'experts' in London don't.
For example this story led the local news and will have been heard by tens of thousands of people in South Yorkshire and Nottinghamshire last week:
' An uninsured drunk-driver going at about 100mph killed a pensioner who was on the way to visit his great-grandchildren.
Killer Aleksandrs Ivanovs, who is a Latvian national, was seen smiling and handing cigarettes to friends in the immediate aftermath of the crash, before swearing at paramedics who arrived at the scene and refusing to do a breathalyser test for police officers.
...
Ivanovs, aged 32 and of Manvers Road, Mexborough, was sentenced to six years in prison at Sheffield Crown Court after pleading guilty to causing death by dangerous driving.
Judge Goose said he did not have the power to order the deportation of Ivanovs as Latvia is part of the European Union. '
http://www.doncasterfreepress.co.uk/news/drunk-driver-seen-smiling-after-killing-great-grandad-in-100mph-crash-1-7951828
Seeing the visceral hatred being expressed by Tory supporters for one another, and even though labour voters are not unified on this, I'm coming round to the view labour might have a chance in2020. Which may be why anew pm tries to have one sooner.
Helmut von Moltke the Elder
By themselves they show that the government's economic strategy is one of 'borrow and bribe' and not 'austerity'.
Not that this government is the first or will be the last to do that.
But I think you're being unfair to have a go at Tories who are now seeing what Cameron and Osborne believe in. That's the great thing about this referendum, the Europhile Tories have been flushed out for what they are.
Lot's of peace and love on PB this morning I see.!
Of little interest to most of the audience and a marmite position for the rest.
What will happen to the economy in the short (less than 2 years) and medium term if Brecit happens? How low will GBP fall? How many points off GDP will be taken off? Will inflation rise significantly as well as interest rates? Serious answers please as like a lot of people in the country, I am concerned.
Perhaps you'd like to remind us how successful he was at running Spurs.
I'm a likely Leave voter, but also think Remain remain favourite.