That said, I was disappointed that only 53% of Scots thought their country could be successful if it left the UK.
Yep, and 82% of of those who do not believe that Scotland could be “a successful, independent country” are people planning to vote No. Now, about that positive case for the Union...
Or the positive case for Independence?
It's obviously being made somewhere.
'-only 9% of No voters think an independent Scotland could be a success, with another 9% unsure of whether it could or not.
- conversely, a whopping 97% of Yes voters believe an independent Scotland could be successful, with 0% believing it couldn’t and 3% planning to vote Yes anyway despite not being completely certain of it.'
I had an interesting discussion with one of our finance guys over lunch. He said the growth in the economy is only sustainable in the short term. Basically we will reach a point where companies will run into capacity walls in terms of energy, infrastructure and skilled labour by the end of 2016. He said the government basically needs to invest in road transport, shipping, air transport, energy and bring in new training for young people to go into jobs without requiring a degree. He also said companies need to stop attaching such huge importance to degrees as well.
On the other side he said companies will need to invest a lot of money in building new production capacity or firing up mothballed plants (which is also costly) and the government need to assist this by cutting investment penalties.
Finally he said the biggest issue is education, and while the new free schools are good, they may have come too late to save UK PLC because the current crop of graduates and school leavers don't have the basic work skills.
I had an interesting chat with Big Ste down the Red Lion at lunch, and he said Labour had a significant and sustained opinion poll lead on education.
That said, I was disappointed that only 53% of Scots thought their country could be successful if it left the UK.
Yep, and 82% of of those who do not believe that Scotland could be “a successful, independent country” are people planning to vote No. Now, about that positive case for the Union...
Or the positive case for Independence?
Please ! No ! The case for independence is just tooooo positive - lambs will lie down with lions, vineyards in Dundee, PC Plum will be the chief constable - it could do with some realism. And the unionists could do with something upbeat and appealing to the heart strings instead of saying Scotland will fall into the sea and the resulting tsunami will wipe out all the oil rigs.
Mike should get in touch with the authors and run it as a "with permission" thread.
Doubt many here will read it otherwise. David Aaranovitch's views are far more, er, "insightful".
Given tim's pathological fixation with denigrating and belittling those who have the temerity to disagree with him, are you surprised so many of his posts are skimmed?
Yes, it's a very good article, and a brief précis sans abuse would have generated much more interest and discussion - but tim's not interested in that.....
I had an interesting discussion with one of our finance guys over lunch. He said the growth in the economy is only sustainable in the short term. Basically we will reach a point where companies will run into capacity walls in terms of energy, infrastructure and skilled labour by the end of 2016. He said the government basically needs to invest in road transport, shipping, air transport, energy and bring in new training for young people to go into jobs without requiring a degree. He also said companies need to stop attaching such huge importance to degrees as well.
On the other side he said companies will need to invest a lot of money in building new production capacity or firing up mothballed plants (which is also costly) and the government need to assist this by cutting investment penalties.
Finally he said the biggest issue is education, and while the new free schools are good, they may have come too late to save UK PLC because the current crop of graduates and school leavers don't have the basic work skills.
My wife is back teaching at college. One of the courses they run is "event management". It is popular but how many actually get jobs in that field is not clear. Not many I suspect. One thing that she has noticed is that the mature students who come on such courses are actively looking for employment. They frequently don't complete the course because they get work.
This is bad for the college which gets marked very heavily on retention rates. The younger students find a life of 3 days a week on reasonable money quite congenial and make no such efforts (they may, in fairness, look for part time work to help fund their lifestyle).
It seems to me that so much of our tertiary sector is not focussed on what employers want. Placing students in work, even before the final exams, should surely be commended. Teaching courses that promise some sort of X factor lifestyle without any rigorous analysis of where the employment is going to come from is a waste of resources.
We need courses focussed on what the employers in an area want. Lots of them. We want them to have an input into what is taught. We want the courses to feel much more like a work environment with the discipline of work. I fear many of our present courses make people less employable, not more.
@tnewtondunn: BREAKING: MoD scientists confirm Sarin Gas was used on the victims of the Damascus chemical weapons atrocity, No10 reveal.
Such a shame Cameron didn't listen to Hague instead of Osborne and hold fire until all this information came out. He'll live with that inept decision for a long time
Why on earth did the Americans tell Cameron to hold the vote quickly when they had no intention of taking action for a few weeks?
@tnewtondunn: BREAKING: MoD scientists confirm Sarin Gas was used on the victims of the Damascus chemical weapons atrocity, No10 reveal.
Such a shame Cameron didn't listen to Hague instead of Osborne and hold fire until all this information came out. He'll live with that inept decision for a long time
Don't worry about it, the Iranians are bound to come to the rescue.
BUMPER DAY FOR COUNCIL BY ELECTIONS There is ten, Yes! TEN by elections today. Now I have split what I do into two. You have all the General Election 2015 stuff being kept here, and the council by election results and information has moved to my other blog. THE POLLS HAVE NOW CLOSED Feel free to bookmark it, link to it and share to your hearts content.
Click the links below for the information you would like to find out, such as Candidates, Past results, ONS data & Ward maps.
BOSTON - FENSIDE
CARLISLE - YEWDALE
CHARNWOOD - LOUGHBOROUGH ASHBY
CORNWALL - WADEBRIDGE EAST
DAVENTRY - RAVENSTHORPE
EAST CAMBRIDGESHIRE - ELY EAST
NORTHAMPTONSHIRE - MIDDLETON CHENEY
ST EDMUNDSBURY - BARDWELL
TORRIDGE - TORRINGTON
WYCOMBE - HAMBLEDEN VALLEY
What is being defended?
List of votes from when each election was last held.
CONSERVATIVES had 9 candidates totaling 5,905 votes = 39.5% LABOUR had 7 candidates totaling 3,354 votes = 22.44% LIBDEMS had 8 candidates totaling 2,205 votes = 14.75% UKIP had 4 candidates totaling 1,602 votes = 10.72% INDEPENDENTS had 3 candidates totaling 1,273 votes = 8.51% ENGLISH DEM had 2 candidates totaling 367 votes = 2.45% BOSTON INDEPENDENTS had 1 candidate with 182 votes = 1.2% GREEN PARTY had 1 candidate with 55 votes = 0.36%
In these elections there is now
10 UKIP candidates (up 6) 10 CONSERVATIVES (up1) 9 LABOUR (up2) 6 LIBDEMS (down2) 2 GREEN (up1) 4 INDEPENDENTS (up1) NO ENGLISH DEM OR BOSTON INDEPENDENTS this time.
Mike should get in touch with the authors and run it as a "with permission" thread.
Doubt many here will read it otherwise. David Aaranovitch's views are far more, er, "insightful".
Given tim's pathological fixation with denigrating and belittling those who have the temerity to disagree with him, are you surprised so many of his posts are skimmed?
Yes, it's a very good article, and a brief précis sans abuse would have generated much more interest and discussion - but tim's not interested in that.....
He gets a lot more than he gives out, but yes, you have a point.
In short, the article says that Westminster journalists running round the Bubble like headless chickens saying "Ed is playing politics!" this week, "Cameron is damaged!" the other week, "2015 will be like 1983 / 1992 / 1997 / whatever election suits my argument!" etc are buffoons, and the weary and cynical public know it, and this is consistently reflected in the polling.
@tnewtondunn: BREAKING: MoD scientists confirm Sarin Gas was used on the victims of the Damascus chemical weapons atrocity, No10 reveal.
Such a shame Cameron didn't listen to Hague instead of Osborne and hold fire until all this information came out. He'll live with that inept decision for a long time
You have to remember, tim, that Obama can go to Congress trusting in John Boehner's undertakings to support his motion.
Cameron never had that option.
The leader of the opposition in the UK is weak, vacillatiing, indecisive, untrustworthy, disloyal and unreliable: a politician who is guaranteed to put domestic party political advantage over the security and foreign interests of the country and who has proven himself willing to renege on any promise or undertaking he makes.
@tnewtondunn: BREAKING: MoD scientists confirm Sarin Gas was used on the victims of the Damascus chemical weapons atrocity, No10 reveal.
Such a shame Cameron didn't listen to Hague instead of Osborne and hold fire until all this information came out. He'll live with that inept decision for a long time
Why on earth did the Americans tell Cameron to hold the vote quickly when they had no intention of taking action for a few weeks?
That is a very good question. And more to the point why did Hague say that Parlaiment should not be recalled and Cameron take Osbornes side instead.
Does it matter when the vote was taken?
It is not as if Ed Miliband is capable of undergoing a Damascene conversion when confronted with the facts and truth.
@tim - No MP seriously thought anything other than Sarin, or something very similar, killed those poor men, women and children, did they? So what difference would a delay have made? Ed M would be just as weak, vacillating and untrustworthy this week as he was last week.
I had an interesting discussion with one of our finance guys over lunch. He said the growth in the economy is only sustainable in the short term. Basically we will reach a point where companies will run into capacity walls in terms of energy, infrastructure and skilled labour by the end of 2016. He said the government basically needs to invest in road transport, shipping, air transport, energy and bring in new training for young people to go into jobs without requiring a degree. He also said companies need to stop attaching such huge importance to degrees as well.
On the other side he said companies will need to invest a lot of money in building new production capacity or firing up mothballed plants (which is also costly) and the government need to assist this by cutting investment penalties.
Finally he said the biggest issue is education, and while the new free schools are good, they may have come too late to save UK PLC because the current crop of graduates and school leavers don't have the basic work skills.
I had an interesting chat with Big Ste down the Red Lion at lunch, and he said Labour had a significant and sustained opinion poll lead on education.
Knows his stuff, it turns out.
Re Labour's opinion poll lead on education, obviously the people are not too well informed. Of course we know how the "educators" vote regardless of outcomes.
@tnewtondunn: BREAKING: MoD scientists confirm Sarin Gas was used on the victims of the Damascus chemical weapons atrocity, No10 reveal.
Such a shame Cameron didn't listen to Hague instead of Osborne and hold fire until all this information came out. He'll live with that inept decision for a long time
Why on earth did the Americans tell Cameron to hold the vote quickly when they had no intention of taking action for a few weeks?
That is a very good question. And more to the point why did Hague say that Parlaiment should not be recalled and Cameron take Osbornes side instead.
Does it matter when the vote was taken?
It is not as if Ed Miliband is capable of undergoing a Damascene conversion when confronted with the facts and truth.
Ed has kindly kept Cameron out of an unpopular intervention which would have given him endless grief. He has also assumed bad boy status with our allies thus leaving Cameron isolated but with sympathy.
I really don't know why you attack him when he's just being helpful. The politics might be stupid but hey that's Ed.
Mike should get in touch with the authors and run it as a "with permission" thread.
Doubt many here will read it otherwise. David Aaranovitch's views are far more, er, "insightful".
Given tim's pathological fixation with denigrating and belittling those who have the temerity to disagree with him, are you surprised so many of his posts are skimmed?
Yes, it's a very good article, and a brief précis sans abuse would have generated much more interest and discussion - but tim's not interested in that.....
He gets a lot more than he gives out, but yes, you have a point.
In short, the article says that Westminster journalists running round the Bubble like headless chickens saying "Ed is playing politics!" this week, "Cameron is damaged!" the other week, "2015 will be like 1983 / 1992 / 1997 / whatever election suits my argument!" etc are buffoons, and the weary and cynical public know it, and this is consistently reflected in the polling.
Nick Sparrow's article on PB was much more persuasive.
And what the article really says is that polls do not shift immediately in response to media reporting.
Still Cameron will quite happily take the August fall of 0.4% in Labour VI and a 0.6% increase in Conservative VI every month between now and 2015.
If the regime did use chemical weapons it shows they're a lot more stupid than most people thought they were. Hopefully that means the estimated time of its collapse can be brought forward somewhat.
@tnewtondunn: BREAKING: MoD scientists confirm Sarin Gas was used on the victims of the Damascus chemical weapons atrocity, No10 reveal.
Such a shame Cameron didn't listen to Hague instead of Osborne and hold fire until all this information came out. He'll live with that inept decision for a long time
Why on earth did the Americans tell Cameron to hold the vote quickly when they had no intention of taking action for a few weeks?
That is a very good question. And more to the point why did Hague say that Parlaiment should not be recalled and Cameron take Osbornes side instead.
Does it matter when the vote was taken?
It is not as if Ed Miliband is capable of undergoing a Damascene conversion when confronted with the facts and truth.
Ed has kindly kept Cameron out of an unpopular intervention which would have given him endless grief. He has also assumed bad boy status with our allies thus leaving Cameron isolated but with sympathy.
I really don't know why you attack him when he's just being helpful. The politics might be stupid but hey that's Ed.
Cameron can unblot his copy book by securing a UNSC resolution.
Miliband is damned in the eyes of the international community forever.
@tnewtondunn: BREAKING: MoD scientists confirm Sarin Gas was used on the victims of the Damascus chemical weapons atrocity, No10 reveal.
Such a shame Cameron didn't listen to Hague instead of Osborne and hold fire until all this information came out. He'll live with that inept decision for a long time
Why on earth did the Americans tell Cameron to hold the vote quickly when they had no intention of taking action for a few weeks?
That is a very good question. And more to the point why did Hague say that Parlaiment should not be recalled and Cameron take Osbornes side instead.
Does it matter when the vote was taken?
It is not as if Ed Miliband is capable of undergoing a Damascene conversion when confronted with the facts and truth.
Ed has kindly kept Cameron out of an unpopular intervention which would have given him endless grief. He has also assumed bad boy status with our allies thus leaving Cameron isolated but with sympathy.
I really don't know why you attack him when he's just being helpful. The politics might be stupid but hey that's Ed.
Cameron can unblot his copy book by securing a UNSC resolution.
Miliband is damned in the eyes of the international community forever.
Don't be silly Mr Pole the Iranians love him. He'll always have Tehran and George Galloway.
Mike should get in touch with the authors and run it as a "with permission" thread.
Doubt many here will read it otherwise. David Aaranovitch's views are far more, er, "insightful".
Given tim's pathological fixation with denigrating and belittling those who have the temerity to disagree with him, are you surprised so many of his posts are skimmed?
Yes, it's a very good article, and a brief précis sans abuse would have generated much more interest and discussion - but tim's not interested in that.....
He gets a lot more than he gives out, but yes, you have a point.
In short, the article says that Westminster journalists running round the Bubble like headless chickens saying "Ed is playing politics!" this week, "Cameron is damaged!" the other week, "2015 will be like 1983 / 1992 / 1997 / whatever election suits my argument!" etc are buffoons, and the weary and cynical public know it, and this is consistently reflected in the polling.
Nick Sparrow's article on PB was much more persuasive.
And what the article really says is that polls do not shift immediately in response to media reporting.
Still Cameron will quite happily take the August fall of 0.4% in Labour VI and a 0.6% increase in Conservative VI every month between now and 2015.
Nick Sparrow's article was indeed excellent but this was still a salutory reminder once again of how little the froth that we debate on here actually matters.
The conclusion that the Lib Dems are in really serious trouble, as opposed to a mid term dip is interesting.
The rate of progress for the tories is modest despite the ever better news on the economy. I have muttered before about voteless recoveries and I think this is the biggest single risk for the tories. If the economy is growing but people feel worse off the tories may get little benefit.
What Labour really need to do is hold their nerve. The pressure to panic is building however and we can but hope.
By the logic in this article Ed Miliband need not worry about his negative figures as he may have hordes of supporters in this mythical world of a spiral of silence.What's true for the Conservatives in this poll may be true for Ed or it may all be rubbish.
"The secret of how to get to the top of the world’s largest companies is, it seems, not to go to Harvard. Or to Yale, Oxford or Cambridge — at least, not for your first degree.
Most leaders of the world’s biggest businesses do not have a bachelor’s degree from one of the highest ranking universities, a new analysis shows. Of the chief executives of the 500 largest corporations, only 25 were undergraduates at Harvard, 13 went to the University of Tokyo, 12 to École Polytechnique in Paris and 11 to Stanford. Oxford has 5 graduates among them and Cambridge 3.
Few, however, stopped at one degree. Many have a second or even third, often from more prestigious universities or business schools: 113 hold an MBA and 53 have a doctorate. Typical of this trend is Muhtar Kent, the American-born boss of Coca-Cola, who studied as an undergraduate at the University of Hull in the 1970s and later did an MBA at Cass Business School in London. >> http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/education/article3860936.ece
@tnewtondunn: BREAKING: MoD scientists confirm Sarin Gas was used on the victims of the Damascus chemical weapons atrocity, No10 reveal.
Such a shame Cameron didn't listen to Hague instead of Osborne and hold fire until all this information came out. He'll live with that inept decision for a long time
Why on earth did the Americans tell Cameron to hold the vote quickly when they had no intention of taking action for a few weeks?
That is a very good question. And more to the point why did Hague say that Parlaiment should not be recalled and Cameron take Osbornes side instead.
Does it matter when the vote was taken?
It is not as if Ed Miliband is capable of undergoing a Damascene conversion when confronted with the facts and truth.
Ed has kindly kept Cameron out of an unpopular intervention which would have given him endless grief. He has also assumed bad boy status with our allies thus leaving Cameron isolated but with sympathy.
I really don't know why you attack him when he's just being helpful. The politics might be stupid but hey that's Ed.
Cameron can unblot his copy book by securing a UNSC resolution.
Miliband is damned in the eyes of the international community forever.
Don't be silly Mr Pole the Iranians love him. He'll always have Tehran and George Galloway.
And Moscow and Beijing.....
We were looking for a distinctive foreign policy.....has Ed stumbled into it.....?
When the government first came into power I seem to remember 2018 being related to the roll out timetable, somehow that was brought forwards and now scores of people are going to be moved to an untested and mostly unfinished system just before an election, seems like a terrible idea.
I have read article after article on the universal credit, I consider myself to be quite well informed and I still can't figure out exactly what it changes. I know what IDS said it would do, but so far everything written about the changes point to tinkering around the edges while branding it a huge change.
As for IDS knowing about welfare, I don't deny that, my comment was more on what IDS wants the computer systems to do and what functions they will carry out electronically. He seems woefully untechnical and not someone I would trust with a massive IT budget. In fact no one in the DWP inspires confidence, and from what I've heard as someone in the industry the government are pretty much the worst employer in IT because of constantly changing specifications. One day ministers and civil servants want one thing, the next day they say they want something completely different. That alone causes a massive rise in the cost of labour. If the government had decent IT advisers and stuck to their original specifications then I don't think there would be any late projects.
Microsoft are just putting the finishing touches on a global virtualised server system that is incredibly ambitious, they delivered it on time and under budget. At Sony we just finished upgrading our server network (1000x the capacity and 20x the speed), ahead of time and under budget. The common thread here is that for both companies the specification was set early and not changed, big IT companies are successful because they achieve what they set out to do. The government still has not learned this lesson, and universal credit is just another example in a long line of failures by setting the original specification poorly and not sticking to it.
Plenty of posters on PB rightly rage at the waste of money that was Labour's failed NHS system, but the same can now be said about the DWP universal credit system. It needs to be junked, new objectives need to be set and a whole new team needs to be appointed. Then get IBM in and let them deal with it, don't change the spec in between and in 2-3 years it will be operating within the specifications set.
I think RN touched on the potential problem downthread. MS can specify a global virtualised server system well, because it is (or at least should be) clearly definable. It may be large, ambitious and complex, but it is definable.
I'm guessing that the benefits systems are a multi-headed hydra of different systems and processes, with different purposes, data formats, and storage solutions. Merging all of these and making it work would be a nightmare, as would trying to specify a new system.
The systems analysis and definitions work alone would be significant, before you even get to a prototyping stage.I wonder how many bugs and nonconformities they've found in the existing systems whilst working on the new one?
Aaronovitch used to be a reliable Labour supporter I think. He must be the new Dan Hodges.
He's still a Labour Party member - he's also a big interventionist and this has tipped the balance. I'd stick him very much in the bien pensant intellectual ex-Communist sort who's shifted a bit to the right but he's no Tory. Sort of the opposite argument to Iraq has made him speak out and also EdM's failure of leadership on a wide range of things.
Mike should get in touch with the authors and run it as a "with permission" thread.
Doubt many here will read it otherwise. David Aaranovitch's views are far more, er, "insightful".
Given tim's pathological fixation with denigrating and belittling those who have the temerity to disagree with him, are you surprised so many of his posts are skimmed?
Yes, it's a very good article, and a brief précis sans abuse would have generated much more interest and discussion - but tim's not interested in that.....
He gets a lot more than he gives out, but yes, you have a point.
In short, the article says that Westminster journalists running round the Bubble like headless chickens saying "Ed is playing politics!" this week, "Cameron is damaged!" the other week, "2015 will be like 1983 / 1992 / 1997 / whatever election suits my argument!" etc are buffoons, and the weary and cynical public know it, and this is consistently reflected in the polling.
Nick Sparrow's article on PB was much more persuasive.
And what the article really says is that polls do not shift immediately in response to media reporting.
Still Cameron will quite happily take the August fall of 0.4% in Labour VI and a 0.6% increase in Conservative VI every month between now and 2015.
Nick Sparrow's article was indeed excellent but this was still a salutory reminder once again of how little the froth that we debate on here actually matters.
The conclusion that the Lib Dems are in really serious trouble, as opposed to a mid term dip is interesting.
The rate of progress for the tories is modest despite the ever better news on the economy. I have muttered before about voteless recoveries and I think this is the biggest single risk for the tories. If the economy is growing but people feel worse off the tories may get little benefit.
What Labour really need to do is hold their nerve. The pressure to panic is building however and we can but hope.
David
There has been significant and continuing shifts in the supplementary questions on the government's handling of the economy and on personal/household confidence.
The moves have all been positive for the Conservatives and, starting from very low confidence figures, there remains much scope for continued improvement.
I realise there has been little impact at VI level but the pressure is building up and it is counter-intuitive to believe Labour's lead is robust enough to withstand such dam busting force.
Is there no end to Ed's humiliation - from tonight's Snowmail:
Has David Miliband been tough enough on Syria?
We will also be debating Ed Miliband's leadership of the Labour party on the Syrian question and more generally. The Times columnist David Aaronovitch has written a searing critique of the Labour leader, concluding he is a vulture. He will be debating Miliband supporter Jenni Russell.
If the economy is growing but people feel worse off the tories may get little benefit.
Yep that is huge. Which is why we will get small tax cuts for low/middle earners before 2015.
Cutting taxes with the deficit on the wrong side of £50bn is problematic. It risks undermining the message in the same way as the 45p cut did, even if that might ultimately have brought in more income.
What the government really needs is an increase in wages. I wonder if they will be tempted to reduce the squeeze on public sector pay just a little?
Mike should get in touch with the authors and run it as a "with permission" thread.
Doubt many here will read it otherwise. David Aaranovitch's views are far more, er, "insightful".
Given tim's pathological fixation with denigrating and belittling those who have the temerity to disagree with him, are you surprised so many of his posts are skimmed?
Yes, it's a very good article, and a brief précis sans abuse would have generated much more interest and discussion - but tim's not interested in that.....
He gets a lot more than he gives out, but yes, you have a point.
In short, the article says that Westminster journalists running round the Bubble like headless chickens saying "Ed is playing politics!" this week, "Cameron is damaged!" the other week, "2015 will be like 1983 / 1992 / 1997 / whatever election suits my argument!" etc are buffoons, and the weary and cynical public know it, and this is consistently reflected in the polling.
Nick Sparrow's article on PB was much more persuasive.
And what the article really says is that polls do not shift immediately in response to media reporting.
Still Cameron will quite happily take the August fall of 0.4% in Labour VI and a 0.6% increase in Conservative VI every month between now and 2015.
Nick Sparrow's article was indeed excellent but this was still a salutory reminder once again of how little the froth that we debate on here actually matters.
The conclusion that the Lib Dems are in really serious trouble, as opposed to a mid term dip is interesting.
The rate of progress for the tories is modest despite the ever better news on the economy. I have muttered before about voteless recoveries and I think this is the biggest single risk for the tories. If the economy is growing but people feel worse off the tories may get little benefit.
What Labour really need to do is hold their nerve. The pressure to panic is building however and we can but hope.
The "economy stupid" thing is probably the worst bit of conventional wisdom. As you say, the economy impacts people in very different ways. And there's no doubt that living standards are falling even as the economy is growing (just because Labour say it doesn't make it untrue).
And there's so many glaring exceptions to the "rule" that it's completely undermined, starting with the Tory lead over Labour on the economy in 1997.
"The secret of how to get to the top of the world’s largest companies is, it seems, not to go to Harvard. Or to Yale, Oxford or Cambridge — at least, not for your first degree.
Most leaders of the world’s biggest businesses do not have a bachelor’s degree from one of the highest ranking universities, a new analysis shows. Of the chief executives of the 500 largest corporations, only 25 were undergraduates at Harvard, 13 went to the University of Tokyo, 12 to École Polytechnique in Paris and 11 to Stanford. Oxford has 5 graduates among them and Cambridge 3.
Few, however, stopped at one degree. Many have a second or even third, often from more prestigious universities or business schools: 113 hold an MBA and 53 have a doctorate. Typical of this trend is Muhtar Kent, the American-born boss of Coca-Cola, who studied as an undergraduate at the University of Hull in the 1970s and later did an MBA at Cass Business School in London. >> http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/education/article3860936.ece
@tnewtondunn: BREAKING: MoD scientists confirm Sarin Gas was used on the victims of the Damascus chemical weapons atrocity, No10 reveal.
Such a shame Cameron didn't listen to Hague instead of Osborne and hold fire until all this information came out. He'll live with that inept decision for a long time
Why on earth did the Americans tell Cameron to hold the vote quickly when they had no intention of taking action for a few weeks?
That is a very good question. And more to the point why did Hague say that Parlaiment should not be recalled and Cameron take Osbornes side instead.
Does it matter when the vote was taken?
It is not as if Ed Miliband is capable of undergoing a Damascene conversion when confronted with the facts and truth.
Ed has kindly kept Cameron out of an unpopular intervention which would have given him endless grief. He has also assumed bad boy status with our allies thus leaving Cameron isolated but with sympathy.
I really don't know why you attack him when he's just being helpful. The politics might be stupid but hey that's Ed.
Cameron can unblot his copy book by securing a UNSC resolution.
Miliband is damned in the eyes of the international community forever.
Don't be silly Mr Pole the Iranians love him. He'll always have Tehran and George Galloway.
And Moscow and Beijing.....
We were looking for a distinctive foreign policy.....has Ed stumbled into it.....?
Russia and China ; as my old pal Vladimir Ilyich would put it "useful idiot".
Even Cameron can call him that now, he's in the clear.
Is there no end to Ed's humiliation - from tonight's Snowmail:
Has David Miliband been tough enough on Syria?
We will also be debating Ed Miliband's leadership of the Labour party on the Syrian question and more generally. The Times columnist David Aaronovitch has written a searing critique of the Labour leader, concluding he is a vulture. He will be debating Miliband supporter Jenni Russell.
"The secret of how to get to the top of the world’s largest companies is, it seems, not to go to Harvard. Or to Yale, Oxford or Cambridge — at least, not for your first degree.
Most leaders of the world’s biggest businesses do not have a bachelor’s degree from one of the highest ranking universities, a new analysis shows. Of the chief executives of the 500 largest corporations, only 25 were undergraduates at Harvard, 13 went to the University of Tokyo, 12 to École Polytechnique in Paris and 11 to Stanford. Oxford has 5 graduates among them and Cambridge 3.
Few, however, stopped at one degree. Many have a second or even third, often from more prestigious universities or business schools: 113 hold an MBA and 53 have a doctorate. Typical of this trend is Muhtar Kent, the American-born boss of Coca-Cola, who studied as an undergraduate at the University of Hull in the 1970s and later did an MBA at Cass Business School in London. >> http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/education/article3860936.ece
What I want to know is why our very own Nabavi of All Sussex isn't CEO of Coca-Cola.
He is a man of three degrees, two of which were collected from distinctly disreputable institutions.
I don't buy this 'secret Tories' idea. I think many people do not like to talk about politics in general. Perhaps Tories are more prone to keeping their feelings to themselves. Whereas Labour supporters like to share their feelings, because they have more of a social outlook to life.
Is there no end to Ed's humiliation - from tonight's Snowmail:
Has David Miliband been tough enough on Syria?
We will also be debating Ed Miliband's leadership of the Labour party on the Syrian question and more generally. The Times columnist David Aaronovitch has written a searing critique of the Labour leader, concluding he is a vulture. He will be debating Miliband supporter Jenni Russell.
"The secret of how to get to the top of the world’s largest companies is, it seems, not to go to Harvard. Or to Yale, Oxford or Cambridge — at least, not for your first degree.
Most leaders of the world’s biggest businesses do not have a bachelor’s degree from one of the highest ranking universities, a new analysis shows. Of the chief executives of the 500 largest corporations, only 25 were undergraduates at Harvard, 13 went to the University of Tokyo, 12 to École Polytechnique in Paris and 11 to Stanford. Oxford has 5 graduates among them and Cambridge 3.
Few, however, stopped at one degree. Many have a second or even third, often from more prestigious universities or business schools: 113 hold an MBA and 53 have a doctorate. Typical of this trend is Muhtar Kent, the American-born boss of Coca-Cola, who studied as an undergraduate at the University of Hull in the 1970s and later did an MBA at Cass Business School in London. >> http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/education/article3860936.ece
What I want to know is why our very own Nabavi of All Sussex isn't CEO of Coca-Cola.
He is a man of three degrees, two of which were collected from distinctly disreputable institutions.
With 3 degrees the nabob of Sussex might be better placed on X Factor.
The first obvious point is that in order to consider this hypothesis valid you have to think that 2015 will be a re-run of 1992. We've had four General Elections since and if my memory serves, research from both the 1997 and 2001 contests showed that had turnout been higher, Labour would have had even larger majorities.
I'd love to know how much research was done on those not voting in 2010 - anecdotally, it's hard not to think the LDs might have done better with more younger people voting. 1992 was a high turnout election - just shy of 78% as I recall and my memory of telling was the avalanche of what I suspect were mainly Conservative voters in the last 90 minutes of polling.
I would contend (though I have no evidence) that the "spiral of silence" argument works best in high turnout contests which draw in the more politically-apathetic.
Mike should get in touch with the authors and run it as a "with permission" thread.
Doubt many here will read it otherwise. David Aaranovitch's views are far more, er, "insightful".
Given tim's pathological fixation with denigrating and belittling those who have the temerity to disagree with him, are you surprised so many of his posts are skimmed?
Yes, it's a very good article, and a brief précis sans abuse would have generated much more interest and discussion - but tim's not interested in that.....
He gets a lot more than he gives out, but yes, you have a point.
In short, the article says that Westminster journalists running round the Bubble like headless chickens saying "Ed is playing politics!" this week, "Cameron is damaged!" the other week, "2015 will be like 1983 / 1992 / 1997 / whatever election suits my argument!" etc are buffoons, and the weary and cynical public know it, and this is consistently reflected in the polling.
Nick Sparrow's article on PB was much more persuasive.
And what the article really says is that polls do not shift immediately in response to media reporting.
Still Cameron will quite happily take the August fall of 0.4% in Labour VI and a 0.6% increase in Conservative VI every month between now and 2015.
Nick Sparrow's article was indeed excellent but this was still a salutory reminder once again of how little the froth that we debate on here actually matters.
The conclusion that the Lib Dems are in really serious trouble, as opposed to a mid term dip is interesting.
The rate of progress for the tories is modest despite the ever better news on the economy. I have muttered before about voteless recoveries and I think this is the biggest single risk for the tories. If the economy is growing but people feel worse off the tories may get little benefit.
What Labour really need to do is hold their nerve. The pressure to panic is building however and we can but hope.
David
There has been significant and continuing shifts in the supplementary questions on the government's handling of the economy and on personal/household confidence.
The moves have all been positive for the Conservatives and, starting from very low confidence figures, there remains much scope for continued improvement.
I realise there has been little impact at VI level but the pressure is building up and it is counter-intuitive to believe Labour's lead is robust enough to withstand such dam busting force.
"What Labour really need to do is hold their nerve."
I agree. Ed has the potential to be have an Miligasm every bit as satisfying and a lot longer lasting than the Cleggasm which came just before the last election.
He's much more saleable than any of Thatcher Heath IDS Hague or Howard before their first elections. He's a blank page who needs some smart image people and a few catchy policy ideas and he'll almost certainly eclipse Cameron in popularity
" The crash happened on the Sheppey Crossing on the A249 at 7.15am as commuters headed over the bridge towards the mainland. The collisions continued for ten minutes as cars and lorries crashed into each other in visibility that was down to 20 yards.
One driver involved, Chris Buckingham, told Sky News that a lorry driver used his truck to block the entrance to the bridge. “There was somebody, from what I’ve been told by the police there at the scene, who actually witnessed the first part of the accident, a lorry driver,” he said.
“He was going the other way and what he managed to do, which has probably saved lives, is ... he’s gone down to the end of the carriageway, gone across the roundabout and actually blocked off the road so no more cars could actually enter the dual carriageway before the emergency services got there. “Whoever that guy is, I’d like to shake his hand because he’s probably saved lives today.”
I've just listened to an indignant David Cameron on the BBC News. Nick Robinson correctly points out that had Cameron and Clegg been able to persuade their own MPs to support the motion on Syria, it wouldn't have mattered how Labour voted as there are around 100 more Coalition MPs than Labour MPs.
I just can't see why so many on this forum seem set on blaming Ed Miliband and Labour for the defeat when those Conservatives and Liberal Democrats who failed to support the Government seem responsible.
If the regime did use chemical weapons it shows they're a lot more stupid than most people thought they were. Hopefully that means the estimated time of its collapse can be brought forward somewhat.
@tnewtondunn: BREAKING: MoD scientists confirm Sarin Gas was used on the victims of the Damascus chemical weapons atrocity, No10 reveal.
Such a shame Cameron didn't listen to Hague instead of Osborne and hold fire until all this information came out. He'll live with that inept decision for a long time
Why on earth did the Americans tell Cameron to hold the vote quickly when they had no intention of taking action for a few weeks?
That is a very good question. And more to the point why did Hague say that Parlaiment should not be recalled and Cameron take Osbornes side instead.
Does it matter when the vote was taken?
It is not as if Ed Miliband is capable of undergoing a Damascene conversion when confronted with the facts and truth.
Ed has kindly kept Cameron out of an unpopular intervention which would have given him endless grief. He has also assumed bad boy status with our allies thus leaving Cameron isolated but with sympathy.
I really don't know why you attack him when he's just being helpful. The politics might be stupid but hey that's Ed.
Cameron can unblot his copy book by securing a UNSC resolution.
Miliband is damned in the eyes of the international community forever.
Note: The subject Avery is having his delusional world manipulated successfully.
Comments
'-only 9% of No voters think an independent Scotland could be a success, with another 9% unsure of whether it could or not.
- conversely, a whopping 97% of Yes voters believe an independent Scotland could be successful, with 0% believing it couldn’t and 3% planning to vote Yes anyway despite not being completely certain of it.'
http://tinyurl.com/mol78y5
http://thepollshavenowclosed.blogspot.co.uk/
Knows his stuff, it turns out.
The worrying suspicion forms that this was because it contains the word "shaven".
Yes, it's a very good article, and a brief précis sans abuse would have generated much more interest and discussion - but tim's not interested in that.....
I've never been to Scotland (well, Aberdeen, but that's not really Scotland).
Are the locals really as ugly as the cast of Balamory?
http://www.whitehouse.gov/issues/foreign-policy/syria
This is bad for the college which gets marked very heavily on retention rates. The younger students find a life of 3 days a week on reasonable money quite congenial and make no such efforts (they may, in fairness, look for part time work to help fund their lifestyle).
It seems to me that so much of our tertiary sector is not focussed on what employers want. Placing students in work, even before the final exams, should surely be commended. Teaching courses that promise some sort of X factor lifestyle without any rigorous analysis of where the employment is going to come from is a waste of resources.
We need courses focussed on what the employers in an area want. Lots of them. We want them to have an input into what is taught. We want the courses to feel much more like a work environment with the discipline of work. I fear many of our present courses make people less employable, not more.
There is ten, Yes! TEN by elections today. Now I have split what I do into two. You have all the General Election 2015 stuff being kept here, and the council by election results and information has moved to my other blog. THE POLLS HAVE NOW CLOSED
Feel free to bookmark it, link to it and share to your hearts content.
Click the links below for the information you would like to find out, such as Candidates, Past results, ONS data & Ward maps.
BOSTON - FENSIDE
CARLISLE - YEWDALE
CHARNWOOD - LOUGHBOROUGH ASHBY
CORNWALL - WADEBRIDGE EAST
DAVENTRY - RAVENSTHORPE
EAST CAMBRIDGESHIRE - ELY EAST
NORTHAMPTONSHIRE - MIDDLETON CHENEY
ST EDMUNDSBURY - BARDWELL
TORRIDGE - TORRINGTON
WYCOMBE - HAMBLEDEN VALLEY
What is being defended?
List of votes from when each election was last held.
CONSERVATIVES had 9 candidates totaling 5,905 votes = 39.5%
LABOUR had 7 candidates totaling 3,354 votes = 22.44%
LIBDEMS had 8 candidates totaling 2,205 votes = 14.75%
UKIP had 4 candidates totaling 1,602 votes = 10.72%
INDEPENDENTS had 3 candidates totaling 1,273 votes = 8.51%
ENGLISH DEM had 2 candidates totaling 367 votes = 2.45%
BOSTON INDEPENDENTS had 1 candidate with 182 votes = 1.2%
GREEN PARTY had 1 candidate with 55 votes = 0.36%
In these elections there is now
10 UKIP candidates (up 6)
10 CONSERVATIVES (up1)
9 LABOUR (up2)
6 LIBDEMS (down2)
2 GREEN (up1)
4 INDEPENDENTS (up1)
NO ENGLISH DEM OR BOSTON INDEPENDENTS this time.
Courtesy of UK GENERAL ELECTION 2015
In short, the article says that Westminster journalists running round the Bubble like headless chickens saying "Ed is playing politics!" this week, "Cameron is damaged!" the other week, "2015 will be like 1983 / 1992 / 1997 / whatever election suits my argument!" etc are buffoons, and the weary and cynical public know it, and this is consistently reflected in the polling.
Cameron never had that option.
The leader of the opposition in the UK is weak, vacillatiing, indecisive, untrustworthy, disloyal and unreliable: a politician who is guaranteed to put domestic party political advantage over the security and foreign interests of the country and who has proven himself willing to renege on any promise or undertaking he makes.
It is not as if Ed Miliband is capable of undergoing a Damascene conversion when confronted with the facts and truth.
I really don't know why you attack him when he's just being helpful. The politics might be stupid but hey that's Ed.
And what the article really says is that polls do not shift immediately in response to media reporting.
Still Cameron will quite happily take the August fall of 0.4% in Labour VI and a 0.6% increase in Conservative VI every month between now and 2015.
Miliband is damned in the eyes of the international community forever.
Poor guy. He's a good writer, otherwise.
norman smith @BBCNormanS 27m
PM at g-20 on Commons #syria vote - "Everyone has to live with the way they voted."
norman smith @BBCNormanS 28m
PM at G-20 accuses Labour of taking "the easy and political path" over Commons
norman smith @BBCNormanS 29m
PM says Commons vote on #syria was lost because people "felt let down over Iraq"
The conclusion that the Lib Dems are in really serious trouble, as opposed to a mid term dip is interesting.
The rate of progress for the tories is modest despite the ever better news on the economy. I have muttered before about voteless recoveries and I think this is the biggest single risk for the tories. If the economy is growing but people feel worse off the tories may get little benefit.
What Labour really need to do is hold their nerve. The pressure to panic is building however and we can but hope.
"The secret of how to get to the top of the world’s largest companies is, it seems, not to go to Harvard. Or to Yale, Oxford or Cambridge — at least, not for your first degree.
Most leaders of the world’s biggest businesses do not have a bachelor’s degree from one of the highest ranking universities, a new analysis shows. Of the chief executives of the 500 largest corporations, only 25 were undergraduates at Harvard, 13 went to the University of Tokyo, 12 to École Polytechnique in Paris and 11 to Stanford. Oxford has 5 graduates among them and Cambridge 3.
Few, however, stopped at one degree. Many have a second or even third, often from more prestigious universities or business schools: 113 hold an MBA and 53 have a doctorate. Typical of this trend is Muhtar Kent, the American-born boss of Coca-Cola, who studied as an undergraduate at the University of Hull in the 1970s and later did an MBA at Cass Business School in London. >> http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/education/article3860936.ece
We were looking for a distinctive foreign policy.....has Ed stumbled into it.....?
Yep that is huge. Which is why we will get small tax cuts for low/middle earners before 2015.
I'm guessing that the benefits systems are a multi-headed hydra of different systems and processes, with different purposes, data formats, and storage solutions. Merging all of these and making it work would be a nightmare, as would trying to specify a new system.
The systems analysis and definitions work alone would be significant, before you even get to a prototyping stage.I wonder how many bugs and nonconformities they've found in the existing systems whilst working on the new one?
There has been significant and continuing shifts in the supplementary questions on the government's handling of the economy and on personal/household confidence.
The moves have all been positive for the Conservatives and, starting from very low confidence figures, there remains much scope for continued improvement.
I realise there has been little impact at VI level but the pressure is building up and it is counter-intuitive to believe Labour's lead is robust enough to withstand such dam busting force.
Onwards and upwards!
Has David Miliband been tough enough on Syria?
We will also be debating Ed Miliband's leadership of the Labour party on the Syrian question and more generally. The Times columnist David Aaronovitch has written a searing critique of the Labour leader, concluding he is a vulture. He will be debating Miliband supporter Jenni Russell.
What the government really needs is an increase in wages. I wonder if they will be tempted to reduce the squeeze on public sector pay just a little?
And there's so many glaring exceptions to the "rule" that it's completely undermined, starting with the Tory lead over Labour on the economy in 1997.
That's not to say it's unimportant, of course.
Even Cameron can call him that now, he's in the clear.
He is a man of three degrees, two of which were collected from distinctly disreputable institutions.
Galaxy and ReachTEL: 53-47 to Coalition
Essential Research: 52-48 to Coalition
http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/2013/09/06/galaxy-and-reachtel-53-47-essential-research-52-48/
The first obvious point is that in order to consider this hypothesis valid you have to think that 2015 will be a re-run of 1992. We've had four General Elections since and if my memory serves, research from both the 1997 and 2001 contests showed that had turnout been higher, Labour would have had even larger majorities.
I'd love to know how much research was done on those not voting in 2010 - anecdotally, it's hard not to think the LDs might have done better with more younger people voting. 1992 was a high turnout election - just shy of 78% as I recall and my memory of telling was the avalanche of what I suspect were mainly Conservative voters in the last 90 minutes of polling.
I would contend (though I have no evidence) that the "spiral of silence" argument works best in high turnout contests which draw in the more politically-apathetic.
Russia and China ; as my old pal Vladimir Ilyich would put it "useful idiot".
Even Cameron can call him that now, he's in the clear.
Mr. Brooke
"идиот" has a much more pejorative and forceful meaning in Russian than it does in English.
Highly appropriate.
"What Labour really need to do is hold their nerve."
I agree. Ed has the potential to be have an Miligasm every bit as satisfying and a lot longer lasting than the Cleggasm which came just before the last election.
He's much more saleable than any of Thatcher Heath IDS Hague or Howard before their first elections. He's a blank page who needs some smart image people and a few catchy policy ideas and he'll almost certainly eclipse Cameron in popularity
" The crash happened on the Sheppey Crossing on the A249 at 7.15am as commuters headed over the bridge towards the mainland. The collisions continued for ten minutes as cars and lorries crashed into each other in visibility that was down to 20 yards.
One driver involved, Chris Buckingham, told Sky News that a lorry driver used his truck to block the entrance to the bridge. “There was somebody, from what I’ve been told by the police there at the scene, who actually witnessed the first part of the accident, a lorry driver,” he said.
“He was going the other way and what he managed to do, which has probably saved lives, is ... he’s gone down to the end of the carriageway, gone across the roundabout and actually blocked off the road so no more cars could actually enter the dual carriageway before the emergency services got there. “Whoever that guy is, I’d like to shake his hand because he’s probably saved lives today.”
I just can't see why so many on this forum seem set on blaming Ed Miliband and Labour for the defeat when those Conservatives and Liberal Democrats who failed to support the Government seem responsible.
"Russian spokesman says BG is a small island nobody listens to. I'd like to blame Cameron, but Russia is a kleptocracy."
But Bulgaria isn't an island...