The Government is at a watershed moment that could go either way.
It is to be hoped they take urgent and immediate action to stop directors abuse of their companies with punitive prison sentences for riping off the shareholders and employees and enact legislation that all companies have to settle their accounts within 30 days unconditionally and if they intend disputing the invoice it still has to be paid, pending any review of the charges.
Furthermore maintaining sub contractors viability in this immediate crisis within reason needs to be considered together with a root and branch review of services that should be in the public sector and those rightly continue in the private sector.
The problem for labour to sustain the charge that these were profit driven private businesses is they have failed largely by under cutting tenders and the shareholders have worthless shares
This sounds a "what would the public like us to do and what would keep us popular" type of response. Massive State intervention via legislation into business and questioning the entire basis of outsourcing within the public sector.
It's the sort of thing Corbyn and McDonnell could support.
There are times when events change narratives and this is one.
Are you saying that directors should be exempt from criminal charges for riping off their Companies and what is wrong with 30 day compulsive payment of invoices
How many payment runs do you want companies to do a month ?!
Guardian are suggesting Carillion will pay just about 1p in the £. That will mean ruin for many smaller firms who have them as their main ‘customer'.
Having allowed Boris to make them the party of Trump, the Tories are also in danger of becoming the party of Carillion. Dangerous times for the Blues.
Most Tory voters back Leave and most voters who think the private sector should not do any public sector work are already voting Labour anyway
I see that Jon Trickett is being completely irresponsible, as well as irrational, in respect of Interserve. Quite how a profit warning is evidence that 'shareholders cream off the profits' is a mystery, but then Labour prides itself on its economic illiteracy so perhaps we shouldn't be surprised.
One of my girlfriend's uber Corbynista friends thinks profits warnings are just a capitalist tool of deflating the share price allowing the directors and banks to buy the shares on the cheap and make a profit in the future.
With cynicism like that she really should be in politics. She'd thrive.
I hope we're not missing the bigger picture. France and Germany are possibly the biggest obstacle to a post-Brexit trade deal, and have been pushing the harder line.
Whilst the Germans have been distracted by their own political problems, the British and French Governments have clearly been doing quite a bit of work behind the scenes on a cordial post-Brexit relationship. The Bayeux tapestry and rumours on an imminent deal over Calais, both May on payments, and Macron on not slowing down speed of entry, are part of that.
Long way to go, but that's important.
The Bayeux tapestry loan shows that the Remain campaign for the next referendum is already up and running, and it’s not based on ‘project fear’ but on shared history and shared interests.
Happens all the time at Lingfield, Southwell and Kempton in the winter.
That looks the "Apprentice Jockeys who have never sat on a horse and have no saddle" Handicap series of races - always entertaining but not good for punting.
I see that Jon Trickett is being completely irresponsible, as well as irrational, in respect of Interserve. Quite how a profit warning is evidence that 'shareholders cream off the profits' is a mystery, but then Labour prides itself on its economic illiteracy so perhaps we shouldn't be surprised.
One of my girlfriend's uber Corbynista friends thinks profits warnings are just a capitalist tool of deflating the share price allowing the directors and banks to buy the shares on the cheap and make a profit in the future.
As so often, the split between Remain and Leave voters was telling. Each side thought theirs would win such a referendum – but remainers were more certain than leavers that most people now agreed with them
Why has he not published the Remain/Leave result, since he must have asked the question to be able to break it down like that? Unless he is splitting based on 2016 past-vote, in which case his results do not back up the spin.
When, other than in 2016, have people voted Leave or Remain?
They haven't, but if he wants to claim differential delusion it has to be based on current voting intention. His results could just indicate that 2016 Leave voters themselves have changed their minds.
Interestingly only 55% of 2017 Tory voters think that Leave would win a second referendum, and the only age group that thinks Leave would win are the over 65s.
Almost all pre 2016 EU referendum polls had a clear majority of voters expecting a Remain victory
It's hard to see how May's ratings and the result of GE2017 isn't dragging down the Brexit numbers.
I don't think so, more Tory voters now back Leave than was the case before the EU referendum and slighy more Labour voters now back Remain, the 2 main parties have just polarised
I hope we're not missing the bigger picture. France and Germany are possibly the biggest obstacle to a post-Brexit trade deal, and have been pushing the harder line.
Whilst the Germans have been distracted by their own political problems, the British and French Governments have clearly been doing quite a bit of work behind the scenes on a cordial post-Brexit relationship. The Bayeux tapestry and rumours on an imminent deal over Calais, both May on payments, and Macron on not slowing down speed of entry, are part of that.
Long way to go, but that's important.
The Bayeux tapestry loan shows that the Remain campaign for the next referendum is already up and running, and it’s not based on ‘project fear’ but on shared history and shared interests.
In the same spirit of shared history, we should offer to loan them this great work as a reciprocal gesture.
Just look at the collapse in Corbyn's ratings in the last 3 months.
Ditto Mrs May.
Theresa May's ratings have hardly changed, admittedly they are dire but then this is Scotland.
The change in the Corbyn figures over just three months, on the other hand, is striking. I wonder what has driven it?
Theresa May had a positive rating in late 2016.
As for Corbyn, I think the 'victory' at GE2017 is wearing off plus his views on Brexit might be driving it.
A harbinger for the polls in the rest of the Britain later on this year?
Labour won the 2014 local elections by 2% and double the number of councils of the Tories, so Corbyn is starting from a much higher base thsn he was in 2017
I see that Jon Trickett is being completely irresponsible, as well as irrational, in respect of Interserve. Quite how a profit warning is evidence that 'shareholders cream off the profits' is a mystery, but then Labour prides itself on its economic illiteracy so perhaps we shouldn't be surprised.
One of my girlfriend's uber Corbynista friends thinks profits warnings are just a capitalist tool of deflating the share price allowing the directors and banks to buy the shares on the cheap and make a profit in the future.
With cynicism like that she really should be in politics. She'd thrive.
She is up for a career in politics. She's very active in the NUS, so a future Labour MP in the next decade.
So a projected unionist majority of 3 at Holyrood based on this poll during mid term should be regarded as a likely outcome?
A point that I have made before is that ultimately the future of the Union will be much more influenced by the SNP MSPs rather than their MPs. People should recall that there were only 6 SNP MPs at the time of the first IndyRef.
Ironically one of the reasons the SNP lost ground at the GE2017 was that even having 56 out of 59 MPs made little difference, not because of the quality of their MPs (above average), but because of their influence being totally swamped by MPs not from Scotland.
This has the double edged effect of making people less likely to vote for the SNP at Westminster but more likely to accept the need for independence as even 59 SNP MPs cannot fully defend Scotland.
Turning to Holyrood, which is the politically important place in Scotland these days, a cracking poll for the Greens. The list vote is the important one for them. They should gain a few MSPs on the back of it. Labour does noticeably worse in Holyrood than at Westminster, which suggests both a personal following for Jeremy Corbyn and that Scottish Labour aren't sealing the deal with the voters. Ruth Davidson continues to do a good job of projecting moderate Unionism in Scotland while not being blighted by the corpse of the UK Conservative Party that she is shackled to. A personal following for her too, I think. The Scottish Lib Dems are doing OK on ambitions that are much reduced compared with previous times.
The SNP are seeing a major fall in support, but not having crunched the numbers, I suspect their number of MSPs may not fall as much as the vote shares would suggest, thanks to the weakness of Scottish Labour. In any case we are talking about a lower level of SNP dominance at this stage - not they will be wiped out.
The support for the Scottish Greens in the list vote has basically become a contrivance by SNP supporters switching to Green to boost the overall number of MSPs in Holyrood supporting secession and willing to keep the SNP in government. They know the SNP is grossly overrepresented in the constituency vote thanks to FPTP there, and that means that a vote for the SNP in the list vote is virtually worthless.
There should be a single vote, with the vote being used to determine the regional list allocations as well as the constituency seats. Until that is done, the system is open to manipulation.
Presumably you also think that Unionist tactical voting is a manipulative contrivance?
Try looking at the facts. It is those supporting secession, not those opposing it, which have benefitted from tactical contrivances to manipulate the list vote. The fact is that it is the SNP whose list votes have been near useless, which has benefitted from such tactical contrivances to boost secessionist representation in Holyrood. In 2016 the SNP and Greens between them got 47.1% of the constituency and 48.3% of the list vote. (The Green vote jumped 6% in the list vote, the SNP vote dropped 5%.). But between them they have 53.5% of seats in the supposedly proportionate Scottish parliament.
Likewise, if Labour in Scotland was benefiting from "Unionist tactical voting" as you put it, the Labour list vote in 2016 (for which it relied for 21 of its 24 seats) would have been higher than its constituency share. In fact it was 3% lower.
Thus there is a good argument, reinforced by this latest poll, for the UK government to change the systems for devolved parliaments to use a single vote for both list and regional seat allocations.
As so often, the split between Remain and Leave voters was telling. Each side thought theirs would win such a referendum – but remainers were more certain than leavers that most people now agreed with them
Why has he not published the Remain/Leave result, since he must have asked the question to be able to break it down like that? Unless he is splitting based on 2016 past-vote, in which case his results do not back up the spin.
When, other than in 2016, have people voted Leave or Remain?
They haven't, but if he wants to claim differential delusion it has to be based on current voting intention. His results could just indicate that 2016 Leave voters themselves have changed their minds.
Interestingly only 55% of 2017 Tory voters think that Leave would win a second referendum, and the only age group that thinks Leave would win are the over 65s.
Almost all pre 2016 EU referendum polls had a clear majority of voters expecting a Remain victory
It's hard to see how May's ratings and the result of GE2017 isn't dragging down the Brexit numbers.
I don't think so, more Tory voters now back Leave than was the case before the EU referendum and slighy more Labour voters now back Remain, the 2 main parties have just polarised
I mean, on the trend of the right/wrong in hindsight numbers.
I hope we're not missing the bigger picture. France and Germany are possibly the biggest obstacle to a post-Brexit trade deal, and have been pushing the harder line.
Whilst the Germans have been distracted by their own political problems, the British and French Governments have clearly been doing quite a bit of work behind the scenes on a cordial post-Brexit relationship. The Bayeux tapestry and rumours on an imminent deal over Calais, both May on payments, and Macron on not slowing down speed of entry, are part of that.
Long way to go, but that's important.
The Bayeux tapestry loan shows that the Remain campaign for the next referendum is already up and running, and it’s not based on ‘project fear’ but on shared history and shared interests.
In the same spirit of shared history, we should offer to loan them this great work as a reciprocal gesture.
We should have renamed St. Pancras "Trafalgar" when the Eurostar moved there.
I'm so disappointed the French no longer arrive at Waterloo.
So a projected unionist majority of 3 at Holyrood based on this poll during mid term should be regarded as a likely outcome?
A point that I have made before is that ultimately the future of the Union will be much more influenced by the SNP MSPs rather than their MPs. People should recall that there were only 6 SNP MPs at the time of the first IndyRef.
Ironically one of the reasons the SNP lost ground at the GE2017 was that even having 56 out of 59 MPs made little difference, not because of the quality of their MPs (above average), but because of their influence being totally swamped by MPs not from Scotland.
This has the double edged effect of making people less likely to vote for the SNP at Westminster but more likely to accept the need for independence as even 59 SNP MPs cannot fully defend Scotland.
True that Holyrood not Westminster is more important for the SNP but then if there will be a majority of Unionist MSPs and only a minority of SNP and Green MSPs after the next Holyrood election as this poll suggests that kills SNP indyref2 hopes.
The projected seat counts look right to me - Labour winning Scottish Westminster seats, mostly at the expense of the SNP, but also a couple from the Conservatives. (Lib Dem North East Fife klaxon!)
Turning to Holyrood, which is the politically important place in Scotland these days, a cracking poll for the Greens. The list vote is the important one for them. They should gain a few MSPs on the back of it. Labour does noticeably worse in Holyrood than at Westminster, which suggests both a personal following for Jeremy Corbyn and that Scottish Labour aren't sealing the deal with the voters. Ruth Davidson continues to do a good job of projecting moderate Unionism in Scotland while not being blighted by the corpse of the UK Conservative Party that she is shackled to. A personal following for her too, I think. The Scottish Lib Dems are doing OK on ambitions that are much reduced compared with previous times.
The SNP are seeing a major fall in support, but not having crunched the numbers, I suspect their number of MSPs may not fall as much as the vote shares would suggest, thanks to the weakness of Scottish Labour. In any case we are talking about a lower level of SNP dominance at this stage - not they will be wiped out.
Holyrood
" Sir John Curtice, the election expert, said that this would still allow the SNP to emerge as the largest party at Holyrood with 53 seats, down ten. The Conservatives would be second with 33 (up two); Labour third with 27 (up three); the Greens with ten (up four); and the Lib Dems up one at six. "
So a Unionist majority of 3 then
Given that the Scottish secessionist parties (SNP and Green) have on this poll a combined share of 41%/42% (constituency/list) compared to 58/57% for those opposing secession (Lab/Con/LD/UKIP), the majority for the latter ought to be around 25 rather than 3, were seats allocated proportionally. The Holyrood voting system and its opportunity for manipulation hands the secessionists a huge advantage that serves to threaten the union.
@PolhomeEditor: SNP MPs suddenly dealing with urgent business on their phones as Jeremy Corbyn mentions Stagecoach in a list of private companies carrying out public services. #PMQs
If Bercow wants to get through the order paper this won't finish before 1. Very few Tories got (randomly) selected so more questions overall given that they have to alternate.
If Bercow wants to get through the order paper this won't finish before 1. Very few Tories got (randomly) selected so more questions overall given that they have to alternate.
Seems a bizarre way to do it. If they have to alternate then why not alternately draw from two hats?
So is Jeremy. That was an effective rallying call from him that will be broadcast widely on social media. Job done.
Didn't you listen to the effective replies that demolished his arguments
I did listen and they didn't demolish his arguments. But few people watch PMQs. What matters is what is used thereafter. Corbyn has got the material he wanted.
So is Jeremy. That was an effective rallying call from him that will be broadcast widely on social media. Job done.
Didn't you listen to the effective replies that demolished his arguments
Not the way that social media works. A video will be spliced together showing whatever the person spreading the video wants to show. Who cares about things like integrity or replies?
So is Jeremy. That was an effective rallying call from him that will be broadcast widely on social media. Job done.
Didn't you listen to the effective replies that demolished his arguments
Not the way that social media works. A video will be spliced together showing whatever the person spreading the video wants to show. Who cares about things like integrity or replies?
Quite. Corbyn's passion will come across well and resonate.
So is Jeremy. That was an effective rallying call from him that will be broadcast widely on social media. Job done.
Didn't you listen to the effective replies that demolished his arguments
I did listen and they didn't demolish his arguments. But few people watch PMQs. What matters is what is used thereafter. Corbyn has got the material he wanted.
Corbyn can talk to his cohort but he has to attract conservatives to form a government and he will not achieve that on a hard left platform
Interesting debate behind the rahrahs at PMQs that defines the two main parties. I think the two parties will be happy with their respective definitions: The Tories for free enterprise and Labour for protection against crony capitalism.
Someone should tell Mrs May that it's no good implying the SNP's policy of independence is even worse in its effects than her own policy of Brexit.
So is Jeremy. That was an effective rallying call from him that will be broadcast widely on social media. Job done.
Didn't you listen to the effective replies that demolished his arguments
Not the way that social media works. A video will be spliced together showing whatever the person spreading the video wants to show. Who cares about things like integrity or replies?
Quite. Corbyn's passion will come across well and resonate.
The May dickriders are delusional. Corbyn just wants a few meme-able soundbites and phrases that can be shared on Facebook by people who have giant TVs in tiny houses and kid named after Game of Thrones characters.
Corbyn comfortably come off best - he has the wind behind him on this issue - but May managed to pull it back a bit with her final answer. Until then, although clearly across the detail of her brief, she struck the wrong tone in at least two places. Refusing to engage with Corbyn second question just because it did not conclude with a question mark sounded petty, and her repeated insistence that the government was just a “customer” of Carillion, while technically correct, made her sound rather feeble.
So is Jeremy. That was an effective rallying call from him that will be broadcast widely on social media. Job done.
Didn't you listen to the effective replies that demolished his arguments
I did listen and they didn't demolish his arguments. But few people watch PMQs. What matters is what is used thereafter. Corbyn has got the material he wanted.
Corbyn can talk to his cohort but he has to attract conservatives to form a government
The projected seat counts look right to me - Labour winning Scottish Westminster seats, mostly at the expense of the SNP, but also a couple from the Conservatives. (Lib Dem North East Fife klaxon!)
Turning to Holyrood, which is the politically important place in Scotland these days, a cracking poll for the Greens. The list vote is the important one for them. They should gain a few MSPs on the back of it. Labour does noticeably worse in Holyrood than at Westminster, which suggests both a personal following for Jeremy Corbyn and that Scottish Labour aren't sealing the deal with the voters. Ruth Davidson continues to do a good job of projecting moderate Unionism in Scotland while not being blighted by the corpse of the UK Conservative Party that she is shackled to. A personal following for her too, I think. The Scottish Lib Dems are doing OK on ambitions that are much reduced compared with previous times.
The SNP are seeing a major fall in support, but not having crunched the numbers, I suspect their number of MSPs may not fall as much as the vote shares would suggest, thanks to the weakness of Scottish Labour. In any case we are talking about a lower level of SNP dominance at this stage - not they will be wiped out.
Holyrood
" Sir John Curtice, the election expert, said that this would still allow the SNP to emerge as the largest party at Holyrood with 53 seats, down ten. The Conservatives would be second with 33 (up two); Labour third with 27 (up three); the Greens with ten (up four); and the Lib Dems up one at six. "
So a Unionist majority of 3 then
Given that the Scottish secessionist parties (SNP and Green) have on this poll a combined share of 41%/42% (constituency/list) compared to 58/57% for those opposing secession (Lab/Con/LD/UKIP), the majority for the latter ought to be around 25 rather than 3, were seats allocated proportionally. The Holyrood voting system and its opportunity for manipulation hands the secessionists a huge advantage that serves to threaten the union.
On this poll Unionists will win a majority at Holyrood for the first time since 2007. Thus the Union would actually be safer than it has been for a decade.
So is Jeremy. That was an effective rallying call from him that will be broadcast widely on social media. Job done.
Didn't you listen to the effective replies that demolished his arguments
Not the way that social media works. A video will be spliced together showing whatever the person spreading the video wants to show. Who cares about things like integrity or replies?
Quite. Corbyn's passion will come across well and resonate.
The May dickriders are delusional. Corbyn just wants a few meme-able soundbites and phrases that can be shared on Facebook by people who have giant TVs in tiny houses and kid named after Game of Thrones characters.
May explained, Corbyn ranted. May used facts, Corbyn used his usual anti-cap prejudices.
This is a bit like justin thinking no-one needs to take more than £500 on holidays.
So is Jeremy. That was an effective rallying call from him that will be broadcast widely on social media. Job done.
Didn't you listen to the effective replies that demolished his arguments
Not the way that social media works. A video will be spliced together showing whatever the person spreading the video wants to show. Who cares about things like integrity or replies?
Quite. Corbyn's passion will come across well and resonate.
The May dickriders are delusional. Corbyn just wants a few meme-able soundbites and phrases that can be shared on Facebook by people who have giant TVs in tiny houses and kid named after Game of Thrones characters.
May explained, Corbyn ranted. May used facts, Corbyn used his usual anti-cap prejudices.
This is a bit like justin thinking no-one needs to take more than £500 on holidays.
We all come to this with our prejudices. Both Corbyn and May made good broader points, although the Carillion business can't be described as helpful to the government. It now comes down to which side gets the most out of the point they are making.
As so often, the split between Remain and Leave voters was telling. Each side thought theirs would win such a referendum – but remainers were more certain than leavers that most people now agreed with them
Why has he not published the Remain/Leave result, since he must have asked the question to be able to break it down like that? Unless he is splitting based on 2016 past-vote, in which case his results do not back up the spin.
When, other than in 2016, have people voted Leave or Remain?
They haven't, but if he wants to claim differential delusion it has to be based on current voting intention. His results could just indicate that 2016 Leave voters themselves have changed their minds.
Interestingly only 55% of 2017 Tory voters think that Leave would win a second referendum, and the only age group that thinks Leave would win are the over 65s.
Almost all pre 2016 EU referendum polls had a clear majority of voters expecting a Remain victory
It's hard to see how May's ratings and the result of GE2017 isn't dragging down the Brexit numbers.
I don't think so, more Tory voters now back Leave than was the case before the EU referendum and slighy more Labour voters now back Remain, the 2 main parties have just polarised
I mean, on the trend of the right/wrong in hindsight numbers.
Those figures are not really relevant, what is relevant is support for a second referendum and voting intention in such a referendum
So is Jeremy. That was an effective rallying call from him that will be broadcast widely on social media. Job done.
Didn't you listen to the effective replies that demolished his arguments
Not the way that social media works. A video will be spliced together showing whatever the person spreading the video wants to show. Who cares about things like integrity or replies?
Quite. Corbyn's passion will come across well and resonate.
The May dickriders are delusional. Corbyn just wants a few meme-able soundbites and phrases that can be shared on Facebook by people who have giant TVs in tiny houses and kid named after Game of Thrones characters.
Was it Marx who said he was a Socialist not because he loved the poor but because he hated them?
Corbyn comfortably come off best - he has the wind behind him on this issue - but May managed to pull it back a bit with her final answer. Until then, although clearly across the detail of her brief, she struck the wrong tone in at least two places. Refusing to engage with Corbyn second question just because it did not conclude with a question mark sounded petty, and her repeated insistence that the government was just a “customer” of Carillion, while technically correct, made her sound rather feeble.
Didn't take long. Our very own Mr Independence RCS moves to California and within a few months he has persuaded most of the state to try to secede from the central government.
New California would be comfortably Republican, while Old California would be massively Democratic. It seems a neat device to bring two more Republican Senators to Washington.
(I believe Nigel Farage has been involved in the Calexit campaign.)
Edit to add: there is basically no chance this happens.
It should happen - it would be the right thing to do (free SoCal!) but it’s not going to.
Didn't take long. Our very own Mr Independence RCS moves to California and within a few months he has persuaded most of the state to try to secede from the central government.
New California would be comfortably Republican, while Old California would be massively Democratic. It seems a neat device to bring two more Republican Senators to Washington.
(I believe Nigel Farage has been involved in the Calexit campaign.)
Edit to add: there is basically no chance this happens.
It should happen - it would be the right thing to do (free SoCal!) but it’s not going to.
It there not a difference between SoCal and New Cal? SoCal made slightly more sense from a geographical point of view.
Corbyn comfortably come off best - he has the wind behind him on this issue - but May managed to pull it back a bit with her final answer. Until then, although clearly across the detail of her brief, she struck the wrong tone in at least two places. Refusing to engage with Corbyn second question just because it did not conclude with a question mark sounded petty, and her repeated insistence that the government was just a “customer” of Carillion, while technically correct, made her sound rather feeble.
Bad news for the SNP -but it makes no difference to anti Tory arithmetic in the Commons since the SNP would have supported a Corbyn government anyway. To win an election Labour needs to win Tory marginals in Middle England -and it isnt happening because of Corbyn.
You don’t understand what the very word ‘citizenship’ means.
So if you’re a boss who earns a fortune but doesn’t look after your staff… An international company that treats tax laws as an optional extra… A household name that refuses to work with the authorities even to fight terrorism… A director who takes out massive dividends while knowing that the company pension is about to go bust…
I’m putting you on warning. This can’t go on anymore. A change has got to come. And this party – the Conservative Party – is going to make that change.
Except Jeremy Corbyn can plausibly claim to be walking the walk while Conservatives are the party of the citizens of nowhere.
Didn't take long. Our very own Mr Independence RCS moves to California and within a few months he has persuaded most of the state to try to secede from the central government.
New California would be comfortably Republican, while Old California would be massively Democratic. It seems a neat device to bring two more Republican Senators to Washington.
(I believe Nigel Farage has been involved in the Calexit campaign.)
Edit to add: there is basically no chance this happens.
It should happen - it would be the right thing to do (free SoCal!) but it’s not going to.
It there not a difference between SoCal and New Cal? SoCal made slightly more sense from a geographical point of view.
Perhaps Old California would then try and secede from the USA? There is already a secessionist movement there
Didn't take long. Our very own Mr Independence RCS moves to California and within a few months he has persuaded most of the state to try to secede from the central government.
New California would be comfortably Republican, while Old California would be massively Democratic. It seems a neat device to bring two more Republican Senators to Washington.
(I believe Nigel Farage has been involved in the Calexit campaign.)
Edit to add: there is basically no chance this happens.
It should happen - it would be the right thing to do (free SoCal!) but it’s not going to.
It there not a difference between SoCal and New Cal? SoCal made slightly more sense from a geographical point of view.
Perhaps Old California would then try and secede from the USA? There is already a secessionist movement there
I seem to remember things got a little problematic the last time that was tried.
Prime ministers questions: Hapless versus Hopeless. The tragedy of British politics 2018.
Didnt the remainers tell us during the referendum campaign that Brexit made it inevitable that Scotland would go for independence? This latest poll exposes that as a lie.
Yes it's bad in Scotland Wales and NI but brilliant in England .
No, its terrible but we are spending more than ever (as if that is actually an answer), apparently.
With the benefit of hindsight I suspect that Corybn wishes he had gone on the vanishing nurses this week.
I think he would have been criticized if he did.Due to Carillion going into liquidation this week.This is fundamental to Corbyn as it is change from the consensus over the past twenty years.May saying the Labour government gave Carillion contracts enhances the change from Blair.
Didn't take long. Our very own Mr Independence RCS moves to California and within a few months he has persuaded most of the state to try to secede from the central government.
New California would be comfortably Republican, while Old California would be massively Democratic. It seems a neat device to bring two more Republican Senators to Washington.
(I believe Nigel Farage has been involved in the Calexit campaign.)
Edit to add: there is basically no chance this happens.
It should happen - it would be the right thing to do (free SoCal!) but it’s not going to.
It there not a difference between SoCal and New Cal? SoCal made slightly more sense from a geographical point of view.
Perhaps Old California would then try and secede from the USA? There is already a secessionist movement there
I seem to remember things got a little problematic the last time that was tried.
I don't think Trump would complain, without Old California he would have beaten Hillary in the popular vote and increased his Electoral College majority, much like the Tories would have won a majority in 2017 without Scotland
The Government is at a watershed moment that could go either way.
It is to be hoped they take urgent and immediate action to stop directors abuse of their companies with punitive prison sentences for riping off the shareholders and employees and enact legislation that all companies have to settle their accounts within 30 days unconditionally and if they intend disputing the invoice it still has to be paid, pending any review of the charges.
Furthermore maintaining sub contractors viability in this immediate crisis within reason needs to be considered together with a root and branch review of services that should be in the public sector and those rightly continue in the private sector.
The problem for labour to sustain the charge that these were profit driven private businesses is they have failed largely by under cutting tenders and the shareholders have worthless shares
This sounds a "what would the public like us to do and what would keep us popular" type of response. Massive State intervention via legislation into business and questioning the entire basis of outsourcing within the public sector.
It's the sort of thing Corbyn and McDonnell could support.
There are times when events change narratives and this is one.
Are you saying that directors should be exempt from criminal charges for riping off their Companies and what is wrong with 30 day compulsive payment of invoices
I would not wish to have to settle my accountant's and counsel's fees in 30 days, while waiting considerably longer for clients to settle their bills.
I do understand that some professions would need exemption
Yeah, heaven forbid that Counsel was paid within 30 days eh? Jeez....
Lawyers are notoriously slow to pay for medico-legal reports. Indeed some of my colleagues will not release reports until paid for this very reason.
I am sure that you are not one of these slowcoaches!
I pay disbursements as swiftly as I can. But, sometimes, it takes me a while to get paid. If, say, there's a dispute over a will, and the only asset of the estate is a house, and the client doesn't have much money, neither the solicitor nor counsel will get paid until an agreement is reached, and the house has been sold.
There’s a nice market niche for banks who understand how counsel billings and cash flow works
The projected seat counts look right to me - Labour winning Scottish Westminster seats, mostly at the expense of the SNP, but also a couple from the Conservatives. (Lib Dem North East Fife klaxon!)
Turning to Holyrood, which is the politically important place in Scotland these days, a cracking poll for the Greens. The list vote is the important one for them. They should gain a few MSPs on the back of it. Labour does noticeably worse in Holyrood than at Westminster, which suggests both a personal following for Jeremy Corbyn and that Scottish Labour aren't sealing the deal with the voters. Ruth Davidson continues to do a good job of projecting moderate Unionism in Scotland while not being blighted by the corpse of the UK Conservative Party that she is shackled to. A personal following for her too, I think. The Scottish Lib Dems are doing OK on ambitions that are much reduced compared with previous times.
The SNP are seeing a major fall in support, but not having crunched the numbers, I suspect their number of MSPs may not fall as much as the vote shares would suggest, thanks to the weakness of Scottish Labour. In any case we are talking about a lower level of SNP dominance at this stage - not they will be wiped out.
Holyrood
" Sir John Curtice, the election expert, said that this would still allow the SNP to emerge as the largest party at Holyrood with 53 seats, down ten. The Conservatives would be second with 33 (up two); Labour third with 27 (up three); the Greens with ten (up four); and the Lib Dems up one at six. "
So a Unionist majority of 3 then
Given that the Scottish secessionist parties (SNP and Green) have on this poll a combined share of 41%/42% (constituency/list) compared to 58/57% for those opposing secession (Lab/Con/LD/UKIP), the majority for the latter ought to be around 25 rather than 3, were seats allocated proportionally. The Holyrood voting system and its opportunity for manipulation hands the secessionists a huge advantage that serves to threaten the union.
On this poll Unionists will win a majority at Holyrood for the first time since 2007. Thus the Union would actually be safer than it has been for a decade.
Yes, the risk of losing Scotland has diminished a bit, but that's not the point. It shouldn't require a 15% lead for opponents of secession in order to deny the secessionists a majority of seats at Holyrood. Thanks to a flaw in the system for electing MSPs, it is still too easy for secessionist parties to gain a majority of seats in Holyrood on a minority of the vote.
The projected seat counts look right to me - Labour winning Scottish Westminster seats, mostly at the expense of the SNP, but also a couple from the Conservatives. (Lib Dem North East Fife klaxon!)
Turning to Holyrood, which is the politically important place in Scotland these days, a cracking poll for the Greens. The list vote is the important one for them. They should gain a ajor fall in support, but not having crunched the numbers, I suspect their number of MSPs may not fall as much as the vote shares would suggest, thanks to the weakness of Scottish Labour. In any case we are talking about a lower level of SNP dominance at this stage - not they will be wiped out.
Holyrood
" Sir John Curtice, the election expert, said that this would still allow the SNP to emerge as the largest party at Holyrood with 53 seats, down ten. The Conservatives would be second with 33 (up two); Labour third with 27 (up three); the Greens with ten (up four); and the Lib Dems up one at six. "
So a Unionist majority of 3 then
Given that the Scottish secessionist parties (SNP and Green) have on this poll a combined share of 41%/42% (constituency/list) compared to 58/57% for those opposing secession (Lab/Con/LD/UKIP), the majority for the latter ought to be around 25 rather than 3, were seats allocated proportionally. The Holyrood voting system and its opportunity for manipulation hands the secessionists a huge advantage that serves to threaten the union.
On this poll Unionists will win a majority at Holyrood for the first time since 2007. Thus the Union would actually be safer than it has been for a decade.
Yes, the risk of losing Scotland has diminished a bit, but that's not the point. It shouldn't require a 15% lead for opponents of secession in order to deny the secessionists a majority of seats at Holyrood. Thanks to a flaw in the system for electing MSPs, it is still too easy for secessionist parties to gain a majority of seats in Holyrood on a minority of the vote.
That is an argument for making Holyrood fully PR and scrapping all the constituency seats, you could equally argue if Holyrood was fully FPTP like Westminster it would be much more difficult to stop an SNP majority
I wonder how many cases like this there will be (rather a lot, I expect) ...
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/jan/16/carillion-casualty-landscaper-owed-1m-could-go-bust managing director, Andy Bradley, said he had to make 10 people redundant – out of 90 – on Monday after Carillion went into liquidation. He was told by PricewaterhouseCoopers, the accountants handling the liquidation together with the official receiver, that Flora-tec would be paid only for work done since then.
Flora-tec is owed £1m (£800,000 plus VAT) – more than 10% of its annual turnover – by Carillion for gritting and snow-clearing work carried out at schools, hospitals, prisons and courts in the past two months. Flora-tec was due to be paid for the work next week...
I wonder how many cases like this there will be (rather a lot, I expect) ...
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/jan/16/carillion-casualty-landscaper-owed-1m-could-go-bust managing director, Andy Bradley, said he had to make 10 people redundant – out of 90 – on Monday after Carillion went into liquidation. He was told by PricewaterhouseCoopers, the accountants handling the liquidation together with the official receiver, that Flora-tec would be paid only for work done since then.
Flora-tec is owed £1m (£800,000 plus VAT) – more than 10% of its annual turnover – by Carillion for gritting and snow-clearing work carried out at schools, hospitals, prisons and courts in the past two months. Flora-tec was due to be paid for the work next week...
Honest question: do companies take out credit default insurance for this sort of thing?
@MrHarryCole: Jeremy Corbyn’s spokesman says it is “nonsense that he had a senior moment” after he forgot to ask a question to the Prime Minister at Prime Minister’s Questions.
I wonder how many cases like this there will be (rather a lot, I expect) ...
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/jan/16/carillion-casualty-landscaper-owed-1m-could-go-bust managing director, Andy Bradley, said he had to make 10 people redundant – out of 90 – on Monday after Carillion went into liquidation. He was told by PricewaterhouseCoopers, the accountants handling the liquidation together with the official receiver, that Flora-tec would be paid only for work done since then.
Flora-tec is owed £1m (£800,000 plus VAT) – more than 10% of its annual turnover – by Carillion for gritting and snow-clearing work carried out at schools, hospitals, prisons and courts in the past two months. Flora-tec was due to be paid for the work next week...
Honest question: do companies take out credit default insurance for this sort of thing?
If it's not currently available it sounds like a great business opportunity
@MrHarryCole: Jeremy Corbyn’s spokesman says it is “nonsense that he had a senior moment” after he forgot to ask a question to the Prime Minister at Prime Minister’s Questions.
Those eager young Corbynites are going to get sick of him soon, aren't they....
Yes it's bad in Scotland Wales and NI but brilliant in England .
No, its terrible but we are spending more than ever (as if that is actually an answer), apparently.
With the benefit of hindsight I suspect that Corybn wishes he had gone on the vanishing nurses this week.
I think he would have been criticized if he did.Due to Carillion going into liquidation this week.This is fundamental to Corbyn as it is change from the consensus over the past twenty years.May saying the Labour government gave Carillion contracts enhances the change from Blair.
The contract labour (Leeds) gave was only last week
I think Theresa May is missing an opportunity on Carillion. Rather than making it a Private Sector good/ Private sector bad sector spat, she should acknowledge Jeremy Corbyn has a point. Say Carillion is an example of things going wrong and her government is going to change how public projects are managed to the benefit of all the stakeholders and for value for money. The private sector has a role to play but it needs to be managed better. So embrace the criticism and own the solution.
I think Theresa May is missing an opportunity on Carillion. Rather than making it a Private Sector good/ Private sector bad sector spat, she should acknowledge Jeremy Corbyn has a point. Say Carillion is an example of things going wrong and her government is going to change how public projects are managed to the benefit of all the stakeholders and for value for money. The private sector has a role to play but it needs to be managed better. So embrace the criticism and own the solution.
The private sector needs to be managed better..... by the Govt?
No Tory PM would last 5 minutes after suggesting such interference.
I wonder how many cases like this there will be (rather a lot, I expect) ...
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/jan/16/carillion-casualty-landscaper-owed-1m-could-go-bust managing director, Andy Bradley, said he had to make 10 people redundant – out of 90 – on Monday after Carillion went into liquidation. He was told by PricewaterhouseCoopers, the accountants handling the liquidation together with the official receiver, that Flora-tec would be paid only for work done since then.
Flora-tec is owed £1m (£800,000 plus VAT) – more than 10% of its annual turnover – by Carillion for gritting and snow-clearing work carried out at schools, hospitals, prisons and courts in the past two months. Flora-tec was due to be paid for the work next week...
Honest question: do companies take out credit default insurance for this sort of thing?
I wonder if the sub contractors to Tarmac do that?
Didn't take long. Our very own Mr Independence RCS moves to California and within a few months he has persuaded most of the state to try to secede from the central government.
New California would be comfortably Republican, while Old California would be massively Democratic. It seems a neat device to bring two more Republican Senators to Washington.
(I believe Nigel Farage has been involved in the Calexit campaign.)
Edit to add: there is basically no chance this happens.
There is one scenario where this could happen.
The USA has ever since the Missouri Compromise of 1820 had roughly two centuries of ensuring that when states are added they're added without disrupting the balance of power in the Senate.
There is already a campaign to recognise Puerto Rico as an official State, it would be a Blue state. Splitting California in two while recognising Puerto Rico would maintain the red/blue balance.
@MrHarryCole: Jeremy Corbyn’s spokesman says it is “nonsense that he had a senior moment” after he forgot to ask a question to the Prime Minister at Prime Minister’s Questions.
Those eager young Corbynites are going to get sick of him soon, aren't they....
No, they are fanatics. Its when he loses the next election that the disillusionment sets in -or worse, if Corbyn becomes PM and then (inevitably) fails to deliver their expectations. Either way, there will come a time when Corbyn is regarded as one of the worst ever Labour leaders.
Comments
As for Corbyn, I think the 'victory' at GE2017 is wearing off plus his views on Brexit might be driving it.
A harbinger for the polls in the rest of the Britain later on this year?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_local_elections,_2014
So a projected unionist majority of 3 at Holyrood based on this poll during mid term should be regarded as a likely outcome?
A point that I have made before is that ultimately the future of the Union will be much more influenced by the SNP MSPs rather than their MPs. People should recall that there were only 6 SNP MPs at the time of the first IndyRef.
Ironically one of the reasons the SNP lost ground at the GE2017 was that even having 56 out of 59 MPs made little difference, not because of the quality of their MPs (above average), but because of their influence being totally swamped by MPs not from Scotland.
This has the double edged effect of making people less likely to vote for the SNP at Westminster but more likely to accept the need for independence as even 59 SNP MPs cannot fully defend Scotland.
Likewise, if Labour in Scotland was benefiting from "Unionist tactical voting" as you put it, the Labour list vote in 2016 (for which it relied for 21 of its 24 seats) would have been higher than its constituency share. In fact it was 3% lower.
Thus there is a good argument, reinforced by this latest poll, for the UK government to change the systems for devolved parliaments to use a single vote for both list and regional seat allocations.
I'm so disappointed the French no longer arrive at Waterloo.
Corbyn cock ups and is becoming shouty.
He is going to miss an open goal here
Astonishing
Jezza has given this PMQs to Tezza lock, stock and barrel.
What an idiot. Does he not know that bankrupt companies are, you know, bankrupt?
Corbyn had no answers
We also demand clients promise to hand over the souls of their first born.
Contracts are signed and sealed with the blood of virgins.
Someone should tell Mrs May that it's no good implying the SNP's policy of independence is even worse in its effects than her own policy of Brexit.
Corbyn comfortably come off best - he has the wind behind him on this issue - but May managed to pull it back a bit with her final answer. Until then, although clearly across the detail of her brief, she struck the wrong tone in at least two places. Refusing to engage with Corbyn second question just because it did not conclude with a question mark sounded petty, and her repeated insistence that the government was just a “customer” of Carillion, while technically correct, made her sound rather feeble.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2018/jan/17/juncker-urges-uk-to-stay-in-eu-and-says-hed-be-happy-to-have-it-back-if-it-goes-politics-live?page=with:block-5a5f3feae4b0cb50d2972d41#block-5a5f3feae4b0cb50d2972d41
This is a bit like justin thinking no-one needs to take more than £500 on holidays.
https://twitter.com/LadPolitics/status/953608853769334785
https://twitter.com/MattChorley/status/953608854503378944
https://twitter.com/jimwaterson/status/953610231644291072
With the benefit of hindsight I suspect that Corybn wishes he had gone on the vanishing nurses this week.
You don’t understand what the very word ‘citizenship’ means.
So if you’re a boss who earns a fortune but doesn’t look after your staff…
An international company that treats tax laws as an optional extra…
A household name that refuses to work with the authorities even to fight terrorism…
A director who takes out massive dividends while knowing that the company pension is about to go bust…
I’m putting you on warning. This can’t go on anymore. A change has got to come. And this party – the Conservative Party – is going to make that change.
Except Jeremy Corbyn can plausibly claim to be walking the walk while Conservatives are the party of the citizens of nowhere.
Didnt the remainers tell us during the referendum campaign that Brexit made it inevitable that Scotland would go for independence? This latest poll exposes that as a lie.
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/jan/16/carillion-casualty-landscaper-owed-1m-could-go-bust
managing director, Andy Bradley, said he had to make 10 people redundant – out of 90 – on Monday after Carillion went into liquidation. He was told by PricewaterhouseCoopers, the accountants handling the liquidation together with the official receiver, that Flora-tec would be paid only for work done since then.
Flora-tec is owed £1m (£800,000 plus VAT) – more than 10% of its annual turnover – by Carillion for gritting and snow-clearing work carried out at schools, hospitals, prisons and courts in the past two months. Flora-tec was due to be paid for the work next week...
No Tory PM would last 5 minutes after suggesting such interference.
The USA has ever since the Missouri Compromise of 1820 had roughly two centuries of ensuring that when states are added they're added without disrupting the balance of power in the Senate.
There is already a campaign to recognise Puerto Rico as an official State, it would be a Blue state. Splitting California in two while recognising Puerto Rico would maintain the red/blue balance.