What are parents doing? Watching TV or surfing teh interwebs?
" Only 64 per cent of parents with children under seven read to them at all, while a mere one in five of those get a book out every night.
The study shows the average modern day child gets three bedtime stories a week. But a quarter of a million children aged seven or under – around four per cent – do not own a single book.
The findings come a day after a major study found children who read for pleasure in their spare time perform significantly better at school than other pupils.
The privatisation of Royal Mail was being firmly laid at Vince's door this morning by the CWU chappie on the radio. Politically it shouldn't do much to the conservatives as I'd guess the 30% not opposed will probably vote conservative anyway. (Well they are either CON or Blairite Labour)
I think the Lib Dems could well be the big political losers from it.
I doubt it - the Tories will get the blame as "it's the sort of thing they'd do" - while the Lib Dems are in favour of Post Offices, motherhood and apple pie.....
Mr. Me, yeah, limiting turbulence would be great. I can't help but feel that some modern circuits are really badly designed, because the corners are too fast or even medium speed, which means a following car can't close enough to one its chasing because the airflow's ruined.
Mr. Jessop, I think your sprint race idea is a bit mental, to be honest.
However, you have (sort of) a famous ally! Luca di Montezemolo said last year that F1 should have two one hour races on a weekend rather than one two hour race. His reasoning was that people lacked attention spans suitable for a two hour race. I think his staff were too polite to point out that that's basically the length of a football match, or a film.
For handicapping, what d'you mean exactly?
Of course it's mental, t's my idea! ;-)
Handicapping is putting weights into a successful car ("success ballast"). It is a way of levelling the field in series that have loose regulations, and would be a better solution IMHO than all this resource restriction nonsense. Loosen the regulations, let teams develop newer, innovative ideas, and handicap them if they gain too much of an advantage.
the resource restriction is there to cut costs, already Red Bull are the biggest spenders, especially that the only thing where there isn't restriction is in aero.
Next year will be a big test of the state of play for F1...with the changes to the engines.
'NHS chief Sir Bruce Keogh says he is taking very seriously figures revealed by Channel 4 News which show that health service patients are 45 per cent more likely to die in hospital than in the US.'
Could be because a lot of Americans do not have hospital access.
They can't release the research for "confidentiality reasons". Last time Brian Jarman put a story in the press about "13,000 excess deaths" we all wasted five days of our lives trying to explain it to the PB Tory stats geniuses, so I'd rather see the research first.
Absolutely - but one obvious explanation for the fact that more UK patients die in hospital than US ones is that many millions of Americans do not have access to long-term hospital-based care for terminal diseases. They tend to die at home or on the street. On top of which, a lot more elderly people end up in British hospitals solely because there is nowhere else they can go. In short, one thing to be very careful about is whether there is a like for like comparison going on.
Yes maybe, but to take an extract of the C4 article:
The 2004 figures show that NHS had the worst figures of all seven countries. Once the death rate was adjusted, England was 22 per cent higher than the average of all seven countries and it was 58 per cent higher than the best country.
Miss Vance, that's not necessarily the most neutral way someone who is meant to be objective could be behaving. Is she trying to assess the policy, or attack it?
Her final report is not due out until March 2014......but she appears to have made up her mind to 'stop and suspend this bedroom tax immediately'.....
Hopefully that "Brazilian woman" didn't follow the Grant Spiv testimony method
Do you think Labour will abolish both the Labour and the Coalition bedroom taxes?
It is not illegal to sub-let private accommodation.
Depends on the lease. It's not possible under the most common form, the "assured short hold tenancy'
By its very nature a short-hold tenancy is entirely different to a council tenancy. People tend not to make short-hold accommodation their long-term family homes.
Tell Sid! Why does it feel like the glorious days of the mid 80s today?!
Where will Labour find £3Bn to buy the Royal Mail back - or will they just confisticate assets ?
Perhaps they'll replicate what they did to the old biddies who owned Railtrack shares?
"Gordon's representative on Earth has described shareholders as "grannies" on many occasions. If the "grannies lose their blouses", Ms Vadera cynically observed, it would not matter, as they were only
"shareholders who had added no value to the company".
Mr. Me, yeah, limiting turbulence would be great. I can't help but feel that some modern circuits are really badly designed, because the corners are too fast or even medium speed, which means a following car can't close enough to one its chasing because the airflow's ruined.
Mr. Jessop, I think your sprint race idea is a bit mental, to be honest.
However, you have (sort of) a famous ally! Luca di Montezemolo said last year that F1 should have two one hour races on a weekend rather than one two hour race. His reasoning was that people lacked attention spans suitable for a two hour race. I think his staff were too polite to point out that that's basically the length of a football match, or a film.
For handicapping, what d'you mean exactly?
Of course it's mental, t's my idea! ;-)
Handicapping is putting weights into a successful car ("success ballast"). It is a way of levelling the field in series that have loose regulations, and would be a better solution IMHO than all this resource restriction nonsense. Loosen the regulations, let teams develop newer, innovative ideas, and handicap them if they gain too much of an advantage.
the resource restriction is there to cut costs, already Red Bull are the biggest spenders, especially that the only thing where there isn't restriction is in aero.
Next year will be a big test of the state of play for F1...with the changes to the engines.
Resource restriction isn't working. AFAICR, Moseley's original idea was watered down to a massive extent. And the new engine regulations aren't a liberalisation; they're just a move to an equally restrictive regime.
How did you commemorate the 500th anniversary of Scotland's greatest battlefield defeat and its failed invasion of England yesterday?
Surely only an idiot would be commemorating an event two days after its actual anniversary.
How unlike you not to engage with the issue!
I think wee Eck was feart because it was a Scottish invasion of England - not part of the "poor wee Scots oppressed by the English" narrative, don't you?
That and it was a disaster.
And you opponent was Catherine of Aragon......
How will you commemorate the 700th anniversary of one of England's greatest British battlefield defeats and its failed invasion of Scotland?
By toasting the continuing Union! Of course, both Bannockburn and Flodden had more to do with fights among both Scottish and English Norman overlords than "Scotland" or "England" - but I do think Eck would have been the bigger mad had he acknowledged both - if only to point out the futility of war and how we will resolve this independence question peacefully.
Her lengthy CV lists countless qualifications, civic achievements, books and publications – but Raquel Rolnik makes no mention of dabbling in witchcraft.
Yet the architect and urban planner appears to be an avid follower of Candomble, an African-Brazilian religion that originated during the slave trade.
The academic, brought up a Marxist, actually offered an animal sacrifice to Karl Marx when she was studying for her Masters degree in architecture so ‘he would leave her alone’ to study in peace.
Miss Vance, that's not necessarily the most neutral way someone who is meant to be objective could be behaving. Is she trying to assess the policy, or attack it?
Her final report is not due out until March 2014......but she appears to have made up her mind to 'stop and suspend this bedroom tax immediately'.....
Hopefully that "Brazilian woman" didn't follow the Grant Spiv testimony method
Do you think Labour will abolish both the Labour and the Coalition bedroom taxes?
It is not illegal to sub-let private accommodation.
Depends on the lease. It's not possible under the most common form, the "assured short hold tenancy'
By its very nature a short-hold tenancy is entirely different to a council tenancy. People tend not to make short-hold accommodation their long-term family homes.
This is what it's really about isn't it? The council home was a "home for life" - even after the kids have flown the nest. And as ever, those who benefit, current tenants, are defending their corner.
Back to the question - will Labour abolish both their own, and the coalition's bedroom tax?
'NHS chief Sir Bruce Keogh says he is taking very seriously figures revealed by Channel 4 News which show that health service patients are 45 per cent more likely to die in hospital than in the US.'
Could be because a lot of Americans do not have hospital access.
They can't release the research for "confidentiality reasons". Last time Brian Jarman put a story in the press about "13,000 excess deaths" we all wasted five days of our lives trying to explain it to the PB Tory stats geniuses, so I'd rather see the research first.
Absolutely - but one obvious explanation for the fact that more UK patients die in hospital than US ones is that many millions of Americans do not have access to long-term hospital-based care for terminal diseases. They tend to die at home or on the street. On top of which, a lot more elderly people end up in British hospitals solely because there is nowhere else they can go. In short, one thing to be very careful about is whether there is a like for like comparison going on.
Yes maybe, but to take an extract of the C4 article:
The 2004 figures show that NHS had the worst figures of all seven countries. Once the death rate was adjusted, England was 22 per cent higher than the average of all seven countries and it was 58 per cent higher than the best country.
Miss Vance, that's not necessarily the most neutral way someone who is meant to be objective could be behaving. Is she trying to assess the policy, or attack it?
Her final report is not due out until March 2014......but she appears to have made up her mind to 'stop and suspend this bedroom tax immediately'.....
Hopefully that "Brazilian woman" didn't follow the Grant Spiv testimony method
Do you think Labour will abolish both the Labour and the Coalition bedroom taxes?
It is not illegal to sub-let private accommodation.
Depends on the lease. It's not possible under the most common form, the "assured short hold tenancy'
By its very nature a short-hold tenancy is entirely different to a council tenancy. People tend not to make short-hold accommodation their long-term family homes.
This is what it's really about isn't it? The council home was a "home for life" - even after the kids have flown the nest. And as ever, those who benefit, current tenants, are defending their corner.
Back to the question - will Labour abolish both their own, and the coalition's bedroom tax?
I suspect we both know the answer - no to both.
If was all about stopping council homes from being a home for life why is it that pensioners are exempted from the bedroom tax, while younger people whose children have died, who split child care between homes, who need live-in home-help, who need space to store medical equipment and so on, are not?
I suspect that Labour will rework the bedroom tax for council accommodation quite significantly, but given that private rented accommodation is a very different beast there is no need to do much about the situation there.
Is marxism and withcraft compatable? Though commies were too puritan to tolerate magic and religion? Sounds like she is hedging her bets. Hope if she hosts a covern she does not have any rooms left over spare like.
but I do think Eck would have been the bigger mad had he acknowledged both - if only to point out the futility of war and how we will resolve this independence question peacefully.
I look forward to the bigness of Dave when he does something along these lines around the 23rd-24th June next year. If he can tear himself away from celebrating WWI that is.
I'm not sure whether any historical battle is going to make much difference to the referendum; the touting of Braveheart, 'Freeeedom' and Bannockburn seem very much London metropolitan obsessions. To me a successful Commonwealth games would have ten times more value, and I'm sure Unionists (with hindsight) would rather be having the Olympics next year than last.
I wonder how long it will take until Vince comes out and violently opposes his own policy on Royal Mail ?
All this internet shopping is creating a dangerous parcel bubble and more delivery drivers - well its service industry so not a proper job like ploughing or gnawing diamonds out of rock with your teeth - and dreadful for carbon emissions..
I wonder how long it will take until Vince comes out and violently opposes his own policy on Royal Mail ?
When's the Lib Dem conference?
In fairness, on the record, Vince plays a pretty straight bat and often differences in emphasis are blown up by the media in search of a story into "splits".
Off the record, confronted by a pretty young thing, as my Granny observed, "there's no fool like an old fool....."
'NHS chief Sir Bruce Keogh says he is taking very seriously figures revealed by Channel 4 News which show that health service patients are 45 per cent more likely to die in hospital than in the US.'
Could be because a lot of Americans do not have hospital access.
They can't release the research for "confidentiality reasons". Last time Brian Jarman put a story in the press about "13,000 excess deaths" we all wasted five days of our lives trying to explain it to the PB Tory stats geniuses, so I'd rather see the research first.
If that was wasting your life, what do you call the rest of your 24/7 posting on here?
I remember my surprise at school when I realised the French don't celebrate Agincourt, yet remember "English" defeats. To be fair to the French, they can say that Agincourt was down to the French King's absence (he thought he was made of glass) and thus the French nobles being a disorganised mass, the muddy ground and a lot of luck. We look to the Welsh archers.
But in a direct comparison Flodden was bigger than the petty squabble at Bannockburn, although strategically, it was probably less important.
But I'm no historian, and I doubt if the celebrating Scots next year will worry about the numbers.
I wonder how long it will take until Vince comes out and violently opposes his own policy on Royal Mail ?
When's the Lib Dem conference?
In fairness, on the record, Vince plays a pretty straight bat and often differences in emphasis are blown up by the media in search of a story into "splits".
Off the record, confronted by a pretty young thing, as my Granny observed, "there's no fool like an old fool....."
On topic: The Populus logic is, in the abstract, impeccable. Since very few people 'identified with UKIP' until very recently, there should not be many respondents saying that they "have usually most closely identified" themselves with UKIP. Hence the reasoning that they've picked up far, far too many of this very rare breed, and the consequent weighting downwards of them. You particularly need to do this with on-line polls, which are in large part self-selecting. As we know, UKIP supporters are currently fired up, eager to tell the world how wonderful UKIP is (just look at the ConHome or Telegraph comments), which means an on-line pollster is indeed likely to pick up too many of them.
But - and it's a big but - where Populus may be going wrong is in believing the answer to the question about party identification. When those respondents say they've usually closely identified themselves with UKIP, it's highly likely that they are mis-remembering, fibbing, or (most likely of all) have misunderstood the question, and have actually answered a different question: "Which party do you identify with today?"
Quantifying the extent of any such distortion is difficult, though. It would be better to use a clearer question, such as on about past voting patterns. On the other hand, although Populus may be reporting low shares for UKIP, they're not ridiculously out of line with pollsters using different methodologies, so maybe the effect is not as distorting as it first appears.
As with most of history - it was the power of ideas - in this case the Reformation - that did more to transform Anglo-Scottish relations than any military battle.....
People have rejected railways as a means of transport? Absolute rubbish. Usage is going up massively, a potential result of privatisation. (2) 1.4 billion passenger journeys is hardly a rejection.
Railways are a tool. Cars are a tool. Buses and lorries are tools. Each tool is best applied to a certain job, and has advantages and disadvantages for society. One tool (the car) may suit you best; that does not mean the answer is the same for everyone.
For instance, railfreight carried 101.7 million tonnes of goods in 2011/12 (1). At 44 tonnes a lorry maximum, that is 2.3 million lorry journeys off the road, and most of those will be long distance. Do you fancy having that many lorries clogging up the roads (and damaging them) on your journey?
On topic: The Populus logic is, in the abstract, impeccable. Since very few people 'identified with UKIP' until very recently, there should not be many respondents saying that they "have usually most closely identified" themselves with UKIP. Hence the reasoning that they've picked up far, far too many of this very rare breed, and the consequent weighting downwards of them. You particularly need to do this with on-line polls, which are in large part self-selecting. As we know, UKIP supporters are currently fired up, eager to tell the world how wonderful UKIP is (just look at the ConHome or Telegraph comments), which means an on-line pollster is indeed likely to pick up too many of them.
But - and it's a big but - where Populus may be going wrong is in believing the answer to the question about party identification. When those respondents say they've usually closely identified themselves with UKIP, it's highly likely that they are mis-remembering, fibbing, or (most likely of all) have misunderstood the question, and have actually answered a different question: "Which party do you identify with today?"
Quantifying the extent of any such distortion is difficult, though. It would be better to use a clearer question, such as on about past voting patterns. On the other hand, although Populus may be reporting low shares for UKIP, they're not ridiculously out of line with pollsters using different methodologies, so maybe the effect is not as distorting as it first appears.
I agree with much of that except the last sentence . Populus are giving very much lower figures for UKIP than the other online pollsters such as Opinium , Survation and Comres Online polls though similar figures to Yougov ( slightly lower ) and the telephone pollsters . Therefore the adjustments Populus are making are having a significant effect but is it correct or not . I agree that IMO past vote weighting is better than party ID for weighting .
" ‘It confirmed for us some of his weaknesses as a leader,’ says one of Clegg’s long standing aides. ‘Is he someone capable of taking a decision and holding to it? Frankly, no.’
One Lib Dem minister is more direct: ‘A Miliband government would be catastrophic.’
YouGov tables for the Times poll are now up. They confirm Peter From Putney's post with forced choice question between Tories/Cameron and Labour/Miliband 41% to 40% in favour of Tories.
Voting intention Lab 39, Con 33, UKIP 12, LibDem 8
"The Clegg circle believes that it’ll be better to stand for ‘more of the same’ than ‘change’ at the next election. They calculate that, in the words of one of its members: ‘If the next election was between the coalition and the opposition, the coalition would win.’ This means that the Liberal Democrats have to emphasise what they have done in government rather than what they would have liked to have done differently.
The problem for the Lib Dem leadership is that much of what they’ve done in government isn’t party policy. So, because of the Liberal Democrats’ internal party democracy, they’ll spend next week trying to persuade the party to approve their new stances on tuition fees, nuclear power and the like.
It is critical that they succeed. One ministerial ally of Clegg warns: ‘We can’t say we deserve credit for what the government has done, if the activists are trying to define us against the government.’ At the moment, Clegg’s party managers are confident they’ll get their way on nearly all these motions. But it appears likely that they’ll lose on the top rate of tax — with the party voting to make a return to the 50p rate party policy."
I'm ambivalent on the Royal Mail privatisation. On the one hand, I can easily understand the apprehension of employees facing the prospect of having their job sold off to shareholders. I get the same jitters when Fire Service privatisation is regularly mooted. On the other hand, most days, my postie just delivers me supermarket flyers, charity begging letters, and BT "To the Householder" Broadband offers, so this service does seem ripe for a private company to step in. We do everything online, hardly ever get an important letter through the post box. I rarely send letters, indeed, I've only sent a couple this year, my son's passport application, being the main one, and that was sent via the Post Office checking service. I'd much rather the utilities were renationalised, to be honest.
Mr. Jessop, not sure that would be workable. How would the handicapping system work? Wins? Podiums? Margin of victory?
I wonder if they'll end up bringing refuelling back. I only bet on F1 for about half a season, but I still remember that the BBC F1 Mole (which estimated fuel loads and therefore true pace based on qualifying) was great for insight into how the race would go.
Miss Fitalass, I wonder if we'll see (from all parties) a two-tier manifesto, with a small selection of red line issues and most 'promises' actually up for debate should coalition negotiations ensue.
YouGov tables for the Times poll are now up. They confirm Peter From Putney's post with forced choice question between Tories/Cameron and Labour/Miliband 41% to 40% in favour of Tories.
Voting intention Lab 39, Con 33, UKIP 12, LibDem 8
You can see this question being asked in general elections, where the local election result is sometimes dramatically different to the general for Con & Lab.
2001 Local: Con 40%, Lab 31%, LD 25% 2001 General: Con 32%, Lab 41%, LD 18%
2005 Local: Con 40%, Lab 28%, LD 25% 2005 General: Con 32%, Lab 35%, LD 22%
2010 Local: Con 35%, Lab 27%, LD 26% 2010 General: Con 36%, Lab 29%, LD 23%
YouGov tables for the Times poll are now up. They confirm Peter From Putney's post with forced choice question between Tories/Cameron and Labour/Miliband 41% to 40% in favour of Tories.
Voting intention Lab 39, Con 33, UKIP 12, LibDem 8
For instance, railfreight carried 101.7 million tonnes of goods in 2011/12 (1). At 44 tonnes a lorry maximum, that is 2.3 million lorry journeys off the road, and most of those will be long distance. Do you fancy having that many lorries clogging up the roads (and damaging them) on your journey?
It should be a long-term objective of government policy to improve the railways to the extent that the vast majority of freight travels by rail, and gets off the motorways.
The rough rule of thumb is that the damage to the road surface is proportional to the fourth power of the axle weight.
The maximum axle weight for lorries on UK roads is in the region of 10 tonnes. If we generously take 5 tonnes as a typical axle weight for a British lorry, and 1 tonne as the axle weight of a large, loaded family car, then the lorry does 625 times as much damage to the road surface.
If one compares a more fully loaded lorry with a smaller car, (say 10 tonnes compared to 0.5 tonnes) then the lorry does 160,000 times as much damage.
" ‘It confirmed for us some of his weaknesses as a leader,’ says one of Clegg’s long standing aides. ‘Is he someone capable of taking a decision and holding to it? Frankly, no.’
One Lib Dem minister is more direct: ‘A Miliband government would be catastrophic.’
YouGov tables for the Times poll are now up. They confirm Peter From Putney's post with forced choice question between Tories/Cameron and Labour/Miliband 41% to 40% in favour of Tories.
Voting intention Lab 39, Con 33, UKIP 12, LibDem 8
You can see this question being asked in general elections, where the local election result is sometimes dramatically different to the general for Con & Lab.
2001 Local: Con 40%, Lab 31%, LD 25% 2001 General: Con 32%, Lab 41%, LD 18%
2005 Local: Con 40%, Lab 28%, LD 25% 2005 General: Con 32%, Lab 35%, LD 22%
2010 Local: Con 35%, Lab 27%, LD 26% 2010 General: Con 36%, Lab 29%, LD 23%
2013 Local: Con 25%, Lab 29%, LD 14%, UKIP 23%
The 2001 and 2005 local election voting shares are not comparable with the GE figures in the same year as they were CC elections only in the most Conservative areas of the country hence the higher Conservative figures and much lower Labour figures .
FPT - I'm amused to see Nick Palmer on the previous thread arguing that Lord Mandelson wasn't really anything to do with Labour, and that Royal Mail Privatisation wasn't really a Labour policy, despite being proposed by a Labour Business Secretary and approved by a Labour cabinet, under a Labour PM.
Admittedly it is true that Mandy's plans directly contradicted the 2005 Labour manifesto pledge (well that's a surprise), so I can see Nick's point. However, the point I was making still remains: every party in government which has actually looked at this has ended up agreeing that privatisation is the only viable route forward.
YouGov tables for the Times poll are now up. They confirm Peter From Putney's post with forced choice question between Tories/Cameron and Labour/Miliband 41% to 40% in favour of Tories.
Voting intention Lab 39, Con 33, UKIP 12, LibDem 8
You can see this question being asked in general elections, where the local election result is sometimes dramatically different to the general for Con & Lab.
2001 Local: Con 40%, Lab 31%, LD 25% 2001 General: Con 32%, Lab 41%, LD 18%
2005 Local: Con 40%, Lab 28%, LD 25% 2005 General: Con 32%, Lab 35%, LD 22%
2010 Local: Con 35%, Lab 27%, LD 26% 2010 General: Con 36%, Lab 29%, LD 23%
2013 Local: Con 25%, Lab 29%, LD 14%, UKIP 23%
The 2001 and 2005 local election voting shares are not comparable with the GE figures in the same year as they were CC elections only in the most Conservative areas of the country hence the higher Conservative figures and much lower Labour figures .
Locals 2000: Con 38%, Lab 30% 2001: Con 40%, Lab 31% 2002: Con 42%, Lab 33%
2004: Con 37%, Lab 30% 2005: Con 40%, Lab 28% 2006: Con 39%, Lab 26%
Chris Williamson @WilliamsonChris #Eurozone industrial production back to lowest since April 2010 after dropping a huge 1.5% in July. twitpic.com/dd4946
For instance, railfreight carried 101.7 million tonnes of goods in 2011/12 (1). At 44 tonnes a lorry maximum, that is 2.3 million lorry journeys off the road, and most of those will be long distance. Do you fancy having that many lorries clogging up the roads (and damaging them) on your journey?
It should be a long-term objective of government policy to improve the railways to the extent that the vast majority of freight travels by rail, and gets off the motorways.
The rough rule of thumb is that the damage to the road surface is proportional to the fourth power of the axle weight.
The maximum axle weight for lorries on UK roads is in the region of 10 tonnes. If we generously take 5 tonnes as a typical axle weight for a British lorry, and 1 tonne as the axle weight of a large, loaded family car, then the lorry does 625 times as much damage to the road surface.
If one compares a more fully loaded lorry with a smaller car, (say 10 tonnes compared to 0.5 tonnes) then the lorry does 160,000 times as much damage.
As late as 1960 British Rail receipts were 30% from passengers and 70% from freight . The question is was it more by the design of ( various ) governments or the railways themselves that has changed it into a mainly passenger service . The tonnes of freight carried figure may look impressive but the reality is that vast parts of the network carries no freight at all . For example the GWR line to Devon and Cornwall has no freight trains at all today .
I agree, passenger numbers ARE up since privatisation - shows just how hopeless HMG are at running a railway, eh, Nick?.
So are car passenger miles mind! My point would be - what would be the position if motorists paid £40 billion pa LESS tax and rail users paid the FULL costs of their ticket? [London commuters are an exception - I have no problem with their peak-fare tickets being subsidised]
If trains are currently as over-crowded as everyone says they are, then surely reducing the subsidy and putting up the fares significantly would solve the problem?
Brian (is it welcome back HD2?) you may be interested in the official statistics.
Car passenger miles have been static for about a decade now.
I think that if you priced people off the railways it would probably reduce the overall distance travelled. People might not thank you for that.
YouGov tables for the Times poll are now up. They confirm Peter From Putney's post with forced choice question between Tories/Cameron and Labour/Miliband 41% to 40% in favour of Tories.
Voting intention Lab 39, Con 33, UKIP 12, LibDem 8
You can see this question being asked in general elections, where the local election result is sometimes dramatically different to the general for Con & Lab.
2001 Local: Con 40%, Lab 31%, LD 25% 2001 General: Con 32%, Lab 41%, LD 18%
2005 Local: Con 40%, Lab 28%, LD 25% 2005 General: Con 32%, Lab 35%, LD 22%
2010 Local: Con 35%, Lab 27%, LD 26% 2010 General: Con 36%, Lab 29%, LD 23%
2013 Local: Con 25%, Lab 29%, LD 14%, UKIP 23%
The 2001 and 2005 local election voting shares are not comparable with the GE figures in the same year as they were CC elections only in the most Conservative areas of the country hence the higher Conservative figures and much lower Labour figures .
Locals 2000: Con 38%, Lab 30% 2001: Con 40%, Lab 31% 2002: Con 42%, Lab 33%
2004: Con 37%, Lab 30% 2005: Con 40%, Lab 28% 2006: Con 39%, Lab 26%
Are those actual vote shares or NEV extrapolations ?
YouGov tables for the Times poll are now up. They confirm Peter From Putney's post with forced choice question between Tories/Cameron and Labour/Miliband 41% to 40% in favour of Tories.
Voting intention Lab 39, Con 33, UKIP 12, LibDem 8
You can see this question being asked in general elections, where the local election result is sometimes dramatically different to the general for Con & Lab.
2001 Local: Con 40%, Lab 31%, LD 25% 2001 General: Con 32%, Lab 41%, LD 18%
2005 Local: Con 40%, Lab 28%, LD 25% 2005 General: Con 32%, Lab 35%, LD 22%
2010 Local: Con 35%, Lab 27%, LD 26% 2010 General: Con 36%, Lab 29%, LD 23%
2013 Local: Con 25%, Lab 29%, LD 14%, UKIP 23%
The 2001 and 2005 local election voting shares are not comparable with the GE figures in the same year as they were CC elections only in the most Conservative areas of the country hence the higher Conservative figures and much lower Labour figures .
Locals 2000: Con 38%, Lab 30% 2001: Con 40%, Lab 31% 2002: Con 42%, Lab 33%
2004: Con 37%, Lab 30% 2005: Con 40%, Lab 28% 2006: Con 39%, Lab 26%
Are those actual vote shares or NEV extrapolations ?
They're from Wikipedia, so I assume they're all NEV.
"Insurance was insanely expensive for my children, which is off-putting too."
Insurance is insanely expensive because young people are appallingly bad risks. Basically, insurance companies cannot profitably write premiums to men under the age of 25 unless they are very, very expensive - so many accidents do this group cause.
YouGov tables for the Times poll are now up. They confirm Peter From Putney's post with forced choice question between Tories/Cameron and Labour/Miliband 41% to 40% in favour of Tories.
Voting intention Lab 39, Con 33, UKIP 12, LibDem 8
You can see this question being asked in general elections, where the local election result is sometimes dramatically different to the general for Con & Lab.
2001 Local: Con 40%, Lab 31%, LD 25% 2001 General: Con 32%, Lab 41%, LD 18%
2005 Local: Con 40%, Lab 28%, LD 25% 2005 General: Con 32%, Lab 35%, LD 22%
2010 Local: Con 35%, Lab 27%, LD 26% 2010 General: Con 36%, Lab 29%, LD 23%
2013 Local: Con 25%, Lab 29%, LD 14%, UKIP 23%
The 2001 and 2005 local election voting shares are not comparable with the GE figures in the same year as they were CC elections only in the most Conservative areas of the country hence the higher Conservative figures and much lower Labour figures .
Locals 2000: Con 38%, Lab 30% 2001: Con 40%, Lab 31% 2002: Con 42%, Lab 33%
2004: Con 37%, Lab 30% 2005: Con 40%, Lab 28% 2006: Con 39%, Lab 26%
Are those actual vote shares or NEV extrapolations ?
They're from Wikipedia, so I assume they're all NEV.
Well if you look at the Plymouth University website ( R and T ) they are a mixture . The figures from 2001 and 2005 ( GE years ) are actual vote shares in the CC and few Unitary elections .in that year and therefore are completely uncomparable with the GE percentages .
All of your points have some merit, but none are convincing!
Railways are like football teams - those who follow and/or own them do so for reasons which have nothing to do with the merits or financial sanity of the entire sport - let alone of their particular team. It's irrational.
I believe that no national railway runs without a very significant subsidy from the taxpayer - and that's for a very good reason. The mass people markets have rejected the railway as a transport system.
Moving you from one of a few fixed locations to another, at fixed times and considerable expense is not something which has any appeal in a world where individual consumer choice (aka 'the market') rules supreme. Buses at least have the merit of coming to a point within walking distance of your start and end point, which trains cannot do.
No-one is suggesting that those who cannot drive should be confined to walking distance from home - or to use a bike! Buses and taxis still operate - the latter without subsidy. Ditto planes - again, no subsidy and a profit for the operator.
My suggestion is s simple one - the USA seems to operate on a low-tax motoring basis and there's no inherent reason why we should not do so too.
Of course, that would require investment in our roads - perhaps using the surplus £40 billion of so pa that motoring taxes currently generate? But that simple concept - allow people to make a free choice AND provide them with the means to do so - seems anathema to governments of all colours.
A privatised road network (using the motoring taxes as income) would seek to PROMOTE car ownership and use, since it would generate more income for them - so they would be willing to invest in more and better roads now to generate more income in the future.
Instead, all governments seem to regard cars as evil, and, in the last 15 years or so, have sought to drive the private motorist off the roads, by raising taxes, failing to improve (or even maintain) roads, and clogging them up with various 'traffic calming measures' and increasingly lowered speed limits and mobile speed traps.
A massive waste of taxpayers' money when all our roads are a mass of potholes and worn-out road surfaces.
As late as 1960 British Rail receipts were 30% from passengers and 70% from freight . The question is was it more by the design of ( various ) governments or the railways themselves that has changed it into a mainly passenger service . The tonnes of freight carried figure may look impressive but the reality is that vast parts of the network carries no freight at all . For example the GWR line to Devon and Cornwall has no freight trains at all today .
Changing traffic patterns and road competition.
BR got rid of individual wagonloads slowly from the 1960s onwards; the days of milk churns being picked up from the platform are long gone, as are general goods sidings at stations. Such loads are highly inefficient in terms of staff and infrastructure, and cannot compete with road traffic.
What the railways did start specialising in was the only thing they could compete in: bulk loads. Merry-go-round coal trains, limestone, parcels traffic. Hub-to-hub, large trainloads.
Things have started changing back. Railfreight traffic is increasing despite a reduction in bulk loads, balanced with a consequent rise in intermodal (containerised) traffic. Some supermarkets have also started using railfreight.
One of the good things about privatisation is that it increased sectorisation in the 1980s, allowing freight operators to experiment more with new traffic flows. A trend sadly slowed by the massive costs of connecting a site to the railway network, even if the site is adjacent to the line.
As an aside, car passenger miles are inversely related to the price of oil in almost all countries in the world. If the price of travelling by car rises, people will look to alternatives. This is true whether in Japan, the US, the UK or Saudi Arabia.
Over the past 10 years the price of oil has roughly trebled.
Nobody knows what it will do in the next 10 years; however, what I think we can all agree on is that the ability of the UK government to influence the price of crude is essentially non-existent.
While Lab and Con voters seem to agree on Mr Miliband, they don't on Mr Cameron:
Lab voters on Milband (Cameron): Out of his depth : 28 (25) Weak: 22 (11) Indecisive : 15 (10)
Con voters on Cameron (Miliband) Out of touch: 7 (24) Smug : 7 (21) Arrogant: 4 (14)
Am I reading this right? If your conclusion's right, did you mean:
Lab (Con) voters on Miliband: ... Con (Lab) voters on Cameron:
Labour voters on Miliband and (Cameron)
Con voters on Cameron and (Miliband)
Yes - conclusion could have been better phrased - Labour voters think both Miliband & Cameron are out of their depth (tho Miliband more so), but Con voters do not share same negative impression of Cameron as Labour voters do.
Even though the Class 28's were an example of the hideous amounts of money wasted by BR under the 1955 modernisation plan. A political mistake that cost the railways a massive amount of political support for the next five decades.
Top 4 attributes among supporters (the other guy, among his supporters)
Con on Cameron: Stands up for Britain: 51(16) Determined/Competent/Principled: 34 (16/15/24)
Lab on Miliband: Out of his depth: 28 (5) Principled/Fair/Shares my values: 24 (34/19/16)
Surely the voters that matter here are the current UKIP supporters? If they have a marked preference.
UKIP voters tend to be 'anti-establishment'.
Their views on Cameron are close to Labour VI, their views on Miliband close to Con VI.
Cameron picks up extra marks for 'Doesn't listen' among UKIP (41 vs 22 OA), while Miliband has his highest 'out of touch' score among UKIP: (32 vs 20 OA)
Rumours of a Breaking Bad spin-off show have been floating around for a few months, and now the show's network AMC and Sony Pictures have confirmed that Saul Goodman will get his own pilot show with a view to a series.
Given a working title of Better Call Saul, the programme will be based on Breaking Bad's "criminal" lawyer Saul Goodman, who aids chemistry teacher turned meth cook Walter White (Bryan Cranston) and his partner Jesse Pinkman (Aaron Paul) in their endeavours.
As late as 1960 British Rail receipts were 30% from passengers and 70% from freight . The question is was it more by the design of ( various ) governments or the railways themselves that has changed it into a mainly passenger service . The tonnes of freight carried figure may look impressive but the reality is that vast parts of the network carries no freight at all . For example the GWR line to Devon and Cornwall has no freight trains at all today .
Changing traffic patterns and road competition.
BR got rid of individual wagonloads slowly from the 1960s onwards; the days of milk churns being picked up from the platform are long gone, as are general goods sidings at stations. Such loads are highly inefficient in terms of staff and infrastructure, and cannot compete with road traffic.
What the railways did start specialising in was the only thing they could compete in: bulk loads. Merry-go-round coal trains, limestone, parcels traffic. Hub-to-hub, large trainloads.
Things have started changing back. Railfreight traffic is increasing despite a reduction in bulk loads, balanced with a consequent rise in intermodal (containerised) traffic. Some supermarkets have also started using railfreight.
One of the good things about privatisation is that it increased sectorisation in the 1980s, allowing freight operators to experiment more with new traffic flows. A trend sadly slowed by the massive costs of connecting a site to the railway network, even if the site is adjacent to the line.
Yes I agrre with all you say . There is much freight carried up the WCML from England to Scotland but hardly any on many other main lines at all . GWR to the South West and much of the Southern network has no freight at all .
Even though the Class 28's were an example of the hideous amounts of money wasted by BR under the 1955 modernisation plan. A political mistake that cost the railways a massive amount of political support for the next five decades.
JJ, I called Brian "Bulgy" precisely because of his views on roads!
"The Clegg circle believes that it’ll be better to stand for ‘more of the same’ than ‘change’ at the next election. They calculate that, in the words of one of its members: ‘If the next election was between the coalition and the opposition, the coalition would win.’ This means that the Liberal Democrats have to emphasise what they have done in government rather than what they would have liked to have done differently."
Good for Cleegg. This is the best (infact the only) strategy that make's sense for the Lib-Dems.
Question is, will Vince, Lord Oakshott and the SDP wing of the Lib-Dems throw a spanner in the works?
As late as 1960 British Rail receipts were 30% from passengers and 70% from freight . The question is was it more by the design of ( various ) governments or the railways themselves that has changed it into a mainly passenger service . The tonnes of freight carried figure may look impressive but the reality is that vast parts of the network carries no freight at all . For example the GWR line to Devon and Cornwall has no freight trains at all today .
Changing traffic patterns and road competition.
BR got rid of individual wagonloads slowly from the 1960s onwards; the days of milk churns being picked up from the platform are long gone, as are general goods sidings at stations. Such loads are highly inefficient in terms of staff and infrastructure, and cannot compete with road traffic.
What the railways did start specialising in was the only thing they could compete in: bulk loads. Merry-go-round coal trains, limestone, parcels traffic. Hub-to-hub, large trainloads.
Things have started changing back. Railfreight traffic is increasing despite a reduction in bulk loads, balanced with a consequent rise in intermodal (containerised) traffic. Some supermarkets have also started using railfreight.
One of the good things about privatisation is that it increased sectorisation in the 1980s, allowing freight operators to experiment more with new traffic flows. A trend sadly slowed by the massive costs of connecting a site to the railway network, even if the site is adjacent to the line.
Yes I agrre with all you say . There is much freight carried up the WCML from England to Scotland but hardly any on many other main lines at all . GWR to the South West and much of the Southern network has no freight at all .
It's not quite that bad in the south, with traffic from Southampton Docks and the new 'electric spine' being built specifically for freight. But I agree about large chunks of the west country (aside from the Foster Yeomans / Mendip Rail limestone traffic). It'd be interesting to know the reasons why this situation has occurred - I've no idea.
Even though the Class 28's were an example of the hideous amounts of money wasted by BR under the 1955 modernisation plan. A political mistake that cost the railways a massive amount of political support for the next five decades.
JJ, I called Brian "Bulgy" precisely because of his views on roads!
I gathered that. But as well as preferring BoCo, the loco has much in common with Brian, especially if you know the illustrious history of the Class 28's. ;-)
F1: just read that Grosjean's out of contract at the end of the year. He's likely to remain, particularly as Raikkonen's gone, but it's not a done deal.
One would expect Hulkenberg to get the Lotus seat.
Even though the Class 28's were an example of the hideous amounts of money wasted by BR under the 1955 modernisation plan. A political mistake that cost the railways a massive amount of political support for the next five decades.
JJ, I called Brian "Bulgy" precisely because of his views on roads!
I gathered that. But as well as preferring BoCo, the loco has much in common with Brian, especially if you know the illustrious history of the Class 28's. ;-)
There were all sorts of locos built in small numbers, like the Class 23s (Baby Deltics) and the Class 35 (Hymeks).
BTW it's our Diesel Gala on the Epping Ongar Railway this weekend 14/15th. Should have a visiting Class 47 and possibly a 33, and our Class 25, 31 and 37 and a couple of 03 shunters on view or actually in service. Oh and a Class 205 DEMU (diesel-electric multiple unit) too.
Even though the Class 28's were an example of the hideous amounts of money wasted by BR under the 1955 modernisation plan. A political mistake that cost the railways a massive amount of political support for the next five decades.
JJ, I called Brian "Bulgy" precisely because of his views on roads!
I gathered that. But as well as preferring BoCo, the loco has much in common with Brian, especially if you know the illustrious history of the Class 28's. ;-)
There were all sorts of locos built in small numbers, like the Class 23s (Baby Deltics) and the Class 35 (Hymeks).
BTW it's our Diesel Gala on the Epping Ongar Railway this weekend 14/15th. Should have a visiting Class 47 and possibly a 33, and our Class 25, 31 and 37 and a couple of 03 shunters on view or actually in service. Oh and a Class 205 DEMU (diesel-electric multiple unit) too.
Also diesel gala on North Yorks Moors Railway this weekend , convoy of Deltic/Warship and Western went up through Todmorden on Tuesday from Kidderminster
"The Clegg circle believes that it’ll be better to stand for ‘more of the same’ than ‘change’ at the next election. They calculate that, in the words of one of its members: ‘If the next election was between the coalition and the opposition, the coalition would win.’ This means that the Liberal Democrats have to emphasise what they have done in government rather than what they would have liked to have done differently."
Good for Cleegg. This is the best (infact the only) strategy that make's sense for the Lib-Dems.
Question is, will Vince, Lord Oakshott and the SDP wing of the Lib-Dems throw a spanner in the works?
Almost certainly. They're two ideologically opposed parties stapled together which is why the Lib Dems are never going to be more than at best a third choice party.
The Liberals were a party of small government, personal freedom and responsibility and conservative fiscal policy, whereas the SDP were the usual bunch of agitating spendthirt lefties wanting to poke their nose into everyones business whilst making us pay for the privilege.
If the Liberals made a proper comeback then I'd be tempted to vote for them.
As late as 1960 British Rail receipts were 30% from passengers and 70% from freight . The question is was it more by the design of ( various ) governments or the railways themselves that has changed it into a mainly passenger service . The tonnes of freight carried figure may look impressive but the reality is that vast parts of the network carries no freight at all . For example the GWR line to Devon and Cornwall has no freight trains at all today .
Changing traffic patterns and road competition.
Things have started changing back. Railfreight traffic is increasing despite a reduction in bulk loads, balanced with a consequent rise in intermodal (containerised) traffic. Some supermarkets have also started using railfreight.
One of the good things about privatisation is that it increased sectorisation in the 1980s, allowing freight operators to experiment more with new traffic flows. A trend sadly slowed by the massive costs of connecting a site to the railway network, even if the site is adjacent to the line.
Yes I agrre with all you say . There is much freight carried up the WCML from England to Scotland but hardly any on many other main lines at all . GWR to the South West and much of the Southern network has no freight at all .
It's not quite that bad in the south, with traffic from Southampton Docks and the new 'electric spine' being built specifically for freight. But I agree about large chunks of the west country (aside from the Foster Yeomans / Mendip Rail limestone traffic). It'd be interesting to know the reasons why this situation has occurred - I've no idea.
Yes OK about Southampton Docks but the Portsmouth Brighton line has no freight at all . The Brighton London line does generate a bit from Ardingly , Crawley Foster Yeoman and Purley Cement but sand and gravel from Newhaven docks was stopped some 15 years ago and the sidings connections removed for some unknown reason .
Ho hum. politician gets nose back in pig trough. Jacqui Smith gets the Chair at Birmingham hospitals Trust. How she's remotely qualified for this escapes me.
As late as 1960 British Rail receipts were 30% from passengers and 70% from freight . The question is was it more by the design of ( various ) governments or the railways themselves that has changed it into a mainly passenger service . The tonnes of freight carried figure may look impressive but the reality is that vast parts of the network carries no freight at all . For example the GWR line to Devon and Cornwall has no freight trains at all today .
Changing traffic patterns and road competition.
Things have started changing back. Railfreight traffic is increasing despite a reduction in bulk loads, balanced with a consequent rise in intermodal (containerised) traffic. Some supermarkets have also started using railfreight.
One of the good things about privatisation is that it increased sectorisation in the 1980s, allowing freight operators to experiment more with new traffic flows. A trend sadly slowed by the massive costs of connecting a site to the railway network, even if the site is adjacent to the line.
Yes I agrre with all you say . There is much freight carried up the WCML from England to Scotland but hardly any on many other main lines at all . GWR to the South West and much of the Southern network has no freight at all .
It's not quite that bad in the south, with traffic from Southampton Docks and the new 'electric spine' being built specifically for freight. But I agree about large chunks of the west country (aside from the Foster Yeomans / Mendip Rail limestone traffic). It'd be interesting to know the reasons why this situation has occurred - I've no idea.
Yes OK about Southampton Docks but the Portsmouth Brighton line has no freight at all . The Brighton London line does generate a bit from Ardingly , Crawley Foster Yeoman and Purley Cement but sand and gravel from Newhaven docks was stopped dome 15 years ago and the sidings connections removed for some unknown reason .
Newhaven Marine is a ghost station - closed to all traffic but legally still open!!
"The Clegg circle believes that it’ll be better to stand for ‘more of the same’ than ‘change’ at the next election. They calculate that, in the words of one of its members: ‘If the next election was between the coalition and the opposition, the coalition would win.’ This means that the Liberal Democrats have to emphasise what they have done in government rather than what they would have liked to have done differently."
Good for Cleegg. This is the best (infact the only) strategy that make's sense for the Lib-Dems.
Question is, will Vince, Lord Oakshott and the SDP wing of the Lib-Dems throw a spanner in the works?
Almost certainly. They're two ideologically opposed parties stapled together which is why the Lib Dems are never going to be more than at best a third choice party.
The Liberals were a party of small government, personal freedom and responsibility and conservative fiscal policy, whereas the SDP were the usual bunch of agitating spendthirt lefties wanting to poke their nose into everyones business whilst making us pay for the privilege.
If the Liberals made a proper comeback then I'd be tempted to vote for them.
Can't be done without PR. The market for classical liberalism is well under 10%.
Ho hum. politician gets nose back in pig trough. Jacqui Smith gets the Chair at Birmingham hospitals Trust. How she's remotely qualified for this escapes me.
As late as 1960 British Rail receipts were 30% from passengers and 70% from freight . The question is was it more by the design of ( various ) governments or the railways themselves that has changed it into a mainly passenger service . The tonnes of freight carried figure may look impressive but the reality is that vast parts of the network carries no freight at all . For example the GWR line to Devon and Cornwall has no freight trains at all today .
I agrre with all you say . There is much freight carried up the WCML from England to Scotland but hardly any on many other main lines at all . GWR to the South West and much of the Southern network has no freight at all .
It's not quite that bad in the south, with traffic from Southampton Docks and the new 'electric spine' being built specifically for freight. But I agree about large chunks of the west country (aside from the Foster Yeomans / Mendip Rail limestone traffic). It'd be interesting to know the reasons why this situation has occurred - I've no idea.
Yes OK about Southampton Docks but the Portsmouth Brighton line has no freight at all . The Brighton London line does generate a bit from Ardingly , Crawley Foster Yeoman and Purley Cement but sand and gravel from Newhaven docks was stopped dome 15 years ago and the sidings connections removed for some unknown reason .
Newhaven Marine is a ghost station - closed to all traffic but legally still open!!
While Lab and Con voters seem to agree on Mr Miliband, they don't on Mr Cameron:
Lab voters on Milband (Cameron): Out of his depth : 28 (25) Weak: 22 (11) Indecisive : 15 (10)
Con voters on Cameron (Miliband) Out of touch: 7 (24) Smug : 7 (21) Arrogant: 4 (14)
Am I reading this right? If your conclusion's right, did you mean:
Lab (Con) voters on Miliband: ... Con (Lab) voters on Cameron:
Labour voters on Miliband and (Cameron)
Con voters on Cameron and (Miliband)
Yes - conclusion could have been better phrased - Labour voters think both Miliband & Cameron are out of their depth (tho Miliband more so), but Con voters do not share same negative impression of Cameron as Labour voters do.
Ah I see, it was the conclusion I had wrong. Thanks for clarifying.
CCHQ Press Office @RicHolden William Hague: "He [@DAlexanderMP] reminds me of the story of the cockerel who thought his crowing brought about the dawn" #Syria #HoC
Miss Plato, did you know that the velociraptors in Jurassic Park are hugely oversized? They're really more akin to deinonychus, but the velociraptor name was too cool not to use.
Also, they, and Tyrannosaurus Rex, should've had feathers (not sure if that was known at the time of filming, though).
Rumours of a Breaking Bad spin-off show have been floating around for a few months, and now the show's network AMC and Sony Pictures have confirmed that Saul Goodman will get his own pilot show with a view to a series.
Given a working title of Better Call Saul, the programme will be based on Breaking Bad's "criminal" lawyer Saul Goodman, who aids chemistry teacher turned meth cook Walter White (Bryan Cranston) and his partner Jesse Pinkman (Aaron Paul) in their endeavours.
That's weird. You would have figured that his character - simply because of being secondary and slimy - wouldn't have a chance to survive the series. But maybe it's a "Saul Goodman-like"-figure....
As late as 1960 British Rail receipts were 30% from passengers and 70% from freight . The question is was it more by the design of ( various ) governments or the railways themselves that has changed it into a mainly passenger service . The tonnes of freight carried figure may look impressive but the reality is that vast parts of the network carries no freight at all . For example the GWR line to Devon and Cornwall has no freight trains at all today .
Hm, pretty sure I have seen freight trains pass through Exeter St Davids on occasion.
Miss Plato, did you know that the velociraptors in Jurassic Park are hugely oversized? They're really more akin to deinonychus, but the velociraptor name was too cool not to use.
Also, they, and Tyrannosaurus Rex, should've had feathers (not sure if that was known at the time of filming, though).
Not Tyrannosaurus, Mr. Dancer. Only the raptors would have had feathers.
Comments
Divvie,
"Surely only an idiot would be commemorating an event two days after its actual anniversary"
Relax, you win some, you lose some. On that occasion the Earl of Surry sent the Scots homeward "to think again".
Perhaps the Surrey with the fringe on top?
" Only 64 per cent of parents with children under seven read to them at all, while a mere one in five of those get a book out every night.
The study shows the average modern day child gets three bedtime stories a week. But a quarter of a million children aged seven or under – around four per cent – do not own a single book.
The findings come a day after a major study found children who read for pleasure in their spare time perform significantly better at school than other pupils.
The study by academics at the Institute of Education found that regular access to books between the age of 10 and 16 boosts pupils’ vocabulary and spelling skills and drives up standards in maths..." http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/10301513/Traditional-bedtime-story-dying-out-study-says.html
Next year will be a big test of the state of play for F1...with the changes to the engines.
The 2004 figures show that NHS had the worst figures of all seven countries. Once the death rate was adjusted, England was 22 per cent higher than the average of all seven countries and it was 58 per cent higher than the best country.
"Gordon's representative on Earth has described shareholders as "grannies" on many occasions. If the "grannies lose their blouses", Ms Vadera cynically observed, it would not matter, as they were only
"shareholders who had added no value to the company".
http://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2005-10-24b.20.6
Of course, both Bannockburn and Flodden had more to do with fights among both Scottish and English Norman overlords than "Scotland" or "England" - but I do think Eck would have been the bigger mad had he acknowledged both - if only to point out the futility of war and how we will resolve this independence question peacefully.
Her lengthy CV lists countless qualifications, civic achievements, books and publications – but Raquel Rolnik makes no mention of dabbling in witchcraft.
Yet the architect and urban planner appears to be an avid follower of Candomble, an African-Brazilian religion that originated during the slave trade.
The academic, brought up a Marxist, actually offered an animal sacrifice to Karl Marx when she was studying for her Masters degree in architecture so ‘he would leave her alone’ to study in peace.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2418204/Raquel-Rolnik-A-dabbler-witchcraft-offered-animal-sacrifice-Marx.html#ixzz2efMy614L
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
Back to the question - will Labour abolish both their own, and the coalition's bedroom tax?
I suspect we both know the answer - no to both.
I suspect that Labour will rework the bedroom tax for council accommodation quite significantly, but given that private rented accommodation is a very different beast there is no need to do much about the situation there.
I'm not sure whether any historical battle is going to make much difference to the referendum; the touting of Braveheart, 'Freeeedom' and Bannockburn seem very much London metropolitan obsessions. To me a successful Commonwealth games would have ten times more value, and I'm sure Unionists (with hindsight) would rather be having the Olympics next year than last.
In fairness, on the record, Vince plays a pretty straight bat and often differences in emphasis are blown up by the media in search of a story into "splits".
Off the record, confronted by a pretty young thing, as my Granny observed, "there's no fool like an old fool....."
I remember my surprise at school when I realised the French don't celebrate Agincourt, yet remember "English" defeats. To be fair to the French, they can say that Agincourt was down to the French King's absence (he thought he was made of glass) and thus the French nobles being a disorganised mass, the muddy ground and a lot of luck. We look to the Welsh archers.
But in a direct comparison Flodden was bigger than the petty squabble at Bannockburn, although strategically, it was probably less important.
But I'm no historian, and I doubt if the celebrating Scots next year will worry about the numbers.
But - and it's a big but - where Populus may be going wrong is in believing the answer to the question about party identification. When those respondents say they've usually closely identified themselves with UKIP, it's highly likely that they are mis-remembering, fibbing, or (most likely of all) have misunderstood the question, and have actually answered a different question: "Which party do you identify with today?"
Quantifying the extent of any such distortion is difficult, though. It would be better to use a clearer question, such as on about past voting patterns. On the other hand, although Populus may be reporting low shares for UKIP, they're not ridiculously out of line with pollsters using different methodologies, so maybe the effect is not as distorting as it first appears.
http://www.scotsman.com/lifestyle/heritage/allan-massie-salmond-misses-trick-on-flodden-1-3085800
As with most of history - it was the power of ideas - in this case the Reformation - that did more to transform Anglo-Scottish relations than any military battle.....
People have rejected railways as a means of transport? Absolute rubbish. Usage is going up massively, a potential result of privatisation. (2) 1.4 billion passenger journeys is hardly a rejection.
Railways are a tool. Cars are a tool. Buses and lorries are tools. Each tool is best applied to a certain job, and has advantages and disadvantages for society. One tool (the car) may suit you best; that does not mean the answer is the same for everyone.
For instance, railfreight carried 101.7 million tonnes of goods in 2011/12 (1). At 44 tonnes a lorry maximum, that is 2.3 million lorry journeys off the road, and most of those will be long distance. Do you fancy having that many lorries clogging up the roads (and damaging them) on your journey?
(1): http://www.networkrail.co.uk/aspx/10439.aspx
(2): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rail_transport_in_Great_Britain#Annual_Passenger_Numbers
I agree that IMO past vote weighting is better than party ID for weighting .
https://mobile.twitter.com/DJack_Journo/status/377875138047647744/photo/1?screen_name=DJack_Journo
http://www.spectator.co.uk/columnists/politics/9019071/the-centre-can-be-held/
"Nick Clegg's secret reasons to be cheerful"
" ‘It confirmed for us some of his weaknesses as a leader,’ says one of Clegg’s long standing aides. ‘Is he someone capable of taking a decision and holding to it? Frankly, no.’
One Lib Dem minister is more direct: ‘A Miliband government would be catastrophic.’
forced choice question between Tories/Cameron and Labour/Miliband 41% to 40% in favour of Tories.
Voting intention Lab 39, Con 33, UKIP 12, LibDem 8
http://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/pdqfi3an7f/YG-Archive-Times-results-110913-party-leaders.pdf
"The Clegg circle believes that it’ll be better to stand for ‘more of the same’ than ‘change’ at the next election. They calculate that, in the words of one of its members: ‘If the next election was between the coalition and the opposition, the coalition would win.’ This means that the Liberal Democrats have to emphasise what they have done in government rather than what they would have liked to have done differently.
The problem for the Lib Dem leadership is that much of what they’ve done in government isn’t party policy. So, because of the Liberal Democrats’ internal party democracy, they’ll spend next week trying to persuade the party to approve their new stances on tuition fees, nuclear power and the like.
It is critical that they succeed. One ministerial ally of Clegg warns: ‘We can’t say we deserve credit for what the government has done, if the activists are trying to define us against the government.’ At the moment, Clegg’s party managers are confident they’ll get their way on nearly all these motions. But it appears likely that they’ll lose on the top rate of tax — with the party voting to make a return to the 50p rate party policy."
On the other hand, most days, my postie just delivers me supermarket flyers, charity begging letters, and BT "To the Householder" Broadband offers, so this service does seem ripe for a private company to step in.
We do everything online, hardly ever get an important letter through the post box. I rarely send letters, indeed, I've only sent a couple this year, my son's passport application, being the main one, and that was sent via the Post Office checking service.
I'd much rather the utilities were renationalised, to be honest.
I wonder if they'll end up bringing refuelling back. I only bet on F1 for about half a season, but I still remember that the BBC F1 Mole (which estimated fuel loads and therefore true pace based on qualifying) was great for insight into how the race would go.
Ha. At one weekend I offered something mental like 6 tips. Most of them came off, too.
http://politicalbetting.blogspot.co.uk/2009/09/post-monza-race-analysis-and-title.html
http://www.bbc.co.uk/democracylive/21006886
6 Tories and 1 Labour MP present.
2001 Local: Con 40%, Lab 31%, LD 25%
2001 General: Con 32%, Lab 41%, LD 18%
2005 Local: Con 40%, Lab 28%, LD 25%
2005 General: Con 32%, Lab 35%, LD 22%
2010 Local: Con 35%, Lab 27%, LD 26%
2010 General: Con 36%, Lab 29%, LD 23%
2013 Local: Con 25%, Lab 29%, LD 14%, UKIP 23%
What do you think accounts for Ed's problems with women? (You may use both sides of the paper)
The rough rule of thumb is that the damage to the road surface is proportional to the fourth power of the axle weight.
The maximum axle weight for lorries on UK roads is in the region of 10 tonnes. If we generously take 5 tonnes as a typical axle weight for a British lorry, and 1 tonne as the axle weight of a large, loaded family car, then the lorry does 625 times as much damage to the road surface.
If one compares a more fully loaded lorry with a smaller car, (say 10 tonnes compared to 0.5 tonnes) then the lorry does 160,000 times as much damage.
Admittedly it is true that Mandy's plans directly contradicted the 2005 Labour manifesto pledge (well that's a surprise), so I can see Nick's point. However, the point I was making still remains: every party in government which has actually looked at this has ended up agreeing that privatisation is the only viable route forward.
2000: Con 38%, Lab 30%
2001: Con 40%, Lab 31%
2002: Con 42%, Lab 33%
2004: Con 37%, Lab 30%
2005: Con 40%, Lab 28%
2006: Con 39%, Lab 26%
#Eurozone industrial production back to lowest since April 2010 after dropping a huge 1.5% in July. twitpic.com/dd4946
For example the GWR line to Devon and Cornwall has no freight trains at all today .
Car passenger miles have been static for about a decade now.
I think that if you priced people off the railways it would probably reduce the overall distance travelled. People might not thank you for that.
Lab voters on Milband (Cameron):
Out of his depth : 28 (25)
Weak: 22 (11)
Indecisive : 15 (10)
Con voters on Cameron (Miliband)
Out of touch: 7 (24)
Smug : 7 (21)
Arrogant: 4 (14)
MI5 and Special Branch 'covered up Cyril Smith's abuse of boys': Police dossier handed to prosecutors in 1970 'went missing for four decades'
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2418254/MI5-Special-Branch-covered-Cyril-Smiths-abuse-boys-Police-dossier-handed-prosecutors-1970-went-missing-decades.html#ixzz2efcvOed8
Con on Cameron:
Stands up for Britain: 51(16)
Determined/Competent/Principled: 34 (16/15/24)
Lab on Miliband:
Out of his depth: 28 (5)
Principled/Fair/Shares my values: 24 (34/19/16)
Lab (Con) voters on Miliband:
...
Con (Lab) voters on Cameron:
Thank you for the link. A succinct summary that even I could understand.
Net agree:
Con: +87
Lab: -7
LibDem: +66
UKIP: +83
Oh, and among 2010 LibDems: +47
"Insurance was insanely expensive for my children, which is off-putting too."
Insurance is insanely expensive because young people are appallingly bad risks. Basically, insurance companies cannot profitably write premiums to men under the age of 25 unless they are very, very expensive - so many accidents do this group cause.
http://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/pdqfi3an7f/YG-Archive-Times-results-110913-party-leaders.pdf
http://ttte.wikia.com/wiki/Bulgy
Would be a ko - no standing count.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/sep/12/liberal-democrat-wipeout-hunch-defy-polls
BR got rid of individual wagonloads slowly from the 1960s onwards; the days of milk churns being picked up from the platform are long gone, as are general goods sidings at stations. Such loads are highly inefficient in terms of staff and infrastructure, and cannot compete with road traffic.
What the railways did start specialising in was the only thing they could compete in: bulk loads. Merry-go-round coal trains, limestone, parcels traffic. Hub-to-hub, large trainloads.
Things have started changing back. Railfreight traffic is increasing despite a reduction in bulk loads, balanced with a consequent rise in intermodal (containerised) traffic. Some supermarkets have also started using railfreight.
One of the good things about privatisation is that it increased sectorisation in the 1980s, allowing freight operators to experiment more with new traffic flows. A trend sadly slowed by the massive costs of connecting a site to the railway network, even if the site is adjacent to the line.
As an aside, car passenger miles are inversely related to the price of oil in almost all countries in the world. If the price of travelling by car rises, people will look to alternatives. This is true whether in Japan, the US, the UK or Saudi Arabia.
Over the past 10 years the price of oil has roughly trebled.
Nobody knows what it will do in the next 10 years; however, what I think we can all agree on is that the ability of the UK government to influence the price of crude is essentially non-existent.
Con voters on Cameron and (Miliband)
Yes - conclusion could have been better phrased - Labour voters think both Miliband & Cameron are out of their depth (tho Miliband more so), but Con voters do not share same negative impression of Cameron as Labour voters do.
http://ttte.wikia.com/wiki/BoCo
And it's real-life counterpart:
http://nicwhe8.freehostia.com/d5705/start.html
Even though the Class 28's were an example of the hideous amounts of money wasted by BR under the 1955 modernisation plan. A political mistake that cost the railways a massive amount of political support for the next five decades.
Their views on Cameron are close to Labour VI, their views on Miliband close to Con VI.
Cameron picks up extra marks for 'Doesn't listen' among UKIP (41 vs 22 OA), while Miliband has his highest 'out of touch' score among UKIP: (32 vs 20 OA)
Nick Clegg betrayed his principles to become deputy prime minister: +48 (+40) [-30]
Nick Clegg is too obsessed with issues that don't matter much to most people: +44 (+12) [-51]
Rumours of a Breaking Bad spin-off show have been floating around for a few months, and now the show's network AMC and Sony Pictures have confirmed that Saul Goodman will get his own pilot show with a view to a series.
Given a working title of Better Call Saul, the programme will be based on Breaking Bad's "criminal" lawyer Saul Goodman, who aids chemistry teacher turned meth cook Walter White (Bryan Cranston) and his partner Jesse Pinkman (Aaron Paul) in their endeavours.
Breaking Bad fans may be thankful for the news, but it will also mean more work for Goodman actor Bob Odenkirk, who told The Telegraph that the AMC show is "the golden goose and I’m just thankful I got a chance to be in it". http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/10303620/Better-Call-Saul-Breaking-Bad-spin-off-series-confirmed.html
Question is, will Vince, Lord Oakshott and the SDP wing of the Lib-Dems throw a spanner in the works?
One would expect Hulkenberg to get the Lotus seat.
BTW it's our Diesel Gala on the Epping Ongar Railway this weekend 14/15th. Should have a visiting Class 47 and possibly a 33, and our Class 25, 31 and 37 and a couple of 03 shunters on view or actually in service. Oh and a Class 205 DEMU (diesel-electric multiple unit) too.
The RBS disaster has a distinctly Scottish flavour"
http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/9019531/braveheart-banking/
The Liberals were a party of small government, personal freedom and responsibility and conservative fiscal policy, whereas the SDP were the usual bunch of agitating spendthirt lefties wanting to poke their nose into everyones business whilst making us pay for the privilege.
If the Liberals made a proper comeback then I'd be tempted to vote for them.
http://www.birminghampost.co.uk/news/former-mp-jacqui-smith-gets-5912320
http://www.britishrailwaystations.co.uk/newhavenmarine.html
(pics here by yours truly)
Patrick O Flynn is looking for a freelancer
twitter.com/oflynnexpress/status/378102837302923265
CCHQ Press Office @RicHolden
William Hague: "He [@DAlexanderMP] reminds me of the story of the cockerel who thought his crowing brought about the dawn" #Syria #HoC
https://twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/378111179693903874/photo/1/large
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/dinosaurs/10303795/Jurassic-Park-ruled-out-dinosaur-DNA-could-not-survive-in-amber.html
Also, they, and Tyrannosaurus Rex, should've had feathers (not sure if that was known at the time of filming, though).