I think people are still underestimating just how much the economy is changing. Growth this quarter will be up to 1% and there is every chance that it will be something close to that in Q4.
Next year will be a very strong year for the UK economy. I expect growth to exceed 3%. Unemployment will fall month after month in the same way as we saw yesterday, the deficit will undershoot by a reasonable margin, the squeeze on real wages will start to ease and those who are underemployed (for example on zero hour contracts) are going to find themselves a lot busier.
So we are going to have another few thousand comments from Tim about how this is an unsustainable housing boom, how Osborne is being reckless, about how this is "the wrong sort of growth (this from a party where growth=borrowing, simple as that). Most of the public will not be listening but they will get good news stories on their TVs every week, week after week.
The British people get this. You see it in the economic optimism figures which have changed by a substantial margin over the last 6 months. I suspect these figures are a lagging indicator of tory support. Unless we have a repeat of the omnishambles or some serious mistakes in the Health service it seems very likely that the tories will start to lead the polls at some point next year. Whether that lead will ever be enough to let them win the election outright or even stop Labour squeezing in as the largest party is much more difficult to tell.
But it is the economy and it is starting to roar.
I saw this about today's unemployment figures ;
"The fall of 68,900 in July and August was the biggest two-month drop since June 1997. "
The evil New Labour years were a national tragedy . It's remarkable how quickly Osborne and Cable have righted the ship of state.
I think people are still underestimating just how much the economy is changing. Growth this quarter will be up to 1% and there is every chance that it will be something close to that in Q4.
Next year will be a very strong year for the UK economy. I expect growth to exceed 3%. Unemployment will fall month after month in the same way as we saw yesterday, the deficit will undershoot by a reasonable margin, the squeeze on real wages will start to ease and those who are underemployed (for example on zero hour contracts) are going to find themselves a lot busier.
So we are going to have another few thousand comments from Tim about how this is an unsustainable housing boom, how Osborne is being reckless, about how this is "the wrong sort of growth (this from a party where growth=borrowing, simple as that). Most of the public will not be listening but they will get good news stories on their TVs every week, week after week.
The British people get this. You see it in the economic optimism figures which have changed by a substantial margin over the last 6 months. I suspect these figures are a lagging indicator of tory support. Unless we have a repeat of the omnishambles or some serious mistakes in the Health service it seems very likely that the tories will start to lead the polls at some point next year. Whether that lead will ever be enough to let them win the election outright or even stop Labour squeezing in as the largest party is much more difficult to tell.
But it is the economy and it is starting to roar.
I saw this about today's unemployment figures ;
"The fall of 68,900 in July and August was the biggest two-month drop since June 1997. "
The wasted New Labour years were a national tragedy . It's remarkable how quickly Osborne and Cable have righted the ship of state.
I think people are still underestimating just how much the economy is changing. Growth this quarter will be up to 1% and there is every chance that it will be something close to that in Q4.
Next year will be a very strong year for the UK economy. I expect growth to exceed 3%. Unemployment will fall month after month in the same way as we saw yesterday, the deficit will undershoot by a reasonable margin, the squeeze on real wages will start to ease and those who are underemployed (for example on zero hour contracts) are going to find themselves a lot busier.
So we are going to have another few thousand comments from Tim about how this is an unsustainable housing boom, how Osborne is being reckless, about how this is "the wrong sort of growth (this from a party where growth=borrowing, simple as that). Most of the public will not be listening but they will get good news stories on their TVs every week, week after week.
The British people get this. You see it in the economic optimism figures which have changed by a substantial margin over the last 6 months. I suspect these figures are a lagging indicator of tory support. Unless we have a repeat of the omnishambles or some serious mistakes in the Health service it seems very likely that the tories will start to lead the polls at some point next year. Whether that lead will ever be enough to let them win the election outright or even stop Labour squeezing in as the largest party is much more difficult to tell.
But it is the economy and it is starting to roar.
I saw this about today's unemployment figures ;
"The fall of 68,900 in July and August was the biggest two-month drop since June 1997. "
The wasted New Labour years were a national tragedy . It's remarkable how quickly Osborne and Cable have righted the ship of state.
Yeah...Hurrah to loads of estate agents!
Link?
Unless you know otherwise, they are employed in 'Real Estate Activities'....which is more than just Estate Agents.....
" ....... it seems very likely that the Tories will start to lead the polls at some point next year."
I agree and that's why I've taken PP's odds that they will move ahead of Labour with YouGov at some point next year - on which subject I posted earlier today.
I also believe the LibDems will share in the spoils as coalition partners and quite fancy Ladbrokes' odds of 7/2 for them to win 40-50 seats at the GE. Let's not forget how well they fared against the odds at the Eastleigh by-election.
I think people are still underestimating just how much the economy is changing. Growth this quarter will be up to 1% and there is every chance that it will be something close to that in Q4.
Next year will be a very strong year for the UK economy. I expect growth to exceed 3%. Unemployment will fall month after month in the same way as we saw yesterday, the deficit will undershoot by a reasonable margin, the squeeze on real wages will start to ease and those who are underemployed (for example on zero hour contracts) are going to find themselves a lot busier.
So we are going to have another few thousand comments from Tim about how this is an unsustainable housing boom, how Osborne is being reckless, about how this is "the wrong sort of growth (this from a party where growth=borrowing, simple as that). Most of the public will not be listening but they will get good news stories on their TVs every week, week after week.
The British people get this. You see it in the economic optimism figures which have changed by a substantial margin over the last 6 months. I suspect these figures are a lagging indicator of tory support. Unless we have a repeat of the omnishambles or some serious mistakes in the Health service it seems very likely that the tories will start to lead the polls at some point next year. Whether that lead will ever be enough to let them win the election outright or even stop Labour squeezing in as the largest party is much more difficult to tell.
But it is the economy and it is starting to roar.
I saw this about today's unemployment figures ;
"The fall of 68,900 in July and August was the biggest two-month drop since June 1997. "
The wasted New Labour years were a national tragedy . It's remarkable how quickly Osborne and Cable have righted the ship of state.
Yeah...Hurrah to loads of estate agents!
Link?
Unless you know otherwise, they are employed in 'Real Estate Activities'....which is more than just Estate Agents.....
@SMukesh - As I patiently explained to tim yesterday:
(a) Those are not all estate agents working in sales - a lot of the increase is in areas such as letting agents, managing agents, university accomodation etc. Of course you wouldn't expect the Guardian to have any interest in making the facts clear.
(b) And of course the housing market had completely collapsed in volume terms in many parts of the country, with dire knock-on effects to other sectors of the economy. Thank goodness volumes are at last recovering a little bit, back towards a marginally more normal market, which in turn will, yes, lead to a welcome reversal of the fall in employment in estate agents. Do you have a problem with estate agents?
Johann Lamont may have dug herself a bit of a hole today - more or less accused a businessman of conspiring with the SNP government in a corrupt land deal. She appears to have forgotten there's no parliamentary privilege in Holyrood.
I claim the proceeds of any "housing bubble" bet for the next PB Tory cocktail party!
That would be only fair, because the profit from the last bet has gone into the Nabavi wine cellar sinking fund. I aim to share the proceeds of growth.
If the economy is in a dire state the government generally gets thrown out, as happened with Callaghan, Wilson, Brown, Heath. If the economy is booming the government generally gets re-elected unless it has been in too long, as happened in 1997. If the economy is not doing well but not dire, the incumbent party can get re-elected if the opposition leader is not very good, as was the case with Kinnock in 1992, Romney in 2012 and dare I say Miliband in 2015?
R N.. SMukesh slavishly follows the Cheshire Farmers dogma..regardless
It`s coalition cabinet minister Vince Cable who has raised concern about the Housing Bubble.He predicted the last housing bubble,so he has got good form on this.
Johann Lamont may have dug herself a bit of a hole today - more or less accused a businessman of conspiring with the SNP government in a corrupt land deal. She appears to have forgotten there's no parliamentary privilege in Holyrood.
You appear to have forgotten that she might be right.
If the Lib Dems spend the next 18 months telling everyone how rubbish government policy is, in order to distance themselves from the Conservatives, then Labour don't need to bother campaigning in order to win the GE.
I think there's a final full stop in the link which you need and which Vanilla doesn't recognise. Try adding that, or Google for 'growth university accomodation' and it should come up as one of the first hits.
It later emerged the roadmap was to be revised, after Transport Scotland conceded it had included mobility scooters in figures showing an increase in the number of electric and plug-in hybrid vehicle registrations last year
I claim the proceeds of any "housing bubble" bet for the next PB Tory cocktail party!
That would be only fair, because the profit from the last bet has gone into the Nabavi wine cellar sinking fund. I aim to share the proceeds of growth.
I'll add the fruits of my labour to the fund - profiting from Rod's weird bullishness about RESPECT.
Now if we could only cobble together the money for a train ticket from Bournemouth to get JohnO along...
Johann Lamont may have dug herself a bit of a hole today - more or less accused a businessman of conspiring with the SNP government in a corrupt land deal. She appears to have forgotten there's no parliamentary privilege in Holyrood.
You appear to have forgotten that she might be right.
Jackson Carlaw MSP @JacksonMSP 55m @ScottishLabour smear on @JohnMcGlynn unfounded, scurrilous and self inflicted stain on its reputation. Apology required forthwith #fmqs
The icing on the cake is that the original sale was between the aforementioned business man and the Glasgow Labour dominated Strathclyde Partnership for Transport (SPT).
A problem may be that the Tories - even our restrained DavidL - have locked themselves into the position that there was a serious problem but they've SOLVED it. Now, growth will definitely rocket away, unemplloyment will fall every month. Nothing can possibly go wrong.
It's not usually a wise stance to take. Stuff happens, and the media magnify it.
Whats the rise in employment in that sector over the last year then?
I have no idea, tim. You're the one that's claiming to know which sub-sectors of category L of the ONS statistics (Real Estate) account for the increase in employment, and attributing it all to a boom in house sales.
It's ancient history, but looks like MI5 suppressed it at the time Labour were relying on Liberal support - and the Liberals displayed the same lack of curiosity over the allegations that they have more recently in other cases.
Johann Lamont may have dug herself a bit of a hole today - more or less accused a businessman of conspiring with the SNP government in a corrupt land deal. She appears to have forgotten there's no parliamentary privilege in Holyrood.
You appear to have forgotten that she might be right.
Jackson Carlaw MSP @JacksonMSP 55m @ScottishLabour smear on @JohnMcGlynn unfounded, scurrilous and self inflicted stain on its reputation. Apology required forthwith #fmqs
The icing on the cake is that the original sale was between the aforementioned business man and the Glasgow Labour dominated Strathclyde Partnership for Transport (SPT).
At the very least this an example of SNP waste of tax-payers' money. Lamont is doing her job in bringing this outrage to light. What is wrong with you ?
Johann Lamont may have dug herself a bit of a hole today - more or less accused a businessman of conspiring with the SNP government in a corrupt land deal. She appears to have forgotten there's no parliamentary privilege in Holyrood.
What Lamont asked:
"Ms Lamont asked: "Is there some connection here, or has Mr McGlynn just benefitted from the first minister's gross incompetence with public funds?"
At the very least this an example of SNP waste of tax-payers' money. Lamont is doing her job in bringing this outrage to light. What is wrong with you ?
Ah, the dilemmas of a Britnat righty, bash the SNP or Labour?
Keith Brown, Scottish Transport Minister:
'The land that was purchased that he mentioned was initially purchased by Strathclyde Partnership for Transport, not by the Government, although the Government subsequently bought it from SPT....The cancellation of the GARL project saved £176 million. Of course there has been a cost, because land was purchased at the height of the market and then sold during a recession—there is no question about that.'
It's ancient history, but looks like MI5 suppressed it at the time Labour were relying on Liberal support - and the Liberals displayed the same lack of curiosity over the allegations that they have more recently in other cases.
It's ancient history, but looks like MI5 suppressed it at the time Labour were relying on Liberal support - and the Liberals displayed the same lack of curiosity over the allegations that they have more recently in other cases.
For some of the time Smith was a Labour councillor. IIRC he started as a Liberal in 1945 or so, then switched to Labour in about 1951 and was a Labour Councillor 1952-66, but had a major row with Labour and sat as an Independent until 1970 when he rejoined the Liberals.
It's ancient history, but looks like MI5 suppressed it at the time Labour were relying on Liberal support - and the Liberals displayed the same lack of curiosity over the allegations that they have more recently in other cases.
It's not ancient history for his alleged victims!
Very true! I (thoughtlessly) meant in the context of contemporary politics - and if anyone does try, it will get filed under "they're all as bad as each other".
isam - why are Ukip against privatising RM ? Small govt and all that...
Simply because, as with everything else, UKIP are courting public opinion and going with the flow.
I am an armchair UKIP supporter, but someone more involved says this
Michael Heaver (@Michael_Heaver) 12/09/2013 14:23 How funny that people now realise UKIP is against Royal Mail privitisation. Short term populism? Clearly weren't paying attention in 2007.
iSam - Been backing Raceclear for a couple of weeks at £10 a point. I can see my accounts being suspended at all the bookies eventually..
it just got more likely! Incredible run they are on...
At the very least this an example of SNP waste of tax-payers' money. Lamont is doing her job in bringing this outrage to light. What is wrong with you ?
Ah, the dilemmas of a Britnat righty, bash the SNP or Labour?
Keith Brown, Scottish Transport Minister:
'The land that was purchased that he mentioned was initially purchased by Strathclyde Partnership for Transport, not by the Government, although the Government subsequently bought it from SPT....The cancellation of the GARL project saved £176 million. Of course there has been a cost, because land was purchased at the height of the market and then sold during a recession—there is no question about that.'
It's you who should be concerned about this , I'm amazed that you aren't. On a strange political journey , follow the money.
As objective duo's go, its quite ironic that both Mike and I were two of the first posters on PB to question Gordon Brown's suitability as Labour Leader and a PM well before Blair stood down. We were also both almost alone in rating George Osborne as being quite politically astute when others on all sides were quick to dismiss him.
I backed Ed Miliband at great odds to be the next Labour leader after he impressed the Unions bosses before the last GE. But I also highlighted and commented on how his indecisiveness was proving to be a major weakness in his Leadership on here a while ago. I have no doubt that the Labour party with the help of their Union backers have managed to elect another deeply unattractive Gordon Brown MK2 model. But just like Gordon Brown before him, will Ed Miliband manage to limp weakly along until the GE for fear that his removal might cause yet more damaging infighting between former Brownites and Blairites in the PLP?
It's you who should be concerned about this , I'm amazed that you aren't. On a strange political journey , follow the money.
On the subject of strange political journeys, years of endlessly turning a blind eye to Silvio's jolly japes have obviously buggered up your moral compass.
Johann Lamont may have dug herself a bit of a hole today - more or less accused a businessman of conspiring with the SNP government in a corrupt land deal. She appears to have forgotten there's no parliamentary privilege in Holyrood.
What Lamont asked:
"Ms Lamont asked: "Is there some connection here, or has Mr McGlynn just benefitted from the first minister's gross incompetence with public funds?"
Very cheeky - but not even tepid water, let alone hot.....
Now your claim that she "more or less accused a businessman of conspiring with the SNP government in a corrupt land deal" might be problematic......
As ever, you pluck little morsels to suit. Lamont said in total:
'"Now he supports the Yes campaign [in favour of independence]. Since then he's been appointed to the Scottish government national economic forum. And since then, he has bought back the land from the Scottish government for just £50,000 and made a profit of £790,000."
Ms Lamont asked: "Is there some connection here, or has Mr McGlynn just benefitted from the first minister's gross incompetence with public funds?"'
Mr McGlynn, the businessman, appears to be 'deeply troubled' by 'unfounded statements' of 'impropriety'.
"I'm extremely concerned about the unfounded statements that were made in the debating chamber, which all seem to imply, suggest, some kind of impropriety on my part, which I think is deeply troubling."
Always a pleasure to see @rcs1000 holding forth. Strong opinions, but presented by someone who knows his stuff, can present evidence to back his case, and skips the tribal partisan guff. I particularly admire that he puts his money where his mouth is - or his clients' money anyway!
Warning to anyone dead; Channel 4 is likely to try to blacken your name.
Tonight's target; The late Cyril Smith
Good job Michael Le Vell is not dead , he was able to clear his name . Good job too Nigel Evans is not a Lib Dem , we would be getting post after post from Carlotta and other pb tories demanding he resigns his seat in parliament immediately .
It's you who should be concerned about this , I'm amazed that you aren't. On a strange political journey , follow the money.
On the subject of strange political journeys, years of endlessly turning a blind eye to Silvio's jolly japes have obviously buggered up your moral compass.
Berlusca was an acolyte of disgraced Socialist Craxi and depended on the support of your sister partitionist party Lega Nord. I never had any time for him.
"Oakeshott also thinks the party should be equally bold on party funding. He has a ‘5-5-5’ plan, to limit individual donations to £5,000, to impose a £5m spending cap on general election campaigns and to allow voters to mark on their ballot paper a £5 tax donation to a party of their choice. “Clean politics does have to be paid for, that’s the right solution. Obviously we can’t just hand out taxpayer’s money without giving them control. That really meets all the objection because anyone who doesn’t want to give, doesn’t.
“It also helps with straight jacket voting system where people are often voting against somebody rather than for. If somebody wants to give £5 to the Greens or to Labour in a Lib Dem seat where they are voting tactically, they can do so.""
Sensible idea.
He's just stolen Herman Cain's '9-9-9' plan.
God, at one stage Herman Cain led the GOP primary polling. I mean really!
Warning to anyone dead; Channel 4 is likely to try to blacken your name.
Tonight's target; The late Cyril Smith
Good job Michael Le Vell is not dead , he was able to clear his name . Good job too Nigel Evans is not a Lib Dem , we would be getting post after post from Carlotta and other pb tories demanding he resigns his seat in parliament immediately .
Not once he's been charged you wouldn't.
And I don't recall many posts about Mike Hancock which - if half of what is in the press is true - seems like a horrible abuse of power
"The call for change came as a poll by Populus for Greenpeace showed the Liberal Democrats' green credentials were being damaged. In particular, the survey found, the decision to endorse shale gas exploration, including fracking, has damaged the party's green credentials amongst those that voted Lib Dem in 2010 but have become disillusioned."
Green policies to screw the poor aren't popular, neither are 20 mph speed limits, Residential Parking Zones, and blind europhilia. So who is Oakshot's alternative inspiring figure who will lead the LDs into electoral oblivion?
All this extra consumer spending after real pay has been falling for three years (except for those who got Osbornes bonus gift) where's the money coming from?
And now bond rates are a full one per cent above Germany and the housing bubble depends on throwing hundreds of billions at the property market when interest rates are 0.5% what happens when they go up?
It'd be better if you were honest and just said "Osborne is arranging a bubble and I hope he's timed it right"
Aggregate spending will come from there being a record number of people in work (the 30m figure will be breached for the first time ever by the end of the year), by an increase in the number of hours worked (also at a record) and by investment from businesses more confident about the future.
And I don't doubt for a moment that Osborne has timed his bubble right. It's looking pretty much bang on.
That 1.6 million figure is strongly disputed. The big difference between Scotland and Catalonia is that whereas the British government has agreed a referendum with the Scottish government, the Spanish government refuse to accept Catalonia's right to self determination.
“Our leaders in our party talk quite a lot of talk about social mobility but nothing kills social mobility more than high and rising house prices and a lack of affordable houses to rent. It’s even more important than access to schools.”
Your problem Tim, is that you're a Blairite who opposes housing bubbles. And you're collapsing under your own internal contradictions. You can think "A housing bubble is dead rubbish, and an economy based on housing bubbles is precarious" And you can think "The economy was, generally, reasonably managed from 1997-2010"
But you can't think both at the same time. It is not possible. It can't be laughed off.
Are housing bubbles rubbish, or was New Labour Economic policy rubbish? I think both. To govern is to choose. Which do you choose Tim?
All this extra consumer spending after real pay has been falling for three years (except for those who got Osbornes bonus gift) where's the money coming from?
And now bond rates are a full one per cent above Germany and the housing bubble depends on throwing hundreds of billions at the property market when interest rates are 0.5% what happens when they go up?
It'd be better if you were honest and just said "Osborne is arranging a bubble and I hope he's timed it right"
Aggregate spending will come from there being a record number of people in work (the 30m figure will be breached for the first time ever by the end of the year), by an increase in the number of hours worked (also at a record) and by investment from businesses more confident about the future.
And I don't doubt for a moment that Osborne has timed his bubble right. It's looking pretty much bang on.
Shame he couldn't just, you know, get us back on the growth path without a bubble. Bubbles help no-one.
That 1.6 million figure is strongly disputed. The big difference between Scotland and Catalonia is that whereas the British government has agreed a referendum with the Scottish government, the Spanish government refuse to accept Catalonia's right to self determination.
Well they struggle with Gibraltar's right too, so at least they're being consistent.
“Our leaders in our party talk quite a lot of talk about social mobility but nothing kills social mobility more than high and rising house prices and a lack of affordable houses to rent. It’s even more important than access to schools.”
Your problem Tim, is that you're a Blairite who opposes housing bubbles. And you're collapsing under your own internal contradictions. You can think "A housing bubble is dead rubbish, and an economy based on housing bubbles is precarious" And you can think "The economy was, generally, reasonably managed from 1997-2010"
But you can't think both at the same time. It is not possible. It can't be laughed off.
Are housing bubbles rubbish, or was New Labour Economic policy rubbish? I think both. To govern is to choose. Which do you choose Tim?
A problem may be that the Tories - even our restrained DavidL - have locked themselves into the position that there was a serious problem but they've SOLVED it. Now, growth will definitely rocket away, unemplloyment will fall every month. Nothing can possibly go wrong.
It's not usually a wise stance to take. Stuff happens, and the media magnify it.
Well 3% is hardly a rocket ship Nick, it is just a lot, lot better than what we have been used to since 2008. In the heady, debt fuelled years before that it was in fact fairly average.
I also think that we have forgotten just how unusual policy currently is. We have the lowest interest rates for hundreds of years, we have had them for nearly 5 years now and and we have a Governor promising them (wrongly in my view) for another 2 years. We have had QE to the tune of nearly a quarter of the UK economy. We have a government running what is still a truly scary deficit pumping an additional demand of £10bn a month into the economy. In any normal circumstances any one of the policies would have resulted in really out of control growth.
The fact we have had several years with very little growth indeed despite all these policies is evidence of how sick our economy was and is. The monetary and indeed fiscal accelerators have been rammed to the floor since 2008. It only needs a little bit of traction in those circumstances to get a result (I will leave the rest of the technical details to Morris Dancer).
For the avoidance of doubt I am not saying for one moment that the Coalition has solved our underlying problems. They are profound and will not be sorted by a few quarters of growth. But it will feel a little better.
“Our leaders in our party talk quite a lot of talk about social mobility but nothing kills social mobility more than high and rising house prices and a lack of affordable houses to rent. It’s even more important than access to schools.”
Your problem Tim, is that you're a Blairite who opposes housing bubbles. And you're collapsing under your own internal contradictions. You can think "A housing bubble is dead rubbish, and an economy based on housing bubbles is precarious" And you can think "The economy was, generally, reasonably managed from 1997-2010"
But you can't think both at the same time. It is not possible. It can't be laughed off.
Are housing bubbles rubbish, or was New Labour Economic policy rubbish? I think both. To govern is to choose. Which do you choose Tim?
tim's perfectly capable of holding two entirely contradictory opinions at the same time. It's one of his most obvious talents.
But to be fair to him he has repeatedly said he opposed housing policy as practiced in the UK for 30+ years.
It's just that he goes on and on and on about it in relation to the Tories while you never heard a peep about it when his lot were in power.
“Our leaders in our party talk quite a lot of talk about social mobility but nothing kills social mobility more than high and rising house prices and a lack of affordable houses to rent. It’s even more important than access to schools.”
Your problem Tim, is that you're a Blairite who opposes housing bubbles. And you're collapsing under your own internal contradictions. You can think "A housing bubble is dead rubbish, and an economy based on housing bubbles is precarious" And you can think "The economy was, generally, reasonably managed from 1997-2010"
But you can't think both at the same time. It is not possible. It can't be laughed off.
Are housing bubbles rubbish, or was New Labour Economic policy rubbish? I think both. To govern is to choose. Which do you choose Tim?
The last Govts policies on housing and drugs were shite. And every British Govts policy on housing and drugs has been shite. Does that oreclude me from having a view on politics, are you bound to support the racist and homophobic policies that the Tories held a decade and more ago because you're a Tory voter?
Don't forget running the economy tim, Labour were total shite at that too.
You don't know how I vote Tim. Housing Bubble is rubbish = New Labour is rubbish. And if that's true, and it is, then we should confiscate the assets and suspend the citizenship of all who benefited from their membership of the New Labour government. That's a fine moderate position. Exile is fine. I'm all about moving forward.
Few Tories in the Cabinet would say that outright victory at the next election is likely, but most now think it distinctly possible. Cameron’s Syria defeat could have transformed the political debate; instead, it is being forgotten. And for that, they believe, they have Absent Ed to thank.
Yeah. Reading about Ed Miliband has that effect on me too.
The right-wing papers must be pretty scared of Ed for they seem to publish almost daily news of how rubbish he is-When he gets in,I hope he drafts the most severe press regulations there could be.,aka,Russia,China or Zimbabwe.
"It is now painfully clear that Labour no longer has a coherent foreign policy – or one on welfare, education, tax or the economy. There comes a point when voters start to notice."
and my favorite
"The phrase most associated with Miliband is “out of his depth”, and that’s just from Labour supporters."
The key point about these 'Ed is not up to it' articles is that they are often being written by journalists who aren't natural fans of Cameron. Journalists with access. Journalists with contacts. And journalists who have Labour politicians telling them, off the record, that they don't think they can win with Ed Miliband.
Now I don't want Ed Miliband to win the next election. I think Ed is okay. But I don't think the current Labour front bench is anywhere near up to running the country. Intellectually and in terms of experience and political nous they aren't anywhere near the quality of the 1997 Labour front bench. Nowhere near.
But as a non-Labour supporter, I think he can win. So if I think that, why are his supposed backers talking him down? And they obviously are talking him down, leading journalists don't just make stuff up. It's poor from Labour and diminishing their chances of seeing Ed win, and another example of how poor and unprepared and intellectually scared they are of actually winning (I am beginning to think many leading Labour people don't actually want to win in 2015, they'd prefer to win in 2020, because they know - when in power - they'd be carrying out exactly the same set of mild cuts and handbrake-austerity as the coalition).
Few Tories in the Cabinet would say that outright victory at the next election is likely, but most now think it distinctly possible. Cameron’s Syria defeat could have transformed the political debate; instead, it is being forgotten. And for that, they believe, they have Absent Ed to thank.
One of those typical right-wing articles seeing a great new tomorrow but out of touch with reality.
Yeah. Reading about Ed Miliband has that effect on me too.
The right-wing papers must be pretty scared of Ed for they seem to publish almost daily news of how rubbish he is-When he gets in,I hope he drafts the most severe press regulations there could be.,aka,Russia,China or Zimbabwe.
Why the heck would you hope for that kind of draconian press regulation?
How can that possibly be in Britain's best interest?
You don't know how I vote Tim. Housing Bubble is rubbish = New Labour is rubbish. And if that's true, and it is, then we should confiscate the assets and suspend the citizenship of all who benefited from their membership of the New Labour government. That's a fine moderate position. Exile is fine. I'm all about moving forward.
We agreed then?
A lot of people on here who criticise Brown for high spending a housing bubble and welfare spending plan to vote for Osbornes higher spending, higher welfare spending and taxpayer subsidised attemp at a housing bubble. Without seeing the parallellel apparently
That just illustrates how bad the Eds are - they make Osborne look good.
Has anyone ever been described as a Labour Privy Counsellor before? and who do we think it is?
“In the last week, junior MPs have come up to ask me if we’re going to be all right, as if they’re asking the captain of the Titanic if there are enough lifeboats,” says one Labour privy counsellor.
“I’m afraid that voters have made up their minds about Ed. Once this happens, they seldom change them.” A harsh analysis, but one backed up by just-as-devastating opinion polls.
On topic: not necessarily, or at least, the relationship is more complex than Good Economy = Re-election.
An economy can be in trouble, in very serious trouble, but if the voters think the Opposition will make things even WORSE, then they will vote for the government. This seems to be what happened in 1992. Labour still weren't trusted.
I suggest Miliband and Balls (in particular) are still not trusted today, on the economics, and this might well override other factors - e.g. whether there really is a "feelgood" factor outside the SE.
Labour really need to dump Balls (at least) - especially now that his "too far too fast" narrative looks ridiculous. But can they do that without looking febrile and silly? Difficult.
The value at the moment might be a Tory Overall Majority. It seems impossible, but then a Labour government led by Miliband and Balls seems EQUALLY impossible, and the available odds on these two outcomes are NOT equal.
Spot on. It's not (just) about how well the last government's done but which party the voters think is most trusted to take things forward.
Hence 1992/7. In the former, the Tories were trusted more to get Britain out of the mess that that government was itself partly responsible for. So despite the high unemployment and recession, the Conservatives were re-elected. Come the next election, despite the recovery, the Tories were booted out, partly because the recovery was seen as largely not their doing (ERM and all that) and partly because Labour was now trusted not just on the economy but also on health, education, defence, standards and so on.
Yeah. Reading about Ed Miliband has that effect on me too.
The right-wing papers must be pretty scared of Ed for they seem to publish almost daily news of how rubbish he is-When he gets in,I hope he drafts the most severe press regulations there could be.,aka,Russia,China or Zimbabwe.
Was it only yesterday that you were calling the present Government authoritarian?
Now you want to curb press freedom to point out truth about Labour.
Has anyone ever been described as a Labour Privy Counsellor before? and who do we think it is?
“In the last week, junior MPs have come up to ask me if we’re going to be all right, as if they’re asking the captain of the Titanic if there are enough lifeboats,” says one Labour privy counsellor.
“I’m afraid that voters have made up their minds about Ed. Once this happens, they seldom change them.” A harsh analysis, but one backed up by just-as-devastating opinion polls.
I'm with SMukesh on this one, the last thing Labour should do is panic and remove Ed.
Has anyone ever been described as a Labour Privy Counsellor before? and who do we think it is?
“In the last week, junior MPs have come up to ask me if we’re going to be all right, as if they’re asking the captain of the Titanic if there are enough lifeboats,” says one Labour privy counsellor.
“I’m afraid that voters have made up their minds about Ed. Once this happens, they seldom change them.” A harsh analysis, but one backed up by just-as-devastating opinion polls.
Assuming not libellous, I'd hazard someone like Gerald Kaufman or David Blunkett or perhaps Jack Straw.
For me the most interesting point in that Article is that Ed has few allies left. He has taken on virtually every powerful group both inside and outside his party. Whilst undeniably brave and not without reason, it has left him very exposed.
Yeah. Reading about Ed Miliband has that effect on me too.
The right-wing papers must be pretty scared of Ed for they seem to publish almost daily news of how rubbish he is-When he gets in,I hope he drafts the most severe press regulations there could be.,aka,Russia,China or Zimbabwe.
Why the heck would you hope for that kind of draconian press regulation?
How can that possibly be in Britain's best interest?
Labour and their supporters don't seem overly bothered with the national interest.
Has anyone ever been described as a Labour Privy Counsellor before? and who do we think it is?
“In the last week, junior MPs have come up to ask me if we’re going to be all right, as if they’re asking the captain of the Titanic if there are enough lifeboats,” says one Labour privy counsellor.
“I’m afraid that voters have made up their minds about Ed. Once this happens, they seldom change them.” A harsh analysis, but one backed up by just-as-devastating opinion polls.
Assuming not libellous, I'd hazard someone like Gerald Kaufman or David Blunkett or perhaps Jack Straw.
I was thinking it might be Lord Mandelson, the only person in the Labour party who has ever wanted to privatise The Royal Mail.
For me the most interesting point in that Article is that Ed has few allies left. He has taken on virtually every powerful group both inside and outside his party. Whilst undeniably brave and not without reason, it has left him very exposed.
I think that's part of the problem. He's had a lot of fights and left wounded enemies lurking around him. The only one he has killed off ironically is his brother.
For me the most interesting point in that Article is that Ed has few allies left. He has taken on virtually every powerful group both inside and outside his party. Whilst undeniably brave and not without reason, it has left him very exposed.
But surely you don't worry that his leadership is seriously threatened, still less he'll resign?
Comments
"The fall of 68,900 in July and August was the biggest two-month drop since June 1997. "
The evil New Labour years were a national tragedy . It's remarkable how quickly Osborne and Cable have righted the ship of state.
Unless you know otherwise, they are employed in 'Real Estate Activities'....which is more than just Estate Agents.....
" ....... it seems very likely that the Tories will start to lead the polls at some point next year."
I agree and that's why I've taken PP's odds that they will move ahead of Labour with YouGov at some point next year - on which subject I posted earlier today.
I also believe the LibDems will share in the spoils as coalition partners and quite fancy Ladbrokes' odds of 7/2 for them to win 40-50 seats at the GE. Let's not forget how well they fared against the odds at the Eastleigh by-election.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-09-13/anthony-albanese-to-reveal-if-he-will-stand-for-labor-leadership/4955048
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-09-12/indonesia-rejects-abbotts-asylum-plan/4954574
(a) Those are not all estate agents working in sales - a lot of the increase is in areas such as letting agents, managing agents, university accomodation etc. Of course you wouldn't expect the Guardian to have any interest in making the facts clear.
(b) And of course the housing market had completely collapsed in volume terms in many parts of the country, with dire knock-on effects to other sectors of the economy. Thank goodness volumes are at last recovering a little bit, back towards a marginally more normal market, which in turn will, yes, lead to a welcome reversal of the fall in employment in estate agents. Do you have a problem with estate agents?
http://www.abc.net.au/news/federal-election-2013/guide/parr/
http://vtr.aec.gov.au/HouseDivisionFirstPrefs-17496-140.htm
I claim the proceeds of any "housing bubble" bet for the next PB Tory cocktail party!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-24067411
http://www.studenttenant.com/blog/uk-student-accommodation-growth.
There's also a structural change, with big providers like Unite Group increasingly building specialist accomodation, which in turn needs managing.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-24063461
Eck's government decrees that petrol & diesel emissions are to cease by 2050.
It later emerged the roadmap was to be revised, after Transport Scotland conceded it had included mobility scooters in figures showing an increase in the number of electric and plug-in hybrid vehicle registrations last year
Brilliant!
Now if we could only cobble together the money for a train ticket from Bournemouth to get JohnO along...
Jackson Carlaw MSP @JacksonMSP 55m
@ScottishLabour smear on @JohnMcGlynn unfounded, scurrilous and self inflicted stain on its reputation. Apology required forthwith #fmqs
The icing on the cake is that the original sale was between the aforementioned business man and the Glasgow Labour dominated Strathclyde Partnership for Transport (SPT).
It's not usually a wise stance to take. Stuff happens, and the media magnify it.
"Ms Lamont asked: "Is there some connection here, or has Mr McGlynn just benefitted from the first minister's gross incompetence with public funds?"
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-24067411
Very cheeky - but not even tepid water, let alone hot.....
Now your claim that she "more or less accused a businessman of conspiring with the SNP government in a corrupt land deal" might be problematic......
Keith Brown, Scottish Transport Minister:
'The land that was purchased that he mentioned was initially purchased by Strathclyde Partnership for Transport, not by the Government, although the Government subsequently bought it from SPT....The cancellation of the GARL project saved £176 million.
Of course there has been a cost, because land was purchased at the height of the market and then sold during a recession—there is no question about that.'
On a strange political journey , follow the money.
I backed Ed Miliband at great odds to be the next Labour leader after he impressed the Unions bosses before the last GE. But I also highlighted and commented on how his indecisiveness was proving to be a major weakness in his Leadership on here a while ago. I have no doubt that the Labour party with the help of their Union backers have managed to elect another deeply unattractive Gordon Brown MK2 model. But just like Gordon Brown before him, will Ed Miliband manage to limp weakly along until the GE for fear that his removal might cause yet more damaging infighting between former Brownites and Blairites in the PLP?
Tonight's target; The late Cyril Smith
Roger, you haven't got the best of tracks in this area in working out what is & isn't a credible story.....
'"Now he supports the Yes campaign [in favour of independence]. Since then he's been appointed to the Scottish government national economic forum. And since then, he has bought back the land from the Scottish government for just £50,000 and made a profit of £790,000."
Ms Lamont asked: "Is there some connection here, or has Mr McGlynn just benefitted from the first minister's gross incompetence with public funds?"'
Mr McGlynn, the businessman, appears to be 'deeply troubled' by 'unfounded statements' of 'impropriety'.
"I'm extremely concerned about the unfounded statements that were made in the debating chamber, which all seem to imply, suggest, some kind of impropriety on my part, which I think is deeply troubling."
Good job too Nigel Evans is not a Lib Dem , we would be getting post after post from Carlotta and other pb tories demanding he resigns his seat in parliament immediately .
I'm sure it's credible but he's dead deceased passed away no more gone expired.
He is the late Cyril Smith. It will not affect him at all unless they want to dig him up and poke him with sticks
God, at one stage Herman Cain led the GOP primary polling. I mean really!
Quite. The story isn;t the perpetrator it is the cover up - if indeed there was one....
And I don't recall many posts about Mike Hancock which - if half of what is in the press is true - seems like a horrible abuse of power
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catalan_Way
Edinburgh Way anyone?
Bloody Osborne, cannot even produce a proper bubble. You need the Enron accounting of Brown and Balls for that!
So it is no longer Balls mantra of austerity being too far too fast, but rather the new tune that we must not overstimulate the economy.
It really does look like the Labour manifesto will be the shortest suicide note in history.
You know it's autumn when leaves fall, swallows leave and #OakeshottO'Clock flaps in from cloud cuckoo land
Green policies to screw the poor aren't popular, neither are 20 mph speed limits, Residential Parking Zones, and blind europhilia. So who is Oakshot's alternative inspiring figure who will lead the LDs into electoral oblivion?
And I don't doubt for a moment that Osborne has timed his bubble right. It's looking pretty much bang on.
"A housing bubble is dead rubbish, and an economy based on housing bubbles is precarious"
And you can think
"The economy was, generally, reasonably managed from 1997-2010"
But you can't think both at the same time. It is not possible.
It can't be laughed off.
Are housing bubbles rubbish, or was New Labour Economic policy rubbish?
I think both.
To govern is to choose. Which do you choose Tim?
George Eaton@georgeeaton
That it's still just Oakeshott and Lembit (both non-MPs) calling for Clegg's head shows how secure he is.
Labours contradictions in a nutshell.
I also think that we have forgotten just how unusual policy currently is. We have the lowest interest rates for hundreds of years, we have had them for nearly 5 years now and and we have a Governor promising them (wrongly in my view) for another 2 years. We have had QE to the tune of nearly a quarter of the UK economy. We have a government running what is still a truly scary deficit pumping an additional demand of £10bn a month into the economy. In any normal circumstances any one of the policies would have resulted in really out of control growth.
The fact we have had several years with very little growth indeed despite all these policies is evidence of how sick our economy was and is. The monetary and indeed fiscal accelerators have been rammed to the floor since 2008. It only needs a little bit of traction in those circumstances to get a result (I will leave the rest of the technical details to Morris Dancer).
For the avoidance of doubt I am not saying for one moment that the Coalition has solved our underlying problems. They are profound and will not be sorted by a few quarters of growth. But it will feel a little better.
But to be fair to him he has repeatedly said he opposed housing policy as practiced in the UK for 30+ years.
It's just that he goes on and on and on about it in relation to the Tories while you never heard a peep about it when his lot were in power.
Mr. Steve, you are indeed correct.
The Labour Party leader is seen as out of his depth, and Tories can sense a route towards general election victory in 2015
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/ed-miliband/10304690/Even-Labour-supporters-dont-think-that-Ed-Milibands-up-to-it.html
Housing Bubble is rubbish = New Labour is rubbish.
And if that's true, and it is, then we should confiscate the assets and suspend the citizenship of all who benefited from their membership of the New Labour government. That's a fine moderate position. Exile is fine. I'm all about moving forward.
We agreed then?
Few Tories in the Cabinet would say that outright victory at the next election is likely, but most now think it distinctly possible. Cameron’s Syria defeat could have transformed the political debate; instead, it is being forgotten. And for that, they believe, they have Absent Ed to thank.
"It is now painfully clear that Labour no longer has a coherent foreign policy – or one on welfare, education, tax or the economy. There comes a point when voters start to notice."
and my favorite
"The phrase most associated with Miliband is “out of his depth”, and that’s just from Labour supporters."
oh dear.
Now I don't want Ed Miliband to win the next election. I think Ed is okay. But I don't think the current Labour front bench is anywhere near up to running the country. Intellectually and in terms of experience and political nous they aren't anywhere near the quality of the 1997 Labour front bench. Nowhere near.
But as a non-Labour supporter, I think he can win. So if I think that, why are his supposed backers talking him down? And they obviously are talking him down, leading journalists don't just make stuff up. It's poor from Labour and diminishing their chances of seeing Ed win, and another example of how poor and unprepared and intellectually scared they are of actually winning (I am beginning to think many leading Labour people don't actually want to win in 2015, they'd prefer to win in 2020, because they know - when in power - they'd be carrying out exactly the same set of mild cuts and handbrake-austerity as the coalition).
How can that possibly be in Britain's best interest?
“In the last week, junior MPs have come up to ask me if we’re going to be all right, as if they’re asking the captain of the Titanic if there are enough lifeboats,” says one Labour privy counsellor.
“I’m afraid that voters have made up their minds about Ed. Once this happens, they seldom change them.” A harsh analysis, but one backed up by just-as-devastating opinion polls.
Hence 1992/7. In the former, the Tories were trusted more to get Britain out of the mess that that government was itself partly responsible for. So despite the high unemployment and recession, the Conservatives were re-elected. Come the next election, despite the recovery, the Tories were booted out, partly because the recovery was seen as largely not their doing (ERM and all that) and partly because Labour was now trusted not just on the economy but also on health, education, defence, standards and so on.
Oh, and leadership.
Now you want to curb press freedom to point out truth about Labour.
How very Labour like.
it's all about party.
https://canyoufindit.co.uk/